Crystal Palace Vs Manchester United
- Thread starter bester
- Start date
Just another example of SG1 referees clearly not knowing what SFP is or just under pressure to keep it 11 against 11 because I don't know how David Coote can see that as just reckless. The VAR has probably got his hands tied that the referee got the best view of it so why send him to the screen and of course this referees call term that has come into play. All that said, the VAR maybe should be braver and suggest to the referee you may got a very good view of it but I still think you made an error there.
It was refreshing too see Stuart Attwell producing a red card for SFP without the aid of VAR but I've said it constantly since VAR has came in that referees in general do seem to go for the safe yellow.
It was refreshing too see Stuart Attwell producing a red card for SFP without the aid of VAR but I've said it constantly since VAR has came in that referees in general do seem to go for the safe yellow.
Once again setting the wrong example for the rest of us. These sorts of incidents need a prompt clarification after the game if deemed a mistake.
But what if there had been contact? Is it then a red card?
And if it's a red card if there's contact, why award a yellow card when there's no contact and 'encourage' more challenges like this?
It was a silly challenge from the player who knew what he was doing, but at the end of the day, he wasn’t attempting to hurt his opponent, and didn’t, with no injury caused. A yellow for reckless/match control is fine with me. If it was a Sunday morning with the dog and duck then perhaps different especially with Match Control and not having the luxury of 30 tv cameras and VAR.
It's a clear textbook red.
Remember, the same ref had 'no choice' to send Rice off for kicking a rolling ball 10cm, but had a choice not to send off a leg breaking challenge that the palace player was just fortunate about.
Looking forward to the VAR mic recordings for this one.
And this is why fans get frustrated with the officiating in the premier league. Inconsistency every week over simple decisions.
Remember, the same ref had 'no choice' to send Rice off for kicking a rolling ball 10cm, but had a choice not to send off a leg breaking challenge that the palace player was just fortunate about.
Looking forward to the VAR mic recordings for this one.
And this is why fans get frustrated with the officiating in the premier league. Inconsistency every week over simple decisions.
Never in a million years is this a ‘clear’ red and not a simple decision. Also, please be mindful of your use of the wording of consistency. Consistency meaning things that have been treated the same way during the same game, rather than consistent in other games in previous weeks for different offences. However, you do have a point with Rice for Delaying the Restart of Play compared to a similar incident in the same game which went unpunished.
I'm using the word consistency in the context of following the rules of the game to the letter of the law.
This is what I would call an example of refereeing by outcome.
The offence is a clear red. How you can justify leaping into the air and 2 foot someone as legal is baffling.
The outcome, thankfully, not a broken leg and the Palace player didn't roll on the fall screaming...
Nevertheless, still a red by the letter of the law.... Hence my use of consistency
IMHO, the two footed challenge did miss his foot by an inch, so we shouldnt referee the incident on outcome of the challenge, it was in law SFP so should have been red.
That sort of forceful contact to a top of today's boots is likely metatarsal damage & long time on the sidelines.
Just not a football action any more.
That sort of forceful contact to a top of today's boots is likely metatarsal damage & long time on the sidelines.
Just not a football action any more.
Using another scenario, two players have verbals, one tries to slap/swing for an opponent but misses, you won't send him off because he did not make contact? This "tackle" was not a footballing action, he had no control, 2 feet off the ground, studs planted into the ground, surely it's serious foul play?
Not the same referee although Kavanagh was on VAR and should of shown more bottle to overrule the referee but because Coote had a good view of it and because of this referees call which seems to raise the bar to high levels, he didn't intervene.
I can't help but feel if this was a Championship game without VAR and the conspiracy referees are pressured to keep it 11 against 11 then I think Coote would of went red here. Not many people in the football world liked Mike Dean but his SFP detection was right up there hence his high amount of red cards.
Serious foul play
A tackle or challenge that endangers the safety of an opponent or uses excessive force or brutality must be sanctioned as serious foul play.
Any player who lunges at an opponent in challenging for the ball from the front, from the side or from behind using one or both legs, with excessive force or endangers the safety of an opponent is guilty of serious foul play.
Did he endanger the safety of the opponent or use excessive force or brutality? No contact was made! - just saying!
Violent conduct
Violent conduct is when a player uses or attempts to use excessive force or brutality against an opponent when not challenging for the ball, or against a team-mate, team official, match official, spectator or any other person, “regardless of whether contact is made”
The player 2 footed the ball not the player. Not only not a broken leg, but didn’t make contact with the player and no treatment required. If he gave red would it have been overturned - perhaps not, but was a yellow a decent outcome - probably. Laws of the Game are not so black and white as you make out eg letter of the Law.
I was literally about to post the definition of SFP.
There's also the definition of PIADM.
Playing in a dangerous manner is any action that, while trying to play the ball, threatens injury to someone (including the player themself) and includes preventing a nearby opponent from playing the ball for fear of injury.
Discount 'and includes preventing a nearby opponent from playing the ball for fear of injury', it's the first bit that I would consider applying.
There's then DFK - A direct free kick is awarded if a player commits any of the following offences against an opponent in a manner considered by the referee to be careless, reckless or using excessive force:
jumps at
There's obviously a difference if contact is actually made. DFK if it is made, IDFK if it isn't.
I think law expects a red, the rest of football probably expects a yellow.
There's also the definition of PIADM.
Playing in a dangerous manner is any action that, while trying to play the ball, threatens injury to someone (including the player themself) and includes preventing a nearby opponent from playing the ball for fear of injury.
Discount 'and includes preventing a nearby opponent from playing the ball for fear of injury', it's the first bit that I would consider applying.
There's then DFK - A direct free kick is awarded if a player commits any of the following offences against an opponent in a manner considered by the referee to be careless, reckless or using excessive force:
jumps at
There's obviously a difference if contact is actually made. DFK if it is made, IDFK if it isn't.
I think law expects a red, the rest of football probably expects a yellow.
I think elite football expects a yellow and the rest of football (grassroots) expects a red. There have been 2 sendings off in current game on sky at Preston North End and Referee has done well to deal with as expected, but nothing like the incident we are taking about at Palace, where only the goalkeeper really moaned about the yellow card.
So because there was no contact then it's okay to challenge for the ball like that? I wouldnt like too see what may of happened if he did ended up on the Palace player ankle. Out of control, 2 feet off the ground and definitely excessive force if it did make contact.
