The Ref Stop

Sept 27-28 Premier League discussion

RefIADad

RefIADad

RefChat Addict
First of all, Chelsea-Brighton is bonkers. Both teams with high lines. If you like attack, this is fun. If you like good defending, probably not the game for you. :) Robert Sanchez on quite the walkabout today (I think I have the English slang correct for what he's doing or not doing).

For me, both offside decisions taking Chelsea goals of the board are correct. Just goes to show overall how good professional ARs are to get these right on the field so often.

I think Brighton got away with one on the Madueke SPA/DOGSO. For me, I think that's a DOGSO. I just don't think the Brighton defenders are going to provide the coverage to keep that from being an obvious scoring opportunity. But Palmer's worldie on the free kick kind of made up for it.
 
The Ref Stop
And neither team good enough defensively to play high lines... but good for the neutral!

I don't disagree with you, but I think you would be hard pushed for SPA/DOGSO in that circumstance, distance to goal was great enough and there were defenders who could've potentially covered the situation.

David Coote with one of the biggest refereeing no no's... went to book players from both Chelsea and Brighton for handbags (had the yellow card in his hand) and then decided a quiet word.
 
The Ginger Ref said:
And neither team good enough defensively to play high lines... but good for the neutral!

I don't disagree with you, but I think you would be hard pushed for SPA/DOGSO in that circumstance, distance to goal was great enough and there were defenders who could've potentially covered the situation.

David Coote with one of the biggest refereeing no no's... went to book players from both Chelsea and Brighton for handbags (had the yellow card in his hand) and then decided a quiet word.
Click to expand...
Agree on the DOGSO, Webster was round on the cover. I think anyone understanding football would know he would have never got there, but not sure referees can or should take into account the pace of individual covering defenders.

David Coote was locked away in a room in Stockley Park so I assume you mean Peter Bankes. He 100% realised that one of the two players he was going to caution (Estupinian) was already on one, so he put the yellow away and went for a telling off instead.
 
The Ginger Ref said:
And neither team good enough defensively to play high lines... but good for the neutral!

I don't disagree with you, but I think you would be hard pushed for SPA/DOGSO in that circumstance, distance to goal was great enough and there were defenders who could've potentially covered the situation.

David Coote with one of the biggest refereeing no no's... went to book players from both Chelsea and Brighton for handbags (had the yellow card in his hand) and then decided a quiet word.
Click to expand...
That’s fair. I do think many officials subscribe to the idea that if there’s doubt, go yellow.

This is one of those situations where I know we don’t have “intentional foul” as one of the four considerations, but if we did this foul would have checked that box. It was a clear “uh-oh, I’m beat and better hold him up” type of hold. Not a legitimate challenge in any way, but again I know that’s not one of the four considerations.
 
RefIADad said:
Not a legitimate challenge in any way, but again I know that’s not one of the four considerations.
Click to expand...
which, IMHO, is a miss in the Laws. DOGSO was created to eliminate (well, really reduce) cynical fouls that take away OGSOs—in its first iteration, it was a specie of SFP. IFAB was unhappy that too many refs copped out, and made it more formulaic. I understand that, but we should at least have something that allows the R to consider the cynical nature of a play in grey areas.
 
socal lurker said:
which, IMHO, is a miss in the Laws. DOGSO was created to eliminate (well, really reduce) cynical fouls that take away OGSOs—in its first iteration, it was a specie of SFP. IFAB was unhappy that too many refs copped out, and made it more formulaic. I understand that, but we should at least have something that allows the R to consider the cynical nature of a play in grey areas.
Click to expand...
I know you and I have had this online discussion elsewhere, so we're kind of filling others in here. I agree with you. In my opinion, this was one of those "it could be or couldn't be" types of DOGSOs where the intentional/cynical nature of the foul could swing things more toward a DOGSO red instead of a SPA yellow. But you and I both know that's just adding subjectivity into the Laws, which IFAB/FIFA is trying to eliminate to the detriment of refereeing.
 
Lovely bit of niggle in the Ipswich / Villa game

23 fouls with 10 minutes to go! (Make that 24!)

Stuart Attwell doing his best to keep this 11 v 11 when another ref might've dismissed a player or two.

Very interesting watching the way Attwell referees the game, weighs up the incident before blowing for the decision.
 
It was a strange game, I thought Attwell was consistent and had a good game. He didn't book Villa players when they made a few late challenges on Phillips.
 
The Ginger Ref said:
Lovely bit of niggle in the Ipswich / Villa game

23 fouls with 10 minutes to go! (Make that 24!)

Stuart Attwell doing his best to keep this 11 v 11 when another ref might've dismissed a player or two.

Very interesting watching the way Attwell referees the game, weighs up the incident before blowing for the decision.
Click to expand...
He’s had a lot of criticism over the years, some perhaps deserved but much not. Two things he does well - he does his own thing and doesn’t let anyone sway him from what he believes is correct.
 
MUFC V THFC

Think I totally agree with the red. The slip happened, but then, when out of control he continued to change direction of leg.

Think it ticks the boxes for the SFP: Height, control of body, speed of impact, studs showing.

For the neutral it’s quite a good game - end to end stuff.
 
Pundits saying it’s not reckless but it’s out of control so not a red…. Crikey…

Also - it doesn’t matter if it is an accident.
 
I thought the red was harsh, it's high but it's not excessive force, it's not dangerous, is it a clear and obvious error? Maybe not but when you see Martinez tackle last week just being a yellow and compare it to this one then the mind does boggle sometimes.
 
First angle made it look like a stonewall red card. Other angles not so much.

Think this is one that could have gone either way. But main thing I’m glad about is the lack of VAR input on it
 
I was there, he did ok but splashed a few unnecessary early yellows which kind of stopped him giving more deserving yellows later....
I'd rate him at 7/10
 
Runner Ref said:
First angle made it look like a stonewall red card. Other angles not so much.

Think this is one that could have gone either way. But main thing I’m glad about is the lack of VAR input on it
Click to expand...

So if you think it might not be a red, is it an error? I think since VAR has been introduced, I can only recalled 2 instances where a red card has been overturned for a yellow card.

Its one of those where I can understand why the ref went for red but if it does not meet the threshold for serious foul play then maybe the VAR should get involved?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top