The Ref Stop

Arsenal v Brentford

L

ladbroke8745

RefChat Addict
Should Norgaard have been sent off?

I definitely agree with reckless, but serious foul play? Endangering the safety? I mean, every tackle can endanger the safety but is this right up the top of the spectrum?

I know he only got a yellow card and I fully agree with it.
Just that Arteta, and Martinelli, both saying it should've been a red it'll be another one added to the tally of things against them this season.

www.skysports.com

Arsenal vs Brentford: Christian Norgaard have seen red for his challenge on Gabriel Martinelli?

The Saturday Night Football panel discuss whether Christian Norgaard should have received a red card for his tackle on Gabriel Martinelli in the first half of Arsenals Premier League clash with Brentford.
www.skysports.com www.skysports.com
 
The Ref Stop
I think it is one where both YC and RC could be given. A lot will depend on viewing angles.

I think VAR was right to leave alone, but if the Referee had given a RC, it would have stayed as correct.

Personally, I think is was sufficiently high and late to be endangering the safety of the player, so RC would have been my decision, but as an observer, I would support either decision.
 
All 3 of you are saying this was pretty bad, forceful, just below the knee, possible leg breaker, ball nowhere to be seen...

Yet when MLS got sent off against Wolves for Arsenal you all said the same thing too.
unjust, only a yellow, not dangerous etc.

Now, im not saying id not have sent off Norgaard myself based on one look, it does look "orange" as some have said on here. Can have arguments for both, but to say this is dangerous and definitely red (without consideration for yelloe) and saying Skelly, who came in from the side with studs up intent on taking the man (with no ball in sight) is only a yellow beggars belief.

It really does show that referees have an absolute hard job telling the difference between the two at first sight.

Kent Ref said:
Looks pretty bad to me.

Endangers the safety - yes - possible leg break if the player fell badly.
Click to expand...

es1 said:
I'm very happy with a red, awful tackle.
Click to expand...

Ryanj91 said:
Scissor action
With force
Ball nowhere to be played.
Just below knee.
Had Martinelli's leg been planted, his leg would have most likely been broken. Luckily it wasn't, but this does seriously endanger the player.

Ticks all the boxes for a red.

VAR being inconsistent again
Click to expand...
 
ladbroke8745 said:
All 3 of you are saying this was pretty bad, forceful, just below the knee, possible leg breaker, ball nowhere to be seen...

Yet when MLS got sent off against Wolves for Arsenal you all said the same thing too.
unjust, only a yellow, not dangerous etc.

Now, im not saying id not have sent off Norgaard myself based on one look, it does look "orange" as some have said on here. Can have arguments for both, but to say this is dangerous and definitely red (without consideration for yelloe) and saying Skelly, who came in from the side with studs up intent on taking the man (with no ball in sight) is only a yellow beggars belief.

It really does show that referees have an absolute hard job telling the difference between the two at first sight.
Click to expand...
MLS was glancing contact and a trip. It didn't meet the threshold for force nor endangerment of a player's safety. All agreed upon the review.

This is a lunge in scissors action, knee height from behind. Totally different 'tackle'. Incomparable
 
I pose it to you all that if Norgaard won the ball clearly with his front foot, nobody in football is expecting a foul, let alone a red card, and yet we all know that winning the ball isn’t a mitigating factor.
 
CaptainsPlease said:
VAR should have intervened, it is a lunge that endangers the safety of the opponent.
Click to expand...
The fact that some of us, myself included, think there's enough doubt to go with a caution tells me that it isn't one for VAR. Can it really be a clear and obvious error if a bunch of referees and observers watching it back don't agree that a caution was incorrect?
 
RustyRef said:
The fact that some of us, myself included, think there's enough doubt to go with a caution tells me that it isn't one for VAR. Can it really be a clear and obvious error if a bunch of referees and observers watching it back don't agree that a caution was incorrect?
Click to expand...
We have had 3 (including yours) saying it is a caution and not SFP but none have explained why it is not SFP.
 
CaptainsPlease said:
We have had 3 (including yours) saying it is a caution and not SFP but none have explained why it is not SFP.
Click to expand...
Personally I think there is a question mark about the force of the contact, he doesn't really plant his studs into the opponent's leg.

I actually watched this in a pub in Islington that was packed full of Arsenal fans, normally when there's a dodgy challenge everyone is jumping up but there was barely a peep at this one. Both pundits agreed that a caution was just about right, and I think it would be one of those "not what football expects" decision to go red.
 
RustyRef said:
Personally I think there is a question mark about the force of the contact, he doesn't really plant his studs into the opponent's leg.

I actually watched this in a pub in Islington that was packed full of Arsenal fans, normally when there's a dodgy challenge everyone is jumping up but there was barely a peep at this one. Both pundits agreed that a caution was just about right, and I think it would be one of those "not what football expects" decision to go red.
Click to expand...
How does anybody really know what football expect nowadays?
 
Kent Ref said:
How does anybody really know what football expect nowadays?
Click to expand...
You hear Howard Webb saying all the time that they speak to stakeholders, as an example that is why there have hardly been any penalties for this season as they have listed to what they are saying and changed the guidance to their referees.
 
One of those decisions that could easily go either way. But I’d bet that the panel would overturn a red card.

As a side note, what football expects needs to go in the bin. It’s a vague term that is used to justify decisions when people don’t have any better justification.
 
Runner Ref said:
As a side note, what football expects needs to go in the bin. It’s a vague term that is used to justify decisions when people don’t have any better justification.
Click to expand...
I don't disagree, but then after decisions are made they are judged by a panel made of of mainly people with no knowledge of the laws, or certainly no qualifications. By definition that is reaffirming what football expects.
 
RustyRef said:
I don't disagree, but then after decisions are made they are judged by a panel made of of mainly people with no knowledge of the laws, or certainly no qualifications. By definition that is reaffirming what football expects.
Click to expand...
And it's panels like that that make fans think because the panel overruled it, the ref was wrong.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top