A&H

Bournemouth v Newcastle

P

Paul_10

Well-Known Member
Controversial ending to the game with the handball and potential red card for Joelinton.

This is the bit I don't like when referees don't get sent to the screen because it's "factual", its like those penalties decisions where a tackle may or may not of occured in the box and it's not 100% conclusive then I always say it should be for the on field referee to decide and i feel that should be what happens here because no way that handball is 100% a handball, there is uncertainty just where the ball landed in relation to the t-shirt like and position where the ball landed.

As for Joelinton's arm hitting the neck of the keeper, how has David Coote not deemed that a red card I will never know and the VAR backing that decision is just as mind boggling. Somehow we get red cards produced because heads slightly touch but deliberate actions like this is just a yellow. No doubt in Europe that red would be out in an instant!
 
A&H International
What on Earth is this page all about anyway?

1724600951395.png

Wouldn't it be far easier to just stick with the shirt sleeve guidance?

This was VAR unable to resist the temptation of making a factual conclusion based upon evidence that was inconclusive
Yes, Joelinton should have been dismissed. Blatant SFP. It was guaranteed one of the Bournemouth coaches was gonna take the hit as they were rightly incensed and provoked into misconduct
A quite ridiculous period of added time leaving our (Referee's) reputation in the gutter where it was languishing anyway
 
Last edited:
Big Cat said:
What on Earth is this page all about anyway?

View attachment 7499

Wouldn't it be far easier to just stick with the shirt sleeve guidance?

This was VAR unable to resist the temptation of making a factual conclusion based upon evidence that was inconclusive
Yes, Joelinton should have been dismissed. It was guaranteed one of the Bournemouth coaches was gonna take the hit
A quite ridiculous period of added time leaving our (Referee's) reputation in the gutter where it was languishing anyway
Click to expand...

It never was the "t-shirt" line. That was a bad phrase that got into the public consciousness. It's always been level with the bottom of the armpit and to simplify things, refs have been told to use the PL badge on the shirt as an estimate.
 
cwyeary said:
It never was the "t-shirt" line. That was a bad phrase that got into the public consciousness. It's always been level with the bottom of the armpit and to simplify things, refs have been told to use the PL badge on the shirt as an estimate.
Click to expand...
Either way, it's not credible to conclude this was HB on a factual basis. The decision will be (and is being) universally derided
Being told to use the badge on the arm as a guide is just typical of 'making it up on a regional basis'. Also, absolutely nobody (except a tiny number of people like yourself) knows that PGMOL have taken it upon themselves to enshrine this in EPL LOTG, so how can anyone agree with it especially when shirt sleeve somehow dominates expectation?
 
Last edited:
My opinion, handball offence. Hits below the armpit line, goes directly into the goal. There can be no question. Nice and easy.

Sleeves has never been in law as mentioned above, how would it work with long and short sleeve tops?

Red card - Uses excessive force or brutality when not challenging for the ball. Easy VC.

Reminds me of the foul on Saka in the Italy game in the '20 final.
 
wazztie16 said:
My opinion, handball offence. Hits below the armpit line, goes directly into the goal. There can be no question. Nice and easy.

Sleeves has never been in law as mentioned above, how would it work with long and short sleeve tops?

Red card - Uses excessive force or brutality when not challenging for the ball. Easy VC.

Reminds me of the foul on Saka in the Italy game in the '20 final.
Click to expand...
Shirt sleeve may never have been worded in Law, but you can bet you arse someone somewhere made that their Regional LOTG because the notion did not come from nowhere
 
That's a nailed on red card in rugby but in football a clothesline tackle to the neck of the GK with the ball in their hand is only a yellow? What on Earth are we doing here?
 
Big Cat said:
Shirt sleeve may never have been worded in Law, but you can bet you arse someone somewhere made that their Regional LOTG because the notion did not come from nowhere
Click to expand...

Not something we should be taking into consideration though as referees.

Get law right, first and foremost.
 
wazztie16 said:
Why can't it? Curious to know.
Click to expand...
Because it can't be factually determined that it hit the cartoon character's red bit or green bit
What can be factually determined is that Joelinton assaulted the opposition Goalkeeper
 
Choke slam and strangulation on Havertz last week.

Clotheslining keepers this week.

Welcome to the Premier League version of WWE
 
Sending the referee to the screen for a factual handball decision would just be wasting everyone's time.
It is worrying to see PGMOL officials seeming to regress even further over failing to send players off for serious offences. It does not help the rest of us one bit.
 
On my own here I think but I'm not seeing a red card offence. Its a pulling offence. Clear as day unsporting but not convinced it was excessive force, brutal or safety endangerment. It reminds me a lot of the Chiellini incident Euro 2020 (2021) albeit that was a shirt pull rather than directly around the neck.

I'm with BC on the handball though it's really undeterminable from the broadcast pictures we were shown. My gut said it was shoulder above the bottom of the armpit and should have stood. We know that the VAR has all images available to him not just what broadcast show us so maybe he had a better more accurate picture?
 
JamesL said:
On my own here I think but I'm not seeing a red card offence. Its a pulling offence. Clear as day unsporting but not convinced it was excessive force, brutal or safety endangerment. It reminds me a lot of the Chiellini incident Euro 2020 (2021) albeit that was a shirt pull rather than directly around the neck.
Click to expand...

For me, the speed of the goalkeeper means it's brutality. It's a brutal act due to the goalkeeper moving at that speed. Had the GK been stationary, I'm seeing a caution for USB.
 
wazztie16 said:
For me, the speed of the goalkeeper means it's brutality. It's a brutal act due to the goalkeeper moving at that speed. Had the GK been stationary, I'm seeing a caution for USB.
Click to expand...
I don't see the logic there. It becomes violent because the GK was moving at high speed? Either the players action is "deliberately violent" or it isn't. Yes the GK speed might increase the force that is felt, but it doesn't change the force that is used. The latter being the part we need to judge.
Dictionary definition of violent is:
"using or involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or something."
I don't think for 1 second that Joelinton is intending to hurt the GK. Id hope he was attempting murder in broad daylight in front of 000's of people too.

I also understand that this is subjective and interpretations differ, and also acutely aware I am holding a minority opinion here but that's just how I see it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top