Bournemouth v Newcastle
- Thread starter Paul_10
- Start date
santa sangria
RefChat Addict
Handball
Red card
Simples. Really nothing to see here IMHO.
Red card
Simples. Really nothing to see here IMHO.
For me it's not a footballing action, there's no justification for what he did and there was sufficient force, Coote had a good view of it but the VAR must surely had the camera angle we saw on TV from the opposite way which shows clearly how bad it looked. The VAR has to be braver I feel and not overturn because the referee had a good view and made an instant decision.
As fans it's hard to get your head around how minimal contact with heads can result in a red card but an non footballing action which looks more like a WWE move is just a yellow. For what it's worth, the red card last week I can support because it's in the laws where any head movement to an opponent even if fairly minimal should be sanctioned with a red but this is far more dangerous than that would ever be.
Where is this? It says quite the opposite actually...
It's clearly VC because clotheslining an opponent's neck is a brutal act. It would also help if the LOTG could be modified so the VC definition referring to contact with 'head or face' also included neck.
This.
Based on the video, for me, the ball makes contact at the bottom of the sleeve below the armpit.
I originally saw Joelinton reach across Neto’s neck and grab his collar but having looked at it again, I see that the contact from Joelinton’s hand is made to the neck of Neto. Given that the contact is to the neck, a sensitive area, and the force used is high, I think excessive force is used. As to whether SFP or VC, I don’t accept that merely because a GK has control it must be VC (think for example a GK collecting the ball then being collected by a sliding challenge from an attacker) but in this case this is clearly not a challenge for the ball, and thus VC.
Had a look back (as I said I would do) and my opinion hasn't changed. This is just plain reckless.
There is no striking. There is NO contact with the head. It's a holding/pulling action across the shoulder and chest with some contact at lower neck as result of the momentum of the pull. Arm reaches around. Pulls back.
I usually agree with Keith Hackett on many queried decisions, but Keith thinks goal and red card. I disagree though will be interesting to see what the Independent MCS Panel decide to both.
Must of read something 'old' then but I was always under the impression any head movement towards an opponent even without alot of force is VC.
Dermot Gallagher thinks the handball decision is wrong and Joelinton is just a yellow basically backing up what James has been saying that contact was more around the chest therefore it's reckless not violent.
For me it still looks more contact is around the neck and he obviously not challenging for the ball and it is quite dangerous play. I seen comments even in Rugby this would be a red and that is obviously a more contact sport.
This is what the law says specifically:
In addition, a player who, when not challenging for the ball, deliberately strikes an opponent or any other person on the head or face with the hand or arm, is guilty of violent conduct unless the force used was negligible.
Well we can debate long and hard whether the "headbutt" meets that criteria but most people in football accept that being a red card because we have seen players been sent off for that type of incident before.
Also basing on that law, I can't understand why Joelinton wasn't sent off, even if the contact was more around the chest area, it's still striking an opponent off the ball with force. If he wanted to commit a cynical offense to stop him releasing the ball, then block him off and take the yellow that way and there be far less controversy.
David F
Member
I respect the opinions of those who are fine with YC here, but I think occasionally there’s an offence so unusual it’s not captured in refs’ muscle memory, even at the top level.
The muscle memory is saying YC here - the ball is in play, Joelinton is slowing the game down, and as a ref you’d anticipate the caution offence about to happen. You’re already going YC, expecting him to do the same as what Burn did shortly before.
And then he clotheslines the keeper and there’s nothing instinctive to say “that’s a red” because you’ve never seen a player do that before. So you go with yellow, even though it’s an arm to the neck, with force, with no challenge for the ball.
The muscle memory is saying YC here - the ball is in play, Joelinton is slowing the game down, and as a ref you’d anticipate the caution offence about to happen. You’re already going YC, expecting him to do the same as what Burn did shortly before.
And then he clotheslines the keeper and there’s nothing instinctive to say “that’s a red” because you’ve never seen a player do that before. So you go with yellow, even though it’s an arm to the neck, with force, with no challenge for the ball.
Maybe touches the neck? The whole reason he is able to drag the GK down is by levering the neck. It is dangerous.
Kes
I'll Decide ...
No. I'm not filling in spaces based on outrage or how clumsy it looked.
For me, as can be seen in the slo-mo, the "leverage" is downwards (as you correctly state
) and that comes in the main from the arm and hand over the shoulder and chest. No more to add to this thread now from me. ...
Well I’m absolutely amazed that anyone could consider anything other than a red card for the assault on the Bournemouth goalkeeper. It’s a red card all day long and can easily be made to fit either SFP or VC in my opinion. Sometimes it is just easier to say “Yup got that one wrong” than try and mitigate the error away.
Not sure I'd class that as an assault on the keeper
Well as a retired police officer and I saw the exact same actions carried out on a public street I would have no issue seeing it as an assaultNot sure I'd class that as an assault on the keeper
Yes, my astonishment at members indicating a yellow card has triggered my 'keyboard warrior' response
My issue with the HB, is that of it being indeterminable and therefore a very poor bit of VAR interference
I don't like the insulting 'factual' claim by the PGMOL.. The word 'fact' has merely been used to hide behind on this occasion
'GUIDANCE' grinds my gears because it is the source of inconsistency across the leagues and is no doubt the origin of the 'shirt sleeve' expectation.
I've had to buy a new keyboard on account of me bashing the keys to smithereens last night in despair
He almost always says the total opposite to what was given on the pitch. Whenever they get him on talkSPORT I know exactly what he is going to say. He doesn't really have any credibility, especially not when he talks about a referee's fitness and positioning, and how bad refereeing is compared to his days in charge.