The Ref Stop

Che V City

The Ref Stop
Big Cat said:
What about the blatant double SPA
Without analysing the book, advantage played for SPA by a defensive player, followed by a separate SPA by the same defender on another player = S6... Does it not? Stand to be corrected, but that would have been my decision, so claims of 'excellent performance' need to pass this KMI test
Click to expand...

I don't think you are going to find many, if any, referees giving a player two cautions for SPA for the same attack after they have played advantage. They'd be pilloried by everyone, and even more so in a top level cup final. Also you could argue that the first one hasn't stopped a promising attack as the advantage meant that they had a more promising attack.

I know it happened to Chris Baird in an international qualifier, but those challenges were reckless in their own right and one was borderline SFP so it wasn't a case of two SPAs.
 
Big Cat said:
As for the Sub thing. Nothing the ref could do under the Laws AFAIK
Click to expand...
Agreed, but was there the need to draw it out by running over to Kepa, chatting to him, then running over to Sari, chatting to him then giving the big cutting the grass signal to show ‘no sub’. It felt like it was all for the cameras when in reality, it should be as simple as just playing on if the player won’t leave, as per the LOTG
 
I have not seen it, only read about it, but maybe one for all of you/us who like to involve the captain in matters? Afterall, he does have a degree of responsibility for his team?
Nevermind using the captain for stuff (IMO) like dissent, that you should be able to handle yourself (although I do understand the step process despite it not rolled out here), how about trying to use him for something like this, when it really does matter?

(and yes I do already get the issues you will have if said problem IS the captain!!)
 
First tackle was a yellow, second was more so a yellow, it happened with Cakir recently showing Moss how it should be done!!
 
QuaverRef said:
Agreed, but was there the need to draw it out by running over to Kepa, chatting to him, then running over to Sari, chatting to him then giving the big cutting the grass signal to show ‘no sub’. It felt like it was all for the cameras when in reality, it should be as simple as just playing on if the player won’t leave, as per the LOTG
Click to expand...
https://twitter.com/x/status/1099752126346158081

I see your point, but I think it's important that it doesn't look like the ref is ignoring or missing the sub. It was for the cameras, but in the context of it being such a big match and unusual situation, I'm not sure it's the worst idea.
 
Wonder if it's something along the lines of:

"I've given plenty of time, but I can't force him to come off, if he won't come off I have to continue the game okay?"
 
GraemeS said:
https://twitter.com/x/status/1099752126346158081

I see your point, but I think it's important that it doesn't look like the ref is ignoring or missing the sub. It was for the cameras, but in the context of it being such a big match and unusual situation, I'm not sure it's the worst idea.
Click to expand...
It was important, especially in a televised cup final, that he went and spoke to the manager and made it clear that the sub couldn't happen. Don't understand why that is being discussed.

If it was me at grassroots, I still would've talked to the manager but it would've been much quicker: "if he refuses to come off, I have no option but to restart the game."
 
I hear in the media Sari saying it was a miscommunication and he will not be punishing Arrizabalaga.

Is this a plausible scenario (in defence of Arrizabalaga)? Sari instructions at ET to slow the game down and waste as much time to get it to a shoot out. Arrizabalaga feigns injury and sells it so well even Sari believes it. Trainers go in, Arrizabalaga : "take your time guys but I am OK, just wasting time". Sari now wants to replace his 'injured' keeper. Trainers go back and tell Sari Arrizabalaga is ok and was only wasting time. Sari now has to somehow save face but its a no win situation.
 
Not necessarily faking. One can be injured enough to need treatment or a couple of minutes, but not so injured as unable to do KFTPM—which invoke reacting, but not running. (I’m not saying he wasn’t faking/exaggerating, just that it isn’t necessarily the case.)
 
spuddy1878 said:
What do you think Jon Moss asked Sarri then ?
Click to expand...
@Dutch Referee Blog suggests Sarri/Zola also checked if the sub can happen after the whistle has ended extra time.

That would be another can of worms. Is Kepa ”unable to continue” would Sarri have to get him to feign injury to get the sub made...? a lot of ifs... did anyone see if Kepa had words during the interval before KFTPM?
 
one said:
I hear in the media Sari saying it was a miscommunication and he will not be punishing Arrizabalaga.

Is this a plausible scenario (in defence of Arrizabalaga)? Sari instructions at ET to slow the game down and waste as much time to get it to a shoot out. Arrizabalaga feigns injury and sells it so well even Sari believes it. Trainers go in, Arrizabalaga : "take your time guys but I am OK, just wasting time". Sari now wants to replace his 'injured' keeper. Trainers go back and tell Sari Arrizabalaga is ok and was only wasting time. Sari now has to somehow save face but its a no win situation.
Click to expand...
Well, the injuries to Arrizabalaga took three minutes, and the nonsense about not coming off took two minutes, but only three mins added.

Sarri's a good actor if he didn't want to replace him to put his Willy on the line for the penalties.
 
JH said:
It was important, especially in a televised cup final, that he went and spoke to the manager and made it clear that the sub couldn't happen. Don't understand why that is being discussed.

If it was me at grassroots, I still would've talked to the manager but it would've been much quicker: "if he refuses to come off, I have no option but to restart the game."
Click to expand...
There's a fourth official there to manage substitutions, something we don't have at grassroots.

The referee just needs to get on with play. It was a ridiculous spectacle
 
bloovee said:
Well, the injuries to Arrizabalaga took three minutes, and the nonsense about not coming off took two minutes, but only three mins added.

Sarri's a good actor if he didn't want to replace him to put his Willy on the line for the penalties.
Click to expand...
The 3 minutes was clearly indicated before the substitution malarkey. They then played 5 minutes of added time.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
es1 said:
He was off
Click to expand...

Just offside I think. Interestingly, the replay which we saw after the game was a different one to the one we saw just after it happened. The replay after the game showed it to be just offside. I'm assuming that the VAR officials saw that replay and not the one which we saw on tv as it happens.

The bigger mistake was when the AR flagged Hazard despite the directive to keep the flag down if it's a close one when VAR is being used. ARs still getting used to protocol which is expected
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top