A&H

City v Sheff United

Status
Not open for further replies.
S

spuddy1878

RefChat Addict
All the talk will be about the opening goal.

Not sure if it's hit the referee or he's just got right in the way but surely he would have been better to pull play back here and give the drop to Sheffield United.
 
The Referee Store
spuddy1878 said:
All the talk will be about the opening goal.

Not sure if it's hit the referee or he's just got right in the way but surely he would have been better to pull play back here and give the drop to Sheffield United.
Click to expand...
If he didn’t get hit by the ball, there is no basis in law to stop play. (At least till next year....)
 
The ball didn't hit him, rather he accidentally blocked a player off, so to stop play would be totally incorrect in law. It was unfortunately, although some blame should go the player who played the ball in front of Fleck knowing that the referee was stood in that space, but you just can't stop play for that.
 
RustyRef said:
The ball didn't hit him, rather he accidentally blocked a player off, so to stop play would be totally incorrect in law. It was unfortunately, although some blame should go the player who played the ball in front of Fleck knowing that the referee was stood in that space, but you just can't stop play for that.
Click to expand...
It will however be reflected in his match report because of such awful positioning leading to his interference with a player and the scoring of a goal.
 
Thats SEVEN goals scrubbed off so far this season that would have been 100% GOALS last season.....

EDIT: I've removed the bits that applied intentional bias as opposed to deleting the whole post as I do agree that Sheffield United have had the worst luck. But this is a refereeing site not a fans forum and suggesting intentional bias is not on.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Brian Hamilton said:
It will however be reflected in his match report because of such awful positioning leading to his interference with a player and the scoring of a goal.
Click to expand...

Not sure it will Brian, he was well placed but then the ball got passed straight in front of him. At lower levels there's an argument to say he should have been a bit wider, but they don't expect that in the prem.
 
Sheffields Finest said:
Thats SEVEN goals scrubbed off so far this season that would have been 100% GOALS last season.....

EDIT: I've removed the bits that applied intentional bias as opposed to deleting the whole post as I do agree that Sheffield United have had the worst luck. But this is a refereeing site not a fans forum and suggesting intentional bias is not on.
Click to expand...

He's from Manchester, came through the Manchester FA, WHY is he reffing Manchester teams!!! We never get Pawson!!!!

https://www.premierleague.com/refer...QSp_kmX1JV_t2TPTArsn3X13msmx2jml96jwAGSVlUXnE
 
Sheffields Finest said:
He's from Manchester, came through the Manchester FA, WHY is he reffing Manchester teams!!! We never get Pawson!!!!

https://www.premierleague.com/refer...QSp_kmX1JV_t2TPTArsn3X13msmx2jml96jwAGSVlUXnE
Click to expand...

Anthony Taylor is from Manchester but gets Manchester teams, it doesn't work on postcodes any more and rather who the referees support. Mike Dean wasn't allowed to referee Liverpool or Everton previously, and famously was removed from a cup final as a result. This was due to his Wirral postcode but now he can officiate them as he supports Tranmere and therefore has no affinity to either Liverpool or Everton. I know Anthony Taylor supports Altrincham, no idea who Chris Kavanagh supports but it can't be Man City otherwise he wouldn't be refereeing them and for the reason below it won't be Man Utd either.

I believe they also apply it to rivalries. So as an example, a Man Utd fan wouldn't be able to officiate Man City, a Liverpool fan not Everton, a Wednesday fan not United, etc. I would guess that Pawson has declared that he supports either Wednesday or United and therefore is precluded from both of their games.
 
RustyRef said:
Not sure it will Brian, he was well placed but then the ball got passed straight in front of him. At lower levels there's an argument to say he should have been a bit wider, but they don't expect that in the prem.
Click to expand...
I'd disagree. It was the direction of his movement that caused me concern not his initial position (but even then I thought he was too close). He moved across play into the area into which the ball was being played rather than away to the left to get a better angle. He invited contact and interference.
 
RustyRef said:
Anthony Taylor is from Manchester but gets Manchester teams, it doesn't work on postcodes any more and rather who the referees support. Mike Dean wasn't allowed to referee Liverpool or Everton previously, and famously was removed from a cup final as a result. This was due to his Wirral postcode but now he can officiate them as he supports Tranmere and therefore has no affinity to either Liverpool or Everton. I know Anthony Taylor supports Altrincham, no idea who Chris Kavanagh supports but it can't be Man City otherwise he wouldn't be refereeing them and for the reason below it won't be Man Utd either.

I believe they also apply it to rivalries. So as an example, a Man Utd fan wouldn't be able to officiate Man City, a Liverpool fan not Everton, a Wednesday fan not United, etc. I would guess that Pawson has declared that he supports either Wednesday or United and therefore is precluded from both of their games.
Click to expand...
I think Mr K is a Stockport fan but I'm happy to be corrected on this one.
 
When did this become a fans forum where people just come on to slag of referees, rather than discussing specific incidents?
 
This thread is about another dodgy offside and dodgy match affecting positioning affecting a result.
 
Brian Hamilton said:
I'm discussing referee movement from the perspective of a former Contributory League Observer.
Click to expand...

Sorry, wasn't aimed at you.

It was aimed at the person indirectly suggesting the referee shouldn't have been appointed because they live in Manchester, and accusing the referee of having more assists than Jesse Lingard.
 
Right, I'll leave this going but will make this very clear point. This isn't a fans forum and if you want to complain about referee (or VAR) decisions that have gone against your team go elsewhere, this isn't the place for it. Critiquing a referee's decision is fine as that is good for all referees' learning, but we won't have rants about decisions and certainly won't entertain or accept suggestions that referees have been less than impartial.
 
socal lurker said:
If he didn’t get hit by the ball, there is no basis in law to stop play. (At least till next year....)
Click to expand...
RustyRef said:
so to stop play would be totally incorrect in law
Click to expand...

In the second game of the seasons for Man City there was a goal disallowed because the player who scored revived the ball after it hit a team mates's hand. There was no basis in law to disallow that goal because the law requires the ball to hit the player's had who scores the goal. They used the spirit of the law there. You either go with the principle or you don't. You don't pick and choose on when to go with the (poor) wording and when to apply the spirit.
 
Or, and i know it's a crazy idea, they felt he had committed an offence by handling the ball?

Handling the ball and creating a goalscoring opportunity is an offence. No need for "spirit of the game".
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20191230-085437.png
    Screenshot_20191230-085437.png
    599.4 KB · Views: 7
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top