The Ref Stop

Courtois Red

Donate to RefChat

Help keep RefChat running, any donation would be appreciated

Charlie Jones

Charlie Jones

Work Until You Don't Have To Introduce Yourself
so - I presume everyone has seen Swanseas PK and Courtois Red ... What does everyone think of Mr Oliver's decision?

Personally I think it was a spot on call!
 
The Ref Stop
Spot on in my opinion. Yes there was a covering defender but he would more than likely had a pretty much empty net to aim at if Courtois hadn't fouled him
 
Spot on yeah. And he didn't argue either always a good sign
 
Agree with OP tbh, referee got it spot on, originally though free kick but again was proved wrong by replay
 
Either way, I think you could argue serious foul play aswell as DOGSO
 
What was funny though was Jose mourinho not talking about it at all.
 
I think it is an DOGSO ... If Courtois doesn't impede then that is a very simple finish for Gomis, his touch past was perfectly weighted to get on the end of it
 
Covering defender? Yes. One. Defender.

Replace Courtois with a defender making a dreadful tackle as the player comes in on goal with just the GK to beat after. That's the precise definition of DOGSO.

Why do we think to treat it differently when a GK makes that tackle, fouling the player. "Well, there was a (single) covering defender... "

No, no, no, no. The GK is a far better defender of the goal than a field player... why? Because the ******* can handle the ball in his own penalty area!

And yet? Clear DOGSO. Be consistent, please.

(and pardon my ranting on this one, it happens far too often here where the GK gets a "free pass" because there's a defender somewhere in the picture... and NOBODY ELSE)
 
PK and red card for DOGSO but also, a great example of teamwork between the Ref and AR and their communication.
  • AR was correct with the "no offside" decision which so irked John Terry.
  • AR must have (IMHO) informed Oliver the foul was in the PA. I don't think Oliver could have made that himself.
  • Oliver, with his own view unobstructed, then has all the information he needs to make the call.
Good work all round by the officials.
 
I have not considered the "covering defender" at all in my decision not to go for DOGSO (for precisely the reasons you have mentioned).
I think his last touch takes him toward the corner flag and was heavy. Maybe he was just switching feet and would have immediately brought the ball under control, but the GK gets the benefit of the doubt on that one.
I can honestly say Ryan Giggs, Darren Fletcher or Tom Cleverley (ie the dross of Man Utd's midfielder the past few years) would NOT have scored that chance.
You can't ask for consistency on an issue worded like DOGSO. It's so open to interpretation with so maybe factors to consider. (Some are very clear cut, this isn't one of them)
Was he heading toward opponents goal? At the exact moment of the foul no. Well, rightly or wrongly I interpret that as not DOGSO under the LOTG wording.
 
unfortunately @deusex I disagree ... if you watch the challenge, his touch does take him away from the direct path of goal but not enough for it not to be considered a DOGSO

agree to disagree though! this is why the forums are worthwhile
 
Having seen it again and taken my swans tinted glasses off...
It could be DOGSO but ball is heading away from goal, clearly away so not DOGSO in that respect even with an empty net. I still say that instead of DOGSO a call of Serious Foul Play would possibly be a better choice, I'd say that the tackle endangers an opponents safety in the manner of it so that would justify a red card on it's own so it's a correct decision
 
I'd certainly not consider it an error in law were I assessing as I think it's one that could go either way.
Chelsea are appealing, which is certainly worth a go. I'll be interested to see the outcome. Can't see it being overturned, but the people who make these decisons aren't known for their consistency.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top