The Ref Stop

Everton v Brentford

L

ladbroke8745

RefChat Addict
Norgaard sending off.
Without looking at still as we all know stills don't tell the whole story..
Is it really worthy of a red card?
A we really saying to players to not attempt to go for a goal anymore?
Seems like the ex pros on MOTD think it's ridiculous.

Around 1:21 I think.

 
The Ref Stop
FirsFox40 said:
Was that the challenge on Palmer? Red for me, that.
Click to expand...
Yet was given as a yellow and not looked at for upgrade (sorry, was looked at, they apparently all are, but thought nothing of it) to red.

The Brentford midfielder went to try and divert the ball goalwards with no player in his line until Pickford turns. The midfielder is already commited to try and score. There is nothing in that, for me, that screams serious foul play and that the referee got that incredibly wrong for it to be reviewed.
It is, for me, a natural play and a natural collision.
 
ladbroke8745 said:
There is nothing in that, for me, that screams serious foul play and that the referee got that incredibly wrong for it to be reviewed.
It is, for me, a natural play and a natural collision.
Click to expand...
Catching a player knee height with the full face of the studs showing is not what I'd consider a "natural collision". It's a dangerous challenge and easily meets the criteria for SFP.
 
The argument from the ex-pros as to why it isn't a red is that it was accidental and he was going for the ball. Both of those statements are true, but as referees we should know that it being accidental and an attempt to get the ball has pretty much zero relevance. Did it use excessive force and / or endanger the safety of an opponent? It clearly did both, he's lunged at speed with a straight leg and caught Pickford full on the knee.

I do think it will get overturned on appeal, because the ex-pros and ex-managers will probably hold the same views as the likes of Shearer, i.e. it was accidental and he had eyes on the ball. But that would just further prove the argument that it is lunacy having people with no qualifications in the laws making rulings on laws already applied by qualified referees.
 
RustyRef said:
The argument from the ex-pros as to why it isn't a red is that it was accidental and he was going for the ball. Both of those statements are true, but as referees we should know that it being accidental and an attempt to get the ball has pretty much zero relevance. Did it use excessive force and / or endanger the safety of an opponent? It clearly did both, he's lunged at speed with a straight leg and caught Pickford full on the knee.

I do think it will get overturned on appeal, because the ex-pros and ex-managers will probably hold the same views as the likes of Shearer, i.e. it was accidental and he had eyes on the ball. But that would just further prove the argument that it is lunacy having people with no qualifications in the laws making rulings on laws already applied by qualified referees.
Click to expand...
If it were at speed, which I don't think it was, then Pickford would have sustained much more of an injury than just a scratch.
Excessive force? He is literally stretching to get on the end of a cross that the forward missed. It happens in every game.
Literally.
Only difference is Pickford made a meal of it as he always does and pointed to the scratch.

Unfortunately players go down and stay down so much these days to con refs for "injuries" that you now can't tell if a player is genuinely injured.
I'm not saying no contact was made, but I don't think the contact made was anything near what Pickford made out. And I'm going to be honest here, I don't think VAR gets involved if he didn't have that sulk and points to his shin (with child size shin pads by the way).
 
ladbroke8745 said:
If it were at speed, which I don't think it was, then Pickford would have sustained much more of an injury than just a scratch.
Excessive force? He is literally stretching to get on the end of a cross that the forward missed. It happens in every game.
Literally.
Only difference is Pickford made a meal of it as he always does and pointed to the scratch.

Unfortunately players go down and stay down so much these days to con refs for "injuries" that you now can't tell if a player is genuinely injured.
I'm not saying no contact was made, but I don't think the contact made was anything near what Pickford made out. And I'm going to be honest here, I don't think VAR gets involved if he didn't have that sulk and points to his shin (with child size shin pads by the way).
Click to expand...
With respect, I think you might be looking at this with slightly red & white tined glasses. I don't think many referees will say that this wasn't a red card, it seems to just be largely ex-pros. Neutral journalists seem to agree with it being red, for example I've just listened to Max Rushden and Barry Glendenning and they both think it was a nailed on red card.
 
RustyRef said:
With respect, I think you might be looking at this with slightly red & white tined glasses. I don't think many referees will say that this wasn't a red card, it seems to just be largely ex-pros. Neutral journalists seem to agree with it being red, for example I've just listened to Max Rushden and Barry Glendenning and they both think it was a nailed on red card.
Click to expand...
I'm definitely not looking at this from any other angle than as a ref.
I'll quite happily watch every game these days with plenty of red cards when players are going to try and score a goal in the future.
 
ladbroke8745 said:
I'm definitely not looking at this from any other angle than as a ref.
I'll quite happily watch every game these days with plenty of red cards when players are going to try and score a goal in the future.
Click to expand...
There's the counter argument though that when Pickford fouled, and badly injured, Van Dijk everyone thought it was a red card, but he was just trying to stop a goal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top