Fleetwood v Arsenal

[ladbroke8745]

Game paused for a drone at beginning.

Dowman sent off for VC.

Now tell me, how different was that to the one made by Palmer reacting to a challenge?
Palmer actually ran a few yards to do so.

My conspiracy theory is VAR. Whereas Brooks could have sent him to screen, the argument is not clear and obviously wrong. So yellow on field stood.
This game has no VAR so he had to make a decision and went red knowing that a yellow may not be sufficient and VAR not about to correct if wrong.

 

[Ryanj91]

How on earth is there any force in that to warrant VC?

Like coms just said, all their legs are tangled up.

One talking point that is of note...I would like to know if the ref can use his watches? Stoppage was over 8 mins for the drone, add on normal stoppages, yet added time was only 7?

 

[alexv]

It is a red for me. He’s kneed him in reaction to the tackle

 

[RustyRef]

I'm not really seeing anything violent in that, he's gone to kick him but then pulled out, really don't see how that was excessive force or brutality. Fully expect that one will be overturned on appeal.

 

[Paul_10]

I wouldn't be surprised if it was the assistant who probably made that decision for the ref there as I doubt Salisbury would of seen that from his position. However I do think its harsh though, it's definitely just more petulant than violent.

Good point made about whether the lack of influence from VAR made the officials err on the side of giving a red because it looked like a kick out from the Arsenal player.

 

[DavidObs]

I wouldn't be surprised if it was the assistant who probably made that decision for the ref there as I doubt Salisbury would of seen that from his position. However I do think its harsh though, it's definitely just more petulant than violent.

Good point made about whether the lack of influence from VAR made the officials err on the side of giving a red because it looked like a kick out from the Arsenal player.

One would think err on the side of caution without VAR with a yellow, rather than full blooded with a red.

 

[socal lurker]

I think it is more along the lines of, to the extent that you believe VAR causes Rs to err on the side of cautions that can be upgraded, that isn't in play. So he can't weasel out (consciously on subconsciously) and gives his best decision. I don't at all think refs err on the side of red without VAR, but they may err more on the side of yellow with VAR.

 

[Paul_10]

One would think err on the side of caution without VAR with a yellow, rather than full blooded with a red.

Nope I always believe it's the other way round because upgrading a yellow to a red is seen less of an error than the other way round but when you got no VAR and a official sees a player kicking out then it gives you a decision to be made and your instinct will surely lead more to a red card.

 

[DJIC]

One would think err on the side of caution without VAR with a yellow, rather than full blooded with a red.

That’s always my last thought in the process, do I have any option/reasoning to keep the player on the pitch?

 

[bester]

Off the ball 'kick-outs' used to be invariably red. On first view I have no problem with the decision although you can see the force level wasn't high on replay.
Not sure whether the trend changed pre or post the introduction of VAR

 

[Pembroke]

It is a red for me. He’s kneed him in reaction to the tackle

Kneed can mean multiple things. This was a gentle knee, a teeny weeny nudge. Brutality? Zero. Excessive force? None.

 

[alexv]

Kneed can mean multiple things. This was a gentle knee, a teeny weeny nudge. Brutality? Zero. Excessive force? None.

I wouldn’t say that was a teeny weeny nudge from the AR’s view. He’s been helped that the player didn’t roll around on the floor, and he probably would’ve caught him in the head if the Fleetwood player wasn’t turning away

 

[RustyRef]

Unsurprisingly Arsenal have appealed, I’d be very surprised if this isn’t deemed wrong and the suspension removed

 

[SelbyRef]

Is anyone punishing the initial tackle on Dowman? Obviously take social media comments with a pinch of salt but plenty (and not just AFC fans) are suggesting that was a red card tackle with the implication it has (ended up as) a scissor type motion on Dowman’s back leg.

Personally I don’t see it - strong challenge yes, but I didn’t think it warranted anything further.

Dowman Incident

 

[ARF]

The follow through is pushing me towards reckless, but I'm not seeing sufficient force there for SFP. Referee would have had no view of it though, and the AR would be primarily focusing on the foot that plays the ball for the throw-in decision (not to mention having the opposite angle to ^that clip). For me, yellow for the tackle, and yellow for the petulant reaction.

 

[SelbyRef]

The follow through is pushing me towards reckless, but I'm not seeing sufficient force there for SFP. Referee would have had no view of it though, and the AR would be primarily focusing on the foot that plays the ball for the throw-in decision (not to mention having the opposite angle to ^that clip). For me, yellow for the tackle, and yellow for the petulant reaction.

Yep could probably live with that outcome to be fair, though for me I don’t think there’s that much follow through, in that Neal’s momentum such as it is has stopped by the time Dowman’s leg is caught up with his.

 

[RustyRef]

Appeal successful, decision overturned and suspension removed.

 

[Pembroke]

Is anyone punishing the initial tackle on Dowman? Obviously take social media comments with a pinch of salt but plenty (and not just AFC fans) are suggesting that was a red card tackle with the implication it has (ended up as) a scissor type motion on Dowman’s back leg.

Personally I don’t see it - strong challenge yes, but I didn’t think it warranted anything further.

Dowman Incident

I think this is a foul.