IPS v ARS Red Card

[lincs22]

Chris Kavanagh made that decision quickly. Looks late and high, but no different to 10 other challenges this weekend.

Was he right?

 

[Archer]

 

[RustyRef]

Definite red card for me, late, high and with force, but the biggest point for me is I don't think he was trying to play the ball and rather was just trying to hurt Saka

 

[es1]

Red red red red red red

 

[Wolf_Ref]

Outstanding decision (neutral here).

No intent to play the ball. Horrid tackle. Just a really nasty one. As Rusty said. Straight leg with force. Could have demolished the Achilles and/or broken the ankle.

 

[Archer]

Would be nice if media/commentators stopped referring to such challenges as “reckless”.

Use “forceful” if you can’t be arsed reading Law and don’t want to use “dangerous”.

 

[one]

Outstanding decision

Only because SFP red cards without involvement of VAR is becoming less and less common.

Few years ago this would have been just a good or correct decision.

 

[Wolf_Ref]

Would be nice if media/commentators stopped referring to such challenges as “reckless”.

Use “forceful” if you can’t be arsed reading Law and don’t want to use “dangerous”.

They’ll never stop doing that

 

[cooperd5]

After telly review, definitely red.
I was there today and missed it as the challenge was so late, I was looking where the ball went....

 

[Paul_10]

Nice too see a referee going red without the need for VAR and most importantly getting the decision right.

As for the media keep saying reckless when describing red card challenges then the fact so many different people do it may mean maybe the word reckless should be removed from the laws when describing a certain type of yellow card offense because in the eyes of many different people, reckless is clearly defined as something as serious/severe therefore a red card offense.

Admittedly I would have no idea what word you would replace it with so maybe as suggested, pundits/fans alike should just read the laws more and try and avoid using the word reckless when describing a red card offense.

 

[Jaylen]

Such a late and dangerous challenge. Red all day long.

 

[Johnson]

My instinct was YC but after considering considerations, I think that instinct was wrong. Point of contact is the back of the Achilles, mode of contact is the studs, there is no chance or attempt to fairly play the ball and it’s at least lunge adjacent. Considerations in favour of yellow card are the force was not super high, the player doesn’t come from distance and the point of contact is low, but the nature of the challenge is such I think the safety of the opponent was still endangered.

 

[QuaverRef]

Nice too see a referee going red without the need for VAR and most importantly getting the decision right.

As for the media keep saying reckless when describing red card challenges then the fact so many different people do it may mean maybe the word reckless should be removed from the laws when describing a certain type of yellow card offense because in the eyes of many different people, reckless is clearly defined as something as serious/severe therefore a red card offense.

Admittedly I would have no idea what word you would replace it with so maybe as suggested, pundits/fans alike should just read the laws more and try and avoid using the word reckless when describing a red card offense.

You could have stopped at ‘pundits/fans should just read the laws’

 

[Paul_10]

You could have stopped at ‘pundits/fans should just read the laws’

True but the counter argument is so many different people use reckless to describe a red card challenge and you can understand why so my point was is the use of reckless to describe a yellow card challenge too strong of a word and should be used to describe a red card challenge?

I do cringe though when pundits/social media supporters use that word mind as they are wrong to use it.

 

[Archer]

My day job is in another sport at the elite level, and I frequently communicate to the media, supporters, other stakeholders - and indeed commentate or provide b-roll - and I *have* to be able to refer to Law Regulations to frame things in an accurate context.

It’s just being lazy otherwise.

A fan doesn’t have to know Law, but those EARNING A LIVING reporting on it should be able to quote it.

 

[ChasObserverRefDeveloper]

Nice too see a referee going red without the need for VAR and most importantly getting the decision right.

As for the media keep saying reckless when describing red card challenges then the fact so many different people do it may mean maybe the word reckless should be removed from the laws when describing a certain type of yellow card offense because in the eyes of many different people, reckless is clearly defined as something as serious/severe therefore a red card offense.

Admittedly I would have no idea what word you would replace it with so maybe as suggested, pundits/fans alike should just read the laws more and try and avoid using the word reckless when describing a red card offense.

As they still use "linesman" (changed in 1997 to Assistant Referee) and "foul and abusive language" (never in the LOTG) let's not hold our breath

 

[Runner Ref]

As they still use "linesman" (changed in 1997 to Assistant Referee) and "foul and abusive language" (never in the LOTG) let's not hold our breath

I'm pretty sure Soccer Saturday still uses 'Professional Foul' to describe a red for DOGSO

 

[bester]

The FA use caution codes that haven't kept up with the LOTG eg C1-DI, C1-DP so not much hope football will change long standing colloquialisms

 

[RustyRef]

I do have some sympathy with the pundits and commentators, as the law wording could be better. The word reckless by it's dictionary definition, sounds like something that would be a red card offence. For example, one definition is ...

doing something dangerous and not worrying about the risks and the possible results

It probably isn't a great word to use in the laws, although granted I'm not sure what word would be better.

 

[Martiju]

I do have some sympathy with the pundits and commentators, as the law wording could be better. The word reckless by it's dictionary definition, sounds like something that would be a red card offence. For example, one definition is ...

doing something dangerous and not worrying about the risks and the possible results

It probably isn't a great word to use in the laws, although granted I'm not sure what word would be better.

"disregard for safety of an opponent"?

I'm sure nearly all of us work in places with very specific usage of terms that can be misinterpreted if you work in a different field. Ultimately like all terms the important thing is that the concept it aims at describing just needs to be understood by the community that need it. It absolutely should be shared language by any professionals involved, and they should be able to explain it to the wider public as necessary.