Liverpool-Inter

[Joshref]

Surely that's like saying if you slide in and take the ball your follow through can be ignored? Players have to make a decision on the sort of challenge they do whether they are jumping in with arm flailing about or studs showing in a challenge knowing full well that if they can't stop (as they are uncontrolled) then they may make a foul that ends up in a card being given to them?

I suggest you read Anubis’ post again because you’re agreeing with him here

 

[Anubis]

Surely that's like saying if you slide in and take the ball your follow through can be ignored? Players have to make a decision on the sort of challenge they do whether they are jumping in with arm flailing about or studs showing in a challenge knowing full well that if they can't stop (as they are uncontrolled) then they may make a foul that ends up in a card being given to them?

I posted in response to someones quote.....

hence i quoted, their quote

of course never personal but genuinely worried that anyone would not see that as a card.

 

[Paul_10]

not in any way reckless and at worst a foul........

And I always thought using still shots was a big no no.

At the end of the day, football is a contact sport and imo at worst its a foul. The contact made on the player was a consequence of reaching for the ball which he got. It was not high up on the leg(unlike the first yellow) and in that split second its impossible to move your foot/leg away. I honestly believe (most) refs in the PL would never show a second yellow for that.

 

[GraemeS]

It's studs into the ankle with force. I'm not going to go as far as saying the context is irrelevant, but it's a pretty standard decision to card for that regardless of why it's happened.

I don't think we'd see a moments complaint if that was a first yellow card - the reason it's causing a fuss is because it's a second yellow and we've been conditioned to think there should be a higher bar for those. But that doesn't make this a wrong decision.

 

[ARF]

And I always thought using still shots was a big no no.

At the end of the day, football is a contact sport and imo at worst its a foul. The contact made on the player was a consequence of reaching for the ball which he got. It was not high up on the leg(unlike the first yellow) and in that split second its impossible to move your foot/leg away. I honestly believe (most) refs in the PL would never show a second yellow for that.

The contact was a consequence of his own actions, nothing else. If you can't avoid the fact that you're going to put your studs in the other player's ankle, then you shouldn't be making the tackle in the first place.

 

[Martiju]

The contact was a consequence of his own actions, nothing else. If you can't avoid the fact that you're going to put your studs in the other player's ankle, then you shouldn't be making the tackle in the first place.

Completely agree. Just like when the commentators/pundits say a player 'couldn't do anything else there' - what they invariably mean is they couldn't compete for the ball without being careless, reckless or using excessive force. The answer is always not to make the challenge in the first place.

 

[Anubis]

And I always thought using still shots was a big no no.

At the end of the day, football is a contact sport and imo at worst its a foul. The contact made on the player was a consequence of reaching for the ball which he got. It was not high up on the leg(unlike the first yellow) and in that split second its impossible to move your foot/leg away. I honestly believe (most) refs in the PL would never show a second yellow for that.

When we referee, we should be taking millions of instant screenshots in our head
Whether its offside, or a foul.
Click, click, click, over and over again
If in this incident, we freeze our brain as per the screenshot, we have our card

the screenshot is factually the point of contact, its in black and white what you are sanctioning. They dont always show a true picture of say, a handball, or, an attempt to tackle, but, when caught perfectly on the point of contact you now have everything you need. Iif it helps, look at the guys face. Everything about the clip and pic screams sanction,

no diff to offside, looking along line, where is 9, where is 9, who is playing the pass,where is 9 boom, offside

In your game, if you are content not to sanction that foul, so be it.
I will go out on a limb an say had he not already been cautioned, this would have been a staight red, certainly if reviewed .

 

[refeire]

When we referee, we should be taking millions of instant screenshots in our head
Whether its offside, or a foul.
Click, click, click, over and over again
If in this incident, we freeze our brain as per the screenshot, we have our card

the screenshot is factually the point of contact, its in black and white what you are sanctioning. They dont always show a true picture of say, a handball, or, an attempt to tackle, but, when caught perfectly on the point of contact you now have everything you need. Iif it helps, look at the guys face. Everything about the clip and pic screams sanction,

no diff to offside, looking along line, where is 9, where is 9, who is playing the pass,where is 9 boom, offside

In your game, if you are content not to sanction that foul, so be it.
I will go out on a limb an say had he not already been cautioned, this would have been a staight red, certainly if reviewed .

I got to the end of this thread scratching my head thinking why nobody else has said the 2nd yellow should have been a red. Surely it meets the criteria!

 

[Anubis]

I got to the end of this thread scratching my head thinking why nobody else has said the 2nd yellow should have been a red. Surely it meets the criteria!

Here is why........

you go second yellow, easy sell
you go straight red, harder sell.