A&H

Liverpool v Everton

Status
Not open for further replies.
P

Paul_10

Well-Known Member
Surprised there is no thread on this given the supposed controversy over some of the decisions.

The TNT commentators were not happy Young got a second yellow card(probably because for the neutural it was going to make the game even more just an attack Vs defence type of game) but for me it was stopping a promising attack and whilst the ref could show some leniency, there was complaints when Michael Oliver seemingly did that so refs can't win really. No idea what Dyche was moaning at in terms of he thought the first tackle wasn't a yellow, that was a definite stonewall yellow card.

The Konate potential second yellow card is causing controversy but I think Pawson got this spot on, Beto I think it was wasn't getting to the ball and I'm sure that what the referee was saying to the Everton players and that is the difference, if he was definately getting the ball then I think it would of been a second yellow.
 
  • Like
Reactions: nel
The Referee Store
Though it raises a question of consistency, second yellows have always had a higher bar than first yellows. Though there was no element of doubt for Young's second yellow, very clear SPA, Pawson gave himself a lot of thinking time and found no way out of it. Konate's potential second had lots of elements of doubt and that is what saved him.
 
I’ll take the opposite view, nailed on second yellow for Konate, no intention of playing the ball, only intention was to stop a promising attack, he saw 1 on 1 if the Everton player received the ball. Such an easy sell & what the whole ground was expecting, even Klopp!

In fact Young’s first yellow was similar to Konate’s yellow not given, the player wasn‘t getting the ball and there were numerous covering defenders & was in his own half.

With Pawson’s experience I was surprised he didn’t take the less controversial option.

PS. Any different to Manuel Akanji’s second yellow for Man City?

To be fair to Dyche his post match comments were fair and balanced.
 
Last edited:
Thought Konate's "challenge" was more akin the the egg game, arm across his opponent with zero attempt to play the ball. Agree with DJ, we hear a lot about what the game expects, speaks volumes that even Klopp thought it was a nailed on 2nd yellow.

Young might be in a bit of trouble for his behaviour after the red card, wasn't too dissimilar to VVD's against Newcastle.

Yet more inconsistent application/non-application of the clampdown though after Diaz somewhat theatrical Neymaresque rolling, he could be clearly be seen to waving an imaginary card in the direction of Craig Pawson which went unpunished.
 
Ashley Young: Foul, free kick and caution
Delays restart of play - no further action, but on last chance
Second foul, free kick and second caution.

Konate: Foul, free kick and caution
Second foul, free kick and final warning.

Absolutely fair and square.

I don’t buy that any foul after a caution is an automatic second caution. Hanging fire is a perfect technique for us as referees to keep things tight.

Final warning, next infraction = gone. Or they’re quiet as church mouse and in your pocket. Or they get hooked as he did.

Beto for me, also knew what he was doing and tried to engineer a caution for Konate.
 
es1 said:
No one would have complained if konate had gone but I think it's wrong in law. Ball is practically back with the Liverpool defender when the foul occurs. Its not spa or reckless.
Click to expand...
Completely agree
 
es1 said:
No one would have complained if konate had gone but I think it's wrong in law. Ball is practically back with the Liverpool defender when the foul occurs. Its not spa or reckless.
Click to expand...
That's my take exactly, and why I get frustrated at all of the pundits shouting about this. If Young hadn't been sent off they wouldn't even have been talking about Konate, but since when has there been a levelling up law in football?

Was it reckless? Certainly not. Was it SPA? No, as Beto had zero chance of getting the ball. It was just a bog standard foul that has been blown out of all proportion. That's why I asked the question as to what exactly are you cautioning for. You could just use generic USB, but it most definitely wasn't a mandatory caution, whereas both of Young's were clear SPA.
 
RustyRef said:
That's my take exactly, and why I get frustrated at all of the pundits shouting about this. If Young hadn't been sent off they wouldn't even have been talking about Konate, but since when has there been a levelling up law in football?

Was it reckless? Certainly not. Was it SPA? No, as Beto had zero chance of getting the ball. It was just a bog standard foul that has been blown out of all proportion. That's why I asked the question as to what exactly are you cautioning for. You could just use generic USB, but it most definitely wasn't a mandatory caution, whereas both of Young's were clear SPA.
Click to expand...
I’ve just said this in another thread, but the commentators went on constantly as to why Young shouldn’t have been sent off, despite agreeing that both of his challenges were yellow card worthy. Apparently the referee should have used common sense. Whatever that means.

Pundits don’t have a clue about basic law, yet people take what they say as gospel. Football must be one of, if not the only sport where the supposed experts have very little knowledge of the laws/rules
 
Runner-Ref said:
I’ve just said this in another thread, but the commentators went on constantly as to why Young shouldn’t have been sent off, despite agreeing that both of his challenges were yellow card worthy. Apparently the referee should have used common sense. Whatever that means.

Pundits don’t have a clue about basic law, yet people take what they say as gospel. Football must be one of, if not the only sport where the supposed experts have very little knowledge of the laws/rules
Click to expand...
In fairness it was really just Ally McCoist on co-comms, the studio pundits agreed it was a correct sending off.
 
There are two potential justifications for a second caution for Konate.
Persistent infringement
Or SPA - which is not only for stopping a promising attack it can be given for a foul that merely 'interferes with' a promising attack which I think is justifiable on this one.
 
CaptainsPlease said:
There are two potential justifications for a second caution for Konate.
Persistent infringement
Or SPA - which is not only for stopping a promising attack it can be given for a foul that merely 'interferes with' a promising attack which I think is justifiable on this one.
Click to expand...
Pretty sure it was his first foul after the caution, so persistent infringement is a no no.

Whether stopping or interfering really doesn't matter when a defender has possession of the ball at the time of the foul, there was no promising attack.
 
I think it's technically not SPA but it's one of those that really really feels like a yellow. In the end it's a lot like a 50/50 PK decision in stoppage time of a tied match. You're damned either way. Some times as a ref the situation just lines up to screw you even if you're technically right.
 
Tealeaf said:
Final warning, next infraction = gone. Or they’re quiet as church mouse and in your pocket. Or they get hooked as he did.
Click to expand...
Looks like Klopp knew this technique when he took Konate off. Good decision from him. As a referee I'd expect that from a coach it helps me so that I don't have to send a player off for something cheap.
 
cwyeary said:
I think it's technically not SPA but it's one of those that really really feels like a yellow. In the end it's a lot like a 50/50 PK decision in stoppage time of a tied match. You're damned either way. Some times as a ref the situation just lines up to screw you even if you're technically right.
Click to expand...
I agree

I think you don't give it if you haven't already sent off an opponent for a second caution, and you do if you have
If you're on good form that is!
 
if he'd sent him off the only people discussing the merits of the decision would be us, thinking it wasnt spa
 
RustyRef said:
OK, I'll bite, if you are cautioning Konate what exactly are you cautioning for?
Click to expand...

You could easily say that Konate "shows a lack of respect for the game" by committing what is an obvious, egregious, and unnecessary foul which could not, in any sense, be considered a footballing action. This has the added benefit of allowing the referee to give the caution that everyone and their mothers is expecting, and do it without having to invent a SPA or reckless challenge which doesn't exist.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top