Liverpool Vs Arsenal

[JamesL]

Negligible in LotG context… if player vs player… what do you think?

It's not negligible. But see my next post i was typing... Player on player... There is room for no action, or caution a piece for AA..one for the grab, one for the retaliation. As @Ste500 says, which I agree with now, it's not brutality or excessive force

 

[JamesL]

The LOTG defines non-playing contact to the head and neck as VC unless it is with negligible force. So in that context, you literally only have those two options - is it negligible force? If no, it must be VC.

It specifically says "when a player"...

Of course we know that could then mean that a team official can't be guilty of VC which we know they can as it is listed as an offence a team official can commit. (But of a rabbit hole in the LOTG there )

Rigorously applying the LOTG as they are written as you are suggesting...
A player raises his arm to appeal for a throw in. In doing so, his hand/arm makes more than negligible contact with opponents head...

Red card? Really?

 

[GraemeS]

I think this falls way below the level of contact in those examples.

For what it's worth, I didn't really want to comment until the outcome but my take on it is this:

For me, this is a pure accident. Robertson grabs, or attempts to grab the ARs arm, the AR goes to knock the arm away or Shake out of the grab but in between the arm is retracted and that lead to the contact.

A bit like at school when you'd move someone's chair as they were about to sit down.

Had the AR just shrugged the arm away this probably doesn't even get a mention. If a player grabbed anyone in this forum, we all do exactly the same, a get off me action. There was just an unintended consequence that came about as a result of that.

Agree it's a lower level of contact - hence arguing for 6 matches rather than 12 or retirement!

I'm just struggling a little bit with the decision to jerk the arm towards Robertson. For me if someone grabs your arm and you're trying to get away from them you do exactly that - move away from them.

Even if the AR was "only" attempting to push Robertson away, that's still an unnecessarily aggressive act when compared to alternatives. And we do expect players to be aware of the consequences of their actions, even if unintended.

 

[JamesL]

I'm just struggling a little bit with the decision to jerk the arm towards Robertson. For me if someone grabs your arm and you're trying to get away from them you do exactly that - move away from them.

How do you move away from someone who has a hold of you?
I am 100% sure that in any capacity, (a player, referee, civilian) someone grabs you/me by the arm you/I are going to make some kind of action, probably not dissimilar to the AR here, to disengage from that holding.
The issue comes from, in that exact moment, the arm is retracted and be just misses the arm and carries through. Which is why I presented the chair being removed argument. Even if you attempted to sit down slowly and gently, when the expected barrier is removed you end up landing heavier than the actual force or effort you originally used for the action.

I've already said, if this was player on player I don't think it's straight up VC if the exact circumstances as described happen. We have LOTG as a framework, but sometimes the laws are too rigid to fit every scenario (see my example which would be a textbook example of the LOTG definition, that you didn't say what you would do).

At the end of the day, we need to get to a world where no player is close enough to a referee to be elbowed by them, that would solve the issue completely.

 

[GraemeS]

Apologies for not answering, I missed that post. You've articulated a situation where the law as written feels strict - but I don't think that's particularly relevant here.

An incidental gesture that an opponent has run into is not the same as making a deliberate motion in reference to another person. CH knows Robertson is there and chooses to make an aggressive gesture with his arm in-and-around the space where he knows Robertson is likely to be. Moving your elbow rapidly into the space where there's a good chance someone's head/neck might be is at the very least failing to consider the risks.

To drag back to another football example - a player can make 2-footed flying blocks at knee height in the middle of nowhere all day. As soon as he does it somewhere where he should reasonably expect an opponents leg might end up, they run the risk of seeing red.

(I appreciate this isn't your fault because you and @zarathustra et al are different people, but it's very draining and confusing to alternately be told that I'm not allowed to apply the LOTG and to then be drawn into discussing intricacies of the LOTG to try and make the same point!)

 

[JamesL]

Apologies for not answering, I missed that post. You've articulated a situation where the law as written feels strict - but I don't think that's particularly relevant here.

An incidental gesture that an opponent has run into is not the same as making a deliberate motion in reference to another person. CH knows Robertson is there and chooses to make an aggressive gesture with his arm in-and-around the space where he knows Robertson is likely to be. Moving your elbow rapidly into the space where there's a good chance someone's head/neck might be is at the very least failing to consider the risks.

To drag back to another football example - a player can make 2-footed flying blocks at knee height in the middle of nowhere all day. As soon as he does it somewhere where he should reasonably expect an opponents leg might end up, they run the risk of seeing red.

(I appreciate this isn't your fault because you and @zarathustra et al are different people, but it's very draining and confusing to alternately be told that I'm not allowed to apply the LOTG and to then be drawn into discussing intricacies of the LOTG to try and make the same point!)

You've added a bit there. I didn't say the opponent ran into it, which I agree is obviously a very different matter.

My point is that you said there are only two options, negligible or brutality/excessive force when in a non playing situation a person makes contact with the hand/arm to the neck or face of another (or worse to that effect). That's not strictly true because there are plenty of scenarios where we wouldn't just blindly apply the law as written.

Taking your counter example, technically it's a red card (player lunging from front side or back using one or both legs using excessive force) yet we clearly apply a different standard to that based on proximity to player etc etc.

Using what law says blindly (which is what I feels like you are saying) is not the way to approach this.

You know what, you think he should be banned? That's fine, everyone is entitled to their opinion. As I say, even taking a player on player on this scenario it's not a definite red card for me irrelevant of the snippet of law that we are trying to use.

I thought the FA would ban him to be fair, but I didnt necessarily agree that was the right outcome based on what i thought happened (hence my not really commenting until a decision was made because there was evidence I didn't have)

What is clear from the statements is that the AR and player have had a sensible conversation, come to an agreement about what happened, and to me it feels like that it was an accident because (something like insert my earlier post about what i thought happened) and then presumably that is backed up by the video and audio, and their oral/written evidence they have submitted and the FA's disciplinary team have said no case to answer.

 

[DJIC]

I suspect another key aspect is Liverpool and Robertson are very happy to underplay the incident purely to protect their player from any sanction. Robertson when interviewed would be making light of it to avoid his own ban/fine.

 

[Mr Dean]

Regarding proof, the burden of proof in these disciplinary proceedings are on the balance of probabilities. Although this is a lower threshold than in criminal proceedings, it is still a threshold which needs to be overcome. Clearly, the FA felt that misconduct can't be proved to this threshold and have decided to take no further action. And this decision makes sense, if Hatzidakis says that it was accidental, how can you prove otherwise?

 

[Joshref]

If you're referring to me, you should note that I'm not defending Robertson - I know he's chippy, I know he will have been chirping away at the AR on his side all 1st half and I know he shouldn't have made contact. You'll note a page or so back I had a discussion with one of out esteemed forum staff when I suggested that maybe we could proactively use a dissent caution if he's really annoyed the AR that much?

I just happen to think that "being elbowed in the throat" isn't the appropriate punishment for the AR to hand out for those offences. I don't want to normalise and accept contact between players and officials regardless of who initiates it and I think failing to punish an official for something that would clearly be unacceptable for a player to do creates a bad double-standard. Lack of accountability is usually a nonsense accusation when thrown at match officials, but it seems accurate here.

You're also not exactly coming across neutral in this post either. Keane is outright lying when he pretends he wouldn't have lost his mind if that happened to him - taking his word as gospel instead of realising he's clearly talking ****e suggests serious preconceptions on your part.

I don’t think anyone is saying that if Robbo had been dissenting the AR had full right to elbow him, the fact is it is almost very clearly an accidental elbow when shrugging a player off, there should be no further action seen for it.

Every studio pundit regardless of allegiance laughing with Keane shows the general consensus to it. Most non Liverpool football fans I’ve spoken to agree with the decision, and on here it seems to be similar.

 

[RustyRef]

Comment has been made on recording of the comms system, but I'm not sure they are recorded. That was certainly the case in the past, but could have changed, don't know if anyone on here will know. Not sure any recording would help though, it might show that Robertson swore or was aggressive, but Hatzidakis is hardly going to have said "take that you %$£&". Perhaps if he was heard to say something like "get off" or "don't touch me" that would lean towards his version of events.

The most telling thing for me is Liverpool aren't making anything of this, Klopp was interviewed earlier and said he was happy with the outcome. That can only really be because they know Robertson did something wrong, whether that was verbally abusing the assistant or manhandling him. If Robertson was 100% innocent they would not be letting this go in my opinion.

 

[RustyRef]

Player grabs Officials arm. Official aggressively brakes the contact. In doing so catches Player in face. Due to being annoyed by Player, Official continues to walk away, offering a slight shrug that can basically be read as, "didn't mean to catch you, but don't touch me". Player then goes full baby mode.

Morale of the story, do not grab on to the arm of someone with the build of Hatzidakis. The guys friggin huge.

I met him years ago before he was on the Premier League, and the guy is built like a tank. Which also makes me doubt the extent of the content, Premier League players go down if even flicked in the face, had Robertson really been caught full force in the face by Hatzidakis he would still be down now.

 

[bloovee]

I have said it before of a need for a culture shift, right from the top. As long as we have this sort of 'acceptance' by IFAB we have no hope of that badly needed culture shift.

View attachment 6521

So you really expect a professional game to be stopped to caution a subbed player for shouting "That's a foul, ref!"?

 

[one]

So you really expect a professional game to be stopped to caution a subbed player for shouting "That's a foul, ref!"?

Funny you picked up on the word disagreement but not on the words objection or complaint which are much stronger.

If you are talking about expectation, I am expecting for the body that makes the laws not to openly say it's ok for player to object or complain about referee decisions. I'm expecting for 'professiinal' football players to respect the referees the same as or even better than profession rugby players. One can only wish. Hope this clarifies my expectations.

 

[santa sangria]

I’m kinda sorry to bring this up again… so, I’ve now at last seen good quality video of this.

Here’s a FB link to Viaplay Nordics who have posted the UK (BT?) half time analysis with the clip: https://fb.watch/jXonZIvdSm/

IMHO damning for the AR. Whatever is said, he knows the player is there, it’s not some surprising reaction to contact, he just lashes out with the elbow.

Now, the contact might be trifling, a brush, or there might not be any contact at all.

But IMHO stunned there was no action against the AR. It is “conduct unbecoming” at least and - I’m no HR lawyer - probably sackable, easily suspendable.

The “no decision” is incompetent IMHO from the powers that be.

 

[RustyRef]

I’m kinda sorry to bring this up again… so, I’ve now at last seen good quality video of this.

Here’s a FB link to Viaplay Nordics who have posted the UK (BT?) half time analysis with the clip: https://fb.watch/jXonZIvdSm/

IMHO damning for the AR. Whatever is said, he knows the player is there, it’s not some surprising reaction to contact, he just lashes out with the elbow.

Now, the contact might be trifling, a brush, or there might not be any contact at all.

But IMHO stunned there was no action against the AR. It is “conduct unbecoming” at least and - I’m no HR lawyer - probably sackable, easily suspendable.

The “no decision” is incompetent IMHO from the powers that be.

To be fair, the only people that don't seem to have accepted it are Liverpool fans. Even Klopp has said it is the right outcome.

Robertson grabbed him, of that there is no doubt. If someone grabs me when I'm not expecting it I will try to shrug them off.

 

[JamesL]

Robertson grabbed him, of that there is no doubt. If someone grabs me when I'm not expecting it I will try to shrug them off.

Exactly the point I was making. Anyone saying otherwise is not being true to themselves. Natural human reaction imo

 

[one]

And how many players have we send off for 'natural human reactions', but we called it retaliation?

If this was a player on player incident are we letting off the player who elbows another player in the chin because it's a natural reaction however soft contact may be? Would we refer to it as shrugging off? I don't intend any offence here (pun not intended) but I feel we are applying double standards here.

Anywho, officials are happy with no consequences, club and player happy with no consequences. Me sad cause I think football is worse off. This is now a precedent set. I remember similar things said about the Fernandes incident on AR which had no concequences.

 

[santa sangria]

To be fair, the only people that don't seem to have accepted it are Liverpool fans.

Rubbish. LOL. Most Liverpool fans and Klopp are happy that Robertson didn't get a further sanction.
As Murphy (?) said immediately after the incident, the AR is very lucky there has not been a sanction.
I would fully expect serious punishment if I was caught doing this.

 

[RustyRef]

Rubbish. LOL. Most Liverpool fans and Klopp are happy that Robertson didn't get a further sanction.
As Murphy (?) said immediately after the incident, the AR is very lucky there has not been a sanction.
I would fully expect serious punishment if I was caught doing this.

I've only heard Liverpool fans moaning about it all week, loads have been phoning in to TalkSport to say it is a disgrace that the AR hasn't been suspended.

 

[george.g]

I've only heard Liverpool fans moaning about it all week, loads have been phoning in to TalkSport to say it is a disgrace that the AR hasn't been suspended.

TalkSport is known for attracting morons