Man City Vs Liverpool
- Thread starter bester
- Start date
Donate to RefChat
Help keep RefChat running, any donation would be appreciated
Yeah, that whole incident was a bit messy - there was a bit of handbags a few minutes earlier which seemed to very much have Rodri as the aggressor who caused it to escalate and didn't generate a card, then as you say failing to card for the retaliation on Bajetic when he came back after the advantage suggested he either took his eyes off it after seeing the pull or just didn't see it at all and was advised to card from elsewhere.
Other incidents - Liverpool penalty shout just before the 70th minute I thought was very credible. A defender just runs across the path of the attacker, makes no play on the ball and sends him over, it's a classic "easy foul in the centre circle" non-PK decision for me.
And the mass con around 80 - again I think Rodri's retaliation was borderline red in itself, and certainly would have been for a second yellow if the incident I mentioned above had been properly sanctioned. Rodri got away with A LOT across the course of the game in terms of little fouls that the ref didn't seem to want to penalise, but twice shoving an opponent in the chest hard enough to knock them down and staying on the pitch is some very soft refereeing.
Other incidents - Liverpool penalty shout just before the 70th minute I thought was very credible. A defender just runs across the path of the attacker, makes no play on the ball and sends him over, it's a classic "easy foul in the centre circle" non-PK decision for me.
And the mass con around 80 - again I think Rodri's retaliation was borderline red in itself, and certainly would have been for a second yellow if the incident I mentioned above had been properly sanctioned. Rodri got away with A LOT across the course of the game in terms of little fouls that the ref didn't seem to want to penalise, but twice shoving an opponent in the chest hard enough to knock them down and staying on the pitch is some very soft refereeing.
santa sangria
RefChat Addict
Has Howard Webb instructed EPL to continue with the foul tolerance and high threshold for disciplinary sanctions that we saw in the World Cup?
I am very interested to hear what it’s like for mid-season grassroots, semi-pro and elite youth refs ?
I am very interested to hear what it’s like for mid-season grassroots, semi-pro and elite youth refs ?
PinnerPaul
RefChat Addict
On the caution, as it can't be for breaking up a promising attack anymore, how would that be reported - I know USB, but would you call that reckless or acting against spirit of the game?
bester
RefChat Addict
IFAB response when previously asked
"
Can prolonged shirt pulling be considered unsporting behaviour in it's own right or does it need to
stop or interfere with a promising attack? It could be USB in its own right especially if it provokes a notable reaction
If it can be unsporting behaviour in it's own right then can you answer the below scenarios?
1) If an advantage is played on a shirt pulling offence that would've stopped a promising attack if play was stopped, can the player still be cautioned if the referee considered it to be unsporting behaviour? In theory it could but the ‘spirit’ of the Law would not expect a caution, which might be difficult to justify
2) An advantage is played from a shirt pulling offence that involves a non-promising attack, can the player be cautioned for unsporting behaviour? Yes, it could but in the same way that every ‘foul’ is not a caution then every shirt pull is not a caution
"
"
Can prolonged shirt pulling be considered unsporting behaviour in it's own right or does it need to
stop or interfere with a promising attack? It could be USB in its own right especially if it provokes a notable reaction
If it can be unsporting behaviour in it's own right then can you answer the below scenarios?
1) If an advantage is played on a shirt pulling offence that would've stopped a promising attack if play was stopped, can the player still be cautioned if the referee considered it to be unsporting behaviour? In theory it could but the ‘spirit’ of the Law would not expect a caution, which might be difficult to justify
2) An advantage is played from a shirt pulling offence that involves a non-promising attack, can the player be cautioned for unsporting behaviour? Yes, it could but in the same way that every ‘foul’ is not a caution then every shirt pull is not a caution
"
PinnerPaul
RefChat Addict
Thanks
Gosh, what a lot of fanzone stuff! The "retaliation" was Palmer finally giving up trying to get away from Bejcetic's grasp and pulling him instead - I'd have put the booking down to persistent offending (holding, holding and holding).
As for Rodri, he was lucky not to be booked either for the earlier retaliation or a later SPA, but he wasn't the only player who might have been booked but wasn't. But fancy not noticing that Fabinho didn't just scissor Rodri but kicked him as well, so he was lucky not to see red.
https://www.skysports.com/watch/vid...at-the-etihad-after-rodri-and-fabinho-bust-up
Welcome back to domestic football!
As for Rodri, he was lucky not to be booked either for the earlier retaliation or a later SPA, but he wasn't the only player who might have been booked but wasn't. But fancy not noticing that Fabinho didn't just scissor Rodri but kicked him as well, so he was lucky not to see red.
https://www.skysports.com/watch/vid...at-the-etihad-after-rodri-and-fabinho-bust-up
Welcome back to domestic football!
Nasty challenge and nasty response, the challenge is one which we've seen red for before
PinnerPaul
RefChat Addict
I'd hardly call a written response from IFAB "Fanzone stuff"
Of course I didn't mean that post....
However, if I read this right, the responses are not well phrased (so probably genuine IFAB!). I'll say nowt about the way that bit of the law is phrased.
Is this how it should read?
Q: Can prolonged shirt pulling be considered unsporting behaviour in it's own right or does it need to
stop or interfere with a promising attack?
A: It could be USB in its own right especially if it provokes a notable reaction
Q: If it can be unsporting behaviour in it's own right then can you answer the below scenarios?
1) If an advantage is played on a shirt pulling offence that would've stopped a promising attack if play was stopped, can the player still be cautioned if the referee considered it to be unsporting behaviour?
A: In theory it could but the ‘spirit’ of the Law would not expect a caution, which might be difficult to justify
2) An advantage is played from a shirt pulling offence that involves a non-promising attack, can the player be cautioned for unsporting behaviour?
A: Yes, it could but in the same way that every ‘foul’ is not a caution then every shirt pull is not a caution.
The first answer implies that it's more likely to given as USB if the player fouled retaliates. Not a good principle.
The second answer perhaps is at odds with the original Q about prolonged shirt-pulling. If that can be USB, why would the "spirit of the law" not expect a caution? It's only for SPA that advantage negates a caution.
The third answer is just mixed up. Nowadays, not every shirt-pull is to be given as a foul, but it should be phrased "not every foul is a caution" rather than "every foul is not a caution".
Anyway, the offence in this game was Bajcetic pulling Palmer's shirt for four seconds until Palmer grabbed Bajcetic's arm and wrestled him off. It didn't prevent the attack (it was off the ball) but meant Palmer wasn't available for a pass. The "advantage" quickly came to nothing, and the FK could have been given. (Is there a grey area where advantage is played, but doesn't really happen, and a FK is then awarded - so advantage is played and a FK is given; what does that do for not cautioning for SPA?)