The Ref Stop

Merthyr v Walton & Hersham

L

ladbroke8745

RefChat Addict
Think the referee has completely got this wrong. I've tried to see if he has maybe gone in dangerously, even played it at reduced speed and it looks a fantastic tackle/challenge that the forward jumped over.

Am I wrong?

Start from 50 seconds.

Then have a look at the equaliser (think it's about 1:50 onwards.
He then cautions a W&H player for what might be excessive celebrating.
I'm lost on this one.

 
Last edited:
The Ref Stop
2 things... The way the defender challenges is unorthodox and real time can look like a nasty 2 footer, if the referee thinks he catches him.

The other option on the table here is DOGSO. If it's a foul it's DOGSO for me, the only defender I. Shot is not covering and the attacker would surely keep control of the ball.
 
The red card is an absolute stinker of a decision. But as @RustyRef said, he’s probably saw something that he thinks he saw.

Once it’s a foul it has to be red, but never a foul.
 
Last edited:
I think judging from the reaction, the caution post scoring is for dissent. Player carded just gives a dismissive wave off, it’s his team mates who protest it.

As for the red card, similar sort of thing in the Peterborough-Barnsley game yesterday. The way he came running in with the red card out immediately, made me think it was a very bad one. On the video I can see why he went red, thinking it was a two-footed challenge but in actual fact it wasn’t. Arguably worth a caution mind you.

No skin in this game for me, I was there purely to visit a new ground (decided while out injured earlier this season I’d try and see games at all the Premier League and EFL grounds as a bucket list thing) and I had a free date.

www.skysports.com

Peterborough Utd 1-3 Barnsley | League One highlights

Highlights of the Sky Bet League One match between Peterborough United and Barnsley.
www.skysports.com www.skysports.com
 
It’s impossible to tell from the video because you cannot see if there’s any contact etc but given we know there was and assuming the referee saw it then it’s the right call
 
That is a brilliant challenge until you notice that the studs are showing on both feet and are lifted up after it. Playing advantage so Ref did see it. I think it is well spotted myself.
 
OnlyUseMeWhistle said:
It’s impossible to tell from the video because you cannot see if there’s any contact etc but given we know there was and assuming the referee saw it then it’s the right call
Click to expand...

1. We don't know that (unless you've seen a diff video).
2. Since when does contact = SFP?
 
I have taken a naughty screenshot. Blue Defender off the ground, two feet in the air. Studs appear pointed towards the striker. Likely making contact. Which we cannot see, as we do not have the proximity.

I reckon the ref has a better angle. Also another important thing is sound, ref very likely heard the contact and finally I reckon the refs eyes are better than the 20FPS camera we watch it on.

Also players don't usually fake damaged equipment after a game. Why would they? Player was sent off regardless, and they love an opportunity to make a referee look incompetent.
 

Attachments

  • OffGround.png
    OffGround.png
    122.9 KB · Views: 22
OldNavyRef said:
I have taken a naughty screenshot. Blue Defender off the ground, two feet in the air. Studs appear pointed towards the striker. Likely making contact. Which we cannot see, as we do not have the proximity.

I reckon the ref has a better angle. Also another important thing is sound, ref very likely heard the contact and finally I reckon the refs eyes are better than the 20FPS camera we watch it on.

Also players don't usually fake damaged equipment after a game. Why would they? Player was sent off regardless, and they love an opportunity to make a referee look incompetent.
Click to expand...

The sound is a fair point.

But that pic shows his left leg is tucked in and a frame earlier (as this pic is post contact) it was planted on the ground.
This may still be SFP but it is not a "2 footed" challenge.
 
Very optimistic advantage played ~ 48 seconds.

Edit: Didn't even realise it lead directly to the red cadd
 
This was another angle. Two feet off the ground so out of control, studs showing and clear contact with force.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_7360.jpeg
    IMG_7360.jpeg
    293.5 KB · Views: 29
Silverref said:
This was another angle. Two feet off the ground so out of control, studs showing and clear contact with force.
Click to expand...
He’s nowhere near the player at this point. Which is a perfect example of why you need to take freeze frames with a pinch of salt.

The initial challenge is one footed and seems fairly low. It’s the momentum after the challenge in which this freeze frame is from.

Saying studs showing is not really refereeing terminology.
 
Last edited:
Silverref said:
This was another angle. Two feet off the ground so out of control, studs showing and clear contact with force.
Click to expand...
Clear contact with force? How do you conclude either do those things from a still picture?
The opponent is in another postcode when this pic is taken.
 
deusex said:
Clear contact with force? How do you conclude either do those things from a still picture?
The opponent is in another postcode when this pic is taken.
Click to expand...
If we are believing the damage to the shin pad, IMHO the referee has made an excellent decision, the tackle must of endangered the safety of his opponent to do that level of damage, if the shin pad (if we can call it that) wasn't there, the tackle would have caused a significant injury.

He has a good view & good proximity, see the force & hear the contact.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top