A&H

Middlesbrough sending off

The Referee Store
I’d like more context. I’m looking at the ref and his body language is odd - he is static and I wonder if his waiting for something to take control of.

The actual challenge seems reckless to me.
 
The player didn't help himself keeping his foot in there and extending it after the keeper had clear control of the ball. But on replay I wouldn't give it red. In real time I may give it red.
 
Looks nasty enough. I'd give no credence to the commentator about "he has to go for that" and the referee "looking through bodies". No, he doesn't have to go for it, he only lunges for it when he realises the GK is going to get it.
 
According to Colin Wan... Sorry I mean Neil Warnock, it was a fresh faced, looks not older than 18 years old, Assistant referee that gave the information!!
 
Sadly agree with commentator and is something I try determine before passing comment on a clip, what can or has the referee seen?
From the action shown, am not sold on the referee being able to assess that as sfp, would be interested to hear, but of course never will, know the reasoning behind the red.
Without even a clear view ( referee too central instead of wide,common place when refs think they have made it, they dimiss angle for rank), you can go yellow
 
Endangering safety of opponent for me so red.

Sadly gives Mr Warnock another reason to deflect attention from his side's less than spectacular start to the season.
 
I think the player's actually done a decent job of pulling his foot back, minimising the amount of force in the challenge. With the benefit of watching the replays it's no more than a free kick for me. In real time I'd have probably gone yellow.
 
IMHO
the referee is looking through bodies and then making a call on what he believes he has seen
The ball is loose and IMHO both players are entitled to go for it
NEVER A R/C
I could understand why M/o's may have gone Y/C in this situation But Never in MY opinion a RED CARD
 
IMHO
the referee is looking through bodies and then making a call on what he believes he has seen
The ball is loose and IMHO both players are entitled to go for it
NEVER A R/C
I could understand why M/o's may have gone Y/C in this situation But Never in MY opinion a RED CARD
According to Warnock (where’s that pinch of salt?), the referee told him the AR advised that Crooks had gone in studs up
 
IMHO
the referee is looking through bodies and then making a call on what he believes he has seen
The ball is loose and IMHO both players are entitled to go for it
NEVER A R/C
I could understand why M/o's may have gone Y/C in this situation But Never in MY opinion a RED CARD
"Entitled to go for it" in no way takes away from the requirement to do so in a safe manner. There are a number of reasons where it would be valid to argue that it shouldn't be red, but the ball being loose doesn't change the basic requirement to not risk the safety of the other players.
 
It isn't red for me, yellow would have been fine. I don't buy the "he is entitled to go for it argument" as these days you have a duty of care to your opponent, and lunging in with your studs towards an opponent's head is always going to be a risk. The reason I am OK with yellow though is he appears to have pulled his leg back and certainly isn't straight legged.

Also, the referee hasn't "guessed", rather his AR has told him to give a red card. Given Peter Bankes's blocked view he really has little option but to follow that advice, especially if he has said something like "that is a definite red card".
 
"Entitled to go for it" in no way takes away from the requirement to do so in a safe manner. There are a number of reasons where it would be valid to argue that it shouldn't be red, but the ball being loose doesn't change the basic requirement to not risk the safety of the other players.
Excellent point this Graeme.
Two many players think its 5050 and then endanger the opponent when in reality it turned out 49/51 in their opponents favour.
 
Excellent point this Graeme.
Two many players think its 5050 and then endanger the opponent when in reality it turned out 49/51 in their opponents favour.
Particularly fresh in my mind because I gave a penalty for exactly that yesterday! A 50/50 high ball into the box - keeper comes out and punches clear, but also clips the opponents head AND smashes him in the chest/stomach AND also managed to knee him in the thigh. Resulting in a winded player that couldn't be moved off the pitch for a good few minutes, and then even when he was breathing well again, had a dead leg that kept him out of the rest of the match.

And the whole time this player was on the floor being treated and struggling to catch his breath, I had defenders insisting the keeper got the ball first and so it was fine!
 
It isn't red for me, yellow would have been fine. I don't buy the "he is entitled to go for it argument" as these days you have a duty of care to your opponent, and lunging in with your studs towards an opponent's head is always going to be a risk. The reason I am OK with yellow though is he appears to have pulled his leg back and certainly isn't straight legged.

Also, the referee hasn't "guessed", rather his AR has told him to give a red card. Given Peter Bankes's blocked view he really has little option but to follow that advice, especially if he has said something like "that is a definite red card".

Credible though? The refs blocked, both Ars are too far away to make a credible call.
 
Credible though? The refs blocked, both Ars are too far away to make a credible call.
True. In this case maybe.
But it doesnt matter who has the info if it is right. Much easier on comms for AR to say X has done Y to Z without raising the flag. The referee can make/give the decision appearing that it is theirs.
There was a Clip from a oldish game. Where a 4th official informed the ref of a handball offence and goal disallowed despite ref and AR closer.
4th was absolutely bang on with the call as such completely bailed the whole team out.
At our level, yes, you are absolutely staying well out of that.
 
Back
Top