Newcastle v Liverpool
- Thread starter Ryanj91
- Start date
Until after they went down to 10 men…
deusex
RefChat Addict
Is the fact I think VVD is comfortably cutting out that pass if he doesn't foul the player any consideration?
The foul is so long before the ball gets there it's hard to know what was going to happen.
Prob the right decision.
Also, personal attacks were made at Southerner before and Mods are threatening to ban Southerner? Poor form.
The foul is so long before the ball gets there it's hard to know what was going to happen.
Prob the right decision.
Also, personal attacks were made at Southerner before and Mods are threatening to ban Southerner? Poor form.
one
RefChat Addict
Not disagreeing with you. But also pointing out that he had every chance to take a touch and put the ball where he wants and even further away from any defender.
one
RefChat Addict
I am looking at this a different way. This yellow for me is more about selling the decision on the push. Or taking control if you want to call it. "I make the decision and you just have to accept it". DTR just gave him an excuse to take the yellow out. Most of us have done this or at least I have. It's a 50-50 yellow but we take the card out to sell a decision or to take control. So not giving the other yellow doesn't make this inconsistent form a refereeing view point for me but I can see how it would from a fan view point.
Last edited:
Fair point, but not then booking Gordan for doing the same, and allowing persistent fouls by Joelinton, just wasn’t great from a consistency point of view.
But I am fully aware that from the 70’s onwards referees at Anfield haven’t necessarily made rational decisions and have been swayed by the crowd and the occasion.
Not sure I agree here - xG is the expectation of a goal - not the opportunity in itself.
Yes a player 2 yards out with an open goal having rounded the 'keeper will have a higher xG than a player 20 yards out with the 'keeper still to beat, rendering it a better opportunity to score, but both are still obvious opportunities to score a goal.
DOGSO is the denial of that opportunity (however likely or unlikely they are to score)
Our considerations when deciding if an obvious goalscoring opportunity exists are:
- Distance between offence & goal
- General Direction of play
- Likelihood of keeping or gaining control of the ball
- Location and number of defenders
Not how likely there is to be a goal had the offence not occurred.
Are you delusional? No way a defender gets to him. Maybe the flash and even that’s a maybe!
Van Dijk actually gets a foot on the ball, that's how close it is! He just swipes Isak's foot out the way to get to it.
Ooof, even as a ref I don't like this justification, especially in light of a clearly wrong decision and especially in the context of everything else in the game.
He chooses not to send off TAA for a second yellow and is surrounded by Newcastle players, plus all of the bench is on their feet protesting. Considerably more argument with the decision than you see in the case of the "first" yellow. And I can say the same about Liverpool players protesting the red card as well. Both much more public/visible and both causing much more delay to the restart than TAAs throw that resulted in a Newcastle player having to jog 10 yards to pick the ball up.
But he doesn't take yellows out there to sell those decision or take control in those situations - so it's inconsistent even within the very specific definition of consistency you're proposing.
one
RefChat Addict
By "other" yellow I meant the yellow for Gordon. Using the word "other" made sense when quoting a post where not giving a yellow to Gordon made his decisions inconsistent.
I even italicised part in my previous post to help you to see the point I'm making. I know the 4 considerations for DOGSO, I also have a passing familiarity with what goes into calculating xG. There's a lot of crossover:
xG is generally speaking lower if you're further away from goal than an equivalent shot from closer.
xG is higher for players who are more central
xG is affected by how easy it is to take the shot
xG accounts for blocking defenders and the GK, (albiet I don't think gives the same consideration to "covering" defenders as we should for DOGSO)
I'm really not totally sure why you're taking issue with me here? This is DOGSO, the fact the xG is similar to that of the two goals that were scored is sensible to use as part of the supporting evidence for that fact.
OK, so when comparing just two decisions, I see how they in isolation are either consistent or inconsistent with each other. Although again, it drifts towards: TAA got booked because Newcastle kicked up a fuss and the ref had already made a mistake he needed to sell, Gordon didn't because it was an uncontroversial decision and Liverpool didn't complain. I don't like either half of that: punishments shouldn't be harsher because the referee has just messed up, and they shouldn't be harsher because opponents moan about it.
But we have far more evidence than those two decisions available to us. And the point is, the pattern across the whole match is that this referee in this game isn't keen to caution for dissent/DTR, despite having conceivable justification for >10 cards if we include the Newcastle bench. Except for the occasion where he cautions TAA, which is inconsistent with the absence of cards in a dozen other occasions.
In all honesty, I think Brooks was too eager to lay down the 'law' by showing TAA a yellow there, it looks to me he threw the ball back towards the pitch, it's hardly like it's in the 80th min and his side are winning and he threw the ball away from a opposition player which then you would say a yellow would be justified.
I know timing shouldn't come into it but in one of Brooks highest profile game of his career, if he shown 2 yellow cards in the first 10 mins, he would of been slaughtered by pundits and media alike, I wouldn't be surprised if this happened much later on in the game, the second yellow would of came out but not at that point especially for a challenge which did not class as a SPA and the first yellow being quite contentious.
one
RefChat Addict
I think you may be missing the point I am making. I don't necessarily like what or how it was done. I am not saying it was correct either. In fact the phrase we often use here "we have all done it before" implies it's not really a good thing but we did it either in error or deliberately to make things easier for ourselves. The TAA yellow came before all the others key events wit refered of week he had to make decisions on. I am sure had he had the benefit of hindsight (as we do now) he would have handled the TAA yellow differently, not given the yellow or even better give a foul for the push.
Exactly. Best result here in hindsight would have been to get the push call right.
Second best would have been to not overreact to very minor dissent/DTR, because it predictably created problems 3 minutes later when that would have ended up being half of a sending off.
Third best would have been to set a consistent bar by booking Gordon as well a minute later and hoping the message got across at that point. That actually has worked for me in the past! Sometimes players see a DTR yellow and think that's the ref making his point - the second is when they realise that's just the standard now. Those cautions so often come in pairs, because it's the second one that proves it wasn't just a once-off.
Second best would have been to not overreact to very minor dissent/DTR, because it predictably created problems 3 minutes later when that would have ended up being half of a sending off.
Third best would have been to set a consistent bar by booking Gordon as well a minute later and hoping the message got across at that point. That actually has worked for me in the past! Sometimes players see a DTR yellow and think that's the ref making his point - the second is when they realise that's just the standard now. Those cautions so often come in pairs, because it's the second one that proves it wasn't just a once-off.
socal lurker
RefChat Addict
DOGSO is the denial of an obvious goal scoring opportunity. If the xG is high, it is an indicator of how obvious of a goal scoring opportunity it was. It sure isn’t the be all and end all, but it isn’t silly to think about as a clue--though it could be dangerous to overuse, just like most stats.
I think that for the Gordon one, Brooks allowed the free kick to be taken from the new position and got a good ball to Salah from there. Didn't therefore delay the restart but should probably have been.