A&H

Newcastle Vs Arsenal

Havertz could have easily seen red for what was a completely unnecessary challenge. But I do understand why yellow was given. It does bring us back to what we discussed after the Arsenal vs City game; I'm fairly certain this would have been red in most other countries. England still attempts to live off being a physical league, therefore we do everything possible to keep it 11 v 11. The problem is, the players have changed from the days of Razor Ruddock etc, so I'm not convinced we can be seen as being as physical

Bruno should have seen red imo. He had quite clearly lost it as he went lunging into a challenge moment's before the elbow incident.

The goal- I don't think it was a foul. The defender get caught underneath the ball and is looking for a soft one. Whether the ball was out or there was an offside; I haven't seen an angle yet that convinces me 1 way or another. So I guess that nullifies any VAR input. Ideally extra cameras or some other technology would be needed.
 
The Referee Store
Club statement from Arsenal…

I think they’ve done a great deflecting/distraction job to make the focus all about the referees, rather than the defeat
 
Havertz is a damned if you do manned if don't. Had he red carded him he would have accused of running the game with a very harsh decision. It's a dark orange for me (I'm getting splinters from the fence) 😂

Goal, I'm coming off the fence, clearly a push and a foul. The fact that Jesus was looking for it or how he goes down doesn't negate that he was carelessly pushed.
 
Last edited:
From a recent FA Appeal.

The following practical information which is given to Match Officials was also considered:
a. Does the player have a chance of playing the ball in a fair manner?
b. Can the player legitimately play the ball without putting his opponent at undue risk?
c. What degree of speed or intensity is the player using when making the challenge?
d. What is the distance the player has travelled to challenge for the ball?
e. Is the player making the challenge off the ground/airborne and in control of his actions?
f. What was the position of the feet of the player making the challenge?
g. Did the player lead with his studs showing when making the tackle?
h. Does the player show clear malice or brutality when making the challenge?
i. Does the challenge clearly endanger the safety of the opponent?

This list is not exhaustive nor is it a requirement that all elements are made out to satisfy the offence.

See e. (and most of the others!)
 
Runner-Ref said:
Its a bit of an embarrassing turnaround from Arteta after his comments on the Spurs vs Liverpool incident
Click to expand...

I agree. I feel the Liverpool one was worse as it fundemantally didn't follow the protocol and failed basic communication in what they were checking.
 
one said:
Havertz is a damned if you do manned if don't. Had he red carded him he would have accused of running the game with a very harsh decision. It's a dark orange for me (I'm getting splinters from the fence) 😂

Goal, I'm coming off the fence, clearly a push and a foul. The fact that Jesus was looking for it or how he goes down doesn't negate that he was carelessly pushed.
Click to expand...
Different Gabriel 🙂
 
one said:
Havertz is a damned if you do manned if don't. Had he red carded him he would have accused of running the game with a very harsh decision. It's a dark orange for me (I'm getting splinters from the fence) 😂

Goal, I'm coming off the fence, clearly a push and a foul. The fact that Jesus was looking for it or how he goes down doesn't negate that he was carelessly pushed.
Click to expand...

I agree, the Havertz one is the orange card category where some will go yellow and some will go red and therefore it's not a clear and obvious error for VAR to get involved.

The Bruno one is where VAR should be a positive but yet again it's a negative because how is that not VC I will never know. I wonder if Stuart Attwell even saw it because he never gave a foul.

Regarding the goal then I do sometimes wish when a ball has cross the line it's the bottom of the ball that only matters, not this nonsense where 90% of the ball is over the line but only a tiny bit is on the line, it would make it much more easier for officials to be able to know whether it's in or out. I do think it's a foul though but it's that grey area whether it reaches the clear and obvious threshold.
 
Paul_10 said:
Regarding the goal then I do sometimes wish when a ball has cross the line it's the bottom of the ball that only matters, not this nonsense where 90% of the ball is over the line but only a tiny bit is on the line, it would make it much more easier for officials to be able to know whether it's in or out.
Click to expand...

I actually think it makes It harder. So where is the bottom of the ball when the ball is in the air. You're just changing 100% of the ball to 50% of the ball. It's much harder to draw an imaginary plane through the centre of the ball than the inner most edge of the ball. It's like saying the actually boundary line is the middle of the white line instead of the outer edge of it.
 
one said:
I actually think it makes It harder. So where is the bottom of the ball when the ball is in the air. You're just changing 100% of the ball to 50% of the ball. It's much harder to draw an imaginary plane through the centre of the ball than the inner most edge of the ball. It's like saying the actually boundary line is the middle of the white line instead of the outer edge of it.
Click to expand...

That's a fair point which is something I didn't thought of but I think it be easier when the ball is along the ground like in this case and of course if it was implemented like this, then everything that happened afterwards would be irrelevant.

On a side note, I thought all PL grounds would have the GDS cameras(think they are called that) along the lines at both ends, they certainly had that camera angle for the one at Old Trafford which helped whether the ball was out or not.
 
Having seen another replay of the Havertz tackle which clearly shows there is contact with the leading foot I think VAR have missed another red there.

arsenalist.com

Havertz avoid the red card

Havertz avoid the red card
arsenalist.com
 
Paul_10 said:
That's a fair point which is something I didn't thought of but I think it be easier when the ball is along the ground like in this case and of course if it was implemented like this, then everything that happened afterwards would be irrelevant.

On a side note, I thought all PL grounds would have the GDS cameras(think they are called that) along the lines at both ends, they certainly had that camera angle for the one at Old Trafford which helped whether the ball was out or not.
Click to expand...
Goal line technology cameras are used only for "goal/no goal" decisions, and are set up accordingly
 
ChasObserverRefDeveloper said:
Goal line technology cameras are used only for "goal/no goal" decisions, and are set up accordingly
Click to expand...

I mean the 'old' cameras that are perpendicular to the line which broadcasters used to use to determine if the ball has crossed the line or not before goal line technology came in.

Either way, these possible ball out of play VAR situations are quite rare and unless there was definite proof it was out, then I'm happy for the on field decision to remain as it was.
 
I'm amazed that we can't use similar technology to what Bein Sports used.
 
JamesL said:
I'm amazed that we can't use similar technology to what Bein Sports used.
Click to expand...
I'm flabbergasted we don't have cameras all down the line. Stops much of a guesswork immediately.

Get ball in/out of play sorted automatically even?
 
es1 said:
I'm flabbergasted we don't have cameras all down the line. Stops much of a guesswork immediately.

Get ball in/out of play sorted automatically even?
Click to expand...
All a question of cost. With GLT, the GL camera would only be for whether ball went out for a GK/CK? How many times a year does that happen where it can’t be properly called by the AR and VAR with the current cameras? Is that worth adding 4 cameras to every stadium? i don’t think the excessive wurst for perfection needs to go there.
 
socal lurker said:
All a question of cost. With GLT, the GL camera would only be for whether ball went out for a GK/CK? How many times a year does that happen where it can’t be properly called by the AR and VAR with the current cameras? Is that worth adding 4 cameras to every stadium? i don’t think the excessive wurst for perfection needs to go there.
Click to expand...
There's been at least 2 calls this season already which led to goals/goal being disallowed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top