RefSix

OOch!!

QuaverRef

I used to be indecisive but now i'm not so sure
#2
Hard to tell if it was intentional from the footage but he’s had previous. Was it Zlatans head he stamped on a few seasons back?
 

Tino Best

RefChat Addict
#5
This is an interesting incident. I have seen players dismissed for this Mings vs Zlatan a good recent example, but if you look at the clip after the initial challenge Mings is off balance as he has made contact with the Reading defender and is trying to stay on his feet and during that his leg plants on the Reading players face. Foul yes. Yellow card I can see that decision, red card you can certainly call it as SFP because of the injuries no caution can see that as well he is off balance trying to keep on his feet and lands on the defender he isn't looking down but straight ahead so it could be classed as accidental and one of those things. I watched it on the small screen first then enlarged it and I can't see a stamp as such but a continuation of his running. Like I say all three results I can see reasons for. Also the ref has one bite at the cherry for this and the replay is in slow motion so not a real indication of what it looked like in real time.
 

zarathustra

RefChat Addict
#12
Hard to tell whether it was intentional, i.e. a stamp.

But, I think it is definitely a strong contender for SFP.

As for allowing players to wear blades, they are allowed
 

JH

RefChat Addict
#13
Looks deliberate to me, looking down right at him, could've planted his foot anywhere but there. Deserves a long ban.
 

JamesL

RefChat Addict
#15
This is an interesting incident. I have seen players dismissed for this Mings vs Zlatan a good recent example, but if you look at the clip after the initial challenge Mings is off balance as he has made contact with the Reading defender and is trying to stay on his feet and during that his leg plants on the Reading players face. Foul yes. Yellow card I can see that decision, red card you can certainly call it as SFP because of the injuries no caution can see that as well he is off balance trying to keep on his feet and lands on the defender he isn't looking down but straight ahead so it could be classed as accidental and one of those things. I watched it on the small screen first then enlarged it and I can't see a stamp as such but a continuation of his running. Like I say all three results I can see reasons for. Also the ref has one bite at the cherry for this and the replay is in slow motion so not a real indication of what it looked like in real time.
I think the slow mo shows him looking down...
I like to give players a clean slate but lets face it he has previous... didnt he do the same with Zlatan? Kind of "off balance".
Would like to see an alternative angle to confirm his line of vision but I think, in my opinion, he can avoid this collision.
VC for me as cant be SFP. Ball is long gone and this is secondary to his original challenge for the ball.
 

one

RefChat Addict
#19
Simple bio-mechanical laws dictate his stride should have been much longer (ahead of his centre of gravity when having forward motion of the body) in order to regain his balance. So his foot should have landed at least half to one one meter further out.

1549248923029.png
1549248971561.png

Now compare this the length of his next stride

1549249060688.png

Just this video evidence proves to me it was deliberate on it's own merits (no priors required) and VC.
 

PinnerPaul

RefChat Addict
#20
Only one person knows if this was deliberate or not and thats Mings, thats why its so hard to take any further action.
But 'deliberate' isn't in laws so strictly by LOTG - red is surely justified.

We NEVER know what is players' minds - hence law wording avoids 'deliberate' and 'intentional'
 
Top