Palace v Brighton

[one]

player’s number of matches banned?

This would be the same for the specific case of DOGSO and second caution. However it would make a difference in accumulative causations.

My thinking is along the line of we should get the decision right even if the outcome is the same. As an analogy, a dropped ball in the PA to the opponents who kicks the ball to the keeper achieves the same outcome but it is important not to do it that way.

The other issue is setting precedence, as a hypothetical, what would he/VAR do if there is an identical DOGSO on the other side of the field 2 minutes later with the offender not on a caution?

 

[Josh the referee]

I don’t disagree Josh, although in real time I don’t fault AT for not seeing the contact and concluding blatant dive, in which case it’s far more understandable as a decision as opposed to a random caution for making a meal out of the contact.

Was more disappointed with him not seeing the contact tbh especially after this still.

 

[RustyRef]

Was more disappointed with him not seeing the contact tbh especially after this still.View attachment 8040

The fact there was contact doesn't mean it has to be a foul and can't be simulation.

 

[Josh the referee]

The fact there was contact doesn't mean it has to be a foul and can't be simulation.

Completley agree with that but then we should expect that to be consistent across all games which I don't rlly think it is.

 

[Runner Ref]

Completley agree with that but then we should expect that to be consistent across all games which I don't rlly think it is.

We should also expect players to not throw themselves to the ground in the hope of deceiving the officials. But sadly, we are where we are

 

[Josh the referee]

We should also expect players to not throw themselves to the ground in the hope of deceiving the officials. But sadly, we are where we are

Probably the reason that AT gave Guehi his first YC so can understand why people feel hard done by

 

[one]

Completley agree with that but then we should expect that to be consistent across all games which I don't rlly think it is.

I think the difference here was the delay between contact and before he went down. It made it very obvious the purpose was to decieve and nought to do with contact.

 

[socal lurker]

I don’t think VAR should look at upgrades of 2CT at all. (Same for down grading a straight red to a 2CT.) It has no impact at all on the game being played, only on post game consequences. Upgrades from 2CT to straight red for discipline purposes should, IMO, be handled by competition authorities after the match. There just is no reason to delay the match being played to assess future consequences for the player.

(To be clear, I’m not suggesting that is how a VAR today should look at it, but how the protocols should be changed.)

 

[RustyRef]

Completley agree with that but then we should expect that to be consistent across all games which I don't rlly think it is.

The authorities can strive for consistency in refereeing, but they will never fully get to it. Decisions are made by humans who see something once and immediately have to process what they saw and make a decision. Taylor though Nketiah used simulation, I think he felt a slight bit of contact and through himself to the ground. Which is simulation.