Palace v Brighton
- Thread starter RefereeX
- Start date
Donate to RefChat
Help keep RefChat running, any donation would be appreciated
Genuinely thought Anthony Taylor had an absolutely awful game. Felt he was so inconsistent throughout with decisions and cautions across the game which was probably part of the reason for the 2 Palace Sending Offs. Completely agree that both of their 2nd yellows were correct but not really convinced with either of their first yellows.
Potentially some Palace bias though in that opinion
Potentially some Palace bias though in that opinion
Runner Ref
RefChat Addict
Think Guehi was a very lucky boy to not get straight red
I don’t think there’s a huge amount of force in the actual contact for Guehi, relatively glancing, but it’s naughty.
one
RefChat Addict
The second yellow of first double yellow send off was a clear straight red. I dont see why VAR didn't get involved.
The second yellow of second double yellow send off was an orrange. Ok with yellow and no VAR involvement.
The second yellow of third double yellow send off was a clear straight red also for DOGSO. I dont see why VAR didn't get involved.
The second yellow of second double yellow send off was an orrange. Ok with yellow and no VAR involvement.
The second yellow of third double yellow send off was a clear straight red also for DOGSO. I dont see why VAR didn't get involved.
I think there isGenuinely thought Anthony Taylor had an absolutely awful game. Felt he was so inconsistent throughout with decisions and cautions across the game which was probably part of the reason for the 2 Palace Sending Offs. Completely agree that both of their 2nd yellows were correct but not really convinced with either of their first yellows.
Potentially some Palace bias though in that opinion
both their first yellows were stonewall for me. Terrible dive from NketiahI don’t think the first second yellow was as bad as you suggest. Added element of the Brighton player putting his head in to the danger zone too. Think a caution is right there (or at the very least not a clear and obvious error)
I was just very surprised that the third wasn’t considered a very clear dogso.
one
RefChat Addict
I really don't see how his head is in danger zone. He is 6' 4" and probably another foot off the ground. While the foot didn't connect flush on the head I still think it clearly endangered the safety of the opponent.
I think where the problem is, for some reason* football accepts a second yellow in place of a straight red.
* partly to do with fact that the player is going off anyway and that's all the oppoenets care about and the fans of the offender are better off with the lesser punishment.
Don’t think that still does any favours, it makes it look as if the studs on the boot are aimed squarely at the defenders head and I don’t believe they were. I also think Van Hecke crouched to head the ball after the Nketiah had already committed to his challenge. We’ll have to agree to disagree on that.
one
RefChat Addict
The still is just to show the hight of his head (danger zone?) at the time of contact which is factual and shouldnt be a point of contention. For the rest happy to agree to disagree.
There's quite a bit of contact though, so I get he takes like a second to go down but he's not exactly dived if he's been caughtI think there is
There is slight contact and at speed this can obviously have an impact on balance, but at the very least he’s exaggerated the impact so no problem with it being YC for simulation.
Just don't think we see that happen often enough if that's gonna be the case across the whole prem.
But just also thought that Taylor wasn't great at all across the game, missed quite a lot of fouls and was pretty inconsistent with some of the cautions he gave out. Didn't think he managed it great at all.
santa sangria
RefChat Addict
I am not so sure about the DOGSO. There’s a second Brighton defender moving at pace that is a key consideration I think.
I know what you mean, but for me, if Van Hecke doesn’t foul him, there’s absolutely zero chance that the other defender is preventing the attacker from getting a good shot at goal
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.
I think the Van Hecke debate is splitting hairs. The outcome is the same - it’s a foul leading to a red card with a direct free kick in an attacking area. Nobody’s going to complain at the red for that and do we need a VAR check for DOGSO, when we end up potentially, with a messy overturn then send off anyway for a second caution?
santa sangria
RefChat Addict
Was thinking the same. On one hand the YC is smart refereeing and as you say, avoids VAR. Kinda. But… if it’s as nailed on DOGSO as others say, where does that leave VAR’s non-involvement, AT’s assessment score, and the player’s number of matches banned?