Absolutely agree with you in many respects especially with Rice knowing exactly what he was doing, and technically correct by the Referee and therefore 2nd yellow etc. However, could the situation have been managed without the claim of ignoring Law - I think the answer is yes, because the Brighton player also knew what he was doing and went to play the ball when it was moving having thrown it in the direction of Rice. I don’t think he had any other intention other than playing the ball & not making contact with Rice who also went to ground as if lightening had struck him. Some pro-active Refereeing may have also assisted the situation though not easy in a full to capacity noisy ground.
Rice red card
- Thread starter Ori
- Start date
Here is another take and I’m just playing devils advocate after watching all the angles on tv.
Should the Brighton player have been booked for attempting to deceive the referee. He pretends to want to launch the ball forward quickly and kicks at rice. Now from all the angles, there is no one up front for him to lamp the ball forward to.
He kicks rice because he can and wants rice to get booked. Is that clever play or is that deceiving the referee?
Should the Brighton player have been booked for attempting to deceive the referee. He pretends to want to launch the ball forward quickly and kicks at rice. Now from all the angles, there is no one up front for him to lamp the ball forward to.
He kicks rice because he can and wants rice to get booked. Is that clever play or is that deceiving the referee?
This would be dissent by action but in the rice case he attempts to take a free kick with the ball in the wrong place and still moving so 2 reasons you cannot caution mistakes happen only shame is FA can’t fix it as nothing they can do about 2 yellows
I agreed with you.None. If you read my post, I agreed technically it's yellow but one easily managed without a yellow. It was done in frustration as he did not get to it in time. Or the pass was inaccurate.
"What business does he have" is another one of those that sounds good on a forum. But If you referee the game based on "what business does he have" alone you'd be dishing out a lot of unnecessary yellow cards. Or everytime a player shouts over the top of his lung "f*CK me" because missed a **** or a crucial pass you send the off you have a very high red card count. Context, context, context.
An official at their level should have been on top of this immediately after seeing the way the Brighton player got up the way he did and throw the ball towards Rice.
Either to de escalate the Brighton player trying to cause an issue (which he ultimately did)
Or to move the ball back 8 yards or so coz it's no where near the original foul and the ball is moving.
I also don't think he actually sees the incident as two players looked in his way from photos. So even more of a reason why he should have been proactive and stopped play properly to calm the Brighton player down with his captain. Just some standard game management you'd expect.
Firstly, it's nowhere near 8 yards. It's 2 or 3 maximum, and no ones overly bothered where a free-kick is taken in that area of the pitch (within reason of course) because it's not affecting play.
Secondly, the ref probably doesn't see the incident in full because he's moving away from the area, expecting a quick free kick to be taken. The likelihood is that one of the remaining 3 officials has seen it and advised him what's happened and offered their opinion on the sanction.
At the end of the day, Rice has delayed the restart, the Brighton player doesn't actually appear to make a lot of contact with him. Rice's only intentions are to delay the restart to give Arsenal an advantage to get back into position and therefore rightly receives a C4 caution
Really don't think anyone can have any arguments with that whatsoever because its not an incorrect decision. The media have made it out to be a lot more controversial than it actually is.
So it's ok for the referee to follow the rules for Rice to nudge the ball.... HOWEVER, the rules surrounding the position of the free kick and the moving ball, refs are ok to turn a blind eye to? I find this all very contradictory.Firstly, it's nowhere near 8 yards. It's 2 or 3 maximum, and no ones overly bothered where a free-kick is taken in that area of the pitch (within reason of course) because it's not affecting play.
Secondly, the ref probably doesn't see the incident in full because he's moving away from the area, expecting a quick free kick to be taken. The likelihood is that one of the remaining 3 officials has seen it and advised him what's happened and offered their opinion on the sanction.
At the end of the day, Rice has delayed the restart, the Brighton player doesn't actually appear to make a lot of contact with him. Rice's only intentions are to delay the restart to give Arsenal an advantage to get back into position and therefore rightly receives a C4 caution
Really don't think anyone can have any arguments with that whatsoever because its not an incorrect decision. The media have made it out to be a lot more controversial than it actually is.
It should follow the sequence of events and apply accordingly.
1st: Ball isn't in correct position
2nd: Ball is moving
3rd: Rice nudges ball
4th: Kick at Rice
So I think we all agree the 4th is null and void because of 3, but the same logic and rules of the game should apply to 3. So stop the handbags, get the ball back into the correct position, and stationary...game on.
The ball isn't on the exact blade of grass but it's easily within tolerance especially in that part of the pitch.
The ball is moving, however, so if he'd made contact with the ball it would probably have delayed the restart more than Rice did.
I think it's a poor refereeing decision because of the context, but it's technically correct.
The ball is moving, however, so if he'd made contact with the ball it would probably have delayed the restart more than Rice did.
I think it's a poor refereeing decision because of the context, but it's technically correct.
I highly doubt anyone's gonna correct 2 or 3 yards in that area of the pitch unless you're trying to slow the game down. 2 or 3 yards isn't gonna affect the game and no one is going to be bothered by it.
If Rice doesn't make any contact with the ball, there's a chance that it actually would come to a stop. I don't think anyone can be 100% sure that at the time the Brighton player would kick it, that the ball would still be moving, therefore Rice has delayed the restart. It's a textbook caution for delaying the restart in my eyes.
ALL players and clubs know that it's something being clamped down on so their reaction should be:
1. I've given away a free-kick
2. Move away from the area
3. Don't kick the ball
4. Free-kick is taken quickly and there's no complaints
It's not hard for Premier League footballers to grasp this concept.
Last edited:
deusex
RefChat Addict
I'd cringe watching a L7 referee being conned like this, looked awful from an EPL ref.
That kick away by Rice happens EVERY game and nothing is done. If they're stamping it out, fine (but we all know they're not).
Pretty obvious the player intended to kick Rice by anyone that has ever kicked, well, anything.
I'd be calling them both in and saying, "Either I send you both off or you both stop f***ING about and get on with it?"
Good to see foreign players waving an imaginary card is still a caution but us Brits saying "it's a second yellow" to the ref is still okay.
That makes sense.
That kick away by Rice happens EVERY game and nothing is done. If they're stamping it out, fine (but we all know they're not).
Pretty obvious the player intended to kick Rice by anyone that has ever kicked, well, anything.
I'd be calling them both in and saying, "Either I send you both off or you both stop f***ING about and get on with it?"
Good to see foreign players waving an imaginary card is still a caution but us Brits saying "it's a second yellow" to the ref is still okay.
That makes sense.
My thought process is this:
1. Rice has been kicked when the ball’s not in play. I must issue a sanction to the Brighton player.
2. The Brighton player only kicked Rice because he was trying to kick the ball Rice kicked away. Therefore, it would be unfair to not also sanction Rice.
All in all, yellow card to both would be my solution.
1. Rice has been kicked when the ball’s not in play. I must issue a sanction to the Brighton player.
2. The Brighton player only kicked Rice because he was trying to kick the ball Rice kicked away. Therefore, it would be unfair to not also sanction Rice.
All in all, yellow card to both would be my solution.
I’d avoid giving a public warning to a player already on a yellow card.
There’s a difference in how public words and gestures are.
ChasObserverRefDeveloper
Regular Contributor
Not dissent, delaying the restart . . .
I think a couple of factors went against Rice in this decision ...
- PGMOL were very clear in saying this would be a caution at the start of last season. They visited every club to talk them through the new directives, and I'd say the referees were pretty consistent in cautioning this since then. There can't be any doubt that his action delayed the restart as Veltman ended up kicking thin air where the ball once was and then Rice. Granted there is an argument he wouldn't have taken it quickly if the ball had stayed still, but that is just supposition and can't really be taken into account.
- Veltman's kick, and Rice's rolling around, pretty much backed Kavanagh into a corner as it drew attention to it. I'm not even sure he saw it real time and someone told him Rice had kicked the ball away, once that happened the caution was inevitable. Had the clash not happened I suspect he would have managed it without a card, especially if he hadn't seen it as I don't think the ARs or 4th official would be getting involved.
It's not turning a blind eye, it's using common sense as an official and not being overly "busy"
Brighton were gaining very little advantage by taking the ball 2 - 3 yards from the orginal position of the foul. You'd have a long 90 minutes if you insisted on the ball being in the exact location of every foul.
Keepers tend to throw the ball a good 6 - 7 yards ahead of where a foul or offside is given, it is very rarely punished because it is nitpicky and teams don't gain an advantage from it.
This is the only answer required.
There's far too much 'whataboutery' in the arguments against Rice receiving a booking.
- What about Pedro kicking the ball away? Probably not enough in it for Kavanagh to book him, it was a kick out of frustration and Arsenal weren't ready to restart the game. If Pedro doesn't kick it, it probably rolls 10 yards down the line. IMO it's still a booking but can understand why CK doesn't book him.
- What about the ball not being where the foul was? See previous post.
- What about the ball still rolling as Veltman goes to kick it? As officials, we can't be certain that the ball wasn't going to stop rolling before the kick, if the ball was still rolling then Kavanagh would've correctly asked for a retake. Rice's action took that option away and made CK make a decision.
- What about Veltman's kick on Rice? Well it doesn't happen if Rice moves away from the ball as he should. Between them they created a mass brawl and CK was required to act. Correctly booking Rice but I do think it's strange he didn't book Veltman.
I also want to throw a red herring into the mix, as well as delaying the restart, is Declan Rice also guilty of failing to respect the distance? Would be harsh because he has little time to make the distance, but at the same time, intentionally gets in the way (and kicks the ball = DtR).
Maybe CK was fed up of his antics
santa sangria
RefChat Addict
Respect