Ref4Me

Soton - Leicester

WiisardNic

Active Member
Level 4 Referee
If the referee sent him off for DOGSO would a review get triggered if the VAR thought the DOGSO decision was a clear & obvious error but the red was correct for SFP?
I wouldn't say so.

I'm speaking for a grassroots level, but I've been instructed by my association to only put Red Cards on the match card after the game, and not the code, because it helps with administration and appeals. But, do put the codes on the incident report for the red.
All this administration stuff happens after the game, so I don't think that an either/or situation would be necessary.
 

RefIADad

Well-Known Member
Level 7 Referee
Watching the replay at live speed I'm perfectly good with SFP. The challenge is very much from behind coming into the Achilles area with a locked leg. Yes, there was a very slight touch of the ball, but I'm again going to the magic book and not seeing "getting the ball negates or cancels a foul" anywhere in there.

If the panel overturns this red, it's not good for the game. We don't want these types of challenges to be acceptable.
 

JamesL

RefChat Addict
Level 4 Referee
Travesty that this has been overturned.
The only way out I see is ref has reported as dogso, but not dogso because the foul happened after the defender played the ball taking away the OGSO?
For me its SFP anyway but if panel are asked to review dogso then perhaps that's their only remit?
 

bester

RefChat Addict
Level 7 Referee
Travesty that this has been overturned.
The only way out I see is ref has reported as dogso, but not dogso because the foul happened after the defender played the ball taking away the OGSO?
For me its SFP anyway but if panel are asked to review dogso then perhaps that's their only remit?
This is why I asked the, seemingly daft, question about reviewing it for SFP.
This was obviously going to get overturned on DOGSO grounds.
 

Big Cat

RefChat Addict
Level 5 Referee
OK, so 'The Panel's' reputation is restored
They arguably correctly overturned the DOGSO because it was obviously SFP
Hmmm
 

JamesL

RefChat Addict
Level 4 Referee
Keith Hackett explained in his column this week that the referee was correct to send off, as it denied a clear goalscoring opportunity, was a careless tackle, and was serious foul play🤔
I guess Mr Hackett was not on the panel.
Careless serious foul play. Now I've heard it all.
 
  • Like
Reactions: one

RefIADad

Well-Known Member
Level 7 Referee
Careless serious foul play. Now I've heard it all.

How on Earth can we expect pundits and other media members to properly reference the Laws when an experienced former referee who writes a lot on these topics can even get his nomenclature correct?

The tackle endangered the opponent's safety. The proper misconduct is a sendoff for serious foul play. This is not really that difficult.

And this guy writes and speaks about the Laws for income?
 

one

RefChat Addict
Level 7 Referee
Putting a player and a manager to make up the majority for the panel... Putting fox 🦊 in charge of the hen house. What do you expect.
 

RustyRef

Administrator
Staff member
Appeal board decisions are always a lottery. 66.666% of the panel have no understanding of, or at least no qualification of, the Laws of the Game, so it shouldn't be a surprise that random decisions are made.
 

Big Cat

RefChat Addict
Level 5 Referee
Appeal board decisions are always a lottery. 66.666% of the panel have no understanding of, or at least no qualification of, the Laws of the Game, so it shouldn't be a surprise that random decisions are made.
They correctly overturned DOGSO. Think most people agree with that
I think this is a problem in football
Referees' are generally dismissive of non-Referees' ability to make good judgements, even if the latter don't use the 'right' terminology
 
Last edited:

Alex Rush-Fear

RefChat Addict
Level 4 Referee
They correctly overturned DOGSO. Think most people agree with that
I wouldn't agree with that actually - take the foul tackle out of the equation and Vardy has an obvious goalscoring opportunity. It's not like Vestergaard won the ball first with a clean tackle and then did something separate to foul Vardy - the tackle is one action. The only way Vestergaard could win the ball is by diving in for a tackle which was at least reckless, if not SFP.
 

Big Cat

RefChat Addict
Level 5 Referee
I wouldn't agree with that actually - take the foul tackle out of the equation and Vardy has an obvious goalscoring opportunity. It's not like Vestergaard won the ball first with a clean tackle and then did something separate to foul Vardy - the tackle is one action. The only way Vestergaard could win the ball is by diving in for a tackle which was at least reckless, if not SFP.
As I recall, I thought the GK was favourite to get possession of the ball. However, I wouldn't have a strong feeling on it and wouldn't go so far as to say we're in disagreement and I respect your opinion on it. One way or another, we're unanimous that it's wrong that the Refereeing Team were undermined by the Panel on this occasion
 

bester

RefChat Addict
Level 7 Referee
According to Dale Johnson who seems to have a hotline to Stockley Park. Rob Jones saw the touch on the ball and communicated that to VAR, if he hadn't it would've been more likely to have been reviewed.

Also

"In terms of protocol, the VAR could say this wasn't DOGSO but Vestergaard should be sent off for Serious Foul Play. This requires a monitor review and the referee to relay the information to the player. Southampton appeal would be against DOGSO (I didn't think they'd win it)."
 
Top