A&H

Spurs vs Chelsea

I can't believe that Spurs are still insisting on playing such a high line
 
The Referee Store
Odds on Vicario mistiming one of those and joining the other two in the dressing room, leaving Hojbjerg as the stand in keeper for the draw?
 
Mudryk has committed 3 fouls in 15 minutes, the most of any other player on the pitch, and joint with Udogie (who's got sent off).
 
For those saying Udogie's first challenge should have been SFP, how many top level red cards can you remember where a player has lunged but missed the opponent? I can't think of any, and at senior levels there is almost an unwritten rule that there has to be contact for it to be SFP.

Incredible game, but I don't think there should be too much discussion about officiating and VAR as they have got it mostly right. Yes there will be subjective opinion such as for the Udogie challenge, but aside from that I'd say it has all been correct.
 
Degnann said:
SFP can only be for challenging for the ball so if the play is stopped then it can’t be SFP.

This is the most mental game I’ve seen in recent years. Udoghie decision is baffling
Click to expand...
Incorrect. Only DOGSO and SPA are forgiven if they occur in the time that play continued. From the magic book:

9. If play continues after an incident which is then reviewed, any disciplinary action taken/required during the post-incident period is not cancelled, even if the original decision is changed (except a caution/sending-off for stopping or interfering with a promising attack or DOGSO).​
 
Tim Punter said:
Genuine question. If the ref had blown for a Sterling dive or any other infringement say an offside, would Romero’s tackle not come into play and play is reset?
Or does ‘serious foul play’ or ‘excessive force” still count?
Click to expand...
I’ve always wondered this and I think the rule is that the first infringement is what counts. However, I feel that a dangerous tackle would override that. I know it would for violent conduct.
 
They would still check for SFP. Take as an example a scenario where the ball is played through towards an offside forward, before the flag can go up he two foots the keeper. The restart is an IDFK for offside as that happened first, but the sanction is a red card for SFP.
 
socal lurker said:
Incorrect. Only DOGSO and SPA are forgiven if they occur in the time that play continued. From the magic book:

9. If play continues after an incident which is then reviewed, any disciplinary action taken/required during the post-incident period is not cancelled, even if the original decision is changed (except a caution/sending-off for stopping or interfering with a promising attack or DOGSO).​
Click to expand...
Doh, I actually knew that.

I stand corrected
 
RustyRef said:
They would still check for SFP. Take as an example a scenario where the ball is played through towards an offside forward, before the flag can go up he two foots the keeper. The restart is an IDFK for offside as that happened first, but the sanction is a red card for SFP.
Click to expand...
Exactly. Recall the Van Dijk injury caused by Pickford - not reviewing for the SFP after they determined VVD was offside was considered to be a significant VAR error.
 
In media watch today:

Talksh*** breakfast on the match:
- “the offside rule is unfair” (Jackson wait and see)
- “the VAR screen is not big enough”

FFS they really did not have enough to talk about with the tactics, fouls, goals etc. and instead find more random ways to question the officials!

The mind boggles. It has gone way too far. All the back pages “VARnage” and not Spurs’ collective suicide, or insane high line experiment goes predictably t*** up!
 
cwyeary said:
Any offense in the app is open to review leading to a PK. Red to Romero, yellow to Sterling, and IDFK to Spurs?
Click to expand...

To me, this (with my bolded addition) would have been the correct outcome given that Oliver didn't catch the simulation in real time. I would, of course, have preferred him to catch and call the simulation in real time and then the Romero situation would not have occurred.

Degnann said:
SFP can only be for challenging for the ball so if the play is stopped then it can’t be SFP.

This is the most mental game I’ve seen in recent years. Udoghie decision is baffling
Click to expand...

The Ugodie decision is relatively easy to understand: the point of contact was non-existant from what the camera angles show.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top