Sunderland Cambridge

[ben_white161]

Apologies for the poor video, I'm interested in your opinions on this penalty and whether it warranted a straight red for the defender. It seems massively harsh to me but I'm a Cambridge fan so admittedly it's hard to be objective.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1518127161785389056

 

[Anubis]

As you say, the video is unclear. Is it a red for serious foul play?
If so, again, disclaimer, the footage aint great, then, am perfectly fine with the red
Looks like the defender has flattened the striker.

 

[ben_white161]

As you say, the video is unclear. Is it a red for serious foul play?
If so, again, disclaimer, the footage aint great, then, am perfectly fine with the red
Looks like the defender has flattened the striker.

It's assumed it was given for dogso

 

[ARF]

Looks like his arm's up and has caught the attacker across the back of the head, so no alternative than red for DOGSO IMO.

 

[Anubis]

It's assumed it was given for

This is the point of contact on the foul. Look at the ball !!

obvious? Imo thats sfp, a body slam, wiped out the striker by any means possible.

If we are going down the dogso route, we are in the attempt for the ball catergory, and with it being in the box, a yellow card......

 

[ChasObserverRefDeveloper]

This is the point of contact on the foul. Look at the ball !!

obvious? Imo thats sfp, a body slam, wiped out the striker by any means possible.

If we are going down the dogso route, we are in the attempt for the ball catergory, and with it being in the box, a yellow card......

As it was a push, the DOGSO route would also be a dismissal.

 

[ARF]

As it was a push, the DOGSO route would also be a dismissal.

Combined with the ball not being in playing distance at the point of the foul.

 

[Anubis]

As it was a push, the DOGSO route would also be a dismissal.

I dont see push, I see clatter into striker

 

[Max2]

DOGSO and no attempt to play the ball. Off you pop.

 

[Mooseybaby]

Looks to me that the Sunderland player has run under and beyond the ball. Clumsy challenge by the defender, but not convinced it was an obvious goalscoring opportunity.

 

[Quarryref]

I don't see DOGSO here - the striker doesn't have control and he looks like he has run past the ball, so he's going to have to turn back away from goal to keep possession

.... but that's with the benefit of looking at it a few times and in slowmo.

In real time and from where the ref was, I can see why DOGSO was given.

 

[ARF]

Remove the defender from the equation and he is going to gain control and have an OGSO before anyone can challenge him.

 

[ChasObserverRefDeveloper]

I dont see push, I see clatter into striker

So do I but the offence in the LOTG is a push, so if using DOGSO it's a red

 

[Anubis]

So do I but the offence in the LOTG is a push, so if using DOGSO it's a red

Clattering into someone, takes us to serious foul play....,

 

[santa sangria]

From watching on mobile, I think penalty YC or no card are easily justified here. But not RC.

IMHO the defender makes a poor attempt to head the ball going over the attacker, it’s such a poor attempt I think reckless is justifiable.

I think DOGSO is borderline, no control, facing away from goal, more players are coming. I am in the no DOGSO camp because there are doubts about all three considerations. The clincher for me is the direction of play - this isn’t the kind of heading towards goal at speed we associate with DOGSO.

So, either foul pen SPA downgrade no card ; reckless pen YC ; or foul pen DOGSO downgrade yellow.

On balance YC is the smart choice I think.

 

[ARF]

From watching on mobile, I think penalty YC or no card are easily justified here. But not RC.

IMHO the defender makes a poor attempt to head the ball going over the attacker, it’s such a poor attempt I think reckless is justifiable.

I think DOGSO is borderline, no control, facing away from goal, more players are coming. I am in the no DOGSO camp because there are doubts about all three considerations. The clincher for me is the direction of play - this isn’t the kind of heading towards goal at speed we associate with DOGSO.

So, either foul pen SPA downgrade no card ; reckless pen YC ; or foul pen DOGSO downgrade yellow.

On balance YC is the smart choice I think.

Distance
General direction of play
Likelihood of gaining control of ball
Location and number of defenders
Ball not within playing distance

Seems a very straightforward DOGSO red to me.

 

[JamesL]

Distance
General direction of play
Likelihood of gaining control of ball
Location and number of defenders
Ball not within playing distance

Seems a very straightforward DOGSO red to me.

I thought the same until I watched again.. And actually the player has ran past the flight of the ball and would have ended up with back to goal and not such an obvious chance as I originally thought.

What was the decision here BTW?

 

[RustyRef]

He has plenty of time to turn around though, take the fouling defender out of the equation and at the time of the foul the nearest other defenders are 10m away.

 

[RustyRef]

What was the decision here BTW?

He was sent off

 

[santa sangria]

Distance
General direction of play
Likelihood of gaining control of ball
Location and number of defenders
Ball not within playing distance

Seems a very straightforward DOGSO red to me.

“Sometimes we see different things”