Sunderland vs Newcastle United
- Thread starter ref craig
- Start date
I thought it was a penalty, as that for me was 'charging an opponent', but I did not think it was a red as the Newcastle 'keeper was going to get the ball, hence not 'obvious'.
You should apply for a job on Sky Craig
Definite Penalty ,For me the Red was harsh don't think Fletcher was getting to it
frank_ref
Well-Known Member
It's bad enough having to listen to players bleat on that "last man = red card" but I'm APPALLED to hear it from a referee. Can you reference it in the LOTG please? Cos I only know the bit about "denying an obvious goal-scoring opportunity."
I agree with all those who say, foul yes, red card no. Good to see the referee doing his bit to stamp out the 'shoulder barge myth'. But as it wasn't an obvious chance to score, then it can't be a red. If it was obvious there wouldn't be such debate about it, and the general consensus seems to be that the keeper was getting there first.
My question is, what is it then? A yellow for reckless?
I agree with all those who say, foul yes, red card no. Good to see the referee doing his bit to stamp out the 'shoulder barge myth'. But as it wasn't an obvious chance to score, then it can't be a red. If it was obvious there wouldn't be such debate about it, and the general consensus seems to be that the keeper was getting there first.
My question is, what is it then? A yellow for reckless?
Mooseybaby
Retired big bad baldy in all black!
Glad I am not the only one!
The amount of idiots on fb harping on about "last man" and how it must be the case because "commentators and pundits use the phrase all the time". Pundits and commentators say a lot of things, doesn't make them right!
For me it was a stonewall penalty, no intent to play the ball and far too aggressive. Red card? Not for me.
The amount of idiots on fb harping on about "last man" and how it must be the case because "commentators and pundits use the phrase all the time". Pundits and commentators say a lot of things, doesn't make them right!
For me it was a stonewall penalty, no intent to play the ball and far too aggressive. Red card? Not for me.
Agree it is a foul and a foolish, ill judged one at that. On replay it does look like the keeper is getting the ball but the referee had to make a decision in real time so I can understand why he has gone for DOGSO and red card. I've no sympathy for Collocini - very poor decsion making from a highly paid professional athlete.
RegalRef
Politically Incorrect
howard_webb
Well-Known Member
don't give up ur day job kid
deusex
RefChat Addict
There is no debate. "Being Last man" is not a sending off offence. You should know this!
Debate is one thing, but I'm afraid you're just wrong here Craig.
There is no such thing as "last man", so your assertion that he had to go is incorrect; the question is whether it was the denial of an obvious goalscoring opportunity.
Steve C
The Unfit one!
Good point, could there be a point for excessive force given the speed Collocini came in with the shoulder? ive only seen it once so Im relying on memory here haha!
Mooseybaby
Retired big bad baldy in all black!
As I said previously, I didn't think it was a red card....
However as we all know, when your in the middle you only get one angle and one look at it before we are expected to make a relatively quick and correct decision. Easy to sit at home with sky+, looking at countless angles and many replays with the option of rewinding and pausing to our hearts content.
A statement released on the FA website read: "Fabricio Coloccini will not serve a one-match suspension after his wrongful dismissal claim was successful. "An Independent Regulatory Commission found that the match referee had made an obvious error in dismissing the Newcastle United defender for denying an obvious goalscoring opportunity during the game against Sunderland on Sunday 25 October 2015."
Whilst they are two very different sports, I like cricket's 3rd umpire rules, where for lbw decisions there is a margin of error built in, which is considered "Umpire's call". When the the FA's regulatory commission sit on review appeals, do they consider the referee's view in the appeal or do they just look at the TV replays and say, yes he got that one wrong/no the referee was right based purely on tv evidence?
Interesting that the wording says an obvious error, given the debate on here, social media and news sites (where views are usually warped due to club bias), it is highly debatable as to if it was an obvious goalscoring opportunity, so technically the appeal is correct. However given the speed of the incident etc, was it really an "obvious" error by the referee or just an honest mistake based on the referee's angle and interpretation?
However as we all know, when your in the middle you only get one angle and one look at it before we are expected to make a relatively quick and correct decision. Easy to sit at home with sky+, looking at countless angles and many replays with the option of rewinding and pausing to our hearts content.
A statement released on the FA website read: "Fabricio Coloccini will not serve a one-match suspension after his wrongful dismissal claim was successful. "An Independent Regulatory Commission found that the match referee had made an obvious error in dismissing the Newcastle United defender for denying an obvious goalscoring opportunity during the game against Sunderland on Sunday 25 October 2015."
Whilst they are two very different sports, I like cricket's 3rd umpire rules, where for lbw decisions there is a margin of error built in, which is considered "Umpire's call". When the the FA's regulatory commission sit on review appeals, do they consider the referee's view in the appeal or do they just look at the TV replays and say, yes he got that one wrong/no the referee was right based purely on tv evidence?
Interesting that the wording says an obvious error, given the debate on here, social media and news sites (where views are usually warped due to club bias), it is highly debatable as to if it was an obvious goalscoring opportunity, so technically the appeal is correct. However given the speed of the incident etc, was it really an "obvious" error by the referee or just an honest mistake based on the referee's angle and interpretation?