A&H

Swansea v Brentford FA Cup

Tealeaf

Lighting the darkest hour
Staff member
DOGSO red for Brentford in second half. Nagging at me as a wrong call though.

Challenge comes in, clear foul but advantage is played. Striker hits the ball a bit too far and goalkeeper rushes out and clears.

Whistle goes, referee pulls out red. Looking at it, it’s not a SFP foul, especially as advantage has been played.

This is what gets me. By playing the advantage surely the chance to score is still there, ergo not denied?
 
The Referee Store
I'd have to see the video, but it sounds like the advantage failed to materialize when the player took a heavy touch.
 
Looked it up on the BBC highlights.

It's an easy DOSGO, no advantage since the keeper came out and prevented the other striker from being able to play the ball at all.
 
Just seen it. Careful, OP, there is no advantage played..... a tiny slight delay to see what's happening next but, nothing more.
Its excellent refereeing tbh, as soon as Atwell recognises the move is going nowhere, stops play and dismisses

Watching the highlights Atwell does himself out of further praise at Brentfords goal where he actually does play a great advantage deep in defence but for some reason does not signal it :(
 
Last edited:
Having watched the entire match he did himself some praise but was also his usual self.
Even if he didn't bring it back for the straight red, it was a definite yellow and the kid was already on one so red anyway.
The offside goal disallowed. Assistant I feel failed him.
With the score at 3-1, just after the disallowed goal and 7 minutes after the red card for Brentford, assistant gives offside, Atwell blows and the attacker, for whatever reason, boots it 40-50 yards. He acknowledges it by talking to the player and pointing to what he done wrong. No yellow for kicking the ball away, delaying restart, however you want to word it. This player was already on a yellow and would have seen him sent off and the man advantage gone as both down to 10. I believe this could have altered the ending, maybe not the result but we'd never know.

There were many inconsistencies from him throughout the game overall in the so called minor, middle of the park, free kicks.

But definitely a game of two halves.
 
Challenge comes in, clear foul but advantage is played. Striker hits the ball a bit too far and goalkeeper rushes out and clears.
There's no advantage played as far as I can tell. The striker didn't hit it too far, he had it perfectly under control and touched it forward in a way that would have kept it completely within his stride pattern, had he not been completely wiped out by the defender. The only reason the keeper was able to get there was because the striker had been fouled and denied an obvious goal-scoring opportunity.
 
We had a recent thread very similar to this. If he not played/signalled advantage is immaterial for me here. Its just poor refereeing. On a red card you either blow the whistle almost immediately or play advantage and don't bring it back. In this case the whistle should have gone straight away. It took him 4 seconds to put the whistle in the mouth and 5 seconds to blow it.

What would have he done if the second Swansea player rounded the keeper? keep going without playing advantage? Now there is a covering defender. Way too messy.

If he hasn't played advantage you could argue he is technically right. NOT to the spirit of advantage law for me.

The foul
1550460856243.png

Bringing whistle to mouth
1550461357826.png

Whistle in mouth
1550461043214.png

Whistle sounds
1550461805540.png
 
Last edited:
If he hasn't played advantage you could argue he is technically right. NOT to the spirit of advantage law for me.


my take on it 100%. I maintain its good refereeing, refs get panned/discouraged from signalling advantage then pulling it back, so, the ref simply takes his time before making his call, same as we drum into our ARs to do with offside.
Not that it makes anything more correct from a referee point of view but BBC quotes the Brentford manager as simply saying "the red card was correct", and I don't see any damming of the referee in the report, and indeed in the incident, there is no fuss around the sending off

Its a non story really. Ref correctly sends someone off but deserves electric chair for taking 4 seconds to blow whistle. Cant see the Booker panel judges giving this one too much interest
 
Last edited:
If he hasn't played advantage you could argue he is technically right. NOT to the spirit of advantage law for me.


my take on it 100%. I maintain its good refereeing, refs get panned/discouraged from signalling advantage then pulling it back, so, the ref simply takes his time before making his call, same as we drum into our ARs to do with offside.
Not that it makes anything more correct from a referee point of view but BBC quotes the Brentford manager as simply saying "the red card was correct", and I don't see any damming of the referee in the report, and indeed in the incident, there is no fuss around the sending off

Its a non story really. Ref correctly sends someone off but deserves electric chair for taking 4 seconds to blow whistle.
You and I both know what a manager thinks of a decision doesn't mean much :)

In general advantage decisions I'd agree with you. In the vast majority of red card offences, including this one, I don't.

Come on now. Stop the dramatic and irrelevant statements. Electric chair? I'd send him to Guantanamo Bay prison first. A few years of torture will sort him out :D:cool:
 
You also get my drift re the manager/press etc.... if they can latch onto any tadpole and use it to slate the ref, they will
Not very often a manager comes out and says simply, yes, it was a red.

No doubts had he blown instantly, the talk on here would be, OMG awful why did he not wait !!!!!

I would be satisfied with myself had I done exact same as Atwell yesterday, wee bit thinking time then yip, boom.

Rush in? Slated. Delay whistle? Slated. Advantage signalled (which this was not), Slated

What chance does anybody have !!!

Suppose main thing when 5 pages of should have could have would have are typed is....he got the right man, issued the right sanction and restarted play correctly..... if we can all do that in all of our calls in a game, we be happy :)
 
Just seen it. Careful, OP, there is no advantage played..... a tiny slight delay to see what's happening next but, nothing more.
Its excellent refereeing tbh, as soon as Atwell recognises the move is going nowhere, stops play and dismisses

Hence the use of “nagging”; an irritating inner voice that wouldn’t shut up.

I could justify red to myself for all those reasons, but that bit of doubt just kept on and on. Think a quick(er) red would’ve stopped it before it began.
 
Here is the incident for those who haven't seen it

Someone mentioned a heavy touch, the attacker who took the ball after the foul only touched the ball just before the keeper slides in. I can see why Attwell has given himself time, if that player rounds the keeper and scores he gets praised for a brilliant advantage.
He didn't signal advantage, he just waited to see IF there could be one. There wasn't, he blew, red card, correct decision. Good refereeing for me.
Having said that, usually it is always wise to stop the game when you know you have to send someone, otherwise you put yourself at risk of the player doing something again before you have chance to send him.
 
Having said that, usually it is always wise to stop the game when you know you have to send someone, otherwise you put yourself at risk of the player doing something again before you have chance to send him.

But with DOGSO, if the advantage plays out, there is no send off. Takes a delicate feel on how patient to be on those.
 
There was no advantage. Waiting to see if the player will get the ball and then whistling when he doesn't isn't advantage.

What's your point? You said that you should stop immediately if you're going to have to send off. My point is that waiting to see if there is an advantage first makes sense because if there is advantage then there isn't a send off. The pause is simply good refereeing.
 
What's your point? You said that you should stop immediately if you're going to have to send off. My point is that waiting to see if there is an advantage first makes sense because if there is advantage then there isn't a send off. The pause is simply good refereeing.
You're creating an argument that isn't there. I said it was good refereeing then said, on a separate point, it is "usually wise" to stop the game, not "stop immediately" as you put it. It is usually wise, but that wasn't needed here. We agree.
 
Back
Top