The Ref Stop

United spurs.

JA1989 said:
I was at the game yesterday (neutral, no skin in the game for me so no fan nonsense coming!)
Click to expand...
That's something a United fan would say after that result 😜

JA1989 said:
What did strike me however before the SO was how Fernandes contested verbally every single decision that Kavanagh made (who I thought on the whole looked quick, and had a good game) and there was a couple of times I thought Kavanagh was going to publicly rebuke.
Click to expand...
Can only assume that's the first time you've ever seen Fernandes play (either live or on TV), he is up there as one of the most disliked players on this forum for his serial diving, play acting and constant abuse of officials.

--

Whilst I am still celebrating his dismissal, I still think it is incredibly harsh and is a stretch to class it as SFP. But either way you look at it, it's a petulant kick out to stop play, there is no attempt to play the ball and the contact is high.

Serious foul play​

A tackle or challenge that endangers the safety of an opponent or uses excessive force or brutality must be sanctioned as serious foul play.

Any player who lunges at an opponent in challenging for the ball from the front, from the side or from behind using one or both legs, with excessive force or endangers the safety of an opponent is guilty of serious foul play.
 
The Ref Stop
RefereeX said:
Football always will be subjective. For me, clear and obvious should mean that probably 9 out of 10 referees in a room would all agree.
Click to expand...
Completely agree with the bit in bold, and this isn’t I’m glad VAR didn’t intervene. A general consensus I’d say think VAR should have, but I don’t think you can say large majority.

Last season I think VAR definitely gets involved.
 
Runner Ref said:
Completely agree with the bit in bold, and this isn’t I’m glad VAR didn’t intervene. A general consensus I’d say think VAR should have, but I don’t think you can say large majority.

Last season I think VAR definitely gets involved.
Click to expand...

A red card is a massive game changer at any level, I just can't buy this that a VAR shouldn't get involved because I can understand why the referee thinks it's a red, it has to be a bit more black and white than that in respect was it serious foul play or violent conduct? I don't think it's serious foul play because there is a lack of force, not much contact and it's not endangering the safety of an opponent. Is it violent conduct? For me no, this is hardly John Mcginn challenge last season where he deliberately kicked an opponent with force in frustration. So basing on that(of course just my opinion but seems a large majority do think the red is wrong/harsh) then what is the red card for?

VAR is there to clear up potential errors like this one and if Chris Kavanagh still think it's a red looking at replays then fair enough but he had one view and had to make a decision basing on that and possibly advise from his assistant and unfortunately it looks like the wrong call has been made.
 
VAR is there to subjectively police what is 'clearly and obviously a mistake'
Every week, this subjectivity proves just as difficult as the subjectivity associated with the incident itself. Obviously VAR successfully overrules many C&O blunders as the stats will be twisted to highlight, but there are as many occasions when we disagree with their interference or non-intervention and the controversy associated with those occasions is magnified by the fact the Refereeing team has had a chance to scrutinize the decision yet may not reach an outcome we as individuals vehemently believe is right. The Referees are now a loathed star attraction at the circus, more so than ever

As poacher turned gamekeeper, it's very evident to me that a nasty chasm exists in the relationship between Referees and the wider football community.
I believe VAR has only served to widen the divide. I also have concerns about the zero-tolerance mantra towards participant behaviour because such a binary approach is not likely to nurture any sort of respect. It's not working, but that's a separate discussion
 
Last edited:
Paul_10 said:
A red card is a massive game changer at any level, I just can't buy this that a VAR shouldn't get involved because I can understand why the referee thinks it's a red, it has to be a bit more black and white than that in respect was it serious foul play or violent conduct? I don't think it's serious foul play because there is a lack of force, not much contact and it's not endangering the safety of an opponent. Is it violent conduct? For me no, this is hardly John Mcginn challenge last season where he deliberately kicked an opponent with force in frustration. So basing on that(of course just my opinion but seems a large majority do think the red is wrong/harsh) then what is the red card for?

VAR is there to clear up potential errors like this one and if Chris Kavanagh still think it's a red looking at replays then fair enough but he had one view and had to make a decision basing on that and possibly advise from his assistant and unfortunately it looks like the wrong call has been made.
Click to expand...
VAR is there to clear up ‘clear and obvious’ errors that it was designed to do unlike previous seasons. Was it a clear and obvious error if VAR got involved that’s the question!
 
David G said:
VAR is there to clear up ‘clear and obvious’ errors that it was designed to do unlike previous seasons. Was it a clear and obvious error if VAR got involved that’s the question!
Click to expand...

My(and alot of others) opinion is yes, you see on the replays, there is no contact with the studs, it's more the heel/back of the boot, it's reckless and a yellow card. I can understand why the on field decision was red but the replays do show it's not as bad as it looks. Even Dermot Gallagher is suggesting the decision is wrong which may surprise some.

As I say, we can't just back up the referees decision just because we can understand why they have given a red, it either SFP/VC or it isn't and for me, it's none of those.
 
Paul_10 said:
My(and alot of others) opinion is yes, you see on the replays, there is no contact with the studs, it's more the heel/back of the boot, it's reckless and a yellow card. I can understand why the on field decision was red but the replays do show it's not as bad as it looks. Even Dermot Gallagher is suggesting the decision is wrong which may surprise some.

As I say, we can't just back up the referees decision just because we can understand why they have given a red, it either SFP/VC or it isn't and for me, it's none of those.
Click to expand...
Dermot is a fair & reasonable chap with his reviewing of incidents and tends to go with the Referees on decision making which is good and how it should be because at the end of the day Referees in the PL are there because they very often deserve to be.
 
The Ginger Ref said:
Can only assume that's the first time you've ever seen Fernandes play (either live or on TV), he is up there as one of the most disliked players on this forum for his serial diving, play acting and constant abuse of officials.
Click to expand...
I've seen him 2-3 times in the flesh, and knew about this reputation he's built particularly on dissent. But my word, he was relentless!

The armband isn't a free pass to constantly question the decisions of officials.

Will be interesting to listen to this incident on Mic'd Up, as surely this will be included.
 
David G said:
Dermot is a fair & reasonable chap with his reviewing of incidents and tends to go with the Referees on decision making which is good and how it should be because at the end of the day Referees in the PL are there because they very often deserve to be.
Click to expand...

I'm not suggesting he isn't, not one of those fans who mock him for backing the referee alot but it may surprise people that he thinks the referee got it wrong.
 
My strong opinion, is that yesterday's incident was not SFP. My strong opinion is that Hernandez last week was clearly guilty of cowardly SFP.
VAR disagreed with me on both occasions (as did the panel last for Hernandez :eek: much to most of our disgust)
Two frequently recurring examples of decisions we could all reluctantly accept from the on-field referees. Instead they both result in vitriol towards the MOs because nobody can accept the outcomes when they've both been subjected to forensic scrutiny. Net result = not good for any of us
 
Paul_10 said:
I'm not suggesting he isn't, not one of those fans who mock him for backing the referee alot but it may surprise people that he thinks the referee got it wrong.
Click to expand...
I wasn’t disagreeing with you - I just made a general observation about him.
 
RefereeX said:
Football always will be subjective. For me, clear and obvious should mean that probably 9 out of 10 referees in a room would all agree.
Click to expand...
There's an argument it should be that obvious that it needs all 10 to agree. There shouldn't be any kind of subjectivity about the decision.

I'm still comfortable with the SFP red card here. He's tried to "do" Maddison but just made a mess of it and not made contact properly, but there is absolutely no reason for him to kick towards him at all as he couldn't possibly get the ball. Just a petulant act by a childish captain and it has cost him, perhaps in previous seasons VAR might have bailed him out but with the current very high bar they probably felt they couldn't.
 
RustyRef said:
I'm still comfortable with the SFP red card here. He's tried to "do" Maddison but just made a mess of it and not made contact properly, but there is absolutely no reason for him to kick towards him at all as he couldn't possibly get the ball. Just a petulant act by a childish captain and it has cost him, perhaps in previous seasons VAR might have bailed him out but with the current very high bar they probably felt they couldn't.
Click to expand...

Stop a promising attack?
 
Last edited:
RustyRef said:
There's an argument it should be that obvious that it needs all 10 to agree. There shouldn't be any kind of subjectivity about the decision.

I'm still comfortable with the SFP red card here. He's tried to "do" Maddison but just made a mess of it and not made contact properly, but there is absolutely no reason for him to kick towards him at all as he couldn't possibly get the ball. Just a petulant act by a childish captain and it has cost him, perhaps in previous seasons VAR might have bailed him out but with the current very high bar they probably felt they couldn't.
Click to expand...

Whether he made a mess of it or not seems irrelevant too me as you can't possibly know what his intentions are. The reality is, the on field officials thought it was serious foul play(possibly thought it was studs going into the legs) yet the pictures show contact was minimal, it was with the side/back of the heel and there was no real force in the challenge. The high bar should be irrelevant because for me it's either SFP/VC or it isn't, you can maybe understand a bit more ambiguity for a referee going yellow and possibly be a red but sticking with the on field call however not when it's a straight red especially when it's a massive game changer.
 
Paul_10 said:
Whether he made a mess of it or not seems irrelevant too me as you can't possibly know what his intentions are. The reality is, the on field officials thought it was serious foul play(possibly thought it was studs going into the legs) yet the pictures show contact was minimal, it was with the side/back of the heel and there was no real force in the challenge. The high bar should be irrelevant because for me it's either SFP/VC or it isn't, you can maybe understand a bit more ambiguity for a referee going yellow and possibly be a red but sticking with the on field call however not when it's a straight red especially when it's a massive game changer.
Click to expand...
We don't know what was said on comms. Perhaps Kavanagh said something like he hasn't tried to play the ball, he just kicked Maddison, in which case VAR have nowhere to go as that is what factually happened. If he said he had made forcible contact with studs then I would be more inclined to agree that it might come within VAR's remit. I've been very consistent in my views on this over the years though, in that I think kicking an opponent when the ball isn't playable should be dealt with severely, it is called football not footopponent, allowing a player to just deliberately kick an opponent just doesn't sit comfortably with me and never will.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top