A&H

West ham v man utd

Trip said:
I'm not sure I agree with this tenet. You have very considerable control over your actions even with both feet off the ground. Try challenging for a header without both feet leaving the ground.
Click to expand...

Change your direction once you've left the ground with both feet aimed at an oppenent?

You're comparing apples and oranges......jumping for a header is nowhere near anything like aiming your body as a missle towards your opponents ankles.......
 
The Referee Store
and this boys and girls is why you read a thread fully before replying! haha ... was just about to put the same as @Padfoot - you are comparing 2 non-comparables @Trip - also which tackle are you watching? I'm a West Ham fan, and even I can see that it is a lunging jump, leading foot, studs showing ...

thing is, and I've asked a lot of my football friends this, if Feghouli makes contact with his lead foot on Jones - is it then a red? surprisingly most don't answer with a straight yes or no ...
 
Padfoot said:
Change your direction once you've left the ground with both feet aimed at an oppenent?

You're comparing apples and oranges......jumping for a header is nowhere near anything like aiming your body as a missle towards your opponents ankles.......
Click to expand...
We've gone from "off the ground" to "aiming your body like a missile".....and you're accusing someone else of changing terminology? Those are different things - the latter of which is definitely red, the former that can be anything from no foul to red.

Of course you have a certain amount of momentum once you're off the ground and that's difficult to alter. But what is possible is to remove the risk of making contact using a metal stud by withdrawing a leg. In addition, a two footed challenge is a shorthand for going entirely off the ground, wheras a "one footed" challenge requires consideration of what the other foot is doing and how much control that foot's helping add.

All this explains the reason that discussions using expressions like "studs first" and "two footed" can be valid. Added together, they are indications of the fact that the offender has not taken appropriate action to minimise risk to their opponent, which, in the right context, might have otherwise justified downgrading to yellow or less.
 
Padfoot said:
You're comparing apples and oranges.
Click to expand...

I'm not comparing anything at all. I'm pointing out that this equation, posted in this thread by somebody, can't quite think who for a moment, is demonstrably false:

Both feet off the floor = out of control = dangerous = red card

Clearly, since a fair challenge for a header involves two feet off the floor, it's not a simple as that. I'm using the example of the header not as a comparison with the tackle in question but as a very clear illustration that merely having both feet off the ground is not on its own enough to justify a dismissal.
 
At a recent fa promotion seminar (5-4) the fa representative went through these very tackles. The expectation is that the higher you climb the ladder the more red those orange cards become and the less tolerant we need to be of challenges that start two footed. There is absolutely nothing wrong in jumping two footed into challenges for the ball- but add speed, a nearby opponent and any hint of mistiming and you have yourself a decision to make. As has been said, if your opponent gets there first can you stop/ change direction etc - the result of West Ham's appeal will be interesting- backing MD will help all refs down the line.
 
These days if make a challenge where you lunge with boot feet off the ground you are taking a massive risk. Lunge is the key word as this distinguishes between other situations where both feet leave the ground such as running or jumping.

And if you lunge after making a heavy / poor touch you are even more at risk as the referee's senses will have been heightened. It is amazing how high a percentage of red cards for SFP come after the player has made a bad touch and then tried to get the ball back.
 
RustyRef said:
These days if make a challenge where you lunge with boot feet off the ground you are taking a massive risk. Lunge is the key word as this distinguishes between other situations where both feet leave the ground such as running or jumping.

And if you lunge after making a heavy / poor touch you are even more at risk as the referee's senses will have been heightened. It is amazing how high a percentage of red cards for SFP come after the player has made a bad touch and then tried to get the ball back.
Click to expand...

Very much this, my reffy senses were tingling watching the Gills yesterday, one of our forwards had a bad touch and lost possession.

He the proceeded to sprint about 30 yards back down the pitch after the ball. His only saving grace is that another player fouled the guy with the ball, got a yellow.
 
Not seen any footie for over a week and had to Youtube this clip..

IMO thats a very harsh red card, the Utd player didn't help either doing a Platoon impersonation, not a two footed lunge at all as some have said, its not pretty, granted, old fashioned, yes, and maybe a yellow at very worst but we should be saving our red cards for the more serious stuff..
 
It has torn opinion in my wee group of referees up here in Scotland. In real time, it looked a caution to me. However, when you slow it down the West Ham player has clearly lunged with both feet off of the ground which ticks in the endangering the safety of an opponent box. Add in the speed and the fact he hasn't won the ball = red card for serious foul play.

We run through a series of clips a few months back where we all focused on the point of impact. At the point of impact here, the West Ham player is low, his studs are facing down etc - so we tended to lean towards a caution. However, our coach took us back a couple of steps to show players leaving the ground, jumping/lunging into the tackle. The fact that the tackler has ended up low is purely by chance because they are not in control of their actions. Red card was the battle cry.
 
I have no issue with certain decisions being reviewed after a game, getting the right decision is very important at this level, we are talking millions of pounds and we certainly shouldn't be beyond reproach. Its not a slur on the refs team because that had only the one view and the result won't change. With this though should come review of 'certain' incidents where players can be retrospectively punished for diving, blatant hand balls, punching, spitting etc. It certainly works both ways and cheats should never prosper....Amen brothers!!
 
personally, I believe the decisions should be purely based on the referees match report and what is portrayed by the club - at county elvel the CFA don't get video replayed of say ... a red card on a *Barking v Sawbridgeworth game do they? If **Mr Level 4 Referee issues a red card in the 15th minute here, and Barking appeal, then the appeal is based on the referees report and then a hearing where Barking would beg and plead that their little angel is a victim and not the perpetrator .... and that is how ALL level appeals should be handled

*Note: I have never officiated on the described fixture and do not know of any dismissal being made by ANY Match Official in the 15th minute on this fixture in its history - the fixture is a realistic but fictional fixture made up purely for the means of this post

**Note: I also do not know of, or have heard of a 'Mr Level 4 Referee' - by no means is this a true reflection of a current referee, nor has the mentioned referee ever officiated, to my knowledge, on the aforementioned fixture
 
Can't help but think that it's Jones reaction to the challenge that gets the man sent off.
 
Everyone talking Feghouli take a wee look at how Jones enters the challenge as well fifty fifty ball yes jones gets there just ahead but with his studs showing and no control IMHO yellow for Feghouli and a word for Jones for theatrics and his own challenge. You can't say one has no one when both are fully committed and neither has control because there is no way Jones is stopping if he doesn't get the ball.
 
Charlie Jones said:
personally, I believe the decisions should be purely based on the referees match report and what is portrayed by the club - at county elvel the CFA don't get video replayed of say ... a red card on a *Barking v Sawbridgeworth game do they? If **Mr Level 4 Referee issues a red card in the 15th minute here, and Barking appeal, then the appeal is based on the referees report and then a hearing where Barking would beg and plead that their little angel is a victim and not the perpetrator .... and that is how ALL level appeals should be handled

*Note: I have never officiated on the described fixture and do not know of any dismissal being made by ANY Match Official in the 15th minute on this fixture in its history - the fixture is a realistic but fictional fixture made up purely for the means of this post

**Note: I also do not know of, or have heard of a 'Mr Level 4 Referee' - by no means is this a true reflection of a current referee, nor has the mentioned referee ever officiated, to my knowledge, on the aforementioned fixture
Click to expand...

That isn't right, clubs can no longer appeal red cards without video evidence that clearly shows the referee was incorrect in law or made an obvious error, and I very much doubt that the average ESL game would have that. If they did then this would be available to the panel as well as the referee's report.

All that can be appealed without video evidence is mistaken identity, and in those cases the appealing club have to offer up the player that the red card should have been issued to.
 
Padfoot said:
The right decision was the one made on the pitch.

The subsequent shafting of the match official is a political lubing to ease the passage of premier league money through the FA coffers.......
Click to expand...

Sorry, I don't agree with that......(the first bit especially), no-one has been shafted either, an independent Panel with multiple angles have carefully looked at this in the comfort of an armchair and have deemed such... Move on..... we make honest mistakes.... we are mostly human... (unless you're from Hull :ninja: ).... We are not the centre of the football universe..... we are not what the public pay to see....!!!! :pirate:
 
Sheffields Finest said:
Sorry, I don't agree with that......(the first bit especially), no-one has been shafted either, an independent Panel with multiple angles have carefully looked at this in the comfort of an armchair and have deemed such... Move on..... we make honest mistakes.... we are mostly human... (unless you're from Hull :ninja: ).... We are not the centre of the football universe..... we are not what the public pay to see....!!!! :pirate:
Click to expand...

Not human from Hull? Suppose that's true as we're more than a bit 'godlike' being from the City of Culture 2017........No more dropped 'aitches' around here.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top