The Ref Stop

Wolves vs Arsenal

Decision?

  • Red

    Votes: 30 38.5%

  • Yellow

    Votes: 48 61.5%
  • Total voters
    78

Donate to RefChat

Help keep RefChat running, any donation would be appreciated

Status
Not open for further replies.
Runner Ref said:
Isn’t it weird that out of all the admins on here, it’s only you that ends up in arguments with people.

As I said, most people don’t agree with you on it being a red.
Click to expand...
Not having an argument, I'm just pointing out what you posted was factually incorrect. If you don't like that don't try to post your opinions as facts when they are incorrect. I fully respect that people have opinions that are differing, that is fine, but I won't stay silent when people post supposed facts that are just plain wrong.
 
The Ref Stop
RustyRef said:
Not having an argument, I'm just pointing out what you posted was factually incorrect. If you don't like that don't try to post your opinions as facts when they are incorrect. I fully respect that people have opinions that are differing, that is fine, but I won't stay silent when people post supposed facts that are just plain wrong.
Click to expand...

RustyRef said:
There's very little difference between a kick and a trip. The ball was miles away, so why would he possibly have kicked / tripped him if his only intention wasn't to take him out?
Click to expand...
Was the ball miles away? I highly doubt it. Therefore, factually incorrect. ☺️
 
Runner Ref said:
Was the ball miles away? I highly doubt it. Therefore, factually incorrect. ☺️
Click to expand...
That's known as hyperbole, as was me saying the ball was in a different postcode when it clearly wasn't.

But point taken, if you find me making any statement that is factually incorrect and not hyperbole feel free to call me out.
 
The referees decides if the player should be sent off.

The "independent regulatory commission" decides if the ban imposed by the FA should apply.

As long as everyone's perception is the same on this I don't have a problem with it. The send off is based on the lotg which the referee adjudicates on. The ban is based on community expectations which the reps of footballing community should adjudicate on.

I like these headlines from BBC sports
"Lewis-Skelly ban overturned after Arsenal appeal"
"Arsenal defender Myles Lewis-Skelly's three-match ban - imposed for a red card at Wolves on Saturday - has been overturned."

But not this content
"The Gunners appealed against the decision to send off the 18-year-old and an independent regulatory commission upheld their claim of wrongful dismissal"

The reality is, the IRC is overturning the FA decision not the referee decision, no matter how much spin media want to put on it.
 
Last edited:
one said:
The referees decides if the player should be sent off.

The "independent regulatory commission" decides if the ban imposed by the FA should apply.

As long as everyone's perception is the same on this I don't have a problem with it. The send off is based on the lotg which the referee adjudicates on. The ban is based on community expectations which the reps of footballing community should adjudicate on.

I like these headlines from BBC sports
"Lewis-Skelly ban overturned after Arsenal appeal"
"Arsenal defender Myles Lewis-Skelly's three-match ban - imposed for a red card at Wolves on Saturday - has been overturned."

But not this content
"The Gunners appealed against the decision to send off the 18-year-old and an independent regulatory commission upheld their claim of wrongful dismissal"

The reality is, the IRC is overturning the FA decision not the referee decision, no matter how much spin media want to put on it.
Click to expand...
Someone said it perfectly earlier in the thread when they said certain people would do ‘mental gymnastics’ over this.

Of course they’re deciding if they think he got it wrong. And yes, they believe he did. As do the majority of people, including on here.

Deciding if the ban should occur is the exact same thing as deciding if they think he got it wrong. I’d bet there wouldn’t be as much defensiveness if this wasn’t concerning Oliver.

A claim will only be successful where the Regulatory Commission is satisfied that the Referee made an obvious error in dismissing the Player.

He’s human, he can get things wrong.
 
Last edited:
Runner Ref said:
Someone said it perfectly earlier in the thread when they said certain people would do ‘mental gymnastics’ over this.

Of course they’re deciding if they think he got it wrong. And yes, they believe he did. As do the majority of people, including on here.

Deciding if the ban should occur is the exact same thing as deciding if they think he got it wrong. I’d bet there wouldn’t be as much defensiveness if this wasn’t concerning Oliver.

A claim will only be successful where the Regulatory Commission is satisfied that the Referee made an obvious error in dismissing the Player.

He’s human, he can get things wrong.
Click to expand...
I know this (my post) is counter productive but my cynicism is getting the better of me.

I read the first paragraph. Then I read the rest and immediately think of glass houses, kettles and pots 🤣.

A 2-1 in favour vote is still a successful cailm yet it is an obvous error? Not that I agree that is the criteria for IRC. Me reckons nuf said.
 
one said:
I know this (my post) is counter productive but my cynicism is getting the better of me.

I read the first paragraph. Then I read the rest and immediately think of glass houses, kettles and pots 🤣.

A 2-1 in favour vote is still a successful cailm yet it is an obvous error? Not that I agree that is the criteria for IRC. Me reckons nuf said.
Click to expand...
According to the FA’s own guidance, it gets overturned in the case of the referees obvious error. Not my words, theirs.
 
mctones said:
I thought introduction of VAR would be a good thing, on hindsight it has caused more issues than it solves, I would rather we went back to to ref only and you accept we are human and we make the best intended decision on the one time view we get.
Click to expand...
I mean, I'm in my mid-30's, have been watching football since I was 10 and I don't remember those days. I'm fairly convinced they're imaginary.
 
Runner Ref said:
Someone said it perfectly earlier in the thread when they said certain people would do ‘mental gymnastics’ over this.

Of course they’re deciding if they think he got it wrong. And yes, they believe he did. As do the majority of people, including on here.

Deciding if the ban should occur is the exact same thing as deciding if they think he got it wrong. I’d bet there wouldn’t be as much defensiveness if this wasn’t concerning Oliver.

A claim will only be successful where the Regulatory Commission is satisfied that the Referee made an obvious error in dismissing the Player.

He’s human, he can get things wrong.
Click to expand...
Exactly. The only reason they haven't repealed the red card is because it's not within their power to do so.
 
Is there someone I can speak to about getting back the time I've just spent reading through the last couple of pages of this thread? As @RustyRef can attest to, I love a mention of The FA's disciplinary regulations as much as anyone, and yet even that has failed to change my flaccid state.
 
The panel who decide if VAR decisions are correct are given very guided directions to what law is and any applicable PGMO guidance.

Not sure if that is the case with these red card appeals.
 
IMG_2347.jpegThere’s been some hot debate on this forum regarding the red card

But I reckon we are all in agreement that this is the most idiotic take of all!
 
The Ginger Ref said:
View attachment 7896There’s been some hot debate on this forum regarding the red card

But I reckon we are all in agreement that this is the most idiotic take of all!
Click to expand...
I actually think that guy speaks a lot of sense about football in general, but then as soon as he starts talking about refereeing decisions he just sounds like a complete moron.

I think George Scaife is one of the more balanced 'football influencers', but they all make fools of themselves from time to time.
 
RefereeX said:
I actually think that guy speaks a lot of sense about football in general, but then as soon as he starts talking about refereeing decisions he just sounds like a complete moron.

I think George Scaife is one of the more balanced 'football influencers', but they all make fools of themselves from time to time.
Click to expand...

That's because they know his followers would be saying the same thing so don't want to be seen as defending the referee incase they themselves end up getting abused. Goldbridge is the same, can be knowledgeable talking about the game but when it comes to referees, then forget it because you know what they are going to say.

I do get the impression fans would love if a referee gets found out to be corrupt, would be the biggest I told you so type of thing. I will add sadly, referees have not helped themselves at times, we had Mark Halsey and a incident with booking a player when the player apparently wanted to be booked, Clattenburg refusing to show red cards to Spurs players as he didn't want to be the story and Mike Dean of course not recommending an on field review to protect a mate because he had a tough game. And then when that happens, people will question if more stuff has occurred.

I am going to be interested in Howard Webbs comments if it get shown on mic'd up especially as seemingly the PGMOL backed the decision. As I said in a previous post, I hope the referee describes what he saw as he produces the red card and not say virtually nothing so people may understand why the ref made his decision and why VAR did not get involved.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top