Should have been an easy red card. I’m interested to learn if Dean just missed it or if he saw it and took no action. Either answer isn’t acceptable, but I’d like to know which one it was.
Another game another missed SFP against a Man City player. Ben Davies this time. To be fair, it isn't as forceful as other missed reds this season.
The Man City penalty in the first half is probably changed to a free kick if VAR is in use. Right call on the foul and caution against Lloris, and at live speed it did look like the contact on Sterling happened in the area. However, the replay was pretty obvious that the foul occurred outside of the area. I can understand why the penalty kick was given (long ball where the AR and Moss had to catch up quickly, the contact on the side opposite of the AR, the position of the majority of Sterling's body at the point of contact), but VAR probably overrules the penalty kick. This would have been the opposite of the PK that Ted Unkel eventually gave a couple of weeks ago in a MLS game where Drew Fischer convinced Unkel without even having to go to the monitor himself. On another note, Rebecca Lowe was spot on with her explanation of the difference between a hold continuing into the area vs. why this play shouldn't have been a penalty because a trip doesn't carry into the area. It was refreshing to see a TV host or analyst actually have an intelligent viewpoint on the laws (but not surprising from Lowe, who I think is the best studio host in the business).
I'm presuming you mean the "tackle" against Kompany for which a YC was given? For me on that play, while the bottom of foot made contact with the shin of the other player, the intensity was low, the player made a clear effort to pull out, and for that, I can understand why the caution was given rather than the sending off.
I considered the that the force is lower. We only get the one look at full speed though and it's a pretty poor angle. I think the yellow is acceptable (and some may even say preferred). It still just adds to the list of clear or potential SFP reds that City have not gotten this season.
Tuesday 17 April 19:45 Brighton & Hove Albion v Tottenham Hotspur Referee: Kevin Friend Assistants: Matthew Wilkes, Mark Scholes Fourth official: Lee Probert Wednesday 18 April 19:45 AFC Bournemouth v Manchester United Referee: Graham Scott Assistants: Constantine Hatzidakis, Harry Lennard Fourth official: Andre Marriner Thursday 19 April 19:45 Burnley v Chelsea Referee: Bobby Madley Assistants: Marc Perry, Adrian Holmes Fourth official: Anthony Taylor 19:45 Leicester City v Southampton Referee: Roger East Assistants: Simon Beck, Derek Eaton Fourth official: Neil Swarbrick
It's fitting that there was some clear cut things VAR could have fixed in the Premier League this weekend only a couple days after voting "no" on it.
Roger East is a fine ref, but he's 52. This would be a great match for the PGMOL to give to a top Select Group 2 ref.
Honestly, East is probably my least favorite ref in the PL, alongside Jon Moss. I do agree with you that they could easily have given that game to a SG2 ref.
The one argument against a SG2 referee getting this game is that Southampton is very much in the middle of a relegation fight. If this was a game of mid-table teams like Leicester and Newcastle, I’d completely agree with you.
Ah, Jon Moss. All he did this weekend was give a PK for a foul outside the area. And he missed what could have been SFP for a studs up tackle into Kompany's lower shin.
Let's play the "If there was VAR" game. https://www.clippituser.tv/c/xynpxq Two questions 1) PK or no? 1a) Red or yellow? 2) Enough for VAR to get involved?
I saw it live. Even through red tinted glasses I thought 1) yes 1a) red 2) doesn't matter as EPL has thumbed their nose at the whole VAR idea for now, and even if they didn't the whole "clear and obvious error" tunnel is so wide you can drive a truck through it blindfolded and never come close to hitting the sides.
Yes, yellow, no. With the clampdown on holding, this is the type of foul the authorities want called. This is a yellow. Too much doubt he gets on the end of this cross and is able to steer it into the net. There’s a common sense argument for red. But the game expects yellow historically. Given how VAR has now been used in the major domestic leagues, no—not even close. Would never be given in MLS or Germany right now. Probably not Italy. Last year, at the youth FIFA tournaments, this probably gets called. And this is why WC18 is going to be fascinating to watch. Because was the initial standard what FIFA wanted or was it simply what emerged at a point where people were making things up as they went along? You’d think the application would be more conservative over time, given the principles. But the concept of a one-off tournament that is the biggest stage anyone will ever officiate on is a pull in the other direction—because getting calls right might trump the imperative to apply the protocols right.
It seems to be some kind of a contradiction that this foul is one that, because of the referee's angle, he is never going to see clearly; and yet it is one that seems not to be a clear and obvious error.
You said something similar last week about a handling situation and I just don't understand it. The attacker is 5 yards out, centre of the goal with the keeper to the side and is inches from getting the ball even after the foul. How is that not an OGSO? 30+ yards out with the keeper to beat and DOGSO is called routinely but here you go "nah, he might miss". How? Why?
You think many referees would look at that replay and think "no foul"? I agree with @jayhonk here, I don't see why people confuse calls that vary because of varying preferences between leagues or between referees and calls that vary because they are hard/impossible to spot live.
Technically? Because the ball is moving across goal and not toward it. I know--and fully support--the language that the ball or play can temporarily be moving away from goal and DOGSO can still be satisfied. But this is a cross. The ball isn't moving toward goal until the player gets on the end of it. Practically? How many red cards have you seen given for denying an opponent the opportunity to finish a cross? We'd be giving red cards for pushing people in the back on corner kicks. It opens up a pandora's box. To be very clear, I think the practical answer here is far more important than the technical one.
David Elleray has said the "clearly wrong" standard means 95% of football would expect the decision to go the other way. I look at that play, and although I think foul is the correct call, I can't get anywhere near that standard. Your second paragraph and @jayhonk's point goes to the very heart of the matter with VARs and penalties. In the U-20 WC last year, I pointed out a stray, careless hand to the face that caused an attacker to go to ground. It was 100% a foul. It was a careless strike. A defender swung his arm and caught an attacker in the face while standing fully inside the penalty area. No reasonable person--referee or any other participant--could look at the incident and say it's not a foul. The problem is, it's the type of foul that never gets called and it's the type of incident that historically is not a penalty. So, is the advent of VARs going to change the game and mean that all 100% fouls (or 99% fouls) are now going to be called as penalties? Or does the implementation of VR and its application on penalties only occur when something that the game expects to be called is missed? I'm not saying you guys are wrong in principle. If we have the technology and we're supposed to be calling penalties, then there is an argument that every single foul that occurs in the penalty area and is caught on video needs to be punished. But that's only one argument. The other argument is a much more conservative approach that allows for the fact that penalties are subjective in the first place, so only the most blatant and clearly missed penalties need to be called via VR. The fact that either argument could win on a given day is one of the reasons I think it's a bad idea to subject penalty decisions to VR in the first place, but I'm not winning that battle. What's important now is which way FIFA pushes its referees at the World Cup.