This really shouldn't be a major concern or a concern at all. He's maybe 35-38 yards out. Think about how fast professional attackers can cover that ground. Now add in the fact that the two closest defenders (including the one who committed the foul) are flat-footed at the moment of dispossession while the attacker is moving directly toward goal already. This is an easy red. It's a cynical short-grab to yank a guy down on a breakaway. Everyone expects red. Don't over-complicate things.
Agree. The whole point of DOGSO was to eliminate (or at least reduce) cynical fouls. No way should a cynical foul be given any benefit of the doubt in applying the Ds.
Even as an Arse supporter, I don't have much problem with this being a red. Just wish we would've gotten a similar ruling when Rio knocked down Freddy in the match that ended the unbeaten streak.
OK I haven't had anything to eat so this is probably a dumber question than usual — but why is this even a foul going in? Defender gets the ball cleanly and doesn't really move after that. Attacker gets the ball back, yes, but basically runs over the defender. I know I often have it backwards, but in my game I think I'm at least as likely to call the foul coming out. What am I missing?
I won't comment on whether or not you should go eat something, but... The red defender tries to clear the ball. The blue attacker blocks the clear and directs the ball toward the goal he is attacking. Blue attacker then starts to run by the red defender, who grabs him by the shorts and pulls him to ground. Being honest, I genuinely don't understand what you're saying in your post. There's nothing close to a foul on the attacker.
I must be looking at the wrong clip ... Never mind. Off to lunch. And yes that's an easy red in my game.
If you are so inclined, the count of the six seconds doesnt traditionally start until the ‘keeper is back on his feet and moving to punt. Not sure if that would be 10or more seconds in this case. But, as you mention, no one on Swansea complained because they all have releagtion release clauses in their contracts.
Chelsea was charged today for failing to control their players after Lee Mason blew for half time shortly after awarding a corner kick for Chelsea, prior to the kick being taken. Quite a few of them ran up towards Mason to express their displeasure as he was walking off the pitch. https://www.independent.ie/sport/so...t-halftime-against-huddersfield-36894801.html
Yes but . . . the GK is allowed a reasonable time to stand up before the count starts, not as long as he wants--he'd better be injured if he wants to take 10 seconds. Eighteen seems quite long to permit to me, but 12-13 (including getting up) is never going to be called. Does anyone know if the ref or AR told him to get going. (I can still only think of one example of this being called in a professional game.)
I'm not even saying it should be called. I was just expressing that I find it interesting that it's such an accepted part of the game. Here's one of the only times I've seen it called in a higher level game. This was an NCAA quarterfinal last fall. It was an easy call to make in a 3-0 game with 10 minutes left. It would have been lunacy for Oliver to call it in the final seconds of a 1-0 Premier League relegation playoff (effectively). Call happens at 39:23 in the video (or about 10:15 on the game clock).
Sunday 13 May Burnley v AFC Bournemouth Referee: Paul Tierney Assistants: Adrian Holmes, Derek Eaton Fourth official: Roger East Crystal Palace v West Bromwich Albion Referee: Jonathan Moss Assistants: Simon Bennett, Scott Ledger Fourth official: Lee Probert Huddersfield Town v Arsenal Referee: Michael Oliver (pictured) Assistants: Lee Betts, Ian Hussin Fourth official: Chris Kavanagh Liverpool v Brighton & Hove Albion Referee: Kevin Friend Assistants: Mark Scholes, Sian Massey-Ellis Fourth official: Mike Jones Manchester United v Watford Referee: Lee Mason Assistants: Matthew Wilkes, Mick McDonough Fourth official: Neil Swarbrick Newcastle United v Chelsea Referee: Martin Atkinson Assistants: Stephen Child, Eddie Smart Fourth official: Bobby Madley Southampton v Manchester City Referee: Andre Marriner Assistants: Simon Long, Richard West Fourth official: Mike Dean Swansea City v Stoke City Referee: Anthony Taylor Assistants: Gary Beswick, Adam Nunn Fourth official: Stuart Attwell Tottenham Hotspur v Leicester City Referee: Craig Pawson Assistants: Stuart Burt, Simon Beck Fourth official: David Coote West Ham United v Everton Referee: Graham Scott Assistants: Constantine Hatzidakis, Dan Robathan Fourth official: Simon Hooper Appointments for the final fixtures. Coote and Hooper appearing as 4Os. Mike Jones and Neil Swarbrick announced their retirements as on field referees, making their final appearances as 4Os today. They will continue to work with trialing VAR in England.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Coote_(referee) says he refereed the 2014 League One Playoff Final.
Promotion playoffs, Mike Dean apparently getting some criticism for going yellow instead of red at 7:57 in the video here: Red seems the safer call to me. Unless Dean could say from his angle that he was sure the shot wasn't on frame, it's hard to justify yellow because the available replays sure look like the shot was on target.
Taken from a tweet about the matter, these guys look to be the most likely replacements for Jones and Swarbrick: Congratulations to PGMOL on inviting Andy Madley, Rob Jones and David Coote to the assessment day for potential promotion to SG1. Tim Robinson and Simon Hooper also invited - surprised at those two but wish them all well.
From the replay, it looks like he's starting to go red (back pocket), but switches up, so maybe one of the ARs or 4O had some information for him (ie, AR2 may have seen that the kick was clearly going wide from his angle further upfield).
And an interesting VAR question: would VAR be used to decide if the ball was going in the goal? How does clear error fit into that review? And if you went to VAR, might the handling call be reversed? The angle isn't perfect, but could a hair's breadth of the ball be over the PA line. (I don't think so, but I don't think that video clip is definitive--it's close, and on another play could be so.) So if VAR starts review for whether it should be a send off instead of a caution, can it tell the R that there is a "clear" error because the ball was a smidgen over the PA line and handling should not have been called at all? If so, we have the weird result of taking away a clear scoring opportunity on something being reviewed only for an almost opposite reason And if not, we have the potential for VAR being used on a play, but not reversing an error that can be seen on the replay. Another potential minefield for VAR at the WC.
I thought that was possible, but then did a quick video search and it doesn't appear correct. The first four red cards I can find Dean giving in the EPL, he gives with his right hand from the right back pocket. He keeps his yellow in his front left short pocket. So if he was always moving with his left hand, it appears he was just fumbling with the pocket on that side.
DOGSO is reviewable so if the replay could determine that the ball was clearly going into the goal and the defender behind the keeper had no way of playing it, then this could be upgraded to red via VR. I think both of those things are true, but I think it would take a lot of evidence to convince 95% of people that both things are clearly true. I was about to give a very simple answer, but then I realized this is a brilliant question. If a review is triggered for a possible red card, then everything is on the table. So in that regard, sure the handling call can be reversed in theory. But if the VAR saw that the handling clearly occurred inside the penalty area, then there is no red card situation to review. And if the VAR can't tell the CR that there is a possible red card, and there's no possible penalty (since handling in the area by a goalkeeper is legal), then this could not be reviewed and the incorrect DFK would stand. One way around this situation would be for the VAR to wrongly suggest there was a possible red card, allow the CR to look at the monitor, and then have the CR realize there simply wasn't a foul. This would be consistent with the spirit of VR, trying to get justice on a game-critical incident, but it would be pretty close to a gross violation of the letter of the VAR protocols. If a red had been given instead of a yellow, then everything is much cleaner because the handling being in the penalty area means the red is inherently wrong and then you can review and reverse everything. So one interesting lesson in situations like this might be for referees to err on the side of a red card, which is fascinating. After saying all that, just to be clear I think there's absolutely no doubt that, in this situation, the handling was outside the penalty area and a DFK was the proper call.
Mark Clattenburg interview What do you think about there being no English ref at the World Cup? It’s my fault. I was on the programme, then FIFA made the U17 and U20 announcements, then I stopped and they didn’t have time to change it. But what I’ve said before is that English refs can’t be arrogant. There are only nine European refs going to the World Cup. There are two guys that didn’t make it – Jonas Eriksson and Viktor Kassai, who have done World Cups and Euros. So what right do Michael Oliver or Anthony Taylor have to go? They’re young, they’re the future, but they don’t have the experience of those other two guys. They’ll have more international and Champions League experience soon. And who knows if I’d have made it either? My form might have dipped and I might have got dropped. https://www.fourfourtwo.com/feature...t-be-arrogant-they-have-no-right-be-world-cup
Yes, on paper. But If Clattenburg had never started the process, I tend to believe England would have had a nominee and Atkinson was the obvious option. I think the 45 year limit would have been relaxed. Also he moved to the AAR role because of his retirement. If he was an active WC candidate things would have been different. I could be wrong. But if I’m wrong it just means Oliver would have been the candidate (with a lot less chance of getting there, admittedly). Regardless, I think the fact that Clattenburg takes a (fair) shot at Oliver and Taylor without expressing any remorse for his ARs is telling.