EssexVilla Posted December 24, 2013 Share Posted December 24, 2013 Don't buy the covering defender idea. The "touch was too strong and Andi had no real chance to reach it before the keeper" is impossible to measure. Did the contact or eminent contact, impact Andi's last touch? As a villa fan, i'm with you, but the refs decision on this one was reasonably defensible, at least. (Damn it) I think the touch was bad enough that it was no longer a clear goal scoring opportunity. But the touch is directly impacted by the challenge. There's 2 possibilities when the ball is there to be won. The 1st possibility is that the stoke player doesn't make a challenge, Weimann is then through on goal in a clear goal scoring opportunity. The 2nd possibility is that the stoke makes the challenge fouling weimann. This illegally stops weimann the goal scoring opportunity. The touch is irrelevant due to the impact the fould had on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillaChris Posted December 24, 2013 Share Posted December 24, 2013 I agreed with that, how can you expect Weimann to expertly control the ball when out of the corner of his eye he says Wilson about to lunge in? I thought at the time it was a red card and have seen nothing at all to change my mind. It was much more of a red imo when ironically earlier in the season it was Weimann and Ravel Morrison, I thought he went down too easily on that occasion. Probably just shows the malaise we're in that there's been barely any complaints about this (not sure even Lambert mentioned much about it yet he was after we lost to Fulham he was on the ref straight away). The crouch handball could've been disallowed aswell so we certainly could've got at least a point out of that although of course Delph might well have walked in the second half. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillaChris Posted December 24, 2013 Share Posted December 24, 2013 Anyone got a GIF of Clark getting sent off v Everton right at the start of last season. Would be interested in seeing how different that was in terms of think it was Jelavic's control of the ball. Think that was the last time we had someone sent off for being last man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillaChris Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 What on earth was that 5 minutes of injury time all about today at the end? There were no goals in the second half, we made on sub and I think Sunderland made two as they brought Borini on at half time. So that's only 2 minutes injury time. Just seemed to be a case of home team losing,quick just add 4-5 mins on to keep the locals happy. And he even played an extra minute on top of the 5! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skruff Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 What on earth was that 5 minutes of injury time all about today at the end? There were no goals in the second half, we made on sub and I think Sunderland made two as they brought Borini on at half time. So that's only 2 minutes injury time. Just seemed to be a case of home team losing,quick just add 4-5 mins on to keep the locals happy. And he even played an extra minute on top of the 5! Was a lot of stoppage due to drama/diva stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StanBalaban Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 Yeah and that word removed Gus Pooyet kept moaning about us timewasting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillaChris Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 Yeah but you get natural stoppages like that in all games. There were 3 subs made in the second half so 90 secs extra, there's no way there was an extra 3 and a half minutes on top of that plus that extra minute he just invented in injury time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillaChris Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 How come games that end 4-4 with most of the goals coming in the second half and 6 subs made in that period not have 8-9 minutes added on using that logic? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LockStockVilla Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 Thought Mike Jones (think that's who it was) did well controlling things today and called a fairly reasonable match. Things were certainly boiling over on the pitch, was so sure there were gonna be some reds at some point in the match. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oaks Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 Yeah but you get natural stoppages like that in all games. There were 3 subs made in the second half so 90 secs extra, there's no way there was an extra 3 and a half minutes on top of that plus that extra minute he just invented in injury time. Vlaar was down about a min. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danceoftheshamen Posted January 1, 2014 Author Share Posted January 1, 2014 The additional 6 mins was OTT in my opinion. Have to quickly mention I see our friend Howard Webb was up to the usual antics at OT too in the evening KO.. Man U losing 1-2 so a magical 5 mins extra time appear in that game too but even worse was the disgraceful diving by the Man u players who were pulled on it 3 times but only one yellow card given? Ditto with Chelsea's game another dive by Oscar I believe? Otherwise I notice the reffing in our last few games had been pretty reasonable really barring the odd mistake. No surprises really as we have been playing the lesser teams recently... it's against the big boys the disgraceful decisions come into play more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillaChris Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 Yeah to add balance I thought the ref we had v Swansea was really good. Probably an easy game to ref but still very few debatable decisions. Who was that out of interest? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa4europe Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 sunderland fans going mad on their board and some others ive had a look at 2 main things from today, the offside goal, which i thought was marginally offside and therefore a good decision and the ki yellow card, thought gabby's elbow was accidental but ive seen them end up in red cards, ki was booked because he wouldnt leave the pitch which is fair enough thought he gave them more than he gave us to be honest, not booking colback for the pull back was probably the worst decision of the game and also the moment that i think the crowd and players got on top of him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
srsmithusa Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 I put something about this is the match thread. The minimum added time of 5 minutes was large but not unreasonable. I have no idea where the other 90 seconds came from after that. I think Mr. Jones is normally a good referee, but he had a really bad day. I genuinely think something happened to Mr. Jones after the card he gave for simulating. (first card of the match) It may have been considered a bit harsh, because it looks like there was some contact, but simulating doesn't require that no contact have occurred. I think someone on the crew must have gotten in his ear about that card being harsh. Because he clearly wanted to avoid giving cards after that. He talked to everybody about everything. Long talk about hitting Benteke in the back twice resulted in the next offense a few minute later being ignored. He tried to talk his way to avoiding cards. It fell apart when he didn't book Colback for hanging on to Gabby. Everybody on the pitch knew it was deliberate, tactical, and cynical. Everybody on the pitch lost confidence in the referee. As always happens at that point. All hell breaks loose. Lot's of moaning and complaining. When Gabby elbowed Ki. It was deliberate, but it was aimed chest high. Ki was stooped over and got nailed in the mouth. Jones couldn't see it, was shielded by Ki's body. But the tantrums over it were becuase the players no longer trusted the ref to make the calls. So, Ki reacted very badly. Jones was forced to caution, after that, however, as is usually the case... cautions no longer gain the match control for which they are intended. Honestly, the AR would have been better to assist Jones in getting that right that calling the little touch foul on Gabby later on the far side of the penalty area. Another negative when the players have lost confidence in the ref is that the AR's do too. At which point they sometimes start giving assistance on things that are far beyond their normal duties. Finally, when Gabby hit Colback after the ball was away. Mr. Jones let the play go on out to the wing. Not unreasonable as an advantage was certainly possible. But needed (in the lack of trust environment) a firm observation... clear and loud advantage... or clear barking angrily at Gabby... or something.... anyway Colback took justice into his own hands and pushed Gabby in the back away from play. Should have been red... no question. No way for me to know if Mr. Jones didn't see it off the ball, in which case assistance from the crew was needed, or if he had simply lost his own head in the "trying to avoid cards and talk my way through this" strategy. Either way it was wrong and things disentegrated even further. He was calling a lot in order to control the game without cards. Poyet was screaming at him for calling too much and players were angry he wasn't protecting them. It was an all around poor game for the referee. He's normally quite good, I think, but this match was not a good day for him. Like most matches that go south, it comes from one bad moment from which the referee fails to recover. In this instance it was (my best guess) after the first card, when he (it seemed to me) decided to try not to give cards if he could avoid it. BTW. do you notice that people are still debating the offside call that dissallowed their goal? It's a great example of one key reason (there are several) why I am adamantly opposed to the idea of video replay decisions. We would still be waiting for a decision if we were waiting for a consensus view on the video. And who's to say, given that people look at this one and disagree still, that the video-based decision is vastly more accurate and clear? So in this case, you hold up play, and get a decision just as suspect and debatable as the one you already had.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Butterfingers Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 I think we were lucky that the lad stayed on his feet for the penalty appeal. The offside was correct but we'd be pi##ed off if we had one like that go against us. They played 6.5 mins at the end although it was about 1 min into this before the game restarted. 2 big decisions went our way yesterday, the offside & the penalty appeal. No complaints from me, although we'll have something go against us at some point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kingfisher Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 We were playing counter attack, (as usual) and surprise surprise, really looking dangerous with it towards the end - away from home, with a narrow lead, funny that... But getting back to my point, I thought a couple of times their players stopped us with cynical fouls, the ref should have been wise to that and booked them. I found it astonishing that he didn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danceoftheshamen Posted January 2, 2014 Author Share Posted January 2, 2014 (edited) BTW. do you notice that people are still debating the offside call that dissallowed their goal? It's a great example of one key reason (there are several) why I am adamantly opposed to the idea of video replay decisions. We would still be waiting for a decision if we were waiting for a consensus view on the video. And who's to say, given that people look at this one and disagree still, that the video-based decision is vastly more accurate and clear? So in this case, you hold up play, and get a decision just as suspect and debatable as the one you already had.... The thing is though that whilst i take your point and of course there is always going to be a very thin grey area around any incident, the video replay would remove the vast majority of the incorrect calls which surely has to be better than the current situation where we regularly see blatantly wrong decisions given? I guess the "Close call" situation could easily be resolved by including a "Too close to call" rule or something? So if the decision is deemed 50/50 the on field ruling stands. Also if each manager had a limit of say two challenges per half this would naturally reduce the chances of the close call being challenged anyway as they would not want to waste one on a challenge they could easily lose... I do understand your concerns with the idea however and of course this would need to be kept to a minimum so as not to ruin the games flow too much, although i stand by the point that the game is disrupted anyway when such an incident occurs by players protesting, surrounding the ref and maybe ref consulting with linesman etc etc.... Ok not that much on an offside call but certainly with a sending off or penalty award. Edited to add: I see Gary Neville appears to agree now that game changing decisions where a goal or disallowed goal are at stake should be reviewed. He mentioned the chalked off goal which Newcastle suffered incorrectly against Man City at the weekend when a perfectly good goal was disallowed for offside. That game would have gone to 1-1 then but instead 0-2 with Man City scoring on the break as Newcastle pushed for the equaliser which they should already have had... A definate example of the result being effected by a wrong call. Edited January 14, 2014 by danceoftheshamen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danceoftheshamen Posted January 14, 2014 Author Share Posted January 14, 2014 (edited) As for last nights game against Arsenal i think a couple of things went against us which really didn't help our cause.. The first was the instant yellow card for our player after about 20 seconds from KO..., This immediately restricted his game which is based on high energy and tackling.. didn't help and although it was most likely a yellow normally that would not be given so early... got us off on the wrong foot. Also thought everything seemed to be going Arsenals way a bit in the 1st half especially and some of the throw ins awarded against us were shocking. Otherwise though i thought he did generally ok Gabby damaged Rosicky pretty badly too but it looked accidental to me. Edited January 14, 2014 by danceoftheshamen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted January 14, 2014 Share Posted January 14, 2014 he tried let it flow in fairness and was no unnecessary stoppages though accidental the Rosicky one could have been red depending on referee. Some refs panic at the sight of blood Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TreeVillan Posted January 14, 2014 Share Posted January 14, 2014 He panicked when he saw the loveable Jack wilshere was in a tiny bit of pain and carded delph, he wasnt gonna at first until he had a chat with jack. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts