Jump to content

General officiating/rules


StefanAVFC

Recommended Posts

How does Konsa get a red and England captain Harry Maguire doesn’t? I appreciate it’s not the same ref (actually I’m just guessing here, it could’ve been), but one is at the width of the box and the other is in the D. Shocking inconsistency.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Zatman said:

Nakamba was also off the pitch for the 3rd goal and not allowed back on. seems to have gone unnoticed

Smith mentioned it. Massively backwards that they got an advantage from committing a borderline red card challenge. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, StefanAVFC said:

Smith mentioned it. Massively backwards that they got an advantage from committing a borderline red card challenge. 

We deserved to lose - it’s just that the score line wasn’t reflective when such awful officiating gifts them such advantages 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd want a red if it happened down the other end for Konsa. He's absolutely on goal without that challenge.

Hause's looks bad in slowmo but it's incidental contact as he makes the tackle, I don't think you can argue it's deliberate enough to send him off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

because ive never seen it before and because it would have been the mother of all "typical **** villa" the thought did cross my mind that it would be hilarious if both if them had been sent off...

part of me think if you're going to lose and be pissed off at least let something mind blowingly football is bullshit daft happen 

would be talked about for a long time

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I genuinely thought there were two red cards in that incident. I'm not sure how a referee can look at Hause forearm smashing a guy in the face and not think its a red card. Its the sort of challenge that if it happened to us we'd be screaming for the red card and when the VAR check was going on I was pretty sure it would get upgraded to the red.

Konsa was unlucky but the guy is through on goal and once a foul is given there's no way that its not a red card. To be honest for a referee to give that foul and not send the player off is pretty poor as well.

I thought that he got the bookings involved in the challenge on Nakamba right as well to be honest (although McGinn was unfortunate) as well as the stupid melee afterwards. The annoying thing about that decision is that he should have played the advantage as we were on a dangerous break.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
2 hours ago, a-k said:

Can someone explain how this is given as a pen? If it is for a high boot, shouldn't it be an indirect FK?

 

All i can think is he led with the hand going for the header and was no VAR. No indication he even touched it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Zatman said:

All i can think is he led with the hand going for the header and was no VAR. No indication he even touched it

VAR looked at it for what felt like 5 minutes. Was working from home so I had the game on in the background because why not 😅

  

6 hours ago, Zatman said:

FIFA are investigating to replay South Africa vs Ghana due to poor refereeing. This could open a huge can of worms

I think South Africa - Senegal played a replay during the 2018 qualifiers due to referee match manipulation

Edited by a-k
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Another week, another week of being gaslighted by both PGMOL and the media that 'the rule is the rule' about one hand on the ball and the ball on the ground.

Irregardless Schmeichel doesn't have control. And if the ref sees it live and doesn't see a foul then why the **** is VAR getting involved??

Clear and obvious or stop using it altogether. We are constantly on the end of these ridiculous decisions.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, StefanAVFC said:

And if the ref sees it live and doesn't see a foul then why the **** is VAR getting involved??

 

I can't agree wiuth this. Sometimes a ref will only half see something, or they'll look at something and what they saw isn't the reality - humans are genuinely quite bad at perception and it's really easy for our brain to trick us when we're looking at something and not paying attention to something else. Having the video there and double checking is absolutely fine, in my book - I still think the dynamic of sending the ref over to see a screen as an act of authority theatre is absolutely ridiculous though. 

The biggest issue to come out of today, in my book, is showing still-frames or very slow motion, which we've known for years drastically changes the p[erception of what happened. Multiple angles, fine, but they should see it in real time. I can absolutely see how the ball seemed "under control" from a still image, but anybody who thinks that was under control in real time shouldn't be involved in the game.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, StefanAVFC said:

Another week, another week of being gaslighted by both PGMOL and the media that 'the rule is the rule' about one hand on the ball and the ball on the ground.

Irregardless Schmeichel doesn't have control. And if the ref sees it live and doesn't see a foul then why the **** is VAR getting involved??

Clear and obvious or stop using it altogether. We are constantly on the end of these ridiculous decisions.

Sky are at least talking about the second part of that rule now

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another week where PGMOL wishes they never uttered the words "clear and obvious" 

It means nothing, they check everything, Ramseys was a goal, Watkins wasn't a foul, mcginnsnwas aggressive but not a foul, they had some ridiculous yellow cards not given and the cherry on the top was they checked Buendias goal when it was blatantly onside

Terrible all round 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Davkaus said:

I can't agree wiuth this. Sometimes a ref will only half see something, or they'll look at something and what they saw isn't the reality - humans are genuinely quite bad at perception and it's really easy for our brain to trick us when we're looking at something and not paying attention to something else. Having the video there and double checking is absolutely fine, in my book - I still think the dynamic of sending the ref over to see a screen as an act of authority theatre is absolutely ridiculous though. 

The biggest issue to come out of today, in my book, is showing still-frames or very slow motion, which we've known for years drastically changes the p[erception of what happened. Multiple angles, fine, but they should see it in real time. I can absolutely see how the ball seemed "under control" from a still image, but anybody who thinks that was under control in real time shouldn't be involved in the game.

My point is, and I guess I didn't make it very clear, is that if it's clear and obvious if the ref doesn't see it then VAR should be involved.

But cases like this where the ref clearly sees it and says no foul, why is VAR involved?

Also they are wrong based on rule 12 so...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â