Kjøttbacken Posted February 4, 2021 Share Posted February 4, 2021 39 minutes ago, Sam-AVFC said: How on earth can Bednarek get his red overturned but Luiz hasn't. It's like they try to make everything as controversial as possible. Difference is Martial dived I guess. I would assume Martial get a ban now that they cleared Bednarek? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
a m ole Posted February 4, 2021 Share Posted February 4, 2021 23 hours ago, OutByEaster? said: it's interesting, they've also asked that Mason doesn't take any of their games in future either - there are only 19 referees in the Premier league group. If Southampton have this request granted, they're influencing the decisions on which officials they get, but if they don't then there could well be a natural bias from referee's who know Southampton have tried to have them removed. I can see other clubs having an opinion. Of the nineteen referees: Martin Atkinson Stuart Attwell Peter Bankes David Coote Mike Dean Darren England Kevin Friend Simon Hooper Rob Jones Chris Kavanagh Andy Madley Andre Marriner Lee Mason Jon Moss Michael Oliver Craig Pawson Graham Scott Anthony Taylor Paul Tierney I can honestly say that I don't trust three of them in terms of their integrity and their ability - it'd be lovely to not have those three referee Villa in future, but what happens when every club picks the same official they don't want? Dean, Friend, Moss? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sam-AVFC Posted February 4, 2021 Share Posted February 4, 2021 5 minutes ago, Kjøttbacken said: Difference is Martial dived I guess. I would assume Martial get a ban now that they cleared Bednarek? But they said the first one was a red because he pulled out and didn't try to get the ball. Bednarek was exactly the same! Both reds were ridiculous and should have been overturned IMO. I just think it's ridiculous they've managed to separate the two. If it's because the issue in question is considered subjective then I don't think they should have even considered either. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OutByEaster? Posted February 4, 2021 Moderator Share Posted February 4, 2021 Just now, a m ole said: Dean, Friend, Moss? Two people have now guessed and both have been spot on. What does that tell you about these three officials? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
a m ole Posted February 4, 2021 Share Posted February 4, 2021 1 minute ago, OutByEaster? said: Two people have now guessed and both have been spot on. What does that tell you about these three officials? haha, exactly. I wonder if it is the same offenders for other teams suggesting a bias towards the Sky 6/7, that they’re just bad at refereeing or bias against us. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom_avfc Posted February 4, 2021 Share Posted February 4, 2021 45 minutes ago, Sam-AVFC said: But they said the first one was a red because he pulled out and didn't try to get the ball. Bednarek was exactly the same! Both reds were ridiculous and should have been overturned IMO. I just think it's ridiculous they've managed to separate the two. If it's because the issue in question is considered subjective then I don't think they should have even considered either. I think they’re saying the Bednarek one wasn’t a foul at all as Martial was practically on the floor before he kicked Bednarek. Really they should be giving out bans for any player that they are saying has dived. The Luiz one is without doubt a foul however accidental it was. It’s ridiculous that you can get sent off for that but it’s another decision that you can justify using the wording of the rules when in reality common sense should prevail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OutByEaster? Posted February 4, 2021 Moderator Share Posted February 4, 2021 1 hour ago, tom_avfc said: The Luiz one is without doubt a foul however accidental it was. It’s ridiculous that you can get sent off for that but it’s another decision that you can justify using the wording of the rules when in reality common sense should prevail. I think it has to be a foul because if Luiz wasn't there then there would have been nothing for Jose to make contact with - but it is completely accidental, Jose's heel catching Luiz's knee as he pull his leg back to shoot. There's no intention to make a challenge and for me there's no way on earth it should be a red card, there's a case for it not being a yellow either, just the penalty is punishment enough in my opinion. For the Bednarek one, you can make a case for a red by saying that Martial was off his feet in order to avoid the contact which was coming - I don't think that's necessarily true, I think Martial dived, but if he'd timed the dive better there might well have been contact first and dive second - it's much more a foul than the Luiz one for me - he's heading toward the player with the intention to get involved and tries to stop himself at the last minute - if Martial doesn't throw himself over, we'd have found out whether there was a foul, but I think for that one you either have to go foul and red card or nothing and punishment for Martial. What the two instances show is that there's very little consistency and that they make the rules up as they go along. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom_avfc Posted February 4, 2021 Share Posted February 4, 2021 1 hour ago, OutByEaster? said: I think it has to be a foul because if Luiz wasn't there then there would have been nothing for Jose to make contact with - but it is completely accidental, Jose's heel catching Luiz's knee as he pull his leg back to shoot. There's no intention to make a challenge and for me there's no way on earth it should be a red card, there's a case for it not being a yellow either, just the penalty is punishment enough in my opinion. For the Bednarek one, you can make a case for a red by saying that Martial was off his feet in order to avoid the contact which was coming - I don't think that's necessarily true, I think Martial dived, but if he'd timed the dive better there might well have been contact first and dive second - it's much more a foul than the Luiz one for me - he's heading toward the player with the intention to get involved and tries to stop himself at the last minute - if Martial doesn't throw himself over, we'd have found out whether there was a foul, but I think for that one you either have to go foul and red card or nothing and punishment for Martial. What the two instances show is that there's very little consistency and that they make the rules up as they go along. Yeah I wouldn’t disagree with any of that. The issue is that there is a rule that can be used to back up the David Luiz red card as follows: “Where a player commits an offence against an opponent within their own penalty area which denies an opponent an obvious goal-scoring opportunity and the referee awards a penalty kick, the offending player is cautioned if the offence was an attempt to play the ball; in all other circumstances (e.g. holding, pulling, pushing, no possibility to play the ball etc.) the offending player must be sent off”. It’s a ridiculous reading of the rule to say that if Luiz slides through the back of the player attempting to get the ball he gets a yellow but doing what he does constitutes a red. However given the precedent set in other decisions the intent of the PGMOL seems to be to protect their referees where at all possible. We should be seeing common sense in the application of the rules rather than looking for rules to back up decisions that nobody wants. The Bednarek one I agree with you in that if Martial hadn’t dived he’d probably have got taken out and it genuinely would have been a red card. I saw it as a dive and I assume that’s why he’s had his red card rescinded. In terms of what I’d like to see I completely agree with you. Not even a booking for Luiz accidentally clipping the guy. It’s unfortunate he concedes a penalty from it let alone booking him as well. I was more guessing why they’ve overturned one and not the other. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fightoffyour Posted February 4, 2021 VT Supporter Share Posted February 4, 2021 34 minutes ago, tom_avfc said: Yeah I wouldn’t disagree with any of that. The issue is that there is a rule that can be used to back up the David Luiz red card as follows: “Where a player commits an offence against an opponent within their own penalty area which denies an opponent an obvious goal-scoring opportunity and the referee awards a penalty kick, the offending player is cautioned if the offence was an attempt to play the ball; in all other circumstances (e.g. holding, pulling, pushing, no possibility to play the ball etc.) the offending player must be sent off”. It’s a ridiculous reading of the rule to say that if Luiz slides through the back of the player attempting to get the ball he gets a yellow but doing what he does constitutes a red. However given the precedent set in other decisions the intent of the PGMOL seems to be to protect their referees where at all possible. We should be seeing common sense in the application of the rules rather than looking for rules to back up decisions that nobody wants. The Bednarek one I agree with you in that if Martial hadn’t dived he’d probably have got taken out and it genuinely would have been a red card. I saw it as a dive and I assume that’s why he’s had his red card rescinded. In terms of what I’d like to see I completely agree with you. Not even a booking for Luiz accidentally clipping the guy. It’s unfortunate he concedes a penalty from it let alone booking him as well. I was more guessing why they’ve overturned one and not the other. That’s missing out the part of the rule that says an accidental foul is only a yellow though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom_avfc Posted February 4, 2021 Share Posted February 4, 2021 2 minutes ago, fightoffyour said: That’s missing out the part of the rule that says an accidental foul is only a yellow though. I don’t think it says that to be fair. I got that directly from here on the FA’s laws. I can’t see any mention of accidental fouls and the double jeopardy rule appears only to apply to deliberate attempts to play the ball. In all honesty I’m not sure how much I care what the rule says with decisions like this. Nobody wants an accidental foul (with no challenge even being attempted)to see a player sent off and the outcome of a game completely changed to the extent that this did. The rules can’t cover every hypothetical scenario that could possibly exist in a football match. Football isn’t a difficult game but our officials and the FA are doing a great job of over complicating it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJ Posted February 4, 2021 Share Posted February 4, 2021 4 hours ago, a m ole said: Dean, Friend, Moss? Oliver should be on that list too. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fightoffyour Posted February 4, 2021 VT Supporter Share Posted February 4, 2021 18 minutes ago, tom_avfc said: I don’t think it says that to be fair. I got that directly from here on the FA’s laws. I can’t see any mention of accidental fouls and the double jeopardy rule appears only to apply to deliberate attempts to play the ball. In all honesty I’m not sure how much I care what the rule says with decisions like this. Nobody wants an accidental foul (with no challenge even being attempted)to see a player sent off and the outcome of a game completely changed to the extent that this did. The rules can’t cover every hypothetical scenario that could possibly exist in a football match. Football isn’t a difficult game but our officials and the FA are doing a great job of over complicating it. My (and many others’) mistake it seems, the accidental part isn’t there anymore if it ever was but has been misreported. https://dailycannon.com/2021/02/why-arsenals-red-card-appeal-was-denied/ Quote Many assumed, including numerous journalists (and myself) that this meant if contact was accidental, it would also be covered by this rule. It is not and therein lies all the confusion of the past few days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dante_Lockhart Posted February 5, 2021 Share Posted February 5, 2021 It's all a load of bollocks tbf. Everything about football, especially this season, can do one. If I didn't love Villa so much I'd have turned off long ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dante_Lockhart Posted February 5, 2021 Share Posted February 5, 2021 Quote It’s ridiculous, but it’s true. Luiz could technically be lying, unconscious in the penalty box and if an opposition player tripped over him, the rules, as they stand, mean he should be sent off. Says it all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa4europe Posted February 5, 2021 Share Posted February 5, 2021 8 minutes ago, Dante_Lockhart said: It's all a load of bollocks tbf. Everything about football, especially this season, can do one. If I didn't love Villa so much I'd have turned off long ago. Yep If this was happening during the latter Lerner years or remi garde season or even at times last season I wouldn't be watching anymore Its only villa playing well that's keeping me interested Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted February 7, 2021 Share Posted February 7, 2021 The flag going up late is ridiculous, yesterday it was a shambles. Think it was Lacazette was about 10 yards offside and play went on for 30/40 seconds before being pulled back. Somebody is going to get hurt 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sne Posted February 7, 2021 Share Posted February 7, 2021 Just waiting for some player to get seriously injured in some offside situation where the ref doesn't raise his flag until the situation is over. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest av1 Posted February 7, 2021 Share Posted February 7, 2021 5 minutes ago, Zatman said: The flag going up late is ridiculous, yesterday it was a shambles. Think it was Lacazette was about 10 yards offside and play went on for 30/40 seconds before being pulled back. Somebody is going to get hurt 2 minutes ago, sne said: Just waiting for some player to get seriously injured in some offside situation where the ref doesn't raise his flag until the situation is over. Agreed, it's a shambles. Also what happens in that situation if the injury was a result of what would normally be a red card challenge by a defender? Can it still be a red given that the game should technically have been stopped for the offside? It's bloody ridiculous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted February 7, 2021 Share Posted February 7, 2021 2 minutes ago, av1 said: Agreed, it's a shambles. Also what happens in that situation if the injury was a result of what would normally be a red card challenge by a defender? Can it still be a red given that the game should technically have been stopped for the offside? It's bloody ridiculous. Going by the Pickford/ Van Dijk incident then i dont think it does 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest av1 Posted February 7, 2021 Share Posted February 7, 2021 2 minutes ago, Zatman said: Going by the Pickford/ Van Dijk incident then i dont think it does It's all getting rather silly isn't it? For super tight decisions I can understand the logic, but as you say when guys are clearly offside the flag should go up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts