Jump to content

Weekends Football 12/14 August


andykeenan

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, Villaphan04 said:

yep, the problem with VAR is it can only advise for red card offenses. They can't "re-referee" the game despite that being a clear foul

Yeah, they can only assess whether it was violent conduct or not. Obviously they deemed it not a red, but also explains why a yellow wasn't later given. It's red or nothing.

The ref, however, was looking straight at it to begin with, and  totally missed it. 

Edited by StanBalaban
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, OutByEaster? said:

The hair pull is a red card offence in my opinion.

It really was.

If he put his whole body weight into jumping for ball and didn't realise his hair was being grabbed he could have easily injured a vertebrae in his spine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said:

The hair pull is a red card offence in my opinion.

 

I am sure the PGMOL will find some rule from the early 1900s to back Dean up! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, calcifer said:

The Mike Dean circus is back in town!  Where ever he goes he has to be the centre of attention!  

His issue here is not thinking Romero deserved a red. Naturally, that's subjective but, as VAR, he's not allowed to rule on anything less than a red, unless it's in the direct build-up to a goal.

The actual ref **** up by missing it in real time, when it happened right in front of him.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, StanBalaban said:

His issue here is not thinking Romero deserved a red. Naturally, that's subjective but, as VAR, he's not allowed to rule on anything less than a red, unless it's in the direct build-up to a goal.

The actual ref **** up by missing it in real time, when it happened right in front of him.

and the linesman

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, StanBalaban said:

His issue here is not thinking Romero deserved a red. Naturally, that's subjective but, as VAR, he's not allowed to rule on anything less than a red, unless it's in the direct build-up to a goal.

The actual ref **** up by missing it in real time, when it happened right in front of him.

In what world does grabbing someone by their hair and using it to throw them to the ground not constitute violent conduct? It’s as obvious a red card as you’re likely to see.

When referees are getting things like this wrong with the use of cameras then they’re clearly not good enough. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, StanBalaban said:

His issue here is not thinking Romero deserved a red. Naturally, that's subjective but, as VAR, he's not allowed to rule on anything less than a red, unless it's in the direct build-up to a goal.

The actual ref **** up by missing it in real time, when it happened right in front of him.

Problem is with VAR it is open to interpretation as we have found out before! The build up to the goal would have been checked, look at the 5 mins VAR took to disallow a goal last season vs Manure!  VAR can do what it wants!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, tom_avfc said:

In what world does grabbing someone by their hair and using it to throw them to the ground not constitute violent conduct? It’s as obvious a red card as you’re likely to see.

When referees are getting things like this wrong with the use of cameras then they’re clearly not good enough. 

I agree, I think it's a red. What I'm saying is, if for whatever reason VAR don't deem it a red, then play must continue. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, StanBalaban said:

Indeed. FWIW, I think it's a clear red for Romero, which is why I think Mike Dean has also **** up.

Also **** up on Spurs' first goal which started which a clear foul by Bentancur.

 It also doesn't explain why the ref despite being 2 yards away looking directly at it didn't think it was a yellow card offence/foul either.

Edited by AshVilla
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, StanBalaban said:

Apparently according to BeIn Sports, unless it's either a red card incident, or a foul in the lead up to the goal, VAR cannot intervene.

Which in itself is a stupid rule. However, surely the ferocity of the hair pull surely could count as violent conduct?

Isn't blatant hair pulling a red card offence?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, AshVilla said:

 It also doesn't explain why the ref despite being 2 yards away looking directly at it didn't think it was a yellow card offence/foul either.

Exactly... The ref and his onfield team are the ones who have **** up the most here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â