Southampton vs Arsenal

[JamesL]

Holding, I assume, you are referring to would be in the box for a corner. If referees gave penalties for holding in the box, there would be 5/6 penalties a game. This was very different.

Seeing as this was not a corner you assume incorrectly!!

Ref/VAR had a few choices imo:
1) free kick and DOGSO red as first pull back was outside area.
2) Pen and red no attempt to play ball
3) Pen and yellow (could argue from the first hold back he was trying to play the ball)

2+3 would be a debate as there were so many other factors to decide the colour of card.

Assuming you call a foul here:
1) Always has to be a pen imo..it's holding that continues into pen area. Law is quite specific here. Or if you want to call it pulling you'd play the advantage and finish in the PA and award a pen. I don't see a world where you can go back to the 1st offence if you think other offences have occurred after, especially if one is in PA.

3) absolutely no way no how can a pull be an attempt to play the ball!! It's taught as anything upper body is not an attempt for the ball so 3 just not an option.

Theres not really a debate to be had, call a foul for this and it's a PK RC.

 

[Anubis]

Agree with what you say, but in the world of VAR, it's not always been the case.

My point being there is the covering defender that does eventually come into play (only because of the holding/hugging) so some could say it wasn't DOGSO in the penalty area and then be downgraded. Depends which part of the whole scene the VAR/ref/refchat want to pinpoint where the incident(s) happened.

Well no, its either a DOGSO, or, its not,

A dogso holding in or out the box, can only be a red.

The foul and sanction is awarded at the point of contact apart from holding, which if it starts out and continues in, would be a pk, , so, the covering defender that does come into play, is void


disclaimer i have not seen the clip.

 

[JamesL]

Not really consistent with the penalty given the day earlier in the Man United - Chelsea match. Rules haven't changed. Looks like the referees interpreted the same rules differently.

Yes. Which law 5 allows for.
I haven't seen the Chelsea Pen so can't really compare it, but routinely, this kind of contact is allowed at EPL.

 

[Ryanj91]

I gave the 3 options because the VAR/Ref could see it as 2 separate holding incidents, rather than a continuous hold.

One that was outside (may have continued inside, but can't be sure without side on view etc)

Defender appears to let go for all of one second (I could be wrong with a different angle)

Then the second hold was defo inside the penalty area.

So the 3 options depending on what scenario actually happened and how they viewed the holding (maybe the first hold was a foul, but the second wasn't in their view, so option 1)

I would have gone Pen and red for making no attempt to play the ball.

 

[Anubis]

Agree with what you say, but in the world of VAR, it's not always been the case.

My point being there is the covering defender that does eventually come into play (only because of the holding/hugging) so some could say it wasn't DOGSO in the penalty area and then be downgraded. Depends which part of the whole scene the VAR/ref/refchat want to pinpoint where the incident(s) happened.

Easier clearer way to think of it

You identify the holding as a foul, you instantly have your foul and sanction
whats variable is your restart.

the awarding of foul plus sanction is decided in your head at the point of contact

the restart wont be confirmed until you deem the hold complete

 

[Spanish_Ref]

Can we really sit in front of young referees and tell them this was 50/50 and shouldn't have gone to VAR


Yes. Look at the screenshot you’ve posted, and then look at the direction Gabriel flings himself.

He was still being impended from getting to the ball over a number of seconds. He went down because he was off-balance but also to emphasis the fact he was being held/impended. Unfortunately the direction a player flings himself has no bearing on the previous actions of the defender fouling the attacker. I would also note a player doesn't have to fight for his life and stay on his feet whilst being impended for it to be a penalty.

And unfortunately with this method of thinking, focusing on the direction a player goes down, it's why when Nketiah had a head violently thrusted in his direction, if he had gone down and caused a scene, it would have probably resulted in a VAR check and a red card to the Southampton defender.

If somebody is running/sprinting to get a ball in a training drill or for sprint resistance training you can put all your force into holding onto their shirt from behind and whilst it will massively stop the person trying to get away from you, in most cases it will never cause the person in front to fall over unless there is a trip. There also wasn't enough for Broja to fall to the floor in the Chelsea game, and if that happened to him in a bar//nightclub or in public he wouldn't be on the floor because there is not enough force, however an attacker in these instances has to go down at some point of the offence to guarantee attention is brought to the holding/pulling and your focus on the direction Gabriel flings himself shows this because you are ignoring the offence previously and focusing on whether it was enough to bring him down and in what direction. He's clearly being grabbed/impended by the defender over a period of three or four seconds. It's not like a touch or a slight pull which is understandable and would be 50/50 but the offence starts outside the box and continues into the box.

 

[Spanish_Ref]

Yes. Which law 5 allows for.
I haven't seen the Chelsea Pen so can't really compare it, but routinely, this kind of contact is allowed at EPL.

Hi James,

45 seconds in. This was waved away by Atwell but the VAR got involved and it was reviewed to be a penalty. Same team involved but apart from the Broja incident two nights ago, apart from Xhaka being face on, and the pull is short and sharp, I can't really say there is a difference. The Southampton defender vs Gabriel Jesus was much smarter and rather than being one strong sharp pull/tug, he was holding him and impending him over a number of seconds. It was more of a hold/bear hug than a shirt pull.

I don't think the kind of contact on Jesus is allowed anywhere on the field and the EPL. It's leaning in and two arms around the waist/upper body of an opponent. You might get away with it at throw on's but not when the attacker is running away from the defender with the ball at his feet trying to get a shot away.

 

[QuaverRef]

I would also note a player doesn't have to fight for his life and stay on his feet whilst being impended for it to be a penalty.

Agreed, however throwing yourself to the ground is called simulation

He was still being impended from getting to the ball over a number of seconds. He's clearly being grabbed/impended by the defender over a period of three or four seconds.

Three or four seconds of your slow motion video, so more like a one second hold, which isn’t enough to make a striker leaning forward fly backwards in the opposite direction


Honestly, I’m going to assume you’re an Arsenal fan from the posts so I’m going to stop engaging before this goes down a tricky path

 

[Spanish_Ref]

Agreed, however throwing yourself to the ground is called simulation


Three or four seconds of your slow motion video, so more like a one second hold, which isn’t enough to make a striker leaning forward fly backwards in the opposite direction


Honestly, I’m going to assume you’re an Arsenal fan from the posts so I’m going to stop engaging before this goes down a tricky path

Happy to have a discussion. I'm not an Arsenal fan. A Barnet and Brentford fan actually, but I thought the referee was below par yesterday and there seemed to be a reluctance from VAR to get involved yesterday.

It's not simulation it's football. There's simulation in every sense of the word when a player is trying to manufacture a situation or try and find something there isn't there, and there's a player going down after contact/being held to emphasise the offence. Anyway, no point debating this anymore because we aren't going to go anywhere with it.

 

[shandow]

Rob Jones was very consistent on what he deemed to be holding offences, if he didn't deem it to have a material impact he didn't give it. I think that is all the game can ask for, it is well documented that the PGMOL officials have been ordered to not penalise any contact if it doesn't have an impact.

Saka flung himself to the floor, there was contact but it was minimal and also on the blind side of Jones, personally I would have just said no foul but from his view it looked like a blatant dive.

There was holding on Jesus, and I would say 50/50 on a penalty, the defender was taking a big risk holding on for that long. Not enough for VAR to get involved with though.

The Ben White one, absolutely no chance is that a penalty, nor the one on Tierney.

A polite reminder, as I think this is your first post, this isn't a fan's forum so please don't take it down that route. I say this as it comes across as you being an Arsenal fan and it is all very one sided.

I do not understand how bear hugging an opponent with both arms around them for more than 2 seconds at a time has no material impact? This happened multiple times throughout the game and progressively became worse as the ref allowed it. My point here is, yes the ref is being consistent with his threshold, but we have to call a foul a foul. How can grabbing an opponent with both arms around like I have stated not have material impact? Those have always been given.

 

[gman1978]

The Gabriel Jesus one was a clear penalty. Especially if you remember the Chelsea penalty last night on Broja. Unless we are in the game here of hiding referee's mistakes, I don't think you can call the Jesus one 50/50. He's clearly being held and impended, and it has to go to VAR if Jones misses it.

I think like Jones or/and the VAR team you are very quick to write off the White one and the Tierney one. Two hands to the back of White and a shove is a penalty. The Tierney one reminded me of the foul on Son last year vs Arsenal which many said was a penalty without doubt.

I'm not an Arsenal fan. I'm a football fan and a referee in the MHRML and Barnet Sunday League and I find it difficult to have any sort of honest discussion with any referee that doesn't think the Gabriel Jesus one is a clear penalty. We are here to call the game and say it as it is, not make excuses to protect each other. Sorry this is one of my first posts, but the Jesus one has to be a clear penalty either in real time or called by VAR and the Tierney one is borderline but has to be reviewed. You can't swing your arms or clatter into an opponent in the box and not expect a penalty not to be given. I also note there is no comment on the head action from Lyanco into the Arsenal player. Red for Lyanco and yellow for Nketiah was the call, again a non-call/review by VAR.

you'll find it hard to have a discussion with many refs then, as that was never a clear penalty on Jesus

 

[Spanish_Ref]

you'll find it hard to have a discussion with many refs then, as that was never a clear penalty on Jesus

Was the Broja one for Chelsea a penalty or an incorrect decision?

Deary me. Seems like VAR, the rule changes and maybe post pandemic and the government mess/economic crisis/cost of living crisis has gone to some people's heads if we are now allowing holding/impending of that level on Jesus and with the benefit of VAR being available saying it's not a penalty.

We used to call it fouling football in my day. No rules just do what we want in the playground.

 

[Spanish_Ref]

The foul was also akin to that of Scott McTominay, who gave away a penalty to Chelsea in Manchester United's clash on Saturday for a similar offence. Jesus revealed he spoke to the officials after the game, saying to the official Arsenal website: "I spoke with him straight after and he said 'if you go down before maybe I can give a penalty'.

Jesus explains talk with referee after penalty controversy in Arsenal clash

The Arsenal striker wasn't awarded a penalty against Southampton, despite claims that he should have for a pull in the box

www.football.london

 

[gman1978]

Someone's a little delicate flower this morning

 

[Anubis]

The foul was also akin to that of Scott McTominay, who gave away a penalty to Chelsea in Manchester United's clash on Saturday for a similar offence. Jesus revealed he spoke to the officials after the game, saying to the official Arsenal website: "I spoke with him straight after and he said 'if you go down before maybe I can give a penalty'.

Jesus explains talk with referee after penalty controversy in Arsenal clash

The Arsenal striker wasn't awarded a penalty against Southampton, despite claims that he should have for a pull in the box

www.football.london

Not everybody has faith in Jesus.....

 

[QuaverRef]

The foul was also akin to that of Scott McTominay, who gave away a penalty to Chelsea in Manchester United's clash on Saturday for a similar offence. Jesus revealed he spoke to the officials after the game, saying to the official Arsenal website: "I spoke with him straight after and he said 'if you go down before maybe I can give a penalty'.

Jesus explains talk with referee after penalty controversy in Arsenal clash

The Arsenal striker wasn't awarded a penalty against Southampton, despite claims that he should have for a pull in the box

www.football.london

Considering Jesus did go down (the wrong direction) I think we can say with confidence that this conversation didn’t happen

 

[shandow]

Some odd decisions and refereeing in this one today.

Saka yellow card for diving. Clearly wasn't a dive and within what you would card for a "dive".

Penalty call on Gabriel Jesus. Two arms around the waist/holding and held back over a period of a couple of seconds. Minimum should have been a check of the monitor. Definite penalty for me.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1584183861155545089

Possible penalty on Ben White. Two arm push in the box. Again, should have been a monitor check.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1584180810026225666

Tierney blow to the throat as the cross was coming in. You can hear the connection on the sound of the contact to Tierney's neck.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1584201070493847555

Headbutt/attempted headbutt from Lyanco on Nketiah. Again VAR check as a minimum. Should of been off.

Saka advantage. Played advantage, clearly signals but doesn't pull it back after the advantage was lost whilst his hands were still making the advantage signal.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1584250470180466688

The Saka advantage is hilarious. Road traffic directing.

Something very wrong with that Lyanco lad, hitting Jesus earlier in the match a couple of times too.

 

[OnlyUseMeWhistle]

The Saka advantage is hilarious. Road traffic directing.

Something very wrong with that Lyanco lad, hitting Jesus earlier in the match a couple of times too.

This and your other comment in this thread makes me very doubtful you're actually a level 2 ref like you claim. I've never seen such a senior referee talk about a game with such careless language, usually very deliberately worded and per LOTG as you will see on the rest of this forum

 

[GraemeS]

Considering Jesus did go down (the wrong direction) I think we can say with confidence that this conversation didn’t happen

This is a weird new trend that I've noticed. Last week we had Pep saying that apparently AT had simply declared he wasn't giving some fouls pre-game, now we have Jesus trying to convince us that a referee has told him to dive.

I personally don't think either conversation actually happened, certainly not in the way reported by the speakers. But the problem with giving referees no opportunity to speak and shoving mics in front of players and managers at every opportunity is it gives no balance to the conversation. Outside of refereeing circles, you either believe or disbelieve the statements pretty much based on which team you support and that's the end of it. If the referee did say that, it will be picked up by his mic, so there would certainly be an observer and VAR who heard it at least!

 

[shandow]

This and your other comment in this thread makes me very doubtful you're actually a level 2 ref like you claim. I've never seen such a senior referee talk about a game with such careless language, usually very deliberately worded and per LOTG as you will see on the rest of this forum

Is it any different from various senior referees in this thread calling out the OP as a fan?