A&H

Women’s Charity Shield Scott Red Card

D

Deborah3

New Member
Anybody got any thoughts on the red card for two yellows in the CS game? First challenge looked like she got the ball and may have been for back chat, Second one looked like a yellow at least! Thoughts? D
 
Last edited:
The Referee Store
Fairly standard two yellows leading to red, IMHO. Nothing remarkable about it at all, for me.

On the first yellow, she may have got something on the ball but she also slid in from behind with her momentum taking her on into the player and as I'm sure you know, getting the ball does not absolve a player of wrongdoing. Given that it was a foul and it stopped a promising attack, a yellow seemed perfectly appropriate.
 
Peter Grove said:
Fairly standard two yellows leading to red, IMHO. Nothing remarkable about it at all, for me.

On the first yellow, she may have got something on the ball but she also slid in from behind with her momentum taking her on into the player and as I'm sure you know, getting the ball does not absolve a player of wrongdoing. Given that it was a foul and it stopped a promising attack, a yellow seemed perfectly appropriate.
Click to expand...
I agree Peter but the first one stands out as a bit more manageable, what’s else she supposed to do? If it was lip then fair enough!
 
Agree with Peter. First one is SPA, second is a reckless foul. Don't understand the confusion over it.
What I dont understand is why no one saw the referee show the cards. Commentator missed it. Manager missed it. All seemed very odd
 
There was an advantage played and the cameras instead focussed on the player who missed the goal. Card was shown during the shot where she has her head in her hands.

Referee also hung back as the attack progressed - perhaps to ensure she didn’t lose the player in question?
 
I was under the potentially gross misapprehension that the yc for spa was not to be given under the new lotg, if advantage had been played. Have I totally misread that?
 
Viking said:
I was under the potentially gross misapprehension that the yc for spa was not to be given under the new lotg, if advantage had been played. Have I totally misread that?
Click to expand...
Thats correct. YC can still be given for reckless.
 
The second challenge defines meets the reckless criteria. Slides in with no chance of playing the ball and both knees smashed in Li’s back.
 
Viking said:
I was under the potentially gross misapprehension that the yc for spa was not to be given under the new lotg, if advantage had been played. Have I totally misread that?
Click to expand...
That's true, but the yellow card she (presumably) got for SPA was the first caution and advantage was not played on it. On the second yellow, advantage was played but that caution was almost certainly for a reckless challenge, not SPA.
 
Peter Grove said:
I'm not sure what you mean by, "what else was she supposed to do?" If you're talking about Scott then the what she's supposed to do is not foul the opponent when they're in a promising attacking position.
Click to expand...
If every tackle with contact was a card then the game would be dead. I agree it was a foul but thought the card wasn’t necessarily required on that occasion.
 
Would've been better to stop the game for the second yellow card. Only play advantage for a red card offence if there is a clear goal scoring opportunity.
 
Mr Dean said:
Would've been better to stop the game for the second yellow card. Only play advantage for a red card offence if there is a clear goal scoring opportunity.
Click to expand...
There was? Striker missed the shot
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top