Chelsea v Brighton

[Tealeaf]

He’s a stockier Djimi Traore.

That’s harsh.

Djimi was genuinely afflicted by bad luck.

 

[Anubis]

Who says he wouldn’t have scored from the subsequent corner anyway?

Not sure the relevance of that to smacking someone in the face.

having watched it carefully again, its not far off violent conduct. It is striking an opponent, in the face, it lacks brutality. but, just.

 

[Redster]

Not sure the relevance of that to smacking someone in the face.

having watched it carefully again, its not far off violent conduct. It is striking an opponent, in the face, it lacks brutality. but, just.

Was it deliberate in your view?

 

[Anubis]

Was it deliberate in your view?

Yes but thats not a factor. The lack of force was the saving quality.

 

[santa sangria]

That’s harsh.

Djimi was genuinely afflicted by bad luck.

Do you mean Champion’s League winner, Djimi Traore?

 

[Redster]

Deliberateness is certainly a factor for VC where striking to the head or face is the VC. If it was a deliberate strike to the head it would need to have been of only negligible force to avoid a send off for VC.

From your description it doesn't sound negligible.

VAR protocol is a problem though. How do they go back for VC which occured momentarily before a restart if the restart is in fact taken? They should probably have a little clause which allows them to go back for events which occur so close to a restart that there was no time for a check before the restart.

 

[socal lurker]

Deliberateness is certainly a factor for VC where striking to the head or face is the VC. If it was a deliberate strike to the head it would need to have been of only negligible force to avoid a send off for VC.

From your description it doesn't sound negligible.

VAR protocol is a problem though. How do they go back for VC which occured momentarily before a restart if the restart is in fact taken? They should probably have a little clause which allows them to go back for events which occur so close to a restart that there was no time for a check before the restart.

The VAR protocol does permit going back to sanction VC, spitting, biting, and OFFINABUS even if a restart takes place. (I read that as permitting the red card, not changing any restart.) And Law 5 permits going back if an AR/4O was trying to tell the R of misconduct before the restart takes place (which I read as the restart not actually taking place, so a different restart could be given if the offense was while the ball was in play Before the restart).

 

[Anubis]

Deliberateness is certainly a factor for VC where striking to the head or face is the VC. If it was a deliberate strike to the head it would need to have been of only negligible force to avoid a send off for VC.

From your description it doesn't sound negligible.

VAR protocol is a problem though. How do they go back for VC which occured momentarily before a restart if the restart is in fact taken? They should probably have a little clause which allows them to go back for events which occur so close to a restart that there was no time for a check before the restart.

Imo, its negligible.
Its not brutality but it is a smack to the face.

i accept its gone, done, cant be checked by var, the lot
it just does not sit well we can award say a pk for the most innoucous of shoelaces making contact yet by hook or by crook we have allowed a striker to hit the defender in the face then head home his teams only goal

 

[Redster]

Looking at it, the contact looks more than negligible to me.
Either way, going frame by frame it seems that the ball is in play at the point of contact! Just a run of the mill foul leading to a goal. Anyway, not much can be done now

 

[Anubis]

Looking at it, the contact looks more than negligible to me.
Either way, going frame by frame it seems that the ball is in play at the point of contact! Just a run of the mill foul leading to a goal. Anyway, not much can be done now

This is my issue, its more than run of the mill, its a card too

yet he scores.

Maybe its not a big thing because its only Brighton, and, to his credit ( demise?) the defender sticks to his task rather than hit the deck screaming

rotten to the core tho when you see City get rewarded for cheating yesterday yet the Brighton guy we shrug off as, ah well. cant be helped. Between a highly exp referee who should be gams aware to focus on the Chelsea player and a var with multiple angles and replays, they cant or wont or protocol, whatever, its just tough luck.