Man City v spurs
- Thread starter Hoosier Ref
- Start date
one
RefChat Addict
Sterling the the guy on the far right of the image above about 15 yards away from the foul (on the far left) when the whistle was blown at 87.05.
Here he is standing in front of it, facing the ball with a blocking action at 87.10.
Can see the full video here : https://lasthl.com/tottenham-hotspur-vs-manchester-city-matchday-10/2/
Peter Grove
RefChat Addict
Running from that far away to deliberately come and stand so close to the ball and then in addition, raising the foot to block the kick? Caution all day long for me.
Here is a YouTube of it....
Can we just give City the title now and stop taking bets.... Only Chelsea are anywhere near, Liverpool haven’t got Norwich or West Brom this season!
Oh well, here we go. You want a red for a City player who swings a retaliatory "punch" at a player who has actually just punched him on the back of the head, and a yellow for a City player who does what players do all the time with no-one hammering a ball at them from a yard away, while no-one at all mentions the one SFP in the game (Sissoko's stamp on the back of Sterling's ankle).
This is a legitimate question/discussion. I live in central United States and have no preference for either of these two team. The Mendy incident surprises me with no cards at all. It was late in the game but that should not matter. As a neutral observer, it looked pretty clear at full speed. Yes.... it looked that Mendy was shielding the ball (but not within playing distance) with his arms out and back attempting to hold Lamela. Lamela appeared to be attempting to get through the hold. Lamela gets into Mendy's back and has his hands/arms high into the shoulders of Mendy. It does appear that Lamela's hands contact the back of Mendy's head but is more of a push (still a foul). These are not something that I would characterize as YC worthy from Lamela. 1st foul = Mendy's deliberate hold of Lamela (reaching back, restricting his movement and not within playing distance of the ball), 2nd foul = Lamela's charge from behind and contact to the back of Mendy's head. 1st misconduct is the attempt by Mendy to strike another player in apparent response to his displeasure with the Lamela foul. In one replay, it looks like AR2 is looking DIRECTLY at Mendy and Lamela at a distance of about 5 yards. Yes we are in injury time but surely this warranted something
Here is where the discussion is that I know we will have varying opinions. We have all seen a hard foul followed by the victim player jumping up and two hand shoving or some such retaliation. The retaliation must be dealt with. It is a matter of opinion when the retaliation moves from unsporting (heat of the moment shove) to violent. Where is that line? Thoughts?
I'll go first. I think first foul by Mendy (holding) is not likely to be called at this level. Lamela's team is trailing and his contact to the back of Mendy's head is not severe and he looks to be trying to get through the foul Mendy is committing.
I see these options depending on ITOOTR
1. Mendy committed the 1st foul. DFK to Spurs, send Mendy off for the VC or issue YC for UB if you feel it is a heat of the moment thing in response to a Lamela foul
2. You could interpret the Mendy foul as something not worthy of a call and the Lamela foul worthy of calling giving DFK to City but still need to card Mendy.
3. Doing nothing which is what seems to have happened.
I personally think the attempt by Mendy had it landed would be a pretty significant strike. I think it is worthy of RC
Here is where the discussion is that I know we will have varying opinions. We have all seen a hard foul followed by the victim player jumping up and two hand shoving or some such retaliation. The retaliation must be dealt with. It is a matter of opinion when the retaliation moves from unsporting (heat of the moment shove) to violent. Where is that line? Thoughts?
I'll go first. I think first foul by Mendy (holding) is not likely to be called at this level. Lamela's team is trailing and his contact to the back of Mendy's head is not severe and he looks to be trying to get through the foul Mendy is committing.
I see these options depending on ITOOTR
1. Mendy committed the 1st foul. DFK to Spurs, send Mendy off for the VC or issue YC for UB if you feel it is a heat of the moment thing in response to a Lamela foul
2. You could interpret the Mendy foul as something not worthy of a call and the Lamela foul worthy of calling giving DFK to City but still need to card Mendy.
3. Doing nothing which is what seems to have happened.
I personally think the attempt by Mendy had it landed would be a pretty significant strike. I think it is worthy of RC
one
RefChat Addict
I second your first. I'll also add this incident together with the Sterling no card for blocking the FK is a sample of the reasons why there was no EPL referee in the world cup. There is enough bottling every round to open a bottle shop.
I am a City fan but I feel I've always been capable of rational thought towards my team. The Mendy strike, yes he throws his arm wildly but it's also quite clear that he never had any intention to strike Lamela. You don't miss by that much if you try to hit someone! It's frustration and anger but he's not tried to strike Lamela there and this is clear to all the players, officials and coaches at the game who didn't react at all. If anyone though Mendy tried to hit anyone then the handbags would've come out in force! Earlier in this thread someone said that it should be a yellow for AAA and I agree. You can't react like that just because you think you should get a free kick. But a strike? Absolutely not.
Sterling should be a clear yellow but at every game across the land players stand over the ball and are told to by management and players in ear shot of the ref and they never, ever get a yellow unless they kick the ball away. It's so engrained in the game because it's been allowed to go unpunished for so long that everyone knew that there was no chance of a yellow card, including Sterling, which is why he did it
Seriously? You are deluded.
Ah here it is, our old friend “conspiracy theory against City!”
Was wondering when will it turn up again!!!
Who mentioned conspiracy? I'm having a go at referees on here highlighting petty incidents but not the one that really endangered a player's safety (off the ground, managed to land on one ankle and kick the other...)Ah here it is, our old friend “conspiracy theory against City!”
Was wondering when will it turn up again!!!
Last edited:
Is this a joke? You’re putting Mendys attempt as a punch in quotations, but believe Lamela punches him in the back of the head?? Alright, there’s contact with the back of the head but if you are seriously calling that a punch, your games must see so many reds
Do we as a forum have to bring up every single incident in the game to suits the needs of supporters? It’s a discussion where we highlight things and also provide a potential learning curve for newer and younger referees. This sort of blinkered view doesn’t help them
santa sangria
RefChat Addict
FYI if a player does a Mendy in a game I am AR, I am telling the ref to RC. I am a ref and see a Mendy it's a RC.
You can try to cloak it in "if he'd really wanted to he'd have hit him" but it doesn't wash with me. It's attempts to strike an opponent, VC, RC.
You can try to cloak it in "if he'd really wanted to he'd have hit him" but it doesn't wash with me. It's attempts to strike an opponent, VC, RC.
I completely agree, it's clearly 'attempting to strike'