Manu STN pen or not

[Degnann]

Southampton have won their appeal. Arsenal have not

 

[JamesL]

Southampton have won their appeal. Arsenal have not

I never read too much into appeal outcomes since I learnt that it was a 3 man panel made up of a player, manager and a ref and majority vote!!!

 

[bester]

With VAR can they still suspend players for successful deception of a match official?

 

[Degnann]

I never read too much into appeal outcomes since I learnt that it was a 3 man panel made up of a player, manager and a ref and majority vote!!!

Up here it’ll eventually go to a panel of 3 former category 1s and needs to be unanimous

 

[QuaverRef]

It’s concerning that we need an appeal panel when we’ve got VAR.

 

[Big Cat]

It’s concerning that we need an appeal panel when we’ve got VAR.

Quality post Quaver. Sums up the level of absurdity

 

[socal lurker]

The DOGSO-downgrade was always supposed to have been brought in because the triple-jeopardy of a penalty, rest of the game with 10 men and a suspension was seen as too harsh in the cases of non-cynical fouls. Simple solution to that issue is to allow a post-match review panel to remove the suspension if they are confident it was accidental - downgrades it to only double-jeopardy and takes away a huge amount of the complex decision making for the match-day referee.

I think the rhetoric of triple punishment was really more a debate tactic by those who hated the red card/PK combo.

It isn't that straight forward as there was contact. The problem is that players have been coached from a young age to go down if they feel any contact, many have even spoken publicly about it.

On the other hand, they are coached that way because so many refs won't give the real foul unless the player goes down. I don't think this issue is as simple as blaming the players. I also agree with @JamesL that it doesn't take much contact on a back leg at speed to cause someone to go down awkardly--in American football, swiping at the trail leg to cause the two legs to cross and the runner to fall is a tackling technique when chasing someone.

 

[socal lurker]

It’s concerning that we need an appeal panel when we’ve got VAR.

I think the VAR and the appeal panel have different missions. VARi s applying the LOTG to this game. The appeal panel is deciding if there should be post-game repercussions for the players involved. (I just wish the language would be used better that way--the appeal is of the suspension rather than of the red card.)

 

[Jorik0907]

Make DOGSO in the penalty area a red card offence only when the penalty is missed. If teams want to deliberately miss / concede then fine, VAR has already made things artificial.

I.... actually really like this although you'd still have to have the distinction between a challenge for the ball or not. Lots of DOGSOs are a smaller chance to score than a Pk, but I like the idea

 

[deusex]

Martial has started his dive before both contacts were made.
I've no doubt had he not done this he would have been fouled but he did.
Shows how low his confidence is to dive in that situation when 6-0 up

 

[one]

I.... actually really like this although you'd still have to have the distinction between a challenge for the ball or not. Lots of DOGSOs are a smaller chance to score than a Pk, but I like the idea

Not for me. The teams deciding the faith of the offender has much bigger consequences than is obvious on the surface. For example imagine a deliberate miss by a team in the 90th minute who is trailing by one goal but they want to take revenge on the player who would miss the next blockbuster game. Or the impact on betting markets.

 

[Jorik0907]

Not for me. The teams deciding the faith of the offender has much bigger consequences than is obvious on the surface. For example imagine a deliberate miss by a team in the 90th minute who is trailing by one goal but they want to take revenge on the player who would miss the next blockbuster game. Or the impact on betting markets.

That's why the distinction between playing the ball or not would still have to be there, so let's say, playing the ball, PK scored and not reckless - > same as SPA so no card.
DOGSO-R -> PK miss - > Red, if not, downgrade to yellow.
Problems in law are carding after a restart, but the idea has potential. Not as if people don't go down easily to score a pk and DOGSO already.

 

[JamesL]

It's a huge can of worms. It can go the other way with the keeper making no attempt to save to avoid a red card for team mate!
The existing system works fine. People just need to accept how the law works on this one and remember that these always used to be red cards for a long long time and I barely heard anyone talk about double jeopardy until they started talking about changing the law to allow for it.
I don't think the idea has potential at all, sorry

 

[one]

Yeah, simply put we don't want 'manufactured' outcomes in the sport and this idea encourages it.

 

[bester]

Yeah, simply put we don't want 'manufactured' outcomes in the sport and this idea encourages it.

One persons manufactured outcome. is another persons tactics. Didn't consider the match fixing possibilities so will withdraw on that basis.

 

[bloovee]

I think the VAR and the appeal panel have different missions. VARi s applying the LOTG to this game. The appeal panel is deciding if there should be post-game repercussions for the players involved. (I just wish the language would be used better that way--the appeal is of the suspension rather than of the red card.)

It's being reported as the FA saying the red card was rescinded. That begs the question whether it wasn't DOGSO because Martial was already falling or whether it was a foul at all (i.e. the falling player initiated the contact - which is what reports say, presumably from the FA press release).

 

[RustyRef]

It's being reported as the FA saying the red card was rescinded. That begs the question whether it wasn't DOGSO because Martial was already falling or whether it was a foul at all (i.e. the falling player initiated the contact - which is what reports say, presumably from the FA press release).

You don't appeal the sending off, you appeal against the subsequent suspension. The media just incorrectly report it as the red card having been rescinded, that doesn't happen and rather it is just the suspension that is rescinded.

 

[bester]

You don't appeal the sending off, you appeal against the subsequent suspension. The media just incorrectly report it as the red card having been rescinded, that doesn't happen and rather it is just the suspension that is rescinded.

They appealed against 'wrongful dismissal'. The appeals committee obviously didn't think it was a foul.

Sometimes teams appeal that the suspension length was clearly excessive but that wasn't the case here.

 

[one]

I don't know the rules over there but over here you can not appeal an automatic one week suspension. Only suspension appeal can be made is to reduce to a minimum one game. No suspension at all can only result from appealing the send off.

In other words, if you want no suspension at all you have to speak the send off.