A&H

Newcastle v Liverpool

The Referee Store
Quite the first half for Mr. Brooks. He easily could have given TAA a 2nd yellow in the 5th minute. I can accept why he didn't although it would have been justified. Then sends VVD off for DOGSO. Van Dijk said some naughty things including "you're a ****ing joke". There better be an additional charge or this whole dissent crackdown becomes a joke.
 
TAA’s first booking seemed really soft. Was it really dissent. He has the ball in his hands and throws it back on the field…?

I thought it was a nailed on YC for the aggressive shove in the back that sent him dangerously off the field - but no.

I think anyone who plays grassroots football needs to know that’s likely a yellow card.

VVD nailed on red. Great decision. But the referee seems to be struggling with the yellows in this match so far.
 
GraemeS said:
Poor to see joelinton given his "last chance" warning and then not get booked for another foul immediately after. It's all well and good condemning dissent, but apparently even SG1 officials need to be reminded sometimes
Click to expand...
There is quite a lot of dissent in this game already. But think officials have got the KMDs about right.
 
The so-called crack down will be forgotten about by Christmas at the latest despite what Howard Webb says I suspect. Already being inconsistently applied and numerous incidents of dissent etc that would have resulted in yellow cards on week one being ignored this weekend. Chelsea Vs Luton being a prime example, players standing over the ball to prevent the restart, dropping extra balls on the pitch, kicking the ball away, all of which were ignored.

Van Dijk should be facing a charge over his post-red behaviour, but I won't hold my breath waiting.

Typical Carrager with his red tinted specs claiming it's wasn't a goalscoring opportunity :wall:
 
Wolf_Ref said:
There is quite a lot of dissent in this game already. But think officials have got the KMDs about right.
Click to expand...
Agreed. Which makes TAAs yellow for a very mild bit of dissent (against a clearly wrong decision BTW) stand out even more. If that's your bar for dissent in this game, he's missed about 4 other cautions.
 
On watching back, in the wider context, the first TAA yellow is fine for me. He chucks the ball away at an angle. It’s obvious.

I don’t really buy a case for the SPA second yellow. There’s a high arm, it’s not reckless, and the position on the field for me means no SPA. In the context of the high bar for SPA, no.
 
santa sangria said:
TAA’s first booking seemed really soft. Was it really dissent. He has the ball in his hands and throws it back on the field…?

I thought it was a nailed on YC for the aggressive shove in the back that sent him dangerously off the field - but no.

I think anyone who plays grassroots football needs to know that’s likely a yellow card.

VVD nailed on red. Great decision. But the referee seems to be struggling with the yellows in this match so far.
Click to expand...
Pretty sure the TAA booking will be the new textbook delaying restart rather than dissent - correct decision too. Thrower was there to pick up ball, he threw it away to give himself chance to get back in position

Can get behind no second yellow - was hardly a promising attack out on the left wing well inside own half with a swarm of red shirts coming towards - but cynical and no doubt if he wasn’t on a yellow he’d have got one there

Nailed on red for VVD - can’t believe there’s even a debate about it. Most obvious DOGSO you’ll ever see
 
santa sangria said:
TAA’s first booking seemed really soft. Was it really dissent. He has the ball in his hands and throws it back on the field…?

I thought it was a nailed on YC for the aggressive shove in the back that sent him dangerously off the field - but no.

I think anyone who plays grassroots football needs to know that’s likely a yellow card.

VVD nailed on red. Great decision. But the referee seems to be struggling with the yellows in this match so far.
Click to expand...
It wasn't dissent, it was delaying the restart. The players have been told if they touch the ball after play has stopped they risk a caution, the fact they are still doing it just demonstrates the absolute stupidity of footballers. Had John Brooks given a second caution he would no doubt have been vilified for "ruining the game", yet the only person to blame would be TAA for being an idiot. I could also talk about his defending, but that is another topic 😂
 
I have to say if TAA did get sent off that early in the game then there would a massive reaction to these new rules and that they are being applied too strictly and it's leading to more red cards in the game(which ruins the game apparently) so in one way I'm glad he didn't get a second yellow there but he should of and the timing shouldn't come into it but I think it did there to be honest.

The sending off is a clear DOGSO, good decision despite the protests.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mac
RustyRef said:
It wasn't dissent, it was delaying the restart. The players have been told if they touch the ball after play has stopped they risk a caution, the fact they are still doing it just demonstrates the absolute stupidity of footballers. Had John Brooks given a second caution he would no doubt have been vilified for "ruining the game", yet the only person to blame would be TAA for being an idiot. I could also talk about his defending, but that is another topic 😂
Click to expand...
It's both. He felt he'd been pushed off the pitch and the referee missed the foul - throwing the ball away both displays that displeasure and also stops Newcastle taking the quick throw while he's still picking himself up.

Would matter at grassroots where the two offences have different punishments, but is a less important distinction in the PL. Aside from the fact as l said at the time, it sets a super-low bar which the referee just then forgets about for the rest of the game. For my money, two Newcastle players commit worse DTR offences just in the first half, and most of the dissent around the VVD red card was worse than what TAA showed. It's stuff like that which make these directives feel performative rather than signs of actual useful change.

But also, the best solution would have been just to give the easy foul decision in the first place! Goes back to my overarching theory that the easiest way to achieve "match control" is to just get decisions right.
 
Last edited:
It's very important at this stage of the Behaviour Charter, that VVD faces additional punishment for abusing JB. Equally shameful that my team chucked 3 points away
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top