The Ref Stop

Sheffield United v Villa

Donate to RefChat

Help keep RefChat running, any donation would be appreciated

S

spuddy1878

RefChat Addict
Red card or not for Jagielka !

I personally think it's a red card but wouldn't have had an issue with the yellow either.
 
The Ref Stop
Another case of VAR getting involved when it didn’t need to for me. I think there was enough doubt for the referee to go yellow and it wasn’t a clear and obvious error. Very harsh.
 
I think we can all recognise by now that VAR is not being used solely for "clear and obvious errors" so I'm not going to factor that into my answer.

Looks like a red to me, providing he doesn't take a bad touch I think he's having a shot before the other defender can challenge.
 
I'm not having that as a DOGSO, central defender is in a position where he is capable of running across and block any potential shot.

Harsh red and VAR probably should not of interfered.

What I will say though is that Mcgoldrick should of been shown a second yellow, arieal ball in the air, hands wrapped around the villa player neck and he gives a free kick to Sheffield Utd, the Villa player was perplexed and so was I.
 
socal lurker said:
For those who don't think it is C&O to warrant intervention, what element of DOGSO do you think is not clear?
Click to expand...
With the considerations then: location and number of defenders is the doubt.
But I think red is the right decision.
The defender might get across to hurry a shot, but it's a big if.
With the right touch it's a great one on one.

But... ITOTR is yellow justifiable? Quite easily. It's not C&O.

(VAR is rubbish)
 
  • Like
Reactions: one
Paul_10 said:
I'm not having that as a DOGSO, central defender is in a position where he is capable of running across and block any potential shot.
Click to expand...
Other defender is around 30 yards away - IMO the likelihood is that the attacker will be in the penalty area and have an OGSO before the defender can make a challenge.
 
Paul_10 said:
I'm not having that as a DOGSO, central defender is in a position where he is capable of running across and block any potential shot.

Harsh red and VAR probably should not of interfered.

What I will say though is that Mcgoldrick should of been shown a second yellow, arieal ball in the air, hands wrapped around the villa player neck and he gives a free kick to Sheffield Utd, the Villa player was perplexed and so was I.
Click to expand...

I disagree, the supposed covering defender is on the opposite side of the penalty area and has little chance of getting over. He isn't even in shot on one of the VAR images that covers much of the penalty area.
 
Why the hell has the Ref not chucked his red card at this in the first place? I tell you why, because he knows it can be re-refereed
I said earlier, about how VAR is complicating the life for promising, but relatively inexperienced top flight Refs
 
santa sangria said:
With the considerations then: location and number of defenders is the doubt.
But I think red is the right decision.
The defender might get across to hurry a shot, but it's a big if.
With the right touch it's a great one on one.

But... ITOTR is yellow justifiable? Quite easily. It's not C&O.

(VAR is rubbish)
Click to expand...
While we have similar views of what VAR adds to the game, if we have VAR, this to me is sufficiently clear that it has to be changed. I don't see any way that defender is close enough to change the analysis. But for the foul, it doesn't take much of a touch there. All four considerations are pretty clear to me. IMO, a yellow here is a missed KMI.
 
RustyRef said:
I disagree, the supposed covering defender is on the opposite side of the penalty area and has little chance of getting over. He isn't even in shot on one of the VAR images that covers much of the penalty area.
Click to expand...

I disagree there is one defender not too far away from the 'D' and the angle of his run meant there is every chance of an interception. Maybe it's one of those where the referees say its DOGSO but supporters not buying into it as it's not a clear DOGSO.
Big Cat said:
Why the hell has the Ref not chucked his red card at this in the first place? I tell you why, because he knows it can be re-refereed
I said earlier, about how VAR is complicating the life for promising, but relatively inexperienced top flight Refs
Click to expand...

Cant argue with that, the amount of times of VAR overturning yellows into reds is increasing(I remember mentioning in another thread how the figure was quite high then and it cant be a good thing) and it's the same for handball if albeit the interpretation of what is handball is so unclear even the referees must have some doubt.
 
Paul_10 said:
I disagree there is one defender not too far away from the 'D' and the angle of his run meant there is every chance of an interception. Maybe it's one of those where the referees say its DOGSO but supporters not buying into it as it's not a clear DOGSO.
Click to expand...
This is the angle used by Stephen Warnock on MotD to justify his view that this is not a clear DOGSO because of the presence of a potentially-covering defender.

Screenshot_2021_0304_114545.png

Looking at that particular angle, I think that (while I personally think that on balance, it was DOGSO) I can see where the argument could be made that it was maybe not a clear and obvious error to give only a yellow.
 
@Peter Grove that computer generated image make it a lot more of GSO that it actually was. Its put the attacker a lot more central (he was wider) and the keeper out of position.

Screenshot_20210304-181307__01.jpg

Alex Rush-Fear said:
Other defender is around 30 yards away - IMO the likelihood is that the attacker will be in the penalty area and have an OGSO before the defender can make a challenge.
Click to expand...
Good statement. The keywords there are "the likelihood is that" and not "it is clear and obvious that".
 
one said:
@Peter Grove that computer generated image make it a lot more of GSO that it actually was. Its put the attacker a lot more central (he was wider) and the keeper out of position.

View attachment 4843


Good statement. The keywords there are "the likelihood is that" and not "it is clear and obvious that".
Click to expand...
From that angle its a Dogso for me. I think the TV angles and lens used make the defender seem closer. I was initially no dogso, as I feel the defender could have challenged, but from there, noway
 
Reminds me of the one in Scotland recently that had a thread on here, red card in this one for me. I think there's more chance of the attacker being 1v1 with keeper than the other defender getting to him first so it's a red.
 
socal lurker said:
While we have similar views of what VAR adds to the game, if we have VAR, this to me is sufficiently clear that it has to be changed. I don't see any way that defender is close enough to change the analysis. But for the foul, it doesn't take much of a touch there. All four considerations are pretty clear to me. IMO, a yellow here is a missed KMI.
Click to expand...
All 4 consideration can be clear independently but when you combine distance and defender it creates some doubt.

Had we been exactly the same 10-15 yards closer to goal then no question about it. But as it stands there is doubt in the decision being obviously wrong.

By the time the attacker gets to a shooting position there is a reasonable chance that the second defender will be close enough to make it not a OGSO.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top