A&H

VAR - Everton vs Spurs Son “penalty”

Status
Not open for further replies.
If a red player gives a little push on a blue player that would just be classified as 'careless' at most, but the blue player falls awkwardly and breaks his leg, is that a red card? Discussed at great length at the Gravesend RA meeting last night!
 
The Referee Store
If a red player gives a little push on a blue player that would just be classified as 'careless' at most, but the blue player falls awkwardly and breaks his leg, is that a red card? Discussed at great length at the Gravesend RA meeting last night!
No. The ends don't dictate the misconduct. Merely the action.
 
You'd certainly hope so. Though this will be harder to do with the hole dug by the rushed out statement on Saturday night that 'justified' the decision

I heard this from a pretty high source the other night (no names - no pack drill):

The general consensus of opinion amongst the refereeing fraternity is that Martin made a mistake by opting for a red card.
An experienced top-level referee, he momentarily allowed his initial judgement of yellow card to be upgraded to red, based upon the final visible outcome of the "challenge" and the stress and emotion that was being displayed by all at the time. (Or words to that effect).

If nothing else, it shows that he is after all, a human being.

No real harm done for Tottingham's Son. The red will be rescinded to a yellow in my opinion and Martin will look back and learn from it and probably use it as "teaching" material in the future too ... ;) :)
 
1572958843865.png

On the Son sending off, i don't think the VAR got involved. Above is the challenge by Son way before the injury. As you will see, he is taking Gomes out and the ball is well in front of them. If that challenge is not endangering the player.

You will also note MA position and his sight line is possible partial blocked. I think the 4O got involved and help MA out.
 
View attachment 3816

Above is the challenge by Son way before the injury. As you will see, he is taking Gomes out and the ball is well in front of them. If that challenge is not endangering the player.

.

I don't see that at all. I see a reckless challenge that was always going to attract a caution but that's all. Gomes was travelling at pace with the ball so I don't think it's position in the screenshot you show can be used as evidence that Son was endangering the player. All I see is a reckless challenge.
 
For the handball, it looks to me like it glances off Mina's shoulder before hitting Ali's hand. If that is the case it cannot be handball under the new law.
.

I'm not sure what your reasoning is for this?

The LOTG state:

'"It is usually an offence if a player touched the ball with their hand/arm when the hand/arm has made the body unnaturally bigger (or) the hand/arm is above/beyond their shoulder level.

The above offences apply even if the ball touches a player's hand/arm directly from the head or body (including the foot) of another player who is close".



The above offences apply
 
I'm not sure what your reasoning is for this?

The LOTG state:

'"It is usually an offence if a player touched the ball with their hand/arm when the hand/arm has made the body unnaturally bigger (or) the hand/arm is above/beyond their shoulder level.

The above offences apply even if the ball touches a player's hand/arm directly from the head or body (including the foot) of another player who is close".




The above offences apply

On MOTD2 the PGMOL's logic for the Alli non handball decision was that his arm was only there because of the challenge of oppo, therefore not in an 'unnatural' position.
 
But it was above/beyond the shoulder level?

Might be an example of why the LOTG use "usually." Those guidelines aren't intended to be "gotchas," but to be guidelines on identifying what is deliberate. An arm usually doesn't naturally belong above the shoulder level, so being up there is a strong indicator of deliberate action. But if the arm ends up there because of a challenge from an opponent, it isn't up there deliberately and needs to be viewed differently. (But this also highlights part of the problem of trying to micro-direct what is deliberate--the false sense of precision is offset by "usually" and "usually not," which means referees still have to use judgment in making these calls.
 
I agree with Son's red being overturned and I'm glad it got overturned.
In the same vain as Atkinson, I'm sure I'd have given a red, fearing that I may have missed the severity which then in the PL activates the 'nothing is clear and obvious' - clause the VAR seems to have.
That being said, he should have gone with his instincts.
All in all, that was a messy game no one would ever want to rewatch.
 
Maybe we can get the EPL disciplinary department to renegotiate Brexit, the have experience now in not knowing their arse from their elbow.
I perfectly understand changing in but why post advice condoning it on Sunday night?? Absolute clueless 🤡
 
Maybe we can get the EPL disciplinary department to renegotiate Brexit, the have experience now in not knowing their arse from their elbow.
I perfectly understand changing in but why post advice condoning it on Sunday night?? Absolute clueless 🤡
Quite right, hopeless.
I would like to see some clarification on this. If we can separate the tackle itself from the consequence, presumably they are saying that the consequence should never be a factor in the level of the sanction.
 
For the handball, it looks to me like it glances off Mina's shoulder before hitting Ali's hand. If that is the case it cannot be handball under the new law.
That statement is not entirely correct.
I haven't seen it so I might be it still wasn't but just because it came off mina first does not automatically mean it cannot be handball.

It is usually an offence if a player:
• touches the ball with their hand/arm when:
• the hand/arm has made their body unnaturally bigger
• the hand/arm is above/beyond their shoulder level (unless the player
deliberately plays the ball which then touches their hand/arm)
The above offences apply even if the ball touches a player’s hand/arm
directly from the head or body (including the foot) of another player who is
close
 
  • Like
Reactions: one
Well, Sheff?

Come on, I want to hear "I was clearly wrong!" and some hat tipping! :p
Fair enough, hat tipping accepted but i'm already on it, i'm booked on the next EPL p1ss up in a Brewery training Course. i'm on it with @Mintyref Monk and Bielsa!! ;) What a shower of sh1t they are at the moment....
 
Whilst we're on the topic of VAR and handballs, I thought the handball given at Chelsea vs Ajax for the penalty was pretty harsh? I thought according to the law it was not to be given? Or is it given because the player attempted a block?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top