No he doesn't?
VAR and Refs | General Discussion
- Thread starter Samid
- Start date
He's not even 1 inch away from the guy let alone 2 feet.
Licha probably lucky the ref booked him. If the ref hadn't deemed it punishable at the time I think VAR 100% call for a referral and he'd have been given a red. By giving a yellow the VAR have erred on the side of backing the refs judgement - it was probably right on the limit of VAR considering it an obvious error
If you are right why did he get booked ? By the way I think the incident ticked the box for a red . Here’s the wording
“Using excessive force is when a player exceeds the necessary use of force and endangers the safety of an opponent and must be sent off”
No mention about contact, no mention about intent
He didn’t endanger the safety of the opponent as he didn’t touch him.
Don't think we could have complained if a red was given for that and pretty fortunate it wasn't
He is a couple of inches away at most....and I think Kamada sees it coming...look at how he decides to dodge it at the last second electing to come in from the side. Guys, this one was horrible. There isn't really much to defend. That action should not be on any pitch. If a guy did that to you in your Sunday game, you would question his sanity and probably want to punch him the face. I am actually kinda impressed how Palace reacted there with relative calm
Yep, and the only reason there is no contact is because Kamada brings his right foot in from the side rather than going straight.
If it had happened at the other end there is not a single person on this site who says anything other than red.
He got lucky, there should be zero tolerance for 2 footed lunges, seen too many legs broken due to nonsense like that at amateur level.
Drink driving isn't endangering the public either if you don't run anyone over.
It's not unpopular, it's just plain wrong and a lie. I don't know how you manage to always have the wrongest views on any referee incident about United. It's pretty ridiculous.
Well then making any tackle could endanger an opponent so let's send everyone off who makes a tackle.
He was closer to 1 to 2 inches away from him
There is a vast difference between someone making a genuine tackle compared to someone jumping two footed .
The force he bought both feet down was done without any regard or thought as to what would have been the outcome. Try looking and measure against what is deemed to be serious foul play .
SERIOUS FOUL PLAY
A tackle or challenge that endangers the safety of an opponent or uses excessive force or brutality must be sanctioned as serious foul play.
Any player who lunges at an opponent in challenging for the ball from the front, from the side or from behind using one or both legs, with excessive force or endangers the safety of an opponent is guilty of serious foul play.
About time we had a decision go our way.
The refs are very touchy lately, no?
How I feel.
100% could have been a red, and genuinely shocked it wasn’t given. Actually thought the ref was decent yesterday and didn’t fall for easy dives.He landed 2 feet alright.
My wife referred to this as "bunny-hopping into the other player" and I can't unsee it now.
For Arsenal's second goal, why wasn't there a blocking foul by Martinelli on Ederson? I remember Germany had a goal disallowed during the Euros because a player blocked a defender and the free man got a header and scored, don't see how this was any different. Martinelli had no intention of getting the ball and clearly moved into the path of Ederson, who was then disrupted from getting to the cross.
A perfectly worked set-piece, but a bit of inconsistency in the laws there.
A perfectly worked set-piece, but a bit of inconsistency in the laws there.
Since last season you're basically allowed to do anything to the keeper and everyone acts as though it's fine and always been that way. They supposedly changed the rule this summer but don't seem to actually enforce it.
Yes it's a foul, clearly moves in to the goal keeper to stop him getting the ball.
Just standing there is ok but clearly deliberately barges in.
If they did enforce it Arsenal would finish mid table.
No problem with players being booked or getting a second yellow and sent off for kicking the ball away, should be punished more.
It's the only way to cut that shite out.
It's the only way to cut that shite out.
Fine enough just make it consistent and don’t book a player for kicking the ball a half second after you’ve whistled in a very loud stadium.
Trossard only himself to blame
Agree. Other sports have made it a rule infraction to not immediately leave the ball for the equivalent of a free kick, and I don't see why that couldn't also be the case for football. There's no reason for an opposition player to touch the ball a couple of seconds after a free kick has been awarded, and only slows the game down and prevents quick transition play. I wouldn't mind making it an automatic yellow if you touch the ball after a free kick has been awarded against your team. Of course you'd get borderline cases where it might be argued that the time between touching the ball after a free kick has been awarded is within reasonable reaction time, but at least you'd (hopefully) get rid of the obvious ones where an opposition player is standing over the ball only to kick it away at the last second when a player of the team awarded the free kick gets close to it.
What's more difficult to tackle when it comes to the flow of the game and game management are the situations where a player requires treatment as they are so easy to abuse. The opposition has made a tactical change that needs addressing? No problem - just have the keeper feel a little niggle whenever it's suitable and have a little team talk, the physios will fix him up in three minutes and he'll be as good as new. Team on the back foot and need a breather to see out the game? Here's a timely cramp (why the feck is the game stopped for cramps anyway? might as well stop it if someone is feeling winded after a sprint at that point) that stops the game for two minutes and allows everyone to recover - the only downside is that you'll be down one man for 15 seconds until the referee waves the player onto the pitch again.
Every team does this when it's favourable for them to do so, and everyone knows the game when it's being played, but surely there are measures that can be taken to minimise the really egregious moments and keep some tempo to the match.
Consistency in referees is always a problem.
I think the game would be much better if they stamped out all these shithouse moves teams play.
The whole feigning injury off the ball to game or the other team attacking, is definitely another part of the game that needs to be addressed.
It was fine when players rarely went down and when they did, the other team would put the ball out of play. Now players and teams just do it stop counters and ruin the flow of a game.
I'd simply let the game go on, if the physios need to come on to treat the player, the game carries on and the player becomes inactive when it comes to offsides and all that. If they need to be stretchered off, then I'd say stop it. But that is not something that ever really happens that often. Players wouldn't be long cutting that out if they knew the game wasn't going to be stopped just because they throw themselves to the ground.
Agree with him, bad weekend for the refs. No idea what ref doing in Brighton game, 3 reds ?
Just caught the Brighton game on MOTD2, was watching it earlier but had to leave off. Gibbs White goes in hard, but he's got all of the ball. For that to end up with 3 reds was bit ridiculous.
I'd say Rob Jones is happy Michael Oliver took some of the spotlight off him today.