They'll be talking about the Romero one, obviouslyThe Kulusevski one? Get out
VAR, Refs and Linesmen | General Discussion
- Thread starter Samid
- Start date
Touched his collar. Agree that they deliberately chose a still which made it look like a neck grab.
Oh, I see, missed that one and seemed the timing checked out with the Kulusevski one.
VAR ratified it as serious foul play, not reckless. It wasn't either but it definitely wasn't serious foul play:
Serious foul play
A tackle or challenge for the ball that endangers the safety of an opponent or uses excessive force or brutality; punishable by a sending-off (red card)
I've now gone full tin foil hat and believe the reason PMGOL keep "refining" the rules and interpretation each season around VAR interventions, etc. is to limit the evidence base with which we can compare previous decisions and rely on them as precedence.
Biggest crock of shite I've ever read on here. Seriously.
Literally, I’m assuming they have some sort of agenda so talking out their arse to meet that.
Agenda poster. Can’t help but crowbar their narrative into anything.
I'm going to go for straightforward incompetence.
There's a not insignificant proportion of our fanbase who are so blinded by their hate for Bruno they can't see what's actually happening.
Challenge made by Dragusin won't get a mention because it involved a header and not a sightly raised leg.
How is a challenge from behind that is made with such force that you can knock out a person and at the least leaves a player with a bloodied head is not seen as much, much worse than some studs catching a player on the leg is beyond me.
How is a challenge from behind that is made with such force that you can knock out a person and at the least leaves a player with a bloodied head is not seen as much, much worse than some studs catching a player on the leg is beyond me.
Stop watching football. You are embarrassing yourself with this post.
Brain-dead decision.
He was falling over, was never gonna get the ball and batted his leg out - giving the referee the decision to make.
I thought it was a yellow at best but can't have any complaints given the standard of refereeing and the sheer stupidity of doing that when you're on your way down
I agree it was an idiotic challenge to make especially as he slipped but in no universe is that a red card.
At least we have the comfort that it probably wouldn’t have changed the result. Plus I’ve been one of those who want Bruno benched for a while so in terms of incorrect red cards given it’s certainly not the worst.
Idiotic does not make it a red.
It gives the referee a decision to make when your flailing foot is off the ground and high on the player's leg
Our captain, in a game where we're getting battered, should have better judgement in that circumstance than to give the referee a decision to make.
We live in a daft world where Martinez doing a reckless slide tackle that gets nowhere near the ball and gets all of the man is deemed to be less dangerous then a tap on the shin... It's ridiculous really.
Games gone
Yellow card. I cannot understand how VAR didn't intervene.
I genuinely can't remember a time where there was such a consensus among pundits and even opposition fans on twitter. One of the worst decisions I've ever seen, made worse by the fact that they had the same replays we did
It is a fascinating insight into the weakness, cowardice and possible bias of refs. They're looking at the same footage every other person can see and after on, but don't overturn it.
The progression is to ask why? When you answer that, that's how you fix officiating in the Premier league. My own feeling is that they're scared and make decisions based on how they'll be perceived - so even though nobody would argue, the var official knows over turning a united red card will cause an avalanche of shit on him. I think also there's an element of it being a mates club and not wanting to undermine their pal.
The audio will be infuriating i have no doubt. A false narration of video evidence in real time
It is a fascinating insight into the weakness, cowardice and possible bias of refs. They're looking at the same footage every other person can see and after on, but don't overturn it.
The progression is to ask why? When you answer that, that's how you fix officiating in the Premier league. My own feeling is that they're scared and make decisions based on how they'll be perceived - so even though nobody would argue, the var official knows over turning a united red card will cause an avalanche of shit on him. I think also there's an element of it being a mates club and not wanting to undermine their pal.
The audio will be infuriating i have no doubt. A false narration of video evidence in real time
I absolutely hate that phrase. 'gives them a decision to make'
Their job is literally to make decisions. And if he gets it wrong, his buddy has several slow mo replays to help. This isn't on anyone but the officials.
*man brings wife to emergency room* Hmm, he's given the doctor a decision to make.
*man calls power company due to blackout*
Hmm, he's given the electrician a decision to make
Its an banal, idiotic phrase that makes no sense
I said that earlier. What would you rather be on the end of, Martinez absolutely smashing through you like that, or a light brush of boot down your shinpad protected shin at flimsy contact levels.
No decision really!
That decision has annoyed me. We were shocking, no doubt about that, but going in at half time just one goal behind, well, you never know.
How on Earth has he deemed that a straight red. How on Earth has VAR not intervened. Truly awful standard of officiating.
How on Earth has he deemed that a straight red. How on Earth has VAR not intervened. Truly awful standard of officiating.
It was high, studs showing, and from the side, it's a red all day, get over it
Who was the VAR though?
Just for clarification you are talking about Bruno today?
studs showing?! 180 degrees in the wrong direction!Studs showing where? Diametrically opposite to the player he tackled?
We should be winning an appeal against this easily. Brain dead decision. We're shocking but so are the Refs.
Just fit clarification you are talking about Bruno today?
The tackling foot is off the ground and catches the players leg between the ankle and the knee, which make it high.
Take off your red tinted glasses
Lay off the varnish, Matt.
Where did we question height? It was slightly above the shin. But ‘studs showing’ is a daft take when his foot couldn’t be further from showing his studs into his leg.
It's you who needs to lay off the sauce if you thought there was nothing wrong with that tackle.
I wonder which one of us was a referee for 15yrs?
How the feck can it be "above" the shin, the shinbone runs from the knee to the ankle, he caught him just below the knee, it's a high tackle, so by the letter of the law it's a red.
Studs showing watch the video, his studs are towards the players leg, not the ground.
Scoured the internet for the worst and most misleading angle!
Studs towards players leg!
Pause this on the second replay the second contact is made and you’ll see that Bruno’s ankle makes contact with him and guess what! It means his foot and studs are pointing AWAY from him.
Even Maddison said not a red, is he a top red?
Scoured the internet for the worst and most misleading angle!
Studs towards players leg!
Pause this on the second replay the second contact is made and you’ll see that Bruno’s ankle makes contact with him and guess what! It means his foot and studs are pointing AWAY from him.
Even Maddison said not a red, is he a top red?
You have your opinion, I have mine, we are both entitled to express it.
As for scouring the internet? Nah I just went on YT and searched for it, that was the first one on the list
We are never going to agree on this, so lets just shake hands and agree to disagree
Is that true? I've seen countless challenges through the years much higher, even reckless contact with midriffs, thighs and so on, that result in yellows. Ive also rarely seen such overwhelming consensus among professionals, including the player fouled, pundits etc, that think it simply wasnt a red. It seems such a strange one to argue over.
This is what the actual league said:
They said in a statement: "The referee issued a red card to Fernandes for a challenge on Maddison. The VAR checked and confirmed the referee’s call of serious foul play."
According to the FA's rulebook, serious foul play is defined as being: "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."
I think you're in the extreme minority, maybe as much as ive ever seen for a red card, that thinks this was serious foul play or endangered the opponent's safety.