Side note. The fact we have quite a few on here still trying to argue that such an incredibly obvious decision was incorrect just shows how useless VAR is at getting rid of football fans pervasive sense of injustice. So we put up with all this crap and everybody keeps right on moaning regardless.
VAR, Refs and Linesmen | General Discussion
- Thread starter Samid
- Start date
Disallowed for handball last night. Thoughts?
That's crazy. No VAR?
Looks a terrible decision. The VAR has presumably concluded that the defender headed it and it just flicked the arm of the attacker? There’s no real suggestion of that from those clips though. Be interesting to see what they come out with in response.
This also highlights one of the most stupid rules in football. Even if it had flicked his arm, there’s clearly no intent there. That rule that any contact with a scorer’s arm rules out a goal just needs to be binned immediately - that would remove any issue with what was clearly a perfectly good goal.
Dorgu's is very obviously a red card. I don't think he went in with malicious intent, and sure he wasn't helped by the poor weather conditions, but it's a blatant red.
I also agree the refereeing was inconsistent beyond that, and that Ipswich players should've received more yellow cards. This has been a common theme in a lot of our games this year, which while it's not "massive" decisions like a goal call or a red card, affect the game massively. It's very frustrating.
I also agree the refereeing was inconsistent beyond that, and that Ipswich players should've received more yellow cards. This has been a common theme in a lot of our games this year, which while it's not "massive" decisions like a goal call or a red card, affect the game massively. It's very frustrating.
I wouldn't take comments during or right after the game too serious. The correct decision was made yesterday eventhough I must admit I commented against it during the game.
Three match ban for this seems harsh though as it didn't looked deliberate at all, but yeah ...
You think it's wrong because you don't understand the criteria for a red card, excessive force wasn't the reason he was sent off, endangering an opponent is why he was.
The tackle resulted with his studs over the top of the ball into the shin, clearly there was no maliciousness or intent but that's a potential leg-breaker and the reason it's a clear red
Not sure why there's any debate on the Dorgu tackle tbf, it was a deserved red.
I don't agree with it either. Happy to be in the minority. Modern football
100%. With the footnote that he was also very unlucky due to the unusual action and position of the other player’s leg which he just couldn’t anticipate. Terrible luck which sums up our season.
This is the bit that has me on the fence: if a player randomly sticks his limb in a position that doesn't make sense, how is, here, Dorgu supposed to anticipate that?
It's kind of the inverse of that Rashford sending off in the CL, when Rashford went do a reasonable skill with the ball, and the defender just happened to put his foot underneath Rashford's, for no good reason (ie it wasn't where he would put it to attempt a tackle).
My point being, there are countless acts in a football match that could endanger an opponent if they do something unexpected, but very few are punished in this way. I think it has to be based on the action rather than the outcome. Here the outcome is agreeably savage, and any still looks a clear red. But I don't believe Dorgu's action would have caused any harm if Hutchinson hadn't screwed up.
Edit: the ole ESPN VAR guy claiming it was excessive force. If that's the case I can agree with the red.
It’s a weird one because 99/100 the action of Dorgu does nothing but win the ball. I’m convinced his only intention is win ball. Yes it is red today, but I’m not convinced anyone should get red because of luck and chance led to contact that was not intended or action was not wreckless if not intended.