Dogawful Officiating

[Rod]

4 minutes ago, The Butcher said:

Interesting.

 

Still don't think it's a red. 

Pleased you don't do VAR duties.  Strewth!

[alexf]

6 minutes ago, The Butcher said:

Interesting.

 

Still don't think it's a red. 

Really? 

 

I think seeing it again I can't see what all the fuss was about. Clear red. Purposefully plants his left foot on to Schar and then makes sure to land the right aswell whilst also kicking his leg out to rake the studs. 

 

When you watch it full speed he has so much time to avoid Schar but because Schar turns his body and puts his leg in the air, Duran sees red and thinks Schar is trying to kick him so reacts. 

 

 

Edited yesterday at 09:46 by alexf

[AyeDubbleYoo]

I didn’t realise there was conversation from VAR before the decision is made. Or can the referee not hear that? 

[Rod]

1 minute ago, alexf said:

Really? 

 

I think seeing it again I can't see what all the fuss was about. Clear red. Purposefully plants his left foot on to Schar and then makes sure to land the right aswell whilst also kicking his leg out to rake the studs. 

 

When you watch it full speed he has so much time to avoid Schar but because Schar turns his body and puts his leg in the air, Duran sees red and thinks Schar is trying to kick him so reacts. 

 

 

 

Spot on.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

1 minute ago, AyeDubbleYoo said:

I didn’t realise there was conversation from VAR before the decision is made. Or can the referee not hear that? 

It’s actually the assistants at that point. 

[Cf]

Does highlight a couple of interesting points.

 

- Ref was influenced by where Schar was holding himself. So seems like his reaction helped sell the decision. Had he just popped to his feet might have been different.

- VAR only really looked at the foot dragging incident. It didn't look at the build up which is where, arguably, the offence could be excused. Shows how little time they really have, especially under the pressure.

[Kid Icarus]

I don't understand this bit.

 

[Kid Icarus]

Reads like he's given the owld self- todger grab to someone and it's upgraded to a red.

 

 

Edited yesterday at 10:13 by Kid Icarus

[Yorkie]

Regardless of the specific incident and decision, that particular audio gives a pretty good insight into the flawed nature of it all.

 

"If it's wrong I'll change it!" I.e. the refs feel safeguarded by the existence of VAR and the means for their decisions to be corrected. Thus influencing their decision-making process, potentially resulting in hasty ones being made. Meanwhile the directive is to only change decisions if they're howlers.

 

It's totally flawed, always has been. 

[Slim]

He can just fall backwards or keep his leg bent as he falls.  You can clearly see him extend it to rake across the back.

Come on, if you play football you know you can avoid that very easily.  He also lost his head few min before and was ready to kick off.

[Cf]

Just now, Yorkie said:

Regardless of the specific incident and decision, that particular audio gives a pretty good insight into the flawed nature of it all.

 

"If it's wrong I'll change it!" I.e. the refs feel safeguarded by the existence of VAR and the ability for their decisions to be corrected. This influencing their decision-making process. Meanwhile the directive is to only change decisions if they're howlers.

 

It's totally flawed, always has been. 

 

I agree, but in some ways I don't think this is example is that bad. Often they go the other way - yellow, and only a red if the VAR feels the need to interject. Here he's gone with what he thinks is the right decision saying he's willing to have it changed if he's wrong.

 

I think what they should be allowed to do is ask VAR to be involved in the first place. So no original on field decision. Ref can say what his view of it is but he'd like VAR to offer their input. Then he makes a decision. Would work well in this incident - probably more tricky when the game is flowing.

[Elma]

15 minutes ago, Yorkie said:

Regardless of the specific incident and decision, that particular audio gives a pretty good insight into the flawed nature of it all.

 

"If it's wrong I'll change it!" I.e. the refs feel safeguarded by the existence of VAR and the means for their decisions to be corrected. Thus influencing their decision-making process, potentially resulting in hasty ones being made. Meanwhile the directive is to only change decisions if they're howlers.

 

It's totally flawed, always has been. 

 

Discussion on Talksport yesterday about the non-penalty for Forest at Wolves. Made me think that it's been ages since I've seen a lino with the flag across the chest, and that handball was the perfect time to make that call. They just won't now because they know VAR will pick it up.

[The Butcher]

1 hour ago, The Butcher said:

Interesting.

 

Still don't think it's a red. 

Schar's studs caught Duran in his thigh, causing him to lose balance. He rolled his left ankle as well.

 

I do think it's extremely unlucky and looks way worse than it is.

[Hanshithispantz]

59 minutes ago, Yorkie said:

Regardless of the specific incident and decision, that particular audio gives a pretty good insight into the flawed nature of it all.

 

"If it's wrong I'll change it!" I.e. the refs feel safeguarded by the existence of VAR and the means for their decisions to be corrected. Thus influencing their decision-making process, potentially resulting in hasty ones being made. Meanwhile the directive is to only change decisions if they're howlers.

 

It's totally flawed, always has been. 

Aye, the decision was right but I can understand Villa fans being pissed off if they see that 

 

They didn't even look at the left foot stamp which was the worst part.

[Eveready]

His left leg uses a normal running motion, never coming more than about 6 inches off the ground.  His right leg comes up a foot and a half then back down on Schar, seemed pretty clear to me.

[alexf]

Even though I think it's a clear red and the correct decision. The audio isn't great. Just because Schar is holding between his legs in pain from the left leg impact the ref goes against his assistant advice and upgrades to a red. 

 

Just encourages players to play act which is what we have seen for years, if you don't over-sell the contact you don't get the decisions. 

[80]

4 hours ago, Yorkie said:

Regardless of the specific incident and decision, that particular audio gives a pretty good insight into the flawed nature of it all.

 

"If it's wrong I'll change it!" I.e. the refs feel safeguarded by the existence of VAR and the means for their decisions to be corrected. Thus influencing their decision-making process, potentially resulting in hasty ones being made. Meanwhile the directive is to only change decisions if they're howlers.

 

It's totally flawed, always has been. 

Yep, found it interesting that they didn't caption any of those exchanges. Almost surprised they didn't scrub it out of the audio.

[Lush Vlad]

3 hours ago, The Butcher said:

Schar's studs caught Duran in his thigh, causing him to lose balance. He rolled his left ankle as well.

 

I do think it's extremely unlucky and looks way worse than it is.

 

He rolls his left ankle by reaching with his left leg to land on Schar.  Then when he successfully stamps on him, his ankle rolls.

[geordiesteve710]

The decision itself is one that can go either way- I've seen good arguments for and against but ultimately only one person knows whether the act was clumsy or malicious.

 

The VAR conversation there is like three drunks all blurting their opinions across the pub table trying to drown each other out- there's no discussion as to what the ref saw, what he missed, what he thinks may have happened, clarification on specific questions. I get that it's a quick-fire conversation but is it even worth having? I'd sooner the ref be able to request a slow-motion replay for such a big decision.

 

As for "He's holding between his legs, I'm going red." I mean I'd be fuming if one of our players got sent off on that rationale.

 

 

Edited yesterday at 15:20 by geordiesteve710

[Lush Vlad]

As I have said over and over again and I haven't really heard or seen it discussed.  Does intent even need to come into it here?  It's reckless and 'out of control', no? 

 

Two that come straight to mind.  Probably because they were involving Liverpool in big games, so the media went on about it for weeks after.  Mane when he got sent off against City for accidentally catching Ederson in the head.  Jones away at Spurs last season in THAT game when Diaz got ruled offside when he was on by about 5 yards. 

 

Neither were deliberate acts.  But both dangerous and serious foul play.  Which I think this one fell under and not violent conduct. 

 

The fact he quite clearly tries to do Schar is actually irrelevant, no? 

 

Still not having he didn't mean it, nobody knows, it's accidental etc.  Barely ever happens in games.  Players are always hurdling out the way or avoiding treading on people.  Can't remember the last time I saw something like this.  You're telling me an elite sportsman, that must have an outrageous reaction time can't avoid stamping/treading on a player (twice) after three steps beforehand.  

 

Absolute nonsense. 

[David Edgar]

Schar sticks his studs up to protect himself from any attempt by Duran to land on him. I've been there many times and you are making sure the opponent doesn't get to land one on you. 

[Erikse]

On 08/01/2025 at 10:40, The Butcher said:

Interesting.

 

Still don't think it's a red. 

 

Is this the full audio? Seems really odd to say red just because he's holding somewhere, without even checking why he would be holding there, with all the replays right infront of them. The audio would make so much more sense if they saw where he was holding, checked why he was holding there, and then decide it's a red. Has the audio been cut and edited to shorten it?

 

Edit: Just realised it's the ref saying it.

 

 

Edited 10 hours ago by Erikse

[Erikse]

 

[Hanshithispantz]

The other VAR audios I've seen have been much better than that though, they gave me a bit of confidence that the VAR team actually run through the scenario at a fast pace and hash out the details between them, quickly getting the relevant clips on screen. Even if I don't like it.

 

Like @geordiesteve710 says, that sounds more like a few blokes talking over their pints.

 

 

Edited 10 hours ago by Hanshithispantz