Dogawful Officiating

[Geordie Ahmed]

It's a red card for me

 

Why do people go on about intent? I think his intention is to do a "professional foul" but the intent is irrelevant when the outcome is that his studs catch him on the leg and it rakes down to the players foot

 

I have no major issue if people say it's not a red but I find it mad how people are calling it scandalous, disgrace, worst decision of all time etc etc 

[Stifler]

11 minutes ago, Yorkie said:

Crazy decision imo. Unless he's got the ability to view life in slow motion, I can't believe he's informed enough to make that call. It happens in a microsecond and it's not even that bad anyway. There's no intent, he just sticks his leg out to stop the breakaway and catches him.

 

Looks like another case of a ref making call in the hope VAR will correct it if it's wrong, but they won't because it's not wrong enough. 

Player is already past him when he goes for the challenge. He’s only ever catching the player, and only ever catching the player from behind.

On top of this, it’s stopping a promising counter attack for Wolves.

 

It’s a challenge that everyone has always thought is dirty, and has always thought that there should be more punishment for other than a red card, and a free-kick in a non-dangerous position.

In reality it should always have been a red card, because of the lack of intent of getting the ball, and because of the denying of a chance at goal. We have just been conditioned to think it’s a yellow, because that’s all that has ever been given.

[The Prophet]

I don't think the Arsenal red card decision is that bad.

 

It's incredibly soft, but you can see why he's given it.

 

No idea why pundits are discussing the distance from goal when it was given for serious foul play.

 

 

Edited yesterday at 08:46 by The Prophet

[The Prophet]

What's Lineker on about for the Everton penalty? Bit of an odd take.

 

 

Edited yesterday at 00:04 by The Prophet

[Bimpy474]

Shut up Lineker you idiotic jug eared twat, it was a deliberate as you could get, twat.

[Bimpy474]

Also the BBC listing the latest results starting right to left, shite.

[wormy]

Special shout out to them bringing it back to NUFC which I've just passed while looking for a clip of the challenge.

 

Thank God we've managed to weed out their 18 year old who's been alright the past few months. 

[gdm]

The Arsenal fans & manager victim mentality is boring as fuck. There is no conspiracy. That one today could well get over turned but I can see why he was given a red. The havertz handball last week was the correct decision, the trossard 2nd yellow was the correct decision, the rice second yellow for kicking ball away was harsh but ultimately he delayed the restarting of the game which is a yellow card. They still go on about Gordon’s goal last season. Pathetic fanbase 

[gdm]

3 minutes ago, wormy said:

Special shout out to them bringing it back to NUFC which I've just passed while looking for a clip of the challenge.

 

Thank God we've managed to weed out their 18 year old who's been alright the past few months. 

their 18 year old who was playing when we beat them 2-0 at their place incidentally 

[Yorkie]

Quote

 

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.

 

 

"Uses excessive force" is obviously ruled out immediately because all he's done is flick a leg out to stop the breakaway. So it comes down to whether or not he's endangered an opponent. If that's endangering an opponent then basically every clumsy challenge is.

[wormy]

6 minutes ago, gdm said:

their 18 year old who was playing when we beat them 2-0 at their place incidentally 

 

Who we still beat 2-0, incidentally.

 

All I'm saying is if we're not heading to the League Cup final it's going to be for a lot more reasons than Lewis-Skelly being available. 

 

EDIT: Thought you were arguing in their favour for some reason. Blame the whisky. 

 

 

Edited yesterday at 00:15 by wormy

[Cf]

55 minutes ago, Yorkie said:

Crazy decision imo. Unless he's got the ability to view life in slow motion, I can't believe he's informed enough to make that call. It happens in a microsecond and it's not even that bad anyway. There's no intent, he just sticks his leg out to stop the breakaway and catches him.

 

Looks like another case of a ref making call in the hope VAR will correct it if it's wrong, but they won't because it's not wrong enough. 

 

That's the definition of intent isn't it?

[Yorkie]

There's no intent to hurt him I mean. 

[Geordie Ahmed]

1 hour ago, Yorkie said:

 

"Uses excessive force" is obviously ruled out immediately because all he's done is flick a leg out to stop the breakaway. So it comes down to whether or not he's endangered an opponent. If that's endangering an opponent then basically every clumsy challenge is.

He's not just flicked a leg out though, if that's all it was then a yellow would be correct

 

He's caught him with his studs, which he's then raked down to the players foot

 

I don't think he's meant it, he's just going for a "professional" foul but he's caught him in a dangerous manner

[Geordie Ahmed]

 

 

This angle shows it quite well for me, it's more than a trip

[wormy]

4 minutes ago, Geordie Ahmed said:

He's not just flicked a leg out though, if that's all it was then a yellow would be correct

 

He's caught him with his studs, which he's then raked down to the players foot

 

I don't think he's meant it, he's just going for a "professional" foul but he's caught him in a dangerous manner

 

The studs on the ankle seems to be what's being ignored by most. 

 

I laughed when I saw the decision from the ref's angle. Then I saw the studs on the ankle. At regular speed it doesn't look too bad. And it's still probably harsh relative to most in-game decisions. But that then speaks to the terrible inconsistency of refereeing decisions.

 

Under the laws of the game, it's probably a red. But we'll probably see multiple worse challenges tomorrow that get a yellow or less.

 

Always happy to see an Arsenal persecution complex, though. 

[Yorkie]

Really do think slowing the footage down to a tenth of real time adds a whole layer of severity which in reality  doesn't exist. 

[alexf]

Yeah they need to stop doing that. Takes all the weight and inertia out of the motion so some things that look awful actually had very little force behind them and often the referee hasn't given it in real time but after a VAR shows them a super slow mo they change their mind. 

 

 

Edited yesterday at 02:27 by alexf

[Hanshithispantz]

Whether slowed down or not he catches him on the ankle with his studs a good foot away from the ball, it's a great call by Oliver tbh, the problem is that if he'd given him a yellow nobody would be complaining 

 

It's an 'orange card' as they get missed all the time and they are irritating when they're given to your players, Bruno got a similar one against Southampton. An Everton player against us in that game Iwobi got their winner with 10 men too.

 

 

Edited yesterday at 04:13 by Hanshithispantz

[Tsunami]

Looks to me that he initially intends to just trip the player knowing it’s a yellow. As he goes in he realises he’s got his timing slightly out and it becomes more of a lunge and not a trip. 
 

It’s a bit soft but can’t see it being overturned. 

[Cf]

7 hours ago, Yorkie said:

There's no intent to hurt him I mean. 

 

Sure. And probably true. 

 

But there was an intent to trip him over and with that there's always the possibility of causing harm. So he might not have "intended to hurt him" but he did intend to perform an action which could have hurt him.

 

Now yes, it's football and everything on the pitch can cause harm but it's usually in good faith such as challenging for the ball. That's what tips this challenge into red card territory for me in that there was no effort to play the ball at all. Yellow card just for that fact alone. The studs on the ankle we see yellows for all the time and had it just been a normal challenge a yellow may not have been given and there'd be no controversy. But in this case because there was no attempt to play the ball whatsoever it can easily be considered wreckless. 

[Magpie]

[gdm]

 

[Cf]

Sky Sports going on as if Arsenal have just suffered one the worst injustices ever. 

[Bimpy474]

You win some, you lose some.