Clattenburg

[Frutos]

Definitely not a pen but Kane is my fantasy team captain, so no particular complaints here.

 

[Bombadier Botty]

Dear oh dear. It took to post 8 to get the correct answer, but that ref should be back in the County League.

You do realise that KG is one of these people who has two teams - a Premiership team in THFC and little old Brighton and Hove Albion as his second team, hence why he 'don't give a shit' that his beloved THFC got the decision.

 

[withdeanwombat]

You do realise that KG is one of these people who has two teams - a Premiership team in THFC and little old Brighton and Hove Albion as his second team, hence why he 'don't give a shit' that his beloved THFC got the decision.

Dubious reasons notwithstanding, it WAS and remains the correct answer. The ref remains a stunt double for Blind Pew.

 

[sydney]

far too much old bollox about referees these days.......football is about the players not the ref......i have a re-occuring nightmare that football follows the NFL with the referee and linesmen linked by microphone and all decisions announced from the top of a small wooded box emblazed with the matchday sponsor brought onto the pitch by a polar bear in a sequined jumpsuit....!!

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

Martin Atkinson just as bad in Arsenal v Leicester. Their pen was probably 50/50. In fact technically a penalty in the laws but no doubt Vardy "won it" rather than a flat our foul. But, of course, Arsenal should have had a free kick up the other end before the play developed. Evened up with the softest sending off I've seen all season. If that's a yellow we might as well give up and go home.

I don't think he got the pen or the sending off wrong as such, they were just very very soft - stupid by the offending player as well.

 

[Guinness Boy]

I don't think he got the pen or the sending off wrong as such, they were just very very soft - stupid by the offending player as well.

You're probably right. Soft decisions annoy me as does lack of consistency between refs. Another ref may well have let the second challenge go.

 

[JBizzle]

I get quite annoyed by refereeing these days but it's a symptom of a wider problem. The rules are so open to interpretation that the Kane penalty yesterday was as much a penalty as it wasn't, it completely depends on who is reffing your game.

I didn't think it was, and I thought Vardy's was a penalty and Simpson's sending off was harsh. I guess the issue is consistency...

 

[Mellotron]

Oh, and on the subject of video replays...like they'll ever eliminate all controversy from the game.

This line of thinking always does my head in. It's the same as saying;

"Seatbelts won't save EVERY life in a crash." Therefore we might as well not bother with seatbelts.

It would DEFINITELY help. The issue is with regards to slowing down the game. That is the only potential issue to further technology in Football, really.

 

[Nixonator]

This line of thinking always does my head in. It's the same as saying;

"Seatbelts won't save EVERY life in a crash."

It would DEFINITELY help. The issue is with regards to slowing down the game. That is the only potential issue to further technology in Football, really.

Indeed.

Nothing used to rile me more than walls creeping forward for direct free kicks. Now I find myself almost equally annoyed by how long they take to set up.

 

[Mellotron]

Vardy's was one of those where you could legitimately argue for both a penalty, and a yellow for Vardy for simulation. He chose to hook his leg round the defender's.

 

[Bold Seagull]

It wasn't that bad a decision. Defenders shouldn't jump with their arms away from their body, he did, and it hit his arm. A harsh decision maybe, but probably the right one to be honest. That's why Inigo and Barnes would always have their arms behind their back when in their own area.

About where I am on that decision. The view from the touchline behind Stirling was particularly revealing that his arm did appear to move toward the ball - and it definitely hit his arm. Harsh one, but not a shocker.

 

[Arthritic Toe]

IMHO Clattenburg is the best ref in the PL. He got this one wrong though.

 

[Easy 10]

This line of thinking always does my head in. It's the same as saying;

"Seatbelts won't save EVERY life in a crash." Therefore we might as well not bother with seatbelts.

It would DEFINITELY help. The issue is with regards to slowing down the game. That is the only potential issue to further technology in Football, really.

And its a massive issue that, for me, makes it a complete non-starter. Introducing technology for anything other than line calls would be horrific - just look at the spectrum of opinions on the Leicester and Spurs penalty decisions. Its not always obvious, or black and white, even after looking at it 10 times from 6 different angles.

Plus you'd need so much legislation brought in to accommodate TV replays it would destroy the game as we know it.

 

[Bold Seagull]

And its a massive issue that, for me, makes it a complete non-starter. Introducing technology for anything other than line calls would be horrific - just look at the spectrum of opinions on the Leicester and Spurs penalty decisions. Its not always obvious, or black and white, even after looking at it 10 times from 6 different angles.

Plus you'd need so much legislation brought in to accommodate TV replays it would destroy the game as we know it.

The interesting thing about DRS in cricket, is that it has reinforced that actually, the umpires do a bloody good job on the whole. Far from undermining umpires, they have been supported by it and even emboldened by it, giving decisions they may have previously felt too risky to give. However, they overwhelmingly get most decisions right.

The controversy with DRS is when the decision is really tight, or a grey area like you say. DRS deals with it as 'umpires call', but the system itself then creates it's own controversy, should you lose a review if the ball is shown to be still hitting the stumps, even if it is umpires call. In cricket now they spend as much time debating DRS as they did decisions. As a system it is intended to deal with the absolute shocker, but of course captains use it when they most feel they need it.

DRS could be used to determine if it had hit an arm for handball, but in the Stirling case it couldn't determine the intent, so presumably the decision would remain with the on field ref in this case.

 

[Arthritic Toe]

I just don't know whats happened to the interpretation of 'deliberate' recently in the context of handball. For my money, the law should be interpreted as written, i.e. the defender is only penalised if he deliberately handles it. Its quite clear that in about 8 out of 10 cases of those given in the last couple of seasons, the defender has no intention of deliberately handling it (why would he?), the ball has just hit his hand accidentally.

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

And its a massive issue that, for me, makes it a complete non-starter. Introducing technology for anything other than line calls would be horrific - just look at the spectrum of opinions on the Leicester and Spurs penalty decisions. Its not always obvious, or black and white, even after looking at it 10 times from 6 different angles.

Plus you'd need so much legislation brought in to accommodate TV replays it would destroy the game as we know it.

At what point would they decide that they dont actually know - I don't think it was a pen - but only after I had watched it back a number of times over a few mins.

1 minute? 2 minutes?

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

I just don't know whats happened to the interpretation of 'deliberate' recently in the context of handball. For my money, the law should be interpreted as written, i.e. the defender is only penalised if he deliberately handles it. Its quite clear that in about 8 out of 10 cases of those given in the last couple of seasons, the defender has no intention of deliberately handling it (why would he?), the ball has just hit his hand accidentally.

I agree, I have no idea how you are expected to move a hand out the way of a ball being blasted at you from a Yard

 

[JCL666]

Definitely wasn't a pen. Sterling jumps and turns his back, there's no movement by his arm towards the ball.

As a test, try running and jumping into the air and turning in mid air yourself WITH YOUR HAND BY YOUR SIDES. It's a natural movement (balance etc) to have your arms away from your body.

In Clattenburgers defence, from his perspective, he can probably see that Sterlings arm is away from his body. Although I would refer to my earlier point about running, jumping and turning with your arms by your sides.

He probably could have been helped if linos actually covered the whole line and not just one half.

Some good angles and pics here. You might want to turn the sound off so you don't have to hear "Carra" droning on http://www.skysports.com/football/man-city-vs-tottenham/341443

 

[Easy 10]

The interesting thing about DRS in cricket, is that it has reinforced that actually, the umpires do a bloody good job on the whole. Far from undermining umpires, they have been supported by it and even emboldened by it, giving decisions they may have previously felt too risky to give. However, they overwhelmingly get most decisions right.

The controversy with DRS is when the decision is really tight, or a grey area like you say. DRS deals with it as 'umpires call', but the system itself then creates it's own controversy, should you lose a review if the ball is shown to be still hitting the stumps, even if it is umpires call. In cricket now they spend as much time debating DRS as they did decisions. As a system it is intended to deal with the absolute shocker, but of course captains use it when they most feel they need it.

DRS could be used to determine if it had hit an arm for handball, but in the Stirling case it couldn't determine the intent, so presumably the decision would remain with the on field ref in this case.

At what point would they decide that they dont actually know - I don't think it was a pen - but only after I had watched it back a number of times over a few mins.

1 minute? 2 minutes?

A TV replay will never prove intent. And setting aside how long it may take to conduct the review, the single biggest issue for me is when and how you stop the game for it ? If (for example) the ref turns down what looked like a stonewall pen and play goes on, then how do you review that ? Are we talking about adopting an NFL-style "appeal flag" being thrown onto the field to stop play for the review ? Or do we have to wait for the ball to go dead ? What if the other team scores before the review is seen ? It'd be chile-con-carnage.

Reviews can work ok in sports such as cricket, tennis, NFL because those are sports that occur within a series, or "bursts", of action. There's a natural pause between each play. Football just isn't like that. I cannot see how TV reviews could be introduced without fundamentally altering the structure of the game as we know it, and for what ? People will still argue over the interpretations of the decisions given following a TV replay.

Nope, non starter for me.

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

A TV replay will never prove intent. And setting aside how long it may take to conduct the review, the single biggest issue for me is when and how you stop the game for it ? If (for example) the ref turns down what looked like a stonewall pen and play goes on, then how do you review that ? Are we talking about adopting an NFL-style "appeal flag" being thrown onto the field to stop play for the review ? Or do we have to wait for the ball to go dead ? What if the other team scores before the review is seen ? It'd be chile-con-carnage.

Reviews can work ok in sports such as cricket, tennis, NFL because those are sports that occur within a series, or "bursts", of action. There's a natural pause between each play. Football just isn't like that. I cannot see how TV reviews could be introduced without fundamentally altering the game as we know it, and for what ? People will still argue over the interpretations of the decisions given following a TV replay.

Nope, non starter for me.

I agree - Goal line tech is the only thing that should be in the game.