Disallowed penalty/goal for Newcastle last night...

[The Fish]

whatever.

At least you'll have something to blame if you lose the title on GD.

Referees have been poor for everyone*. If you win the title it's because, over 46 games, you've deserved to. Hughton has earned a shot at a Premier League season, God knows he earned it when he was with us. Knockaert and Dunk have been very good this year too.

Changing subject a second, what's the plan for the Premier League? Will your owners release funds to overhaul the squad, will you stick with the horse that brought you, or will there be something in the middle? Where do you need to strengthen do you reckon?



*Saying that, I've not heard of incidents as bad as the ones we've endured; the Forest reds and the Burton Penalty.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

Changing subject a second, what's the plan for the Premier League? Will your owners release funds to overhaul the squad, will you stick with the horse that brought you, or will there be something in the middle? Where do you need to strengthen do you reckon?
.

Somewhere in between. We probably need reinforcements everywhere bar centre-back. Possibly there too, depending on Goldson's recovery.

*Saying that, I've not heard of incidents as bad as the ones we've endured; the Forest reds and the Burton Penalty.

The Burton one is probably the single worst refereeing mistake, at this level, I've ever seen. Nothing subjective about it - no decision to make - just a massive MISTAKE. Unforgivable.

You let your Toon-tinted glasses influence your view of the Forest ones though. Both were legitimate reds, if not necessarily clear-cut. the ref was well within his rights to adjudicate as he did, and I am still astonished that the league undermined him by rescinding either of them.

 

[Mellotron]

Referees have been poor for everyone*. If you win the title it's because, over 46 games, you've deserved to. Hughton has earned a shot at a Premier League season, God knows he earned it when he was with us. Knockaert and Dunk have been very good this year too.

Changing subject a second, what's the plan for the Premier League? Will your owners release funds to overhaul the squad, will you stick with the horse that brought you, or will there be something in the middle? Where do you need to strengthen do you reckon?



*Saying that, I've not heard of incidents as bad as the ones we've endured; the Forest reds and the Burton Penalty.

The Forests reds were both rescinded, even though Shelvey clearly tries to kick the guy?! If anything that shows bias towards Toon! The other one (Dummett) was a slightly harsh red, as although it was unquestionably last man Lansbury definitely made a meal of it.

You're also forgetting that INSANE decision re: Darlow pulling that player back by the leg when he was on to an open goal. Probably the most blatant red card I've seen in years. Not even a foul given. It has absolutely been swings and roundabouts for you.

Re: BHA - I think we've probably had the rub of the green this season, but last season was quite ridiculous levels of bad luck, so for us it has evened itself out over two seasons rather than one.

 

[Everest]

We were given a penalty, we scored the penalty, then that goal was incorrectly ruled out because the referee and his team didn't know the rules. The only way Burton should have got a free kick is if Ritchie missed and only Newcastle players encroached before the ball was kicked.

Not the same as not getting a penalty awarded.

They are laws, not rules.
There are THREE situations in which an IDFK is awarded to the defending team at a penalty.

I suggest you read up on the laws.

 

[The Fish]

Somewhere in between. We probably need reinforcements everywhere bar centre-back. Possibly there too, depending on Goldson's recovery.



The Burton one is probably the single worst refereeing mistake, at this level, I've ever seen. Nothing subjective about it - no decision to make - just a massive MISTAKE. Unforgivable.

You let your Toon-tinted glasses influence your view of the Forest ones though. Both were legitimate reds, if not necessarily clear-cut. the ref was well within his rights to adjudicate as he did, and I am still astonished that the league undermined him by rescinding either of them.

I should probably clarify, RE: the reds which were both rescinded. Shelvey's was rescinded because the narrative of Shelvey kicking Lansbury in the face is utter rot. Shelvey kicked out of a tangle of legs and that kick hit Lansbury's chest. Lansbury then playacted (as Lansbury is wont to do) to cheat the ref. If they were on top of their game they would have seen that Lansbury fouls Shelvey first (no penalty). On review the FA obviously recognised that the referee got it wrong (either give them both a yellow for being twats, or give them both a red).

Dummett's foul comes under the triple punishment rule change pre-Euro 2016. "However, the law has now changed so that players committing accidental fouls, that deny a goal-scoring opportunity, are not automatically sent off, but cautioned instead.

Players will still be sent off for holding, pulling or pushing, not playing the ball or having no possibility to play the ball, serious foul play, violent conduct or deliberate handball."

Obviously, when those reds were overturned the accusations of bias came flooding our way. It's nonsense to be honest, if there was actual bias in Newcastle's favour they wouldn't have seen reds in that game, we would have seen many more penalties than the 4 we've got.We wouldn't have seen half as many penalties given against us (11). What's more likely, and is borne out by the majority of Championship fixtures, is that the standard of refereeing in this league is dire.

Hell, in that game we had a perfectly good goal chalked off, and at least one "clear" penalty shout ignored.

Everyone seems to think their club is hard done by, and I do think the standard of refereeing has been poor for everyone, my point was that I cannot remember another club being on the receiving end of such simple misunderstanding of the laws of the game. That's not evidence of bias, or a conspiracy, just bad luck or it passing me by.

 

[The Fish]

They are laws, not rules.
There are THREE situations in which an IDFK is awarded to the defending team at a penalty.

I suggest you read up on the laws.

Penalty scored - attacking team encroach - retake
Penalty missed - attacking team encroach - IDFK
Penalty scored - defending team encroach - Goal
Penalty missed - Defending team encroach - retake
Penalty scored - both teams encroach - retake
Penalty missed - both teams encroach - retake

What are the other 2 situations where an indirect freekick is awarded to the defending side?

From FIFA's website;

 

[Buzzer]

Penalty scored - attacking team encroach - retake
Penalty missed - attacking team encroach - IDFK
Penalty scored - defending team encroach - Goal
Penalty missed - Defending team encroach - retake
Penalty scored - both teams encroach - retake
Penalty missed - both teams encroach - retake

What are the other 2 situations where an indirect freekick is awarded to the defending side?

Double touch by the striker is one of them.

 

[Everest]

Double touch by the striker is one of them.

Oooh, forgot that one (plus I didn't count the encroachment one)

So that makes 5

• a penalty kick is kicked backwards (ball must travel forward. Backheeling is permitted provided the ball moves forward.)
• a team-mate of the identified kicker takes the kick; the referee cautions the player who took the kick
• feinting to kick the ball once the kicker has completed the run-up (feinting in the run-up is permitted); the referee cautions the kicker

 

[hans kraay fan club]

I should probably clarify, RE: the reds which were both rescinded. Shelvey's was rescinded because the narrative of Shelvey kicking Lansbury in the face is utter rot. Shelvey kicked out of a tangle of legs and that kick hit Lansbury's chest. Lansbury then playacted (as Lansbury is wont to do) to cheat the ref."

"blah blah blah blah blah Shelvey kicked out blah blah blah"

Can you spot the important part? Which part of Lansbury he made contact with is irrelevant. Lansbury making a meal of it is irrelevant. What punishment Lansbury might have received is irrelevant. Whether it should have been a penalty is irrelevant (to THIS discussion). SHELVEY KICKED OUT. That's the only bit of any relevance. Its a clear red.

And what's more, the stupid idiot did EXACTLY the same thing two weeks later against QPR.

Dummett's foul comes under the triple punishment rule change pre-Euro 2016. "However, the law has now changed so that players committing accidental fouls, that deny a goal-scoring opportunity, are not automatically sent off, but cautioned instead.

Players will still be sent off for holding, pulling or pushing, not playing the ball or having no possibility to play the ball, serious foul play, violent conduct or deliberate handball."

Again, the rule you quote does not absolve Dummett at all. The triple punishment thing only saves him IF in the opinion of the referee it was a. not deliberate and b. he had a possibility of playing the ball (clue - he didn't).

 

[The Fish]

"blah blah blah blah blah Shelvey kicked out blah blah blah"

Can you spot the important part? Which part of Lansbury he made contact with is irrelevant. Lansbury making a meal of it is irrelevant. What punishment Lansbury might have received is irrelevant. Whether it should have been a penalty is irrelevant (to THIS discussion). SHELVEY KICKED OUT. That's the only bit of any relevance. Its a clear red.

And what's more, the stupid idiot did EXACTLY the same thing two weeks later against QPR.



Again, the rule you quote does not absolve Dummett at all. The triple punishment thing only saves him IF in the opinion of the referee it was a. not deliberate and b. he had a possibility of playing the ball (clue - he didn't).

"Shelvey kicked out of a tangle of legs", cherry picking part of a quote can lead to misunderstanding. Shelvey didn't kick at Lansbury, he was trying to untangle his legs, after being fouled by Lansbury. Then Lansbury (who had not been struck) feigns injury in a successful attempt at cheating a bad referee.

http://i.imgur.com/6nJjz4O.gif (your board says this gif is too large a file)

Dummett was clearly an accidental collision after Lansbury began tumbling (again trying to cheat the referee) before contact was made. Don't have it to hand, but I'm fairly certain the referee has to be clear that Dummett has no chance of getting the ball. It's not clear that Dummet has no chance of getting the ball.. He's passing Lansbury, who has now stopped and is in the process of throwing himself to the ground, so had the accidental collision not occurred Dummett could have made contact with the ball.
http://i.imgur.com/Blywvng.gif

Put it this way, why, after all the time in the world to review, and having a wealth of experience and insight, did the FA rescind both red cards if not because they were deemed unjust?

Is it a massive conspiracy? If so, why were the reds given in the first place? Surely if there's a conspiracy we'd not have seen the reds, or the penalties, we'd have got the penalty we deserved and not had the perfectly legal goal chalked off?

Or, is it the much more likely case that the referees in the Championship are terrible? A case supported by your own fans complaints at their standard and the poor standard in most fixtures down here?

Nah, it's probably big club bias.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

"Shelvey kicked out of a tangle of legs", cherry picking part of a quote can lead to misunderstanding. Shelvey didn't kick at Lansbury, he was trying to untangle his legs, after being fouled by Lansbury.

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

No bias there. No sirrreeeeeee.

 

[The Fish]

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

No bias there. No sirrreeeeeee.

Well, answer me this, if the red was justified, why was it rescinded?

 

[hans kraay fan club]

Well, answer me this, if the red was justified, why was it rescinded?

Because the panel made an astonishingly poor decision. I seriously cannot believe your fans* continue to feel hard done by on this one - you got really lucky, you should be happy with that, and move on. Shelvey kicked out - there's really nothing else worth discussing. And, as I say, he did exactly the same thing two weeks later v QPR and got away with it again. Talented footballer, but clearly a knob.



* Not all of them. I did notice one poster on your forum at the time, with a more honest assessment, along the lines of:

"why is it racism?"
"he's no racist, some of his friends are black"
"someone said something about Harry Potter"
"it was Lansbury's fault, he made him kick him"
"its all a conspiracy"
"The FA hate us"
"The QPR player was at fault. He made JJ kick him"
"Its not fair, waah waah waah"
"its the media trying to make him look bad. They need to stop"
"Or, you know, Shelvey could stop constantly acting like a prick?"

 

[The Fish]

Because the panel made an astonishingly poor decision. I seriously cannot believe your fans* continue to feel hard done by on this one - you got really lucky, you should be happy with that, and move on. Shelvey kicked out - there's really nothing else worth discussing. And, as I say, he did exactly the same thing two weeks later v QPR and got away with it again. Talented footballer, but clearly a knob.



* Not all of them. I did notice one poster on your forum at the time, with a more honest assessment, along the lines of:

"why is it racism?"
"he's no racist, some of his friends are black"
"someone said something about Harry Potter"
"it was Lansbury's fault, he made him kick him"
"its all a conspiracy"
"The FA hate us"
"The QPR player was at fault. He made JJ kick him"
"Its not fair, waah waah waah"
"its the media trying to make him look bad. They need to stop"
"Or, you know, Shelvey could stop constantly acting like a prick?"

I've never said Shelvey isn't a horrible prick. He is. However, he didn't kick Lansbury, as the slow-motion replays show, and the red card for this incident was justifiably rescinded.

What's more likely; the referee got it wrong in the heat of the moment, or the review panel got it wrong after poring over it for as long as they like?

 

[Triggaaar]

he was trying to untangle his legs

I can picture a defence lawyer clutching at straws while their client faces assault charges - "He was just caught in between some people and tried to untangle his fists".

If you're legs are tangled, you roll away and your legs, miraculously, come with you. You don't kick.

What's more likely; the referee got it wrong in the heat of the moment, or the review panel got it wrong after poring over it for as long as they like?

What's more likely; the sun will set in the evening or rise in the morning?

 

[hans kraay fan club]

I've never said Shelvey isn't a horrible prick. He is. However, he didn't kick Lansbury, as the slow-motion replays show, and the red card for this incident was justifiably rescinded.

What's more likely; the referee got it wrong in the heat of the moment, or the review panel got it wrong after poring over it for as long as they like?

I never claimed that Shelvey kicked Lansbury, though. I stated that he 'kicked out' at Lansbury. (In fact, even YOU have written on this very thread, that he kicked out) Not the same thing, but the same INTENT, and clear red either way.

So yes, the review panel got it wrong. We can only speculate as to their motivation or decision making process.

 

[The Fish]

I can picture a defence lawyer clutching at straws while their client faces assault charges - "He was just caught in between some people and tried to untangle his fists".

If you're legs are tangled, you roll away and your legs, miraculously, come with you. You don't kick.

What's more likely; the sun will set in the evening or rise in the morning?

You best tell that to every football, rugby and American Football player ever then. They seem to be operating under entirely different rules.

You're implying that it's possible for the referee to be wrong in sending him off and that the FA are wrong to say he shouldn't have been sent off?

I never claimed that Shelvey kicked Lansbury, though. I stated that he 'kicked out' at Lansbury. (In fact, even YOU have written on this very thread, that he kicked out) Not the same thing, but the same INTENT, and clear red either way.

So yes, the review panel got it wrong. We can only speculate as to their motivation or decision making process.

No, you cherry picked part of a sentence to deliberately misrepresent what I was saying. I said he was kicking out of a tangle of legs.

Did you even look at the gif? I mean it's pretty clear that Shelvey has been fouled and is trying to kick free of that tangle of legs. I hope you do look at it. It shows a tangle of legs, Lansbury lifting his legs to prevent Shelvey freeing himself, Shelvey pushing his feet out (I'm reticent to use "Kicking" as you seem keen to cherry pick it out of context) away and failing to make any contact, then Lansbury clutching his face and rolling in feigned agony. It's a pretty clear case of a cheat trying to get another player sent off.

This is all quite silly though, you believe that given time and free from the pressures of the crowd and the cameras, calm experts got the decision wrong, but refuse to countenance the position that the referee got it wrong in the heat of the moment? A position backed up by clips...

 

[hans kraay fan club]

Did you even look at the gif? I mean it's pretty clear that Shelvey has been fouled and is trying to kick free of that tangle of legs. I hope you do look at it. It shows a tangle of legs, Lansbury lifting his legs to prevent Shelvey freeing himself, Shelvey pushing his feet out (I'm reticent to use "Kicking" as you seem keen to cherry pick it out of context) away and failing to make any contact, then Lansbury clutching his face and rolling in feigned agony. It's a pretty clear case of a cheat trying to get another player sent off.

This is all quite silly though, you believe that given time and free from the pressures of the crowd and the cameras, calm experts got the decision wrong, but refuse to countenance the position that the referee got it wrong in the heat of the moment? A position backed up by clips...

I can do this all day. I've nothing better to do.

Yes, I've watched it. I've seen it before, I watched it when you posted it, and I've watched it again now. Despite being very much the kindest angle from Shelvey's point of view (it looks much worse from others) it STILL very clearly shows him kicking out at Lansbury. The fact that the top-knotted prick is a snide cheat, whose actions are deplorable, in no way absolves Shelvey.

The panel have got it wrong because they've gone beyond their remit, which is not to say "Its inconclusive so we'll give him the benefit of the doubt" but to only overturn the match-day officials' decisions if there is clear evidence of an error. Which there isn't.

 

[Easy 10]

This ongoing debate between [MENTION=35039]The Fish[/MENTION] and [MENTION=3566]hans kraay fan club[/MENTION] over the Shelvey / Lansbury incident shows EXACTLY why bringing in video replays for decisions on fouls during a game would be an absolute can of worms, that would cause more problems than it solves. The "right" decision is not always obvious even after several replays. It always boils down to interpretation.

 

[Triggaaar]

You're implying that it's possible for the referee to be wrong in sending him off and that the FA are wrong to say he shouldn't have been sent off?

No. The ref was right to send him off, although the ref might have thought he kicked Lansbury in the head, when he 'only' kicked him in the chest.