LamieRobertson
Not awoke
Does the ref have good eyesight?
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Heaton
- Thread starter briref
- Start date
Does the ref have good eyesight?
I consider centre to be a very wide segment that is essentially anything in line with any part of the goal, a thin line straight through the penalty spot, so a few yards to the left of the left post is narrow enough to qualify as 'off centre' for me.
C
CT1
Guest
I'm also a referee. But you don't have to be a referee to realize thats a red card every time. I was there as well, he wasn't heading for the corner flag.
Albumen
Don't wait for me!
Dougdeep, you're not arguing for the sake of it by any chance are you? It's a clear red.
It was right in front of me in the Lower West. I'm not in the slightest bit important and having a different opinion doesn't make you stupid. Using a single still to try to prove a point is stupid. Of course the ref doesn't have highlights, but he did make a mistake. He admitted that he got it wrong after the Bournemouth debacle, so maybe he might do it again.
I have done a referees course as it goes, just after the 'denying a goalscoring opportunity' rule came it. That's why the 'last man' arguement trotted out by 'experts' annoys me so much. I kind of agree with your 'professional foul' point, but as has been explained, it is more of a colloquial term for the rule rather than the misinterpretation of the rule like the last man thing.
If you've not seen the highlights then I apologise, but if you have and still think it was only a yellow then it beggars belief. You also used the word 'intentional'. There was definitely intent in that foul. He knew what he was doing when he took the risk to come out.
Preaching to the choir, chap!
*rather than a thin line.
symyjym
Banned
100% red card, but I can understand how the ref got it wrong. The trouble is really with the linesman not stepping up to the plate and assisting with the decision.
The second yellow card was justified even if it looked like the ref was making up for the automatic red.
The second yellow card was justified even if it looked like the ref was making up for the automatic red.
rdigs24
Southampton seagull
The Referees assistant was too far away to assist with the decision.
symyjym
Banned
If that is the case, any offside decision beyond 20 yards of him is just a blur and cannot be given.
The Linesmans job is to see the last player line and this decision would be based on the same sight as offside.
BensGrandad
New member
Interesting to note that it wasnt shown on the FL Show when Steve Claridge could have added his piece.
There were posts on another thread about this. There was a technical issue with the coverage that meant the BBC couldn't use a lot of the action, including the 'booking'. Nothing sinister.
rdigs24
Southampton seagull
From the assistants position he couldn't possibly make a decision whereas the referee has a different angle so can tell if there is contact. Viceversa on offsides the linesman is in a better position to judge if the attacking player is offside, whether it be 2 yards infront of him or over the far side of the pitch.
symyjym
Banned
So are you saying now is the linesman couldn't tell if there was contact? Anyway that is not the point, the linesman would have been able to see clearly if there was a player between Buckley and the goal.
I maintain that the linesman is there to assist the referee and not just there for offside decisions.
Last edited:
BensGrandad
New member
Are we certain the lino and ref are not in contact via ear pieces etc. If they are he may have helped the ref reach and make the correct decision.
TheJasperCo
Well-known member
The ref runs diagonally, with linos taking opposite corners. The assistant would never have intervened, even if he had wanted to.
BensGrandad
New member
Having qualified and risen to class 1 ref some 50+ years ago I fully realise that the ref runs in a diagonal but the ball moves quicker than him so he will not always be up with the last player hence the need for a lino for offsides etc. So the lino may have been in a position to say that the the covering defender was nearer the goal than the keeper.
symyjym
Banned
They may have done but I don't remember the ref taking any time to check his earpiece.
It could be argued that Buckley was level with the last man, but it could also be argued that normally the red card is shown when there is only the GK(one man) to beat. In this case the GK was beaten, and Buckley only had one man (level) to beat.
This still photo to me, shows clearly that if the GK hadn't touch Buckley he would have easily had an extra metre in his stride than the covering player and some would say that it was an open goal.
It was a proffesional foul by the GK outside his box with intent to stop a clear cut goal scoring opportunity. Many refs would have shown red, without much complaint from the opposition.
symyjym
Banned
British Bulldog
The great escape
- Feb 6, 2006
- 10,974
Straight red. All day.
It was but in all honesty I think the ref actually done us a favour by not sending him off for that incident, Having thought about it if Burnley had lost the keeper just before half time it would've given their manager time to re-organise and the players time to re-group during half time. By him sending the keeper off early in the second half as well as one of the Burnley coaches it caused them a lot of problems that they never really recovered from, They were chasing the game from the sending off and from the moment the second goal went in they seemed to accept defeat and dropped back further and further as the game went on. Even when Vokes had a clear header very late in the game he only went through the motions when putting it straight at Kuszczak rather than looking like he was trying to score.