The fact there are so many views and opinions on here alone proves it’s not 100% one way or the other. And in those circumstances, I can’t see a VAR endorsed red being overturned. It would need to be absolutely beyond debate that it wasn’t a red.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Albion] Illia Zabarny's red card
- Thread starter Bozza
- Start date
It’s more a case of people don’t know the laws of the game.
Kalimantan Gull
Well-known member
Thats a bit unfair, because it implies its a black and white decision like 'did the ball cross the line'. There is a lot of subjective decisions to be made here - what is out of control to somebody is not out of control to someone else.
There are also some variations in the laws, for example 'getting the ball first' is irrelevant when it comes to reckless tackles that endanger an opponent, but it is relevant when considering whether a penalty is awarded from a normal tackle.
I think in general we need a higher bar for a certain argument to be valid than someone on NSC is willing to make it. Given that you can find someone here to argue just about anything. In fact this logic has become the cornerstone of US political debate.
It does not imply black and white. Obviously there’s a subjective element but when folk are justifying their position with arguments which have no relevance to the laws it implies they don’t know the laws.
For example, someone was suggesting reasons for “planting his foot” to mitigate the action ….its irrelevant if they did this intentionally or not…they clearly did plant their foot on their opponents leg.
Bring back Bryan wade!!
I wanna caravan for me ma
Exactly this, the fact VAR recommended the upgrade to red is enough in itself for the case not to be overturned.
Thunder Bolt
Silly old bat
No, he’s currently suspended so stays suspended until the decision to rescind the red card is made.
Kalimantan Gull
Well-known member
I've been debating this based on stills like this or short slomo cips like in the OP. I've just gone and had a look at the complete, full speed replay for the first time and I can really see why do many think it shouldn't be a red card. You see that still photo and imagine he's come flying in, off the ground, when the reality is he's just stretched out a leg and hes stretching so much is taken him off the ground. It looks from the slomos like he has whacked into the leg with force, whereas if you look closer the leg barely moves, there really isn't much pace behind it. The ball takes most of the impact, then his foot bounces up and catches his calf. The angle from behind RAN looks much less severe than the one above. If that really is a red under the laws then I think the bar has been set too low.
Last edited:
They will not throw VAR under the bus on this. They never do.
This is the key bit for me. His foot essentially bounced off the top of the ball and on to the shin with very little actual force or momentum. The stills make it look 100% worse.
That said, happy to have him suspended for tonight if that's what happens. Personally, I thought it was a harsh red, but the fact that it was upgraded after review seems silly to review and downgrade again. This is where the re-refereeing of VAR annoys me. Initially a yellow on field, reviewed by VAR and upgraded to VAR to a red, then reviewed AGAIN on appeal and potentially downgraded to yellow or kept as a red? All a bit over-the-top
Terry Connor
Active member
- Oct 21, 2022
- 153
I think it's an ADVANTAGE to us since it makes uncertain 'Muff's selection and tactical plan.
Think this is the bottom line - if they overturn it now, they’re admitting the ref got it right initially but then two refs, watching multiple replays, and then the onfield ref all then got it wrong. It would be humiliating.
brighton_tom
Well-known member
- Jul 23, 2008
- 6,059
So with it being appealed does he become available for tonight & any potential ban get moved til after the appeal process is complete?
Already answered a few posts up……no
Washie
Well-known member
The leg bends unnaturally with the challenge yet there's not much force. Any more and that leg breaks.
For me, the magnitude of force doesn’t really come into this case. By your own admission he’s off the ground, has overstretched, not really in control of his actions and and has therefore “endangered the safety of an opponent” which all that’s needed for a red.
Joey Jo Jo Jr. Shabadoo
I believe in Joe Hendry
- Oct 4, 2003
- 12,435
No the appeals process should be completed before they play us. The Bournemouth manager said in his pre-match press conference that they expected to hear last night about the outcome of the appeal, but there is nothing in the press or on their website yet.
TWOCHOICEStom
Well-known member
This is so obviously a red for me.
He clearly didn't mean to and yes it was clearly accidental that his leg rolled over the ball. But if you go into a challenge like that you risk endangering your opponent. Which he did.
He clearly didn't mean to and yes it was clearly accidental that his leg rolled over the ball. But if you go into a challenge like that you risk endangering your opponent. Which he did.