[Albion] Lee Mason

[blue-shifted]

Has PGMOL ever once come out and said there was a human error?

Or are they insisting that referees are divine in their inability to make a mistake?

 

[vagabond]

[tweet]1365784976793481225[/tweet]

 

[Garry Nelson's Left Foot]

Has PGMOL ever once come out and said there was a human error?

Or are they insisting that referees are divine in their inability to make a mistake?

I'm fairly sure that they said that it was the wrong decision to change the saints free kick to a penalty. Not sure where I saw that though.

 

[sydney]

[tweet]1365784976793481225[/tweet]

perilously close to the truth

 

[drew]

I make that wrong on two counts:

The attacking team can take a free kick as soon as they're ready and don't have to wait for the defence to get 11 men behind the ball. Quick free kicks happen all the time when the attacking team want to take advantage of their opponents being out of position.

How were the penalties favours? He just applied the laws correctly.

Don't think that is true. Whilst I don't agree with it, if the ref has instructed the attacking team to wait for the whistle before taking a kick then they have to wait for the whistle.

 

[drew]

He made mistake of telling Dunk he could take and further mistake by allowing goal to stand. He did blow when realised made a mistake. Fact is it no way should he have been allowed to take kick with keeper on right hand post and would have been just as much of a farce if goal had been allowed. I think he did us enough favours by giving 2 penalties

I agree it was a mistake for Mason to allow Dunk to take the kick because he had obviously previously said they need to wait for the whistle before taking the kick and he did that to presumably ensure the wall was 10yrds back. When Dunk asked if he could take it, Mason should have looked around. My guess is that if he had seen the keeper by the post, he wouldn't have said yes. I don't agree with waiting for the defence to be set but that is generally the protocol and I doubt anyone would have argued if Mason has not let Dunk take the kick when he did.

Where I disagree with you is your 'Fact' comment. There is nothing in the laws of the game that require the ref to allow the defence to set up their 'guard' before allowing free kicks. If teams were a bit more cute, they could easily take quick free kicks for fouls around the edge of the box.

It's also laughable that you suggest he did us a favour in giving two penalties.

 

[amexer]

I agree it was a mistake for Mason to allow Dunk to take the kick because he had obviously previously said they need to wait for the whistle before taking the kick and he did that to presumably ensure the wall was 10yrds back. When Dunk asked if he could take it, Mason should have looked around. My guess is that if he had seen the keeper by the post, he wouldn't have said yes. I don't agree with waiting for the defence to be set but that is generally the protocol and I doubt anyone would have argued if Mason has not let Dunk take the kick when he did.

Where I disagree with you is your 'Fact' comment. There is nothing in the laws of the game that require the ref to allow the defence to set up their 'guard' before allowing free kicks. If teams were a bit more cute, they could easily take quick free kicks for fouls around the edge of the box.

It's also laughable that you suggest he did us a favour in giving two penalties.

OK accept didnt do us a favour with penalties. However both could easily have not been given

 

[Albion Dan]

OK accept didnt do us a favour with penalties. However both could easily have not been given

The handball would have been a shocker if not given. The other was less obvious.

 

[blue-shifted]

OK accept didnt do us a favour with penalties. However both could easily have not been given

The second one, yes

 

[Pavilionaire]

Dermot Gallagher's defence of Mason that "he lost focus" may be true, but it is no defence.

Can a brain surgeon tell the family of a patient "I'm sorry he'd dead, I lost focus and cut the wrong bit".

 

[vagabond]

Dermot Gallagher's defence of Mason that "he lost focus" may be true, but it is no defence.

Can a brain surgeon tell the family of a patient "I'm sorry he'd dead, I lost focus and cut the wrong bit".

Yeah. It’s tough maybe, but that is the job, to keep and stay focused with the actions of elite sportsmen .

“Oh terribly sorry, the plane crashed. You know how it is the pilot lost focus”.

 

[albionalex]

I make that wrong on two counts:

The attacking team can take a free kick as soon as they're ready and don't have to wait for the defence to get 11 men behind the ball. Quick free kicks happen all the time when the attacking team want to take advantage of their opponents being out of position.

How were the penalties favours? He just applied the laws correctly.

This wasn't a quick free kick though. The West Brom player holds onto the ball for more than 10 seconds after the foul has been committed.

 

[AmexRuislip]

Lee Mason’s brother (Andy) was a professional footballer. You’d imagine Lee must have played a bit in his younger days.

It seems most referees are pushovers these days

 

[Uh_huh_him]

Dermot Gallagher's defence of Mason that "he lost focus" may be true, but it is no defence.

Can a brain surgeon tell the family of a patient "I'm sorry he'd dead, I lost focus and cut the wrong bit".

Well quite.

What exactly was the problem with focusing whilst organising a freekick.

"Sorry Lewis what did you say? I was just musing on what beautiful weather we're having for the time of year. Can you take the freekick? Yes go ahead dear boy.



oh shit. I mean no wait a minute let's see whether the keeper's ready first"

 

[PILTDOWN MAN]

Well quite.

What exactly was the problem with focusing whilst organising a freekick.

"Sorry Lewis what did you say? I was just musing on what beautiful weather we're having for the time of year. Can you take the freekick? Yes go ahead dear boy.



oh shit. I mean no wait a minute let's see whether the keeper's ready first"

Still think it misses the point that VAR or more importantly Hooper decided that the ball hadn't gone over the line before the 2nd whistle, It had on every clip I've seen and listened to. That means the error, which was only the 2nd whistle, was covered up. EPL and the ref's complicit in changing the events. If not prove it with proper views such as the goalline camera which hasn't been shown surprisingly. It goes further than the poor ref in the middle

 

[Insel affe]

It has happened, they won't give a goal or point in retrospect, time to move on.

I was angry at the time, but we had opportunities to get back in the game, let's not sound like spoilt kids.

 

[Swansman]

In Sweden (and a few other countries), we usually have post-game interviews with the refs where they get the chance to explain why they made certain decisions or admit they made a mistake or explain complicated parts of the laws of the game... its quite nice and makes it easier to accept that decisions are not always perfect. There is a couple of cons to it, but I think the good parts outweighs it.

 

[Uh_huh_him]

Still think it misses the point that VAR or more importantly Hooper decided that the ball hadn't gone over the line before the 2nd whistle, It had on every clip I've seen and listened to. That means the error, which was only the 2nd whistle, was covered up. EPL and the ref's complicit in changing the events. If not prove it with proper views such as the goalline camera which hasn't been shown surprisingly. It goes further than the poor ref in the middle

Match of the day froze the shot with the ball in flight, but it wasn't clear when the whistle blew.

The clip i have seen (only once ) from behind the ref, seemed to clearly show the net bulging as the second whistle sounded.
As I've only seen it once, I can't be sure, but if this is the case, I agree it's a massive cover up.

 

[Hugo Rune]

Match of the day froze the shot with the ball in flight, but it wasn't clear when the whistle blew.

The clip i have seen (only once ) from behind the ref, seemed to clearly show the net bulging as the second whistle sounded.
As I've only seen it once, I can't be sure, but if this is the case, I agree it's a massive cover up.

I saw a Sky clip (once) and the net is hit as the whistle blows. Impossible to rule out the goal with that evidence based on the ball not being in play but he did!

 

[raymondo]

In Sweden (and a few other countries), we usually have post-game interviews with the refs where they get the chance to explain why they made certain decisions or admit they made a mistake or explain complicated parts of the laws of the game... its quite nice and makes it easier to accept that decisions are not always perfect. There is a couple of cons to it, but I think the good parts outweighs it.

Sounds good to me. We can hear everything the international rugby referees say live - we and the pundits may not agree with everything but at least it's transparent. Why not the same for football: it may stop the players effing at the ref, and may keep the ref focused. Lots of benefits if Fifa wanted to do these things.