Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

[Albion] Red Card - Sheff Utd

















Icy Gull

Back on the rollercoaster
Jul 5, 2003
72,015
I didn’t think it was a sending off. I’d have been really pissed off if one of our players had gone for that.

With that ref if it had been a Brighton player I suggest he would have got a red and a pen would have been given if it had been a Brighton handball in the box. The crowd would have swayed it as they did so many things today. The ref was so for Sheffield it was embarrassing and irritating.
 


Jim Van Winkle

Well-known member
Jul 14, 2010
3,125
Hawaii
did we all watch the same coverage (stream)? If not this may help to explain why those operating VAR see things so differently.

The tone of the match had already been set by both teams and the referee - strong challenges were going in all afternoon (I loved it - reminded me of a Championship game). As I said in my previous post it was a 50/50 that both were wholeheartedly committed in. As for the pundits at the BBC maybe one is watching the entirety of the game and the other two are seeing a replay and don’t have knowledge of the tone of the game and how it is flowing.

*note: this thread needs a poll.
 


B-right-on

Living the dream
Apr 23, 2015
6,727
Shoreham Beaaaach
it's been a bad day for VAR, no, correction it's been a bad day for those idiots earning a fortune at Stockley Park in missing the obvious after numerous viewings. It's become a joke.

Now that VAR have admitted they got it wrong, surely Lo Celso can be given a 3 match retrospective ban? Lundstram too if they decide they've had an all-round cock-up day.

And the Bmuff game. That was ridiculous. Bmuff scored but was disallowed and a pen given to Burnley for a handball in the build up play and looked no more of a handball than the one we werent given. And then Bmuff were disallowed another goal for handball that hit their players shoulder.

A very bad day for VAR :shrug:
 




Swansman

Pro-peace
May 13, 2019
22,320
Sweden
Hi

Can anyone explain the point of VAR

Thanks

Main point is probably for some commercial heavy countries to have a quick break while the VAR thing is ongoing. Not really working in the PL since they refuse to use the monitor and everything goes pretty fast, but I'll cut a limb off if i.e. American TV wont use it as an opportunity for extra commercials in i.e. the next World Cup.

American TV companys have been trying to persuade FIFA to introduce timeouts or splitting games in three pieces for several decades and I could easily see VAR turning into something useful for them.
 


Sheebo

Well-known member
Jul 13, 2003
29,319
Gave up expecting anything from the offficials after their bloke jumped on the floor as if he’d been shot when Schelotto was a mile away from him and didn’t get booked. That was a red and surprised it wasn’t given.. then I remembered the game was away...
 


Uh_huh_him

Well-known member
Sep 28, 2011
12,132
Gave up expecting anything from the offficials after their bloke jumped on the floor as if he’d been shot when Schelotto was a mile away from him and didn’t get booked. That was a red and surprised it wasn’t given.. then I remembered the game was away...

We get less than that given against us, but rarely get them given for us.

It's the Brighton way.
 




Weststander

Well-known member
Aug 25, 2011
69,297
Withdean area
The tone of the match had already been set by both teams and the referee - strong challenges were going in all afternoon (I loved it - reminded me of a Championship game). As I said in my previous post it was a 50/50 that both were wholeheartedly committed in. As for the pundits at the BBC maybe one is watching the entirety of the game and the other two are seeing a replay and don’t have knowledge of the tone of the game and how it is flowing.

*note: this thread needs a poll.

The point of the Radio5 team is that Lundstram got there second, took the opponent and endangered his safety. Intent or bad luck doesn’t come into it. He was not in control when he impacted on Dunk.
 
Last edited:


beardy gull

Well-known member
Jul 18, 2003
4,125
Portslade
Thought it was a red but didn't think it was a penalty. Ball to arm rather than arm to ball. Not enough distance.
Ridiculously Lo Celso can't be given a retrospective ban because the incident was seen by the VAR referee.
 






Weststander

Well-known member
Aug 25, 2011
69,297
Withdean area
Thought it was a red but didn't think it was a penalty. Ball to arm rather than arm to ball. Not enough distance.
Ridiculously Lo Celso can't be given a retrospective ban because the incident was seen by the VAR referee.

Lo Celso didn’t receive a yellow for the incident.

Irrespective of VAR, I thought incidents of serious foul play could be examined the following week, if not card was given?

Edit - because VAR had looked it, Lo Celso gets away with it.

Pathetic.
 


Creaky

Well-known member
Mar 26, 2013
3,862
Hookwood - Nr Horley
I remember reading in threads about VAR, before it was introduced, that one reason not to introduce it was it would stop “arguments in the pub” about refereeing decisions.

Well you can throw that one in the bin. :clap:
 




Thunder Bolt

Silly old bat
The point of the Radio5 team is that Lundstram got there second, took the opponent and endangered his safety. Intent or bad luck doesn’t come into it. He was not in control when he impacted on Dunk.

That’s exactly what Garth Crooks & co said.
 




beardy gull

Well-known member
Jul 18, 2003
4,125
Portslade
Lo Celso didn’t receive a yellow for the incident.

Irrespective of VAR, I thought incidents of serious foul play could be examined the following week, if not card was given?

Edit - because VAR had looked it, Lo Celso gets away with it.

Pathetic.

Exactly. Totally absurd. No retrospective action possible as is reserved for incidents "not captured by the match officials or VAR"
 


Icy Gull

Back on the rollercoaster
Jul 5, 2003
72,015


Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here