[Albion] Reviewing Red Card Decision

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

"Is there a reason I should award the goal*?"

Versus...

"Is there I reason I should not award the goal*?"


...are the only things that should come from the referee. Yes/No from VAR plus the reason if required.

(*penalty/card/whatever)

Did you watch the Everton game? Ball* came off Everton shoulder on to Spurs hand in Spurs box. It should have taken VAR about ten seconds to rule 'play on'.

The only reason I can think of for the 4 minute delay is that the 'refereeing team' don't know the rules, or that the rules are not clear. I personally can't see how a ball deflected to a hand a yard away can be 'handball', but I don't know how the rules are worded, and suspect they are ambiguous.

I have a meeting next week to discuss what constitutes plagiarism, how we judge it, who identifies it, who makes the final decision, and what the penalties should be. Our 22 page guidance document is.....unclear. And we are university academics. Our solution cannot be to disregard plagiarism, and we have our own version of VAR called 'turnitin'. The meting will be....interesting.

The ball, not Alan Ball, obviously.

 

[Bry Nylon]

I have a meeting next week to discuss what constitutes plagiarism, how we judge it, who identifies it, who makes the final decision, and what the penalties should be. Our 22 page guidance document is.....unclear.

If it helps, I've got one you can copy.

 

[Winker]

Did you watch the Everton game? Ball* came off Everton shoulder on to Spurs hand in Spurs box. It should have taken VAR about ten seconds to rule 'play on'.

The only reason I can think of for the 4 minute delay is that the 'refereeing team' don't know the rules, or that the rules are not clear. I personally can't see how a ball deflected to a hand a yard away can be 'handball', but I don't know how the rules are worded, and suspect they are ambiguous.

I have a meeting next week to discuss what constitutes plagiarism, how we judge it, who identifies it, who makes the final decision, and what the penalties should be. Our 22 page guidance document is.....unclear. And we are university academics. Our solution cannot be to disregard plagiarism, and we have our own version of VAR called 'turnitin'. The meting will be....interesting.

The ball, not Alan Ball, obviously.

As I understand it, if you copy the work of one person it is called plagiarism, if you copy the work of several, it is called research.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

As I understand it, if you copy the work of one person it is called plagiarism, if you copy the work of several, it is called research.

I'm going to bloody well quote that when I have my meeting.

 

[Winker]

I'm going to bloody well quote that when I have my meeting.

As long as you attribute it to me

 

[Guinness Boy]

I understood the VAR interjection was for Maupay kicking the player on the goal line, not the high foot. He took a swing at the loose ball, missed and kicked the defender in the shin.

Indeed. Which was an obvious red to BT Sport, not even shown on Match of the Day, obviously the incident but not a red according to [MENTION=15363]Plooks[/MENTION] and not visible from the North Stand or WSU.

Turns out the on field ref's decision was spot on

 

[Guinness Boy]

Bullshit. You could see it in wsu. Unless you are one of the old fogies who complained about the shirt numbers on stripes and have RUINED our shirts now.

You do know that the WSU runs for the whole length of the touchline and literally back from row A to Z in the middle? Are you suggesting the view was the same for every seat?

 

[pocketseagull]

Bullshit. You could see it in wsu. Unless you are one of the old fogies who complained about the shirt numbers on stripes and have RUINED our shirts now.

I'm in WSU, have a good set of eyes and still had no idea what was happening, same as the people around me.

 

[perseus]

I understood the VAR interjection was for Maupay kicking the player on the goal line, not the high foot. He took a swing at the loose ball, missed and kicked the defender in the shin.

Luckily it wasn't.

 

[perseus]

Maupay’s challenge looked bad in slow motion but nothing more than a yellow real-time. Glad he didn’t go as it was micro-management again.

Taking of which, in the chance that led to Trossard’s goal, someone stood on their player’s foot (Tettey I think). He went down but no free-kick given. Showing 2 things .. a) it hurts and Connolly wasn’t play-acting/cheating last week as a lot of the press kept claiming and b) he was also dead lucky to get a penalty for it. Seems some referees are now scrutinising incidents to a ridiculous extent and other are more sensible. Let’s hope the latter group prevail for the sake of the sport.

Alonso did not get away with kicking Dan James either. A sly kick or push at a striker is common enough, some players more than others.

 

[Saunders]

Did you watch the Everton game? Ball* came off Everton shoulder on to Spurs hand in Spurs box. It should have taken VAR about ten seconds to rule 'play on'.

The only reason I can think of for the 4 minute delay is that the 'refereeing team' don't know the rules, or that the rules are not clear. I personally can't see how a ball deflected to a hand a yard away can be 'handball', but I don't know how the rules are worded, and suspect they are ambiguous.

I have a meeting next week to discuss what constitutes plagiarism, how we judge it, who identifies it, who makes the final decision, and what the penalties should be. Our 22 page guidance document is.....unclear. And we are university academics. Our solution cannot be to disregard plagiarism, and we have our own version of VAR called 'turnitin'. The meting will be....interesting.

The ball, not Alan Ball, obviously.

I think you are wrong here. I feel they were reviewing if it was a foul on Alli which would override any handball. I think the decision was that he was climbed on and an arm in his face. That would take more looking into and why they took so long. Of course we arent privvy to thier private conversations so we dont qualify to know. This is why we need to be told the how, the why and the where of a VAR decision.

 

[clapham_gull]

Exactly what I thought after seeing replay on MOTD,his foot did look high but no contact.

MOTD played the wrong clip.

 

[Captain Sensible]

It was for Maupay hack of the ball on the goal line. No way a red. VAR reviewed and correctly decided no red. It wasn’t even a foul. They HAVE to start showing the clips on the big screen and announcing what the check is for.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

You do know that the WSU runs for the whole length of the touchline and literally back from row A to Z in the middle? Are you suggesting the view was the same for every seat?

Not sure why you're bothering with him .... his disdain for anyone older than him is well known !

 

[nickjhs]

we all know var is to please the tv viewers and screw the fans at the ground.

Utter bollocks, I can only watch it on the TV, I dont like the way it interferes with the game either, but dislike obvious mistakes made by the ref even more. Sure not everyone at the ground has a clear view of the action all the time, but at all times a certain percentage do have good views depending on where the incident occurred, so according to your point of view VAR is only for the TV fans (oh sorry Viewers, according to you we dont qualify as fans) and the folk at the ground who could see the incident. I do agree VAR needs to be more transparent.

 

[stss30]

The only thing I have concluded from this thread is that Plooks has 20/20 vision and has never missed an incident whilst watching live football.

 

[beorhthelm]

I think you are wrong here. I feel they were reviewing if it was a foul on Alli which would override any handball. I think the decision was that he was climbed on and an arm in his face. That would take more looking into and why they took so long. Of course we arent privvy to thier private conversations so we dont qualify to know. This is why we need to be told the how, the why and the where of a VAR decision.

that still shouldnt need such a long review from an experienced, professional referee. its an obvious push (which dozens occur and ignored), obvious handball (under new ridiculous interpretation). a decision shouldnt be taking more than 30sec, if it does they should just defer back to what ever the ref thinks and continue. trying to get every damn decision "right" is ruining the game, and they still arent always getting it "right", so its an utter fail.

 

[Guinness Boy]

Not sure why you're bothering with him .... his disdain for anyone older than him is well known !

I thought it was anyone not on their third retake of GCSE Sociology, but good point nonetheless.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Guinness Boy]

Well you ate both probably right. Although I would wager it has more to do with the people who sit there. The amount of times people would moan at Greer for giving the ball away when it was not him was maddening. So I suppose if some people can't identify a whole person they won't notice a foot.

“People who sit there”?

So, not only do you think the view is the same in every seat in the stand but you also think the same person is sitting in each seat

And you think you are *not* prejudiced.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Bold Seagull]

It was for Maupay hack of the ball on the goal line. No way a red. VAR reviewed and correctly decided no red. It wasn’t even a foul. They HAVE to start showing the clips on the big screen and announcing what the check is for.

Even replays on the big screen wouldn't have shown what was being checked from that scramble.