(Riverside) Mike Dean

[Ernest]

And it won't be rescinded as we could then ask for a replay etc

 

[sir albion]

That was a perfectly good challenge and even a yellow would have been bloody harsh...pathetic refereeing that means we will miss a influential player for the playoffs and not to mention being down to 10 men in a massive game.

 

[Da Man Clay]

And it won't be rescinded as we could then ask for a replay etc

No we couldn't.

 

[clippedgull]

I see he has been given the last ever game at Upton Park on Tuesday v Man U

 

[Ernest]

No we couldn't.

With the money involved anything could happen and the FL wouldn't want to chance it

 

[Finchley Seagull]

I see he has been given the last ever game at Upton Park on Tuesday v Man U

Better advise no Man U players to tackle anyone, even if they clearly win the ball. Don't want them to miss the cup final.

 

[Sweeney Todd]

What I find laughable is that Ramirez had enough puff to bawl at Mike Dean, but, seconds later, was being stretchered off with an oxygen mask over his face, as if he had been gassed at the Somme. Then he got off the stretcher, Lazarus-like, and walked down the tunnel. Then, at the end of the game, he was cavorting around the pitch like a whirling dervish.

 

[Hampster Gull]

With the money involved anything could happen and the FL wouldn't want to chance it

They could always ask us to SING away any WRITES to this. Better to be RIGHT than LEFT

 

[Ernest]

They could always ask us to SING away any WRITES to this. Better to be RIGHT than LEFT

You TORIES know all about FRAUD

 

[symyjym]

Can anyone enlighten me as to why the referee would defer to his assistant when the referee was only four or five yards away?

Having come to terms with the decision I cannot understand Mike Dean's actions or thought processes at all. When you brandish a straight red you are ending a player's season with three crucial matches remaining.

It just seemed to be a series of incoherent reactions - picking the wrong card, doing nothing when it was knocked out of his hand then not picking it up, not waving the players away, calling on the linesmen for judgement when he was nowhere near the incident and not fit to make such a crucial call, then looking at the blood and showing a straight red. Totally bizarre bit of refereeing.

It was certainly this when we look at what happened. There was also the moment just before when Stephens was pissed off with one of their players for trying to win a free kick without being touched, and the ref had to chat to them both to calm them down. The two incidents were unrelated but it could have looked like a carry on, so add the nasty gash on top of it as a shock factor the ref got caught up in the moment.

I don't blame Mike Dean for making a mistake, but am disappointed that he did.

All this does is enforce the need for the off field officials to have the benefit of a replay and to relay the right decision to the ref. Until this happens there will always be incidents like this that will change games.

 

[B-right-on]

It was certainly this when we look at what happened. There was also the moment just before when Stephens was pissed off with one of their players for trying to win a free kick without being touched, and the ref had to chat to them both to calm them down. The two incidents were unrelated but it could have looked like a carry on, so add the nasty gash on top of it as a shock factor the ref got caught up in the moment.
.

That was Ramierez, same player. Dean probably thought that Stephens was going for a bit of 'afters' as they were going at each other a few times on the pitch and he had that word a min beforehand.

On the goal, Curbishley made a point that it should have been offside. Stuani was offisde when the ball was played, but he wasn't when he scored. However the fact that he was offiside gave him that extra half a yard over our defenders and made him first to the ball to tap it in. Therefore he was using his offisde position to gain an advantage = offside.

He also said it was a yellow card tackle, no way a red.

 

[symyjym]

That was Ramierez, same player. Dean probably thought that Stephens was going for a bit of 'afters' as they were going at each other a few times on the pitch and he had that word a min beforehand.

On the goal, Curbishley made a point that it should have been offside. Stuani was offisde when the ball was played, but he wasn't when he scored. However the fact that he was offiside gave him that extra half a yard over our defenders and made him first to the ball to tap it in. Therefore he was using his offisde position to gain an advantage = offside.

He also said it was a yellow card tackle, no way a red.

Yep, this offside thing is complex for officials and the use of replays when goals are scored would sort it out. There are also lots of onside goals not given over the season.

The live commentary were calling it a rash challenge and a definite red. Later it seems that most agree it probably wasn't even a yellow.

There is so much at stake in football these days it's about time that games are decided by football not controversial ref decisions.

 

[LANGDON SEAGULL]

Similar to the Calderon red card v Newport a couple of years ago. The broken leg was caused by the player tackling Calde, but Calde got sent off due to the nature of the injury


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[quizzicaleyebrow]

Personally, I think he's lying if he says the linesman told him to give the red card. As you say, why would you defer to someone further away when you are so close to an incident. It makes no sense. He saw the gash, reacted to Ramirez's actions and changed his mind and now won't admit it. Sad really.

Can anyone enlighten me as to why the referee would defer to his assistant when the referee was only four or five yards away?

Field of vision. If you're standing that close you can't necessarily see everything that's going on "in perspective". Also why linesmen quite often cock up offsides and line calls two yards in front of them.

 

[One Teddy Maybank]

Mike Dean

Field of vision. If you're standing that close you can't necessarily see everything that's going on "in perspective". Also why linesmen quite often cock up offsides and line calls two yards in front of them.

Yes good point, but in this case for me, a wider perspective offers no relevance. Bad decision, and Dean actually says 'look at his leg', which means he was influenced by the injury and not the tackle.

 

[Bozza]

Surprised to see that Jonathan Douglas, who plays for Ipswich, received no card at all for the challenge that left Derby's George Thorne with a double break.

It's almost as if the referee judged the challenge on merit rather than the resultant injury.

Either that or he didn't "Look at his leg, look at his leg, look at his leg."

 

[Hampster Gull]

You TORIES know all about FRAUD

Don't be an ARSEonist

 

[spence]

Surprised to see that Jonathan Douglas, who plays for Ipswich, received no card at all for the challenge that left Derby's George Thorne with a double break.

It's almost as if the referee judged the challenge on merit rather than the resultant injury.

Either that or he didn't "Look at his leg, look at his leg, look at his leg."

Thorne didn't knock the yellow card out of the refs hand

 

[Tarpon]

Similar to the Calderon red card v Newport a couple of years ago. The broken leg was caused by the player tackling Calde, but Calde got sent off due to the nature of the injury


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yep. Their bench went mental etc. Red card was rescinded I think. Won't happen here. Wagons will be circled.

 

[thedonkeycentrehalf]

The live commentary were calling it a rash challenge and a definite red. Later it seems that most agree it probably wasn't even a yellow.

Generally I find the Sky commentary of Championship games pretty fair to both sides but Don Goodman especially seemed to waving his red and white scarf yesterday and Bill Leslie was not his usual objective self. Those in the studio - even Wurzel - were much more balanced.