Author Topic: A MARRINER - Tottenham v Chelsea EFL  (Read 1074 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

TheThingFromLewes

  • RTR Veterans
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 2,198
    • View Profile
A MARRINER - Tottenham v Chelsea EFL
« on: Wed 12 Jan 2022 20:30 »
VAR correct to overrule the penalty call. I actually think Ledger on the far side said penalty as Marriner wouldn’t have been able to see it.

I am surprised however that Rudiger avoided any punishment for the foul.

It wasn’t DOGSO for a red, however definitely a yellow card should have been issued.
« Last Edit: Wed 12 Jan 2022 23:38 by TheThingFromLewes »

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter


TheThingFromLewes

  • RTR Veterans
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 2,198
    • View Profile
Re: A MARRINER - Tottenham v Chelsea
« Reply #1 on: Wed 12 Jan 2022 21:00 »
Definitely not a penalty when Moura was fouled by Kepa. VAR correct to override for the second time.

Irishref1985

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 298
    • View Profile
Re: A MARRINER - Tottenham v Chelsea
« Reply #2 on: Wed 12 Jan 2022 21:10 »
And VAR intervening for a third time to rule out a Harry Kane goal for offside.. 10/10 for Mike Dean and Mark Scholes so far.....

tef

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 10
  • Gender: Male
  • Location: Berks
    • View Profile
  • Referee Level: L5
Re: A MARRINER - Tottenham v Chelsea
« Reply #3 on: Wed 12 Jan 2022 21:12 »
Perfect example tonight of the benefits of VAR when it’s used well . Two penalty howlers and now the Spurs offside.
A bit of sympathy with Marriner for the first pen as AR2 clearly was the one who called it, but the second one was just poor.

bruntyboy

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 202
    • View Profile
Re: A MARRINER - Tottenham v Chelsea
« Reply #4 on: Wed 12 Jan 2022 21:39 »
Definitely not a penalty when Moura was fouled by Kepa. VAR correct to override for the second time.

I haven't seen the incident but if he was "fouled by Kepa" then why wouldn't it be a penalty? Or are you saying he wasn't fouled by Kepa?

TheThingFromLewes

  • RTR Veterans
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 2,198
    • View Profile
Re: A MARRINER - Tottenham v Chelsea
« Reply #5 on: Wed 12 Jan 2022 21:51 »
Definitely not a penalty when Moura was fouled by Kepa. VAR correct to override for the second time.

I haven't seen the incident but if he was "fouled by Kepa" then why wouldn't it be a penalty? Or are you saying he wasn't fouled by Kepa?

Well spotted. I should have written “tackled”.

dave26

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 347
    • View Profile
Re: A MARRINER - Tottenham v Chelsea
« Reply #6 on: Wed 12 Jan 2022 21:52 »
Definitely not a penalty when Moura was fouled by Kepa. VAR correct to override for the second time.

I haven't seen the incident but if he was "fouled by Kepa" then why wouldn't it be a penalty? Or are you saying he wasn't fouled by Kepa?

There definately wasn’t a foul by Kepa , he took the ball cleanly , Marriner would have been better to let play develop and send the penalty appeal to VAR

Readingfan

  • RTR Veterans
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1,770
    • View Profile
Re: A MARRINER - Tottenham v Chelsea
« Reply #7 on: Wed 12 Jan 2022 22:09 »
A good job there was VAR involved it seems - otherwise Tottenham might have scored 3 goals and levelled the tie!

Claretman

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 315
  • Gender: Male
  • Location: Nth lincs
    • View Profile
  • Referee Level: Retired local league
Re: A MARRINER - Tottenham v Chelsea
« Reply #8 on: Wed 12 Jan 2022 22:14 »
Not Andre’s best night tonight, pretty sure he went with Ledger for the first one.
Unusual for Andre to have given penalties and to have them over turned, it normally has to be stonewall for him to give one.
At least bmb will be pleased he was wearing black and not that ghastly unmentionable colour.

Well done to the card shark in var, hope is as good on sat late afternoon as i fear he may be needed.

Ref Watcher

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 382
    • View Profile
Re: A MARRINER - Tottenham v Chelsea
« Reply #9 on: Thu 13 Jan 2022 10:10 »
Definitely not a penalty when Moura was fouled by Kepa. VAR correct to override for the second time.

I haven't seen the incident but if he was "fouled by Kepa" then why wouldn't it be a penalty? Or are you saying he wasn't fouled by Kepa?

There definately wasn’t a foul by Kepa , he took the ball cleanly , Marriner would have been better to let play develop and send the penalty appeal to VAR
I know they allow play to develop for VAR to check later when there is an offside "just in case" but surely they are not supposed to do that when a foul is involved.  That seems like a recipe for all sorts of retribution to take place.

Ivanhoe

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 26
    • View Profile
Re: A MARRINER - Tottenham v Chelsea EFL
« Reply #10 on: Thu 13 Jan 2022 13:15 »
Marriner once again a very poor advert for english officials. I'd rather the less experienced referees on the way up get more opportunities than these older officials who should be retired and would have been not long ago.
Do we really need officials carrying on at the top level in their fifties ?

dave26

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 347
    • View Profile
Re: A MARRINER - Tottenham v Chelsea
« Reply #11 on: Thu 13 Jan 2022 13:25 »
Definitely not a penalty when Moura was fouled by Kepa. VAR correct to override for the second time.

I haven't seen the incident but if he was "fouled by Kepa" then why wouldn't it be a penalty? Or are you saying he wasn't fouled by Kepa?

There definately wasn’t a foul by Kepa , he took the ball cleanly , Marriner would have been better to let play develop and send the penalty appeal to VAR

I know they allow play to develop for VAR to check later when there is an offside "just in case" but surely they are not supposed to do that when a foul is involved.  That seems like a recipe for all sorts of retribution to take place.
But there wasn’t a foul the fact Kepa took the ball cleanly backs that up and one can only assume that Marriner guessed or was too quick with the whistle , No way Marriner could be 100% sure it was a penalty
There definately wasn’t a foul by Kepa , he took the ball cleanly , Marriner would have been better to let play develop and send the penalty appeal to VAR

(edited to fix quote-hertsref)
« Last Edit: Thu 13 Jan 2022 13:45 by Hertsref123 »

Ref Watcher

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 382
    • View Profile
Re: A MARRINER - Tottenham v Chelsea
« Reply #12 on: Thu 13 Jan 2022 13:49 »
Definitely not a penalty when Moura was fouled by Kepa. VAR correct to override for the second time.

I haven't seen the incident but if he was "fouled by Kepa" then why wouldn't it be a penalty? Or are you saying he wasn't fouled by Kepa?

I know they allow play to develop for VAR to check later when there is an offside "just in case" but surely they are not supposed to do that when a foul is involved.  That seems like a recipe for all sorts of retribution to take place.

But there wasn’t a foul the fact Kepa took the ball cleanly backs that up and one can only assume that Marriner guessed or was too quick with the whistle , No way Marriner could be 100% sure it was a penalty
There definately wasn’t a foul by Kepa , he took the ball cleanly , Marriner would have been better to let play develop and send the penalty appeal to VAR

(edited to fix quote-hertsref)
Whether there was a foul or not in this instance rather misses the point.  Andre Marriner thought there was a foul.  You are suggesting that despite that he should allow play to continue and let VAR decide.  My argument is that in general encouraging referees to play on despite a foul being committed (in their view) is dangerous.
Agree Agree x 2 View List

Claretman

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 315
  • Gender: Male
  • Location: Nth lincs
    • View Profile
  • Referee Level: Retired local league
Re: A MARRINER - Tottenham v Chelsea
« Reply #13 on: Thu 13 Jan 2022 14:02 »
Definitely not a penalty when Moura was fouled by Kepa. VAR correct to override for the second time.

I haven't seen the incident but if he was "fouled by Kepa" then why wouldn't it be a penalty? Or are you saying he wasn't fouled by Kepa?

There definately wasn’t a foul by Kepa , he took the ball cleanly , Marriner would have been better to let play develop and send the penalty appeal to VAR

I know they allow play to develop for VAR to check later when there is an offside "just in case" but surely they are not supposed to do that when a foul is involved.  That seems like a recipe for all sorts of retribution to take place.
But there wasn’t a foul the fact Kepa took the ball cleanly backs that up and one can only assume that Marriner guessed or was too quick with the whistle , No way Marriner could be 100% sure it was a penalty
There definately wasn’t a foul by Kepa , he took the ball cleanly , Marriner would have been better to let play develop and send the penalty appeal to VAR

(edited to fix quote-hertsref)
I am sure that Andre from his position was 100 pct sure there was a foul otherwise he wouldnt have given a penalty kick, the fact that other camera angles available to the var proved there wasnt a foul is exactly what var is there for to prevent a clear and obvious error. If Andre wasnt 100 pct sure he would not have give the penalty kick. Everyone makes mistakes or errors of judgement.

rustyref

  • RTR Veterans
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 753
    • View Profile
Re: A MARRINER - Tottenham v Chelsea EFL
« Reply #14 on: Thu 13 Jan 2022 15:39 »
Given where they happened it is entirely possible the AR had involvement in both the penalty that was turned into a free kick and the one that was overturned.  Certainly I'd be wanting help from my assistant there as to whether it was inside or outside.

This game demonstrated perfectly what benefit VAR can bring when it is used correctly.  Two mistakes, both very clear and obvious, and they are correctly rectified.