RateTheRef

Quote from: Leggy on Sun 19 Mar 2023 19:29

First point to make is that I am very pleased that CK dealt with the Fulham manager and captain according to Law.  I sincerely hope that the proverbial book is thrown at both and that long bans follow - along with a clear message that the same will follow for anyone else taking the came course of action.

My second point (and I suspect that this is going to be less well received) is that, like a couple of other correspondents on this forum, I believe that the correct decision should have been given in real time by CK.  And, whilst I have no way of proving it, had this happened the subsequent furore would not have happened.

To illustrate, imagine that this is an FA Cup tie from a few years ago and one of England's top referees has to use his skill, nous and experience to correctly make the big calls.  On seeing what transpired, he whistles, awards a penalty and quickly shows the red card to the offender.  There will be protests, but nothing of this magnitude.

Fast forward to today, I believe that CK has a good clear view of the incident but is not 100% certain (when is anyone 100% certain??).  He knows he has the VAR "safety net" so gives nothing.  He could have given the penalty / red card and he would still have had the same safety net, but I have long believed that VAR is emaciating our top referees and many are too timid to make the big calls, relying on VAR to do that for them.

None of the above is anything close to an excuse for the subsequent behaviour, but our top referees have got where they are today without VAR and VAR is changing the way they officiate, and not for the better.

The reality doesn't back up that view though.  For all he had an excellent game, the fact that VAR corrected the penalty decision means he will be given a 7.9 for an incorrect key match decision.  No referee is going to willingly / knowingly not make a big call because they know they can reply on VAR, as they know a 7.9 will be forthcoming if they do.

It took me several replays to be sure it was intentional handling, and it was really the angle from behind the goal that made my mind up.  Chris Kavanagh got one view, from the worst possible angle, and was looking through much of Willian's torso, there is no way he could be 100% sure from the view he had.

Fair enough, for what it is worth, my first instinct was that it was handball.  My view was the live TV angle which was different from CKs, which might make your point.  I still firmly believe that - pre-VAR - he would have awarded the penalty - the contact looked all wrong.  We can agree to disagree.

What is emerging is that the Fulham management team had already pre-judged CK, entering the game with an "agenda" ("Our story with CK this season has been tough for us") going back to a game in October.  If a referee went to a club with such an agenda there would be a furore. 

Silva also demonstrated a degree of stupidly by adding (about his own red card):  "I am not going to lie. I didn't say he was a really nice guy and the decision was fair. But he didn't hear me."  Even if this is true (which I doubt) does that make it OK to abuse a referee if they cannot hear it?