Author Topic: Merseyside Derby (Read 3919 times)

LateTackle · « **Reply #105 on:** Wed 21 Oct 2020 11:47 »

Quote from: Scally Bob on Tue 20 Oct 2020 19:21

David Coote has been relieved of his duties for a spell according to media reports. If that’s true I don’t know why he was officiating last night.

The contradictions go on: if he made an error then surely Pickford should be retrospectively punished? If he didn’t make an error why is he being suspended? The pathetic statements from PGMOL have covered every outcome: he saw it, he didn’t see it, he didn’t know he could get involved for VC/SFP, he didn’t think it was VC/SFP etc. etc.

The “leadership” is appalling.

You are correct, the whole thing is becoming a bigger farce by the day. Even if the referee can persuade us all that he didn't see the challenge clearly (and I don't really buy that), surely the whole point of VAR is to help him out in reaching the correct decision. Simple as that, really, but VAR is fast becoming an exercise in backside-covering.

PGMOL solution when stuck in a hole: Issue bigger shovels!

QuoCob · « **Reply #106 on:** Wed 21 Oct 2020 14:46 »

Quote from: Readingfan on Tue 20 Oct 2020 21:01

Quote from: Scally Bob on Tue 20 Oct 2020 19:21
David Coote has been relieved of his duties for a spell according to media reports. If that’s true I don’t know why he was officiating last night.

The contradictions go on: if he made an error then surely Pickford should be retrospectively punished? If he didn’t make an error why is he being suspended? The pathetic statements from PGMOL have covered every outcome: he saw it, he didn’t see it, he didn’t know he could get involved for VC/SFP, he didn’t think it was VC/SFP etc. etc.

The “leadership” is appalling.

I've not seen anything suggesting he's been suspended, unless you've seen different?

The media have reported this week's appointments, where Coote obviously doesn't have a PL middle or VAR - he's due to be Fourth Official at a PL match on Saturday and then refereeing a Championship match on Tuesday.

It was said on Talksport this morning but not backed up by any evidence aside from the "it has been reported" ...

Whistleblower · « **Reply #107 on:** Wed 21 Oct 2020 21:11 »

I saw Coote live twice on his way up the ranks and he was totally underwhelming each time. For some reason he was singled out for rapid promotion. Couldn't understand it then and can't understand it now. A very average performer to my way of thinking. I think his favoured status isn't solely based on his officiating skills.

LateTackle · « **Reply #108 on:** Thu 22 Oct 2020 00:56 »

Quote from: Whistleblower on Wed 21 Oct 2020 21:11

I saw Coote live twice on his way up the ranks and he was totally underwhelming each time. For some reason he was singled out for rapid promotion. Couldn't understand it then and can't understand it now. A very average performer to my way of thinking. I think his favoured status isn't solely based on his officiating skills.

Hardly a first in refereeing circles then!

Scally Bob · « **Reply #109 on:** Sat 24 Oct 2020 16:15 »

Quote from: Microscopist on Wed 21 Oct 2020 11:17

Quote
Take the trouble to look at the video linked if you haven't already done so. I suggested his view could be partially obscured.
Surely, if a referee does not have a clear view of an incident and then sees the aftermath he would, in the course of being told of the offside call, ask whether the challenge had been checked for a possible red card? Of course without the conversation being broadcast we have no idea whether that happened or not.

I'm not fully conversant with all the VAR protocols but it does say:

The referee must always make a decision, i.e. the referee is not permitted to
give ‘no decision’ and then use the VAR to make the decision; a decision to
allow play to continue after an alleged offence can be reviewed.

I suspect Riley and his merry men would manipulate this to say Oliver wasn't allowed to ask to see something he didn't see properly, or something like that. They've already tried to tie everyone in knots attempting to justify Pickford going unpunished so I'm surprised they haven't chucked this in for good measure.

Microscopist · « **Reply #110 on:** Sat 24 Oct 2020 16:33 »

Quote from: Scally Bob on Sat 24 Oct 2020 16:15

Quote from: Microscopist on Wed 21 Oct 2020 11:17
Quote
Take the trouble to look at the video linked if you haven't already done so. I suggested his view could be partially obscured.
Surely, if a referee does not have a clear view of an incident and then sees the aftermath he would, in the course of being told of the offside call, ask whether the challenge had been checked for a possible red card? Of course without the conversation being broadcast we have no idea whether that happened or not.
I'm not fully conversant with all the VAR protocols but it does say:

The referee must always make a decision, i.e. the referee is not permitted to
give ‘no decision’ and then use the VAR to make the decision; a decision to
allow play to continue after an alleged offence can be reviewed.

I suspect Riley and his merry men would manipulate this to say Oliver wasn't allowed to ask to see something he didn't see properly, or something like that. They've already tried to tie everyone in knots attempting to justify Pickford going unpunished so I'm surprised they haven't chucked this in for good measure.

So the referee says "That looked OK from my viewpoint (that's the original decision) but my view was obscured so have you checked for a possible red card?"

LateTackle · « **Reply #111 on:** Sun 25 Oct 2020 18:18 »

Quote from: Microscopist on Sat 24 Oct 2020 16:33

Quote from: Scally Bob on Sat 24 Oct 2020 16:15
Quote from: Microscopist on Wed 21 Oct 2020 11:17
Quote
Take the trouble to look at the video linked if you haven't already done so. I suggested his view could be partially obscured.
Surely, if a referee does not have a clear view of an incident and then sees the aftermath he would, in the course of being told of the offside call, ask whether the challenge had been checked for a possible red card? Of course without the conversation being broadcast we have no idea whether that happened or not.
I'm not fully conversant with all the VAR protocols but it does say:

The referee must always make a decision, i.e. the referee is not permitted to
give ‘no decision’ and then use the VAR to make the decision; a decision to
allow play to continue after an alleged offence can be reviewed.

I suspect Riley and his merry men would manipulate this to say Oliver wasn't allowed to ask to see something he didn't see properly, or something like that. They've already tried to tie everyone in knots attempting to justify Pickford going unpunished so I'm surprised they haven't chucked this in for good measure.
So the referee says "That looked OK from my viewpoint (that's the original decision) but my view was obscured so have you checked for a possible red card?"

Alternatively, he could miss out VAR completely. Just whip his phone out of his pocket and check it on Twitter.

RateTheRef

News:

User

Stats ezBlock

Author Topic: Merseyside Derby (Read 3919 times)

LateTackle

Re: Merseyside Derby

QuoCob

Re: Merseyside Derby

Whistleblower

Re: Merseyside Derby

LateTackle

Re: Merseyside Derby

Scally Bob

Re: Merseyside Derby

Microscopist

Re: Merseyside Derby

LateTackle

Re: Merseyside Derby