|
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - Seagull
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 37
1
« on: Tue 27 Jan 2026 16:00 »
Flawless from Oliver. He glides through games with such calmness, whilst clearly having the respect of the players. To be fair, this was a very easy game to officiate, two teams who wanted to play football the right way, with no major flashpoints, but that shouldn’t detract from how brilliant Oliver was. For me, he’s head and shoulders clear as the best referee in SG1 and probably Europe.
As for the game, don’t think we have any Brighton correspondents on here, but if there is, sincere apologies. That was the biggest robbery since Brinks Mat!
I always assumed Seagull was a Brighton correspondent on this Forum but I may well be mistaken.
Here I am! My only comment is I wish Danny Welbeck had had shorter arms. Great winning goal for Fulham to be fair. Back to my chips!
2
« on: Wed 31 Dec 2025 13:36 »
If so many players etc. were involved, perhaps Mr. Russell has just submitted an incident report to the F.A. for investigation. Just because no yellow or red cards were shown doesn't necessarily mean he hasn't taken action.
3
« on: Mon 29 Dec 2025 13:56 »
I am sure it is to do with keeping the game moving as far as possible, and not penalising things like foul throws unless it is plainly bl**dy obvious or a goal results, as with offside. I have no problem at all with that, indeed I applaud anything which keeps the game going. I am sure if a goal results, the comms system will quickly get to work and the goal will be scrubbed out, either via VAR or direct between referee and appropriate AR.
I agree in principle with your sentiment about keeping the game moving but at the end of the day, a foul throw is a foul throw and should be penalised accordingly, in my opinion. I don't think Referees and ARs should pick and choose which laws to enforce.
4
« on: Mon 29 Dec 2025 13:34 »
I watched the whole game between Crystal Palace and Tottenham yesterday and saw several instances of long throws taken by attackers in their opponent's half being foul throws (feet placement), none of which were detected or penalised. Two questions arise in my mind.
1. Why are ARs evidently not watching for foul throws and raising their flag? Is it down to Referee instructions before the game or "game management" by PGMOL perhaps ("ignore them unless a goal is scored")? One foul long throw by a Palace player was so glaringly obvious with the player's front foot entirely on the pitch, I can't see how it was missed.
2. Luckily, a goal did not result from any of the throws but had that happened, is it within VAR's remit to check the legality of a throw immediately prior to a goal being scored?
When you say feet placement, do you just mean where feet are past the touchline, or do you also mean feet leaving the ground? If the former, and the Palace throw-in you highlight was the only one where the entire foot was past the touchline, then that would have been the only 'foul' throw missed!
As for the second question, I believe it should be within VAR's remit, as it would be an offence by the attacking team in the build-up to the goal.
In each case, the leading foot had no part on the touchline or on the ground outside it. I hope VAR check long throws immediately before a goal. Thanks for your thoughts.
5
« on: Mon 29 Dec 2025 12:00 »
I watched the whole game between Crystal Palace and Tottenham yesterday and saw several instances of long throws taken by attackers in their opponent's half being foul throws (feet placement), none of which were detected or penalised. Two questions arise in my mind.
1. Why are ARs evidently not watching for foul throws and raising their flag? Is it down to Referee instructions before the game or "game management" by PGMOL perhaps ("ignore them unless a goal is scored")? One foul long throw by a Palace player was so glaringly obvious with the player's front foot entirely on the pitch, I can't see how it was missed.
2. Luckily, a goal did not result from any of the throws but had that happened, is it within VAR's remit to check the legality of a throw immediately prior to a goal being scored?
6
« on: Wed 24 Dec 2025 13:28 »
Merry Christmas & Happy New Year to everybody. Hope you have a great time.  I echo the thanks to those who post the appointments each week. It's appreciated very much. 
7
« on: Wed 10 Dec 2025 13:29 »
I agree with the last two posters.
I believe the only way you could get a yellow card for DOGSO is if the defender made a deliberate play for the ball, inside the penalty box resulting in a penalty kick.
DOGSO outside the penalty area would be a red card.
A red card can still be awarded for DOGSO in the penalty area if there’s clearly no deliberate action to play the ball.
Also, a quick word to AR Conor Brown as well for correctly flagging Mason-Clark offside after he and Toner communicated to say a cross was deflected into his path (not deliberate play by the defender)
You're right. Should be a DOGSO red card either way. Confusion and old age on my part.  Do you agree with bringing it back for the free kick award or would a penalty kick have been better punishment, given the DOGSO red card either way?
8
« on: Wed 10 Dec 2025 13:26 »
Having seen the highlights of this match late yesterday evening, I was intrigued by the sending off of a PNE defender just before half time. For those who didn't see it, the scenario was a Coventry forward through on goal being chased closely by the defender who deliberately pulled the attacker back by his shirt just outside the penalty area. The forward managed to make further progress into the penalty area, despite still being pulled back and manhandled. Inside the penalty area, he then falls to the ground.
My question is this. Was Mr. Toner right to bring play back, award a free kick just outside the penalty area and issue a DOGSO red card (which is what he did), or could he/should he have awarded a penalty kick and issued a yellow card (there being no attempt by the defender to play the ball)? I would say both decisions are supportable but which, if either, is the more correct and in line with LOTG or any protocols/interpretations?
Surely if no attempt to play the ball it's red anyway?
You're right. Of course, it should be a DOGSO red either way. Confusion and old age on my part.
9
« on: Wed 10 Dec 2025 12:40 »
Having seen the highlights of this match late yesterday evening, I was intrigued by the sending off of a PNE defender just before half time. For those who didn't see it, the scenario was a Coventry forward through on goal being chased closely by the defender who deliberately pulled the attacker back by his shirt just outside the penalty area. The forward managed to make further progress into the penalty area, despite still being pulled back and manhandled. Inside the penalty area, he then falls to the ground.
My question is this. Was Mr. Toner right to bring play back, award a free kick just outside the penalty area and issue a DOGSO red card (which is what he did), or could he/should he have awarded a penalty kick and issued a yellow card (there being no attempt by the defender to play the ball)? I would say both decisions are supportable but which, if either, is the more correct and in line with LOTG or any protocols/interpretations?
10
« on: Mon 27 Oct 2025 15:08 »
Just a little topic to start the week off
Do we think referee announcements are helping in game fan experience to understand VAR processes and decisions a lot more?
In my opinion, I think it really does have its benefits in some situations. The incident yesterday in the Everton v Spurs game was a good one to be explained to the crowd, in terms of subjective offside (not that the Everton faithful decided to listen to Pawson that much). The penalty ‘on the line’ in the Brentford v Liverpool game as well is another type of incident that should be explained to the crowd.
So I think this is working at the moment and is a benefit for fans in the league. How would you rate it so far?
Also, who have we not heard from yet in terms of speaking to the crowd? I can think of Bramall, Harrington, Tierney (obviously through injury), Madley, Bankes and Salisbury
Of the few games I've been watching on TV when the situation has occurred, I have to be honest and say I haven't picked up what the Referee actually says, what with the commentator and/or his companion babbling on over the top of what's being said plus crowd noise etc. Maybe the spectators in the ground hear it better?
11
« on: Mon 27 Oct 2025 15:03 »
This is the 1st time I have sat down and watched live the new format with Jay Bothroyd and Co, I've never watched a greater load of rubbish in my life. If I was Dermot I'd tell SKY to do one and leave them because Bothroyd has to be the most clueless pundit I've ever heard from. He doesn't take anything on board that Dermot says and seems to just want to argue with whatever he says. I had to turn off after half an hour as it was so painful!
I'd make a list of the issues I had with what was discussed, but I'd literally be here for most of the morning.
I’ve never really been bothered to watch this segment live although I have seen clips of this from last season with Stephen Warnock and Sue Smith which I thought was sometimes pretty decent. For those who did watch this last season, is it better or worse now?
I watched it regularly last season. However, after a few early episodes featuring Jay Boothroyd, I gave up and I don't watch it anymore. I agree that he's clueless (and I'd add ignorant) as a so-called pundit. I hoped so much that Steve Warnock was just on holiday and Jay Boothroyd was a temporary substitute. However, when it became apparent that he was a replacement, I stopped watching it.
12
« on: Thu 23 Oct 2025 15:32 »
I saw the game and unfortunately, the incident in question was a clear penalty kick. In mitigation, he may have been thrown by the fact that the contact was inside the area but the ball was outside. What did surprise me was that he didn't even award a free kick. He had a clear and unobstructed view of the incident too. Just shows that like the rest of us, he's human.
Overall, it wasn't one of his best performances with poor foul detection (e.g. a player stumbled and was awarded a free kick!😃) and occasional poor positioning, getting too close and in the way of play which resulted in being knocked over once.
13
« on: Tue 16 Sep 2025 16:48 »
In the specific case in the Bromley v. Gillingham game, what prompted the panel to look at the incident? Does the panel review every penalty kick award in every game or did Bromley lodge a complaint?
The panel indeed does look at every penalty kick awarded and also not awarded, it's the observer in the stand who makes a note of the Key Match Incidents/Decisions before confirming these with the match official team on the day in the debrief.
As this specific simulation incident led to a penalty being awarded AND a goal being scored the FA deemed serious retrospective action needed, I would hazard a guess that the punishment if the penalty was saved/match result is not altered, it's one game instead.
The panel will also look at KMIs/KMD's where goals are awarded/not awarded (potential fouls/offsides), Direct red cards issued/not issued, Second yellow cards issued/not issued and there may be others on the list for them to review.
Whether the goal was ultimately scored from the penalty is irrelevant. What matters is that the player successfully deceived the match official, leading to a penalty being awarded. Under the rules, this results in a two-match suspension. In contrast, if the deception had been recognised during the game, the offence of simulation would only have attracted a yellow card. Whether the additional sanction was worth the initial gain can only be judged by the player and Gillingham. Either way, Bromley will feel aggrieved.
Thank you for the additional information. A player involved in an act of simulation is certainly taking a risk. Caution if detected, 2 match suspension if penalty kick awarded.
14
« on: Tue 16 Sep 2025 16:42 »
In the specific case in the Bromley v. Gillingham game, what prompted the panel to look at the incident? Does the panel review every penalty kick award in every game or did Bromley lodge a complaint?
The panel indeed does look at every penalty kick awarded and also not awarded, it's the observer in the stand who makes a note of the Key Match Incidents/Decisions before confirming these with the match official team on the day in the debrief.
As this specific simulation incident led to a penalty being awarded AND a goal being scored the FA deemed serious retrospective action needed, I would hazard a guess that the punishment if the penalty was saved/match result is not altered, it's one game instead.
The panel will also look at KMIs/KMD's where goals are awarded/not awarded (potential fouls/offsides), Direct red cards issued/not issued, Second yellow cards issued/not issued and there may be others on the list for them to review.
Thank you for the information. The panel must be kept very busy!
15
« on: Sat 13 Sep 2025 08:12 »
In the specific case in the Bromley v. Gillingham game, what prompted the panel to look at the incident? Does the panel review every penalty kick award in every game or did Bromley lodge a complaint?
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 37
|
Home
Search
Contact
Login
Register
Show Posts