1
General Discussion / Re: Sheffield Utd v Ipswich Town - Tom Nield
« on: Sun 25 Jan 2026 13:26 »Forgot to comment back on this after the game yesterday. Overall, I thought Tom Nield done more than ok in what was a difficult game to referee at times. Temperatures were frayed at some points (not through Tom Nield’s officiating) but it felt a couple of times he struggled to show a bit of authority. Especially at half time when there seemed to be a bit of confrontation between the players and then he seemed to chase after them as they went down the tunnel. But as I said, the player behaviour was not down to Tom Nield’s officiating.
Onto the actual game and incidents themselves, I didn’t really like the level of physicality that Tom let go at times but he was consistent with that so I can’t really argue. There were times where I didn’t feel like players could be strong in aerial challenges because they were given as fouls. Also, was very keen on trying to play advantage and he did play some excellent ones at that.
First incident was the potential Ipswich penalty for sustained holding as mentioned in an earlier post. I wasn’t certain but the sky sports pundits and Mike Dean were adamant it was a penalty.
Next was what ignited the spark between the two sides, Sheffield United’s first goal. As O’Hare rolled the ball past Walton in the Ipswich goal, Tom Nield did signal some form of advantage so I don’t know if he was taken out after the ball was played but also Christian Walton did raise his leg, I believe in an attempt to save that ball, which I believe unintentionally hit O’Hare in the face. I think Chris Wilder and many Sheffield United players were upset by this but I thought it was just a natural coming together which sometimes happens in football. Walton was booked in the aftermath.
Then Ipswich penalty for handball - good decision, clearly struck a raised Sheffield United defender’s arm so correct outcome.
And finally, Bamford’s second yellow for simulation. Cameras didn’t particularly show a great angle for this but it did look like he dived so well done to Tom Nield for correctly identifying simulation and penalising it appropriately. If I’m being honest, I had no idea what Bamford’s first yellow card was for. Only looked like a small foul but doesn’t excuse diving on a yellow card so he can have no complaints.
So overall, Tom Nield can be happy with his performance in a difficult and ill tempered game that had its moments.
The first caution looked like dissent by action (correctly) - for kicking the advertising boards angrily when the free-kick was awarded.
