|
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 - Mr. Owens
Pages: [1]
1
« on: Thu 26 Oct 2023 16:09 »
Just because I've seen it mentioned twice here, advantage is not awarded "to let the game flow," it is awarded so as not to penalize the team who have been fouled. Flow of the game is not a consideration for advantage.
2
« on: Thu 26 Oct 2023 16:05 »
It as the penalty was missed not a game changer
The award of a penalty kick is always going to be a Key Match Incident. I suspect that Mr. Woods will not have received a high score on this match, regardless of how he performed throughout the other 89:50.
3
« on: Mon 23 Oct 2023 13:27 »
I used to not rate Clement Turpin, but I think I was wrong. The last number of years, he has been consistent, quiet, and mostly correct. Probably the first French referee in a long time that I can recall who is really deserving of his standing at UEFA.
4
« on: Mon 23 Oct 2023 13:24 »
I love things like this because they help us to grasp how referees at the very top manage players. There's a definite sense of firmness, but always politeness and, crucially, empathy. I love it.
5
« on: Tue 10 Oct 2023 15:03 »
Dissent which is public, provocative, and personal should be punished by a yellow card. If a player is yelling from 20 yards, then it is definitely public. If a player swears, then it is definitely provocative. If a player is yelling at the referee, then it is definitely personal. How is that not a cautionable offense?
6
« on: Fri 29 Sep 2023 12:22 »
For me this is a good decision by the VAR and the reason we have it. Gillett made a good call with what he saw and at the speed of the incident. VAR has the time and ability to have a second look and that sets the review in motion. Once it is reviewed and the considerations are applied- it is a red card.
I would like to think that the marking system does not mark Gillett down for this as it's not a howler, took at least 3 views before the lay man goes Red Card.
To be fair, issuing the caution was either an error or it wasn't. So Gillett will have to be marked as having gotten a KMI wrong.
7
« on: Thu 28 Sep 2023 17:42 »
 "No, your Royal Highness, Mr. Oliver would not be available for anything less than £2,500,000 a week."
8
« on: Thu 28 Sep 2023 13:39 »
Speed is moderate, force is moderate-to-high (the player lunges), and the point of contact is rear studs to ankle on a planted leg. This endangers the safety of the opponent, it's excessive force and serious foul play. The red card was correct. If you're going to slag off a referees' decision, at least have the decency to use the appropriate considerations when making your complaints.
9
« on: Tue 26 Sep 2023 12:31 »
The reason handball is so difficult to understand is simply because it has fundamentally and substantially changed every year for the last 4 or 5 years. As of last year, an arm above the head was always a handball except when a defender, who was attempting to play the ball, deflects the ball into their arm, even if the arm were stretched above the head. At the latest law change, that was removed and now it is a handball offense when a player "touches the ball with their hand/arm when it has made their body unnaturally bigger. A player is considered to have their body unnaturally bigger when the position of their hand/arm is not a consequence of, or justifiable by, the player's body movement for that specific situation. By having their hand/arm in such a position, the player takes a risk of their hand/arm being hit by the ball and being penalized."
If you ask me, in their attempts to clarify the situation, IFAB have actually made the situation more and more difficult for referees, players, technical staff, and audiences to understand and have done a disservice to the game with regards to handball. Still, they will claim that the key to understanding the handball is the mythical "football understanding" which I'm starting to believe is a "you either have it or you don't, and if you have to ask then you don't have it" type of catch-all.
10
« on: Tue 26 Sep 2023 12:14 »
Dale Johnson has reported in his latest VAR Review column that the 'Independent Panel' that assesses Key Match Incidents have judged that the VAR was correct not to intervene with the Maddison penalty incident.
Did he say why?
11
« on: Tue 26 Sep 2023 12:14 »
I'm a Spurs supporter, but I have to say that the handball decision was correct. Cuti's arm was extended well outside of the natural silhouette of a player and created a barrier to goal. Penalty was the correct decision.
I honestly thought that the official had an unremarkable game -- which means he did well, given the temperature and the atmosphere of a game of that magnitude. Mr. Jones is quickly becoming one of my favourite Premier League officials.
12
« on: Tue 26 Sep 2023 12:05 »
Thanks all, glad to be here.
13
« on: Thu 21 Sep 2023 16:03 »
What I'm unsure of is how the challenge on James Maddison in the first half was not a foul and, consequently, a penalty kick.
14
« on: Thu 21 Sep 2023 16:01 »
Re: Paul Cooper, I've watched the clips from an earlier post and I'd be more concerned about his positioning than his decisions. The DOGSO was soft, but it is a supportable decision from what we can see using the angle we're given; the OFFINABUS, we'll have to take his word for it. What I'm concerned about is the number of times he was caught out of position, or in a bad position. If I ever have time, I will clip up the video to give examples of what I'm seeing.
15
« on: Thu 21 Sep 2023 14:51 »
Good day and hello from Canada. I look forward to discussing the game that we love with all of you.
Pages: [1]
|
Home
Search
Contact
Login
Register
Show Posts