|
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 - Leggy
Pages: 1 ... 32 33 34 35 36 [37] 38 39 40 41 42 ... 46
541
« on: Mon 15 Mar 2021 16:07 »
I only watched part of the game but the penalty perplexes me. Forward sliced the ball, ball going out of play, then he is fouled. In the middle of the park it would be a free kick. However, here the ball has already been played and is going out. Why a penalty? Contact made as shot attempted? Ball still in play but going out? Another example of where an explanation would help fans. I guess TMO thought there was no clear and obvious error or knew something we didn't.
Spurs were awful, recent wins papered over cracks which appeared again yesterday. So a manager under pressure blames Michael because he was tired. Typical deflection tactics from the Master!
Oliver seemed to have a good game. My final ramble is why do players get away with holding back challenges with their arms raised so high? One day an eye socket will get ****.
"In the middle of the park it would be a free kick". Why then, in the penalty area is it not a penalty kick?
I'm quite happy for uncertain referees to give a freekick in the centre circle on the balance of probability. For I penalty kick, I'd want them to be completely sure.
Totally agree, the "it would be given anywhere else" argument is idealist and impractical IMO. The impact on the game must be taken into account and therefore as you say extra certainty will naturally be required. Indeed I have heard of referees at the top level speak about giving "soft" free kicks for game control, managing a certain player, calming the game down etc etc. I have no problem with this, I would certainly have a problem if they did similar with penalties! Despite the intense push in recent years for refereeing to be black and white IMO the best referees are very comfortable with grey!
So I get the "grey" argument and have refereed enough games to have operated under that principle, but then perhaps we need to re-write the Laws as such? The offence is the same, it is just the sanction that differs.
542
« on: Mon 15 Mar 2021 09:57 »
I only watched part of the game but the penalty perplexes me. Forward sliced the ball, ball going out of play, then he is fouled. In the middle of the park it would be a free kick. However, here the ball has already been played and is going out. Why a penalty? Contact made as shot attempted? Ball still in play but going out? Another example of where an explanation would help fans. I guess TMO thought there was no clear and obvious error or knew something we didn't.
Spurs were awful, recent wins papered over cracks which appeared again yesterday. So a manager under pressure blames Michael because he was tired. Typical deflection tactics from the Master!
Oliver seemed to have a good game. My final ramble is why do players get away with holding back challenges with their arms raised so high? One day an eye socket will get ****.
" In the middle of the park it would be a free kick ". Why then, in the penalty area is it not a penalty kick?
543
« on: Fri 12 Mar 2021 17:49 »
So this is now a matter of what did Alan Judge say (or not say) as he and Darren Drysdale have very different versions of events and both cannot be 100% telling the truth.
In the dim and distant past, when completing a misconduct report for either verbal dissent or OFFINABUS we were required to use the "actual words stated" in the report. In the event of a hearing it was not unusual for the player to bring witnesses to state with 100% certainty that player X did not say the words that got him into trouble. The referee usually had to stand by their report and the integrity that they were telling the truth as even if a could be produced to corroborate the referee's side of the story, said referee was not able to "call" the witness.
In this case a further hearing should be convened and Alan Judge, Darren Drysdale, should attend. In addition, witness statements should be taken from the ARs and 4th Official and players in the vicinity who could have reasonably heard what was actually said. The Ipswich Town media team's evidence that the words were not said (can you prove a negative?) should be produced.
If Alan Judge is found to have not been telling the truth, then the mitigation that this week's FA Commission took into account when suspending Darren Drysdale should remain. Any sanction against Alan Judge is for others to determine. If Darren Drysdale is found not to have been telling the truth, then his suspension should be revisited and almost certainly increased. And his reputation will have been further damaged.
544
« on: Thu 11 Mar 2021 19:25 »
Statement on a backdated suspension for Drysdale
‘
An independent Regulatory Commission has given Darren Drysdale a back-dated suspension and warning as to his future conduct for a breach of FA Rule E3.
The match official admitted that his behaviour during the 90th minute of an EFL League One tie between Ipswich Town FC and Northampton Town FC on Tuesday 16 February 2021 amounted to improper conduct.
The suspension, which ran from 19 February 2021 to 10 March 2021, and warning were imposed by the independent Regulatory Commission during a subsequent hearing and its written reasons are available below.
Written Reasons: Here’s the link as it’s a 10 page document https://www.thefa.com/-/media/files/thefaportal/governance-docs/discipline-cases/2021/the-fa-v-darren-drysdale---8-march-2021.ashx
from: https://www.thefa.com/news/2021/mar/11/darren-drysdale-written-reasons-published-110321
The written reasons are well worth a read. They are astonishing for two reasons:
1. The words used by Alan Judge. If that does not warrant a red card for OFFINABUS then nothing does.
2. The FA's role in the case is amateurish - and that is being kind.
Darren Drysdale should not have done what he did, but if our referees have been so emaciated that they simply cannot issue a red card for such direct, personal and virulent abuse then the only surprise is that this has not happened sooner, and more often.
I wonder if your point two has anything to do with Stuart Ripley is a former player ? Just a thought.
Not at all, it was more about their approach to gathering evidence - Alan Judge was not called to the hearing and his desire "not to be involved" was respected. If only referees were permitted the same opportunities when hearings involved players. In addition, the commission could not determine if Darren Drysdale had been suspended or not because no-one at PGMOL could tell them.
545
« on: Thu 11 Mar 2021 19:09 »
Statement on a backdated suspension for Drysdale
‘
An independent Regulatory Commission has given Darren Drysdale a back-dated suspension and warning as to his future conduct for a breach of FA Rule E3.
The match official admitted that his behaviour during the 90th minute of an EFL League One tie between Ipswich Town FC and Northampton Town FC on Tuesday 16 February 2021 amounted to improper conduct.
The suspension, which ran from 19 February 2021 to 10 March 2021, and warning were imposed by the independent Regulatory Commission during a subsequent hearing and its written reasons are available below.
Written Reasons: Here’s the link as it’s a 10 page document https://www.thefa.com/-/media/files/thefaportal/governance-docs/discipline-cases/2021/the-fa-v-darren-drysdale---8-march-2021.ashx
from: https://www.thefa.com/news/2021/mar/11/darren-drysdale-written-reasons-published-110321
The written reasons are well worth a read. They are astonishing for two reasons: 1. The words used by Alan Judge. If that does not warrant a red card for OFFINABUS then nothing does. 2. The FA's role in the case is amateurish - and that is being kind. Darren Drysdale should not have done what he did, but if our referees have been so emaciated that they simply cannot issue a red card for such direct, personal and virulent abuse then the only surprise is that this has not happened sooner, and more often.
546
« on: Thu 11 Mar 2021 18:54 »
Could it be that the VAR couldn't get involved and give a penalty as Jon Moss had identified the offence, but played an attempted advantage? I was watching on Sky and clearly saw him motion as if to say he'd played an advantage when questioned by City players. In which case, I can't think of a category which allows VAR involvement that can be applied here.
If that were the case then Mr. Moss would need to go to additional classes on playing advantage. The only justification for playing advantage instead of awarding a penalty kick is if an attacker is in such a place that he has a better chance of scoring that a free shot at goal from 12 yards and only a goal-keeper in the way. Last night was not such a case.
547
« on: Thu 11 Mar 2021 16:05 »
Debatable doesn’t come into it. This was a clear and obvious error which VAR is supposed to be there to correct and quite frankly failed.
You can blame Moss - and let’s face it he gets more than his fair share of criticism on here, some of it unjustified in my opinion - but the real culprit undoubtedly is Andy Madley who had access to umpteen camera angles and still didn’t see anything wrong. I find it staggering that he came to this conclusion and as others have said it makes a mockery of VAR, especially when less obvious pens are given and we spend hours watching borderline decisions about offside. This could not have been more clear cut.
I await an explanation from the PGMOL - whoops, me sees a flying pig!
Full marks to Foden, a rarity among his peers, in trying to keep on his feet and not go down; honesty didn’t do him any good sadly but morally he cannot be faulted. There are others who are serial offenders - and we all know who they are - who would have gone down whether touched or not to con the ref. In fact I could name a couple who would probably be still flying through the air or collapsing in a heap even now!
I can offer two possible explanations, neither of which are justified, but here goes: 1. Andy Madley, as a "junior" Premier League referee is extremely unwilling to publicly say to a "senior" colleague that a mistake may have taken place? Such deference to seniority has been identified as a major contributory cause in more than one serious plane crash. The junior pilot saw something wrong but was afraid to "challenge" the captain - with disastrous results. Fortunately, this was only a football match. 2. This is an example of a referee who can follow a protocol but fails to have a genuine "feel" for the game. This is a version of the saying that if something looks like a pig, smells like a pig and eats like a pig, then calling it a sheep does not give it a woolly coat. In this case, if it looks like a penalty of the first camera angle, still looks like it on the second camera angle and still looks like it on the third camera angle ....... you get my point.
548
« on: Thu 11 Mar 2021 08:06 »
As an aside, can we just give praise to Phil Foden for getting straight back up and on with the game. Honesty is a rarity in the modern game so fair play - I hope this incident hasn’t dissuaded him from being honest!
First of all i commend foden in his actions.
However Once again referees do not encourage honesty, thus diving and trying to con officials will continue unabated, and as such officials reap what they sow.
100% agree. You dive, you over-react, you scream like a baby and you get a decision in your favour. You try to stay on your feet and play the game and a clear (very clear, no VAR needed, just a decent position and a good pair of eyes) foul goes unpunished. If you were a team manager / coach who's job depends on winning games, what would you do?? Its hard enough for referees without making it harder with this nonsense.
549
« on: Wed 10 Mar 2021 12:15 »
What in the actual hell, was happening last night? So much confusion
Haaland scores
Goal disallowed for offside
Penalty given for foul on Haaland a minute before the original incident
Penalty taken and saved then recalled back for a retake
Penalty then scored and Haaland causes a brawl due to his celebration
Feel sorry for Cakir and his team with all the confusion
But 7 minutes between the original offside call and the goal being scored
How much stoppage time was played?
They are still playing 
550
« on: Mon 08 Mar 2021 18:43 »
There wasn't too much of note from a refereeing perspective in this game, no controversial incidents or VAR interventions, but just wanted to give Kevin some praise for his overall performance. I was impressed with his foul detection, and more so, his ability not to fall for any theatrics. He let the game flow, stayed out of the limelight, and contributed to an entertaining game. Sometimes, as a supporter of a so called lesser club, you fear getting the wrong end of any 50-50 decisions at the bigger clubs, but there was no evidence of that at all from Kevin, especially towards the end when Liverpool were chasing the game and appealing for everything. A really strong, solid performance.
Agreed, I think he's been good this season on the whole.
Not worth its own post but Taylor was good yesterday also, might have looked easy but excellent positioning early on to award the penalty.
I think that to be "switched on" and ready to make a big game decision in a big game after less than a minute is to Taylor's credit. I know he is one of our top referees and you could argue that is what is expected of him, but how many times have we excused refereeing failings due to it being "so early in the game". Taylor was ready, well positioned, made the right call (with negligible dissent) and should receive due praise for that.
551
« on: Thu 04 Mar 2021 18:53 »
This was never a problem in the past. Referees wore black and teams didn't. The only exception seemed to be when Scotland played, and the ref would wear either white or red. Even goalkeepers didn't tend to wear black, except Lev Yashin.
I refereed basketball for many years where referees all wore grey. No teams were allowed to wear grey and so there was never a problem. It seems now that football kits get more gaudy and ridiculous all the time, and referees have been subjected to the same madness.
It would appear that Late Tackle and I or of one mind ...., this was what I said at the start of last week in the discussion about Steven Martin's kit faux par the previous weekend: "How about this for a way forward ...... we (match officials) will wear black - you (teams) don't ?? I do realise that I am a dinosaur and need pensioning off, but this did work for about 100 years. It was only our Caledonian cousins in their national team kit that caused a problem - with a rare sighting of the red, or yellow referee's shirt for the odd Home International match - apart from that, black seemed to work fine."
Great minds
552
« on: Tue 02 Mar 2021 08:08 »
Considering there are innumerable posts now in referee development, coaching and observing I would have thought that was the carrot to help move Mason on if that is what the authorities wished to do. For some time now I have thought that Mason does not look like he is enjoying his refereeing; of course that may be a false impression and he is still wildly enthusiastic and delighted to be officiating but at West Brom he looked a picture of flustered misery. By pretty common consent, he isn't regarded as one of the strongest SG1 performers and it's not good for anyone's self respect to continue in high profile work when you know that you are not really 'cutting the mustard' I believe the expression used is "nicking the money" and I would hate to have that said about me as I imagine would many except the most cynical.
To quote Whistleblower: " Considering there are innumerable posts now in referee development, coaching and observing " - it does beg the question as to whether the footballing authorities are getting a fair return on this investment? Is the standard that much better than 30 years ago when the majority of these roles either did not exist, or were carried out on a voluntary basis? The proliferation of such roles (along with the Country FA equivalents) does, of course, provide a ready made supply of "boys" from which it would appear a fair proportion of the senior refereeing "jobs" are found
553
« on: Mon 01 Mar 2021 18:42 »
Extraordinary post-match comments from Luke Shaw that must have serious repercussions one way or the other.
"I even heard the referee say to H [Maguire], if I say it's a pen then it's going to cause a lot of people to talk afterwards."
If Attwell has said that to Maguire then that is very disappointing and would ruin what was a very good performance. He should face disciplinary consequences of his comments
Manchester United have said that Luke Shaw misheard the conversation between Stuart Attwell and Harry Maguire.
Of course he did. Anyone who has had the "pleasure" of attending a personal hearing will be aware that players "miss-hear" words and conversations all the time. And then they present their mis-hearings as facts to support their case.
554
« on: Mon 01 Mar 2021 18:40 »
I have got the impression that more foul throws are being penalised this season. I saw two this weekend. One was at Peterborough v Wigan, which I was fortunate enough to be at in person. It was right in front of me, was a horrible throw and no one complained. The other was on a game I watched on TV. I think it was Wycombe v Norwich. Again it looked horrible and no one complained. However I rewound the action, checked it, and could see absolutely nothing that contravened the correct procedure. That is not the first time I have seen that this season. The ones that seem to get penalised are the ones that are thrown a very short distance.
I saw the one given against Aarons, was given by the assistant. Obviously they can now multi-task, in my day "linesman" only looked for foot faults. 
To miss-quote Lewis Carroll, I can miss six minor technical offences before breakfast .
555
« on: Sun 28 Feb 2021 18:47 »
Parking the Mason controversy for a moment, how is it any way sensible to appoint a referee as fourth official for a game taking place the day after he has refereed a Premier League game. The fourth official could be called up on to officiate at any time - perhaps for the whole game if the appointed referee tweaks a hammy in the warm up. No referee could or should be put in the position of potentially refereeing two Premier League games in consecutive days. If players were asked to do that .... 
Pages: 1 ... 32 33 34 35 36 [37] 38 39 40 41 42 ... 46
|
Home
Forum
Search
Contact
Login
Register
Show Posts