+-

+-User

Welcome, Guest.
Please login or register.
 
 
 

Login with your social network

Forgot your password?

+-Stats ezBlock

Members
Total Members: 953
Latest: Yorksref
New This Month: 21
New This Week: 3
New Today: 0
Stats
Total Posts: 75117
Total Topics: 5528
Most Online Today: 273
Most Online Ever: 17046
(Mon 29 Mar 2021 19:08)
Users Online
Members: 8
Guests: 187
Total: 195

Show Posts

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 - Rhys147

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 ... 11
31
General Discussion / Re: Sam Barrett - Spurs vs. Burnley
« on: Fri 05 Jan 2024 20:56 »
The difference is one was given by the onfield referee (incorrectly in most people’s opinions) and one wasn’t.

So by your strange consistency theory if a referee makes an error in judgement on the opening day of the season then our referees should continue to apply the same error every single game for the remainder of the season so as to appear consistent?

I think learning from a mistake and applying the learning is a far better way forwards for our elite referees and it appears that’s what they have done. Simple
Yeah that's the main reason VAR normally don't get involved is because the referee has given it on field.

32
General Discussion / Re: Sam Barrett - Spurs vs. Burnley
« on: Fri 05 Jan 2024 20:51 »
Interesting early call which highlights the appalling inconsistency in our officials, Burnley fans will know what I mean…. just a week ago, Burnley concede the softest of penalties for a foot tap at Villa in the dying stages.  Tonight, Udogie is kicked in a similar vein on his ankle, no penalty.

Make it make sense…

Appalling inconsistency!!

It does seem that people can just come on here and say what they like. I bet if you did the washing up 50 times you’d do it differently 50 times. And that’s easier to do than making decisions in a fast pace game whilst trying to take into account every so called similar decision that has ever been made in the past.

My point is, they have VAR and come to a completely different decision on the same incident.  It is virtually identical in fact as an incident.  Neither should be penalties, so why was last week’s one given??!!
Completely agree with you on this one. VAR should have got involved last week and overturned the decision just like they should have done on monday at Liverpool.

33
General Discussion / Re: Sam Barrett - Spurs vs. Burnley
« on: Fri 05 Jan 2024 20:29 »
And yet most people agreed that the burnley one last week wasn't a penalty. I haven't seen the incident you are referring to but if it's like the burnley one last week then it shouldn't have been a penalty.

34
Non Footy Appointments / Re: Challenge Cup Round 3 & 4
« on: Fri 05 Jan 2024 19:04 »
Friday 19th January
Scarlets vs Edinburgh
Referee: Sara Cox
Assistant Referees: TBC & Harry Walbaum
TMO: Dean Richards

Gloucester vs Castres
Referee: Eoghan Cross
Assistant Referees: Robbie Jenkinson & Tomas O'Sullivan
TMO: Leo Colgan

Saturday 20th January
Black Lion vs Clermont
Referee: Gianlucca Gnecchi
Assistant Referees: Franco Rosella & Andrei Gheorghe
TMO: Stefano Roscini

Pau vs Zebre
Referee: Ben Whitehouse
Assistant Referees: Mike English & Ben Connor
TMO: Ian Davies

Oyonnax vs Cheetahs
Referee: Anthony Woodthorpe
Assistant Referees: TBC & Ethan Glass
TMO: David Rose

Benetton vs Montpellier
Referee: Morne Ferreira
Assistant Referees: Marius van der Westhuizen
TMO: Marius Jonker

Sunday 21st January
Perpignan vs Newcastle
Referee: Federico Vedovelli
Assistant Referees: Riccardo Angelucci & Alberto Favaro
TMO: Stefano Penne

Lions vs Ospreys
Referee: Jeremy Rozier
Assistant Referees: Luc Ramos & Evan Urruzmendi
TMO: Patrick Dellac

Dragons vs Sharks
Referee: Adrien Marbot
Assistant Referees: Benoit Rousselet & Thomas Chereque
TMO: Julien Castaignede

35
Non Footy Appointments / Challenge Cup Round 3 & 4
« on: Fri 05 Jan 2024 18:56 »
Friday 12th January
Newcastle vs Benetton
Referee: Tual Trainini
Assistant Referees: Ludovic Cayre & Flavien Hourquet
TMO: Eric Gauzins

Ospreys vs Perpignan
Referee: Morne Ferreira
Assistant Referees: Marius van der Westhuizen & Aimee Barrett-Theron
TMO: Marius Jonker

Saturday 13th January
Sharks vs Oyonnax
Referee: Adam Leal
Assistant Referees: Karl Dickson & John Meredith
TMO: Hamish Smales

Clermont vs Scarlets
Referee: Eoghan Cross
Assistant Referees: Jonny Erskine & Alexandru Ionescu
TMO: Mark Patton

Zebre vs Dragons
Referee: Benoit Rousselet
Assistant Referees: Thomas Chereque & Pierre Bru
TMO: Cedric Marchat

Castres vs Black Lion
Referee: Anthony Woodthorpe
Assistant Referees: Joe James & George Selwood
TMO: David Rose

Edinburgh vs Gloucester
Referee: Gianlucca Gnecchi
Assistant Referees: Alex Frasson & Clara Munarini
TMO: Stefano Roscini

Montpellier vs Lions
Referee: Sam Grove-White
Assistant Referees: Finlay Brown & Ethan Glass
TMO: Andrew McMenemy

Sunday 14th January
Cheetahs vs Pau
Referee: Hollie Davidson
Assistant Referees: Jonny Perriam & Rob McDowell
TMO: Mike Adamson

36
Non Footy Appointments / Re: Champions Cup Round 3 & 4
« on: Fri 05 Jan 2024 18:48 »
Friday 19th January
Glasgow vs Toulon
Referee: Matthew Carley
Assistant Referees: Andrew Jackson & Gareth Holsgrove
TMO: Ian Tempest

Connacht vs Bristol
Referee: Pierre Brousset
Assistant Referees: Pierre-Baptiste Nuchy & Kevin Bralley
TMO: Denis Grenouillet

Saturday 20th January
Harlequins vs Ulster
Referee: Mathieu Raynal
Assistant Referees: Vivien Praderie & Jonathan Gasnier
TMO: Thomas Charabas

Bulls vs Ulster
Referee: Karl Dickson
Assistant Referees: Adam Leal & John Meredith
TMO: Hamish Smales

Leicester vs Leinster
Referee: Andrea Piardi
Assistant Referees: Filippo Russo & Clara Munarini
TMO: Matteo Liperini

Racing vs Cardiff
Referee: Christophe Ridley
Assistant Referees: TBC & TBC
TMO: Tom Foley

Munster vs Northampton
Referee: Tual Trainini
Assistant Referees: Ludovic Cayre & Flavien Hourquet
TMO: Eric Gauzins

Stade Francais vs Stormers
Referee: Luke Pearce
Assistant Referees: TBC & TBC
TMO: Stuart Terheege

Saracens vs Lyon
Referee: Sam Grove-White
Assistant Referees: Mike Adamson & Hollie Davidson
TMO: Andrew McMenemy

Sunday 21st January
Sale vs La Rochelle
Referee: Chris Busby
Assistant Referees: Andrew Cole & Joy Neville
TMO: Brian MacNeice

Toulouse vs Bath
Referee: Andrew Brace
Assistant Referees: Frank Murphy & Paul Haycock
TMO: Olly Hodges

Bayonne vs Exeter
Referee: Nika Amashukeli
Assistant Referees: Saba Abulashvili & Shota Tevzadze
TMO: Ben Whitehouse

37
Non Footy Appointments / Champions Cup Round 3 & 4
« on: Fri 05 Jan 2024 18:39 »
Friday 12th January
Northampton vs Bayonne
Referee: Mike Adamson
Assistant Referees: Ian Kenny & David Sutherland
TMO: Hollie Davidson

Saturday 13th January
Lyon vs Connacht
Referee: Craig Evans
Assistant Referees: Adam Jones & Ben Breakspear
TMO: Ian Davies

Exeter vs Glasgow
Referee: Pierre Brousset
Assistant Referees: Pierre-Baptiste Nuchy & Kevin Bralley
TMO: Denis Grenouillet

Bristol vs Bulls
Referee: Mathieu Raynal
Assistant Referees: Vivien Praderie & Jonathan Gasnier
TMO: Thomas Charabas

Toulon vs Munster
Referee: Nika Amashukeli
Assistant Referees: Saba Abulashvili & Shota Tevzadze
TMO: Ben Whitehosue

Leinster vs Stade Francais
Referee: Christophe Ridley
Assistant Referees: Luke Pearce & Gareth Holsgrove
TMO: Tom Foley

Stormers vs Sale
Referee: Luc Ramos
Assistant Referees: Jeremy Rosier & Evan Urruzmendi
TMO: Patrick Dellac

Cardiff vs Harlequins
Referee: Frank Murphy
Assistant Referees: Peter Martin & Sam Holt
TMO: Joy Neville

Ulster vs Toulouse
Referee: Matthew Carley
Assistant Referees: Sara Cox & Simon Harding
TMO: Ian Tempest

Sunday 14th January
Bath vs Racing
Referee: Andrea Piardi
Assistant Referees: Federico Vedovelli & Filippo Russo
TMO: Matteo Liperini

La Rochelle vs Leicester
Referee: Andrew Brace
Assistant Referees: Keane Davison & Padraic Reidy
TMO: Olly Hodges

Bordeaux vs Saracens
Referee: Chris Busby
Assistant Referees: Andrew Cole & Oisin Quinn
TMO: Brian MacNeice

38
General Discussion / Re: C KAVANAGH - Palace v Everton (FA)
« on: Fri 05 Jan 2024 13:50 »
Not a red for me. Yes the point of contact is high with studs showing however he only brushes the defender and there's minimal contact and so for me does not tick the boxes for a dangerous challenge and he isn't out of control either. If the contact had been more substantial then I would have accepted a red card.

So it’s pot luck for you then? Dive in however you want and see what happens?? Heads I get the ball tails I snap his leg.
That’s how it will be if these challenges are only sanctioned depending on how bad they turn out to be. Outlaw these type of challenges regardless and we won’t be spinning the coin.
No that's not what I'm saying. If he had flown in to the challenge and was out of control even if he had won the ball then I would have been fine with a red being produced. I just don't see the one tonight as a dangerous challenge or a red card. If you believe it should be a red then that's up to you.

With respect that is exactly what you are saying even if you didn’t mean to make that point. A studs up challenge with the foot off the floor over the top of the ball is dangerous and whether someone gets hurt as a result of it depends on which side the coin lands.
Well clearly you are misinterpreting what i'm saying. I did not say tackles like that are pot luck and that it's a flip of the coin on whether the player is injured and I never want to see someone get injured from any form of tackle especially a two-footed tackle. What I said is that i don't believe it's a red card for the reasons I have stated in my previous post.

You said he only brushes the defender with minimal contact. But that that happened is pot luck unless you are suggesting he deliberately only brushes him with minimal contact??
No that's not what i'm saying given i literally just said i don't want anyone to get injured from tackles that are two-footed which this certainly isn't.

If it isn’t a two footed tackle and it hasn’t previously been described as one then it’s unclear why you referencing it??
Opinions are opinions and I’m not trying to change yours, just trying to highlight that you are seemingly pro tackle with studs showing and over the ball but that’s only an issue if you hurt someone, hence my pot luck reference. Your point so far seems to support that but you’re not convinced??
No i'm not pro tackling with studs but on this occasion i don't see it as a red card like many others on this thread have said.

But if he had snapped his leg in two you’d have supported a red?
So we are going to start refereeing games now based on the outcome of certain tackles now are we? There have been many players that have bad injuries for tackles that weren't even that bad for example Harvey Elliot when he was tackled by Pascal Struijk.

I think you’re getting confused here. Your argument is based on refereeing based on the outcome (this one wasn’t that bad; brushed him minimal contact not a red) and you’re asking me if that’s what we are going to do now are we??
You are questioning yourself here, so I’ve kind of got my point across.
I'm on about the tackle it self which isn't a bad tackle. What i said was if the tackle had more force and he was out of control then a red card would have been correct in that scenario where as the tackle by Calvert-Lewin doesn't have force nor was he out of control.

39
General Discussion / Re: C KAVANAGH - Palace v Everton (FA)
« on: Fri 05 Jan 2024 13:13 »
Not a red for me. Yes the point of contact is high with studs showing however he only brushes the defender and there's minimal contact and so for me does not tick the boxes for a dangerous challenge and he isn't out of control either. If the contact had been more substantial then I would have accepted a red card.

So it’s pot luck for you then? Dive in however you want and see what happens?? Heads I get the ball tails I snap his leg.
That’s how it will be if these challenges are only sanctioned depending on how bad they turn out to be. Outlaw these type of challenges regardless and we won’t be spinning the coin.
No that's not what I'm saying. If he had flown in to the challenge and was out of control even if he had won the ball then I would have been fine with a red being produced. I just don't see the one tonight as a dangerous challenge or a red card. If you believe it should be a red then that's up to you.

With respect that is exactly what you are saying even if you didn’t mean to make that point. A studs up challenge with the foot off the floor over the top of the ball is dangerous and whether someone gets hurt as a result of it depends on which side the coin lands.
Well clearly you are misinterpreting what i'm saying. I did not say tackles like that are pot luck and that it's a flip of the coin on whether the player is injured and I never want to see someone get injured from any form of tackle especially a two-footed tackle. What I said is that i don't believe it's a red card for the reasons I have stated in my previous post.

You said he only brushes the defender with minimal contact. But that that happened is pot luck unless you are suggesting he deliberately only brushes him with minimal contact??
No that's not what i'm saying given i literally just said i don't want anyone to get injured from tackles that are two-footed which this certainly isn't.

If it isn’t a two footed tackle and it hasn’t previously been described as one then it’s unclear why you referencing it??
Opinions are opinions and I’m not trying to change yours, just trying to highlight that you are seemingly pro tackle with studs showing and over the ball but that’s only an issue if you hurt someone, hence my pot luck reference. Your point so far seems to support that but you’re not convinced??
No i'm not pro tackling with studs but on this occasion i don't see it as a red card like many others on this thread have said.

But if he had snapped his leg in two you’d have supported a red?
So we are going to start refereeing games now based on the outcome of certain tackles now are we? There have been many players that have bad injuries for tackles that weren't even that bad for example Harvey Elliot when he was tackled by Pascal Struijk.

40
General Discussion / Re: C KAVANAGH - Palace v Everton (FA)
« on: Fri 05 Jan 2024 11:42 »
Not a red for me. Yes the point of contact is high with studs showing however he only brushes the defender and there's minimal contact and so for me does not tick the boxes for a dangerous challenge and he isn't out of control either. If the contact had been more substantial then I would have accepted a red card.

So it’s pot luck for you then? Dive in however you want and see what happens?? Heads I get the ball tails I snap his leg.
That’s how it will be if these challenges are only sanctioned depending on how bad they turn out to be. Outlaw these type of challenges regardless and we won’t be spinning the coin.
No that's not what I'm saying. If he had flown in to the challenge and was out of control even if he had won the ball then I would have been fine with a red being produced. I just don't see the one tonight as a dangerous challenge or a red card. If you believe it should be a red then that's up to you.

With respect that is exactly what you are saying even if you didn’t mean to make that point. A studs up challenge with the foot off the floor over the top of the ball is dangerous and whether someone gets hurt as a result of it depends on which side the coin lands.
Well clearly you are misinterpreting what i'm saying. I did not say tackles like that are pot luck and that it's a flip of the coin on whether the player is injured and I never want to see someone get injured from any form of tackle especially a two-footed tackle. What I said is that i don't believe it's a red card for the reasons I have stated in my previous post.

You said he only brushes the defender with minimal contact. But that that happened is pot luck unless you are suggesting he deliberately only brushes him with minimal contact??
No that's not what i'm saying given i literally just said i don't want anyone to get injured from tackles that are two-footed which this certainly isn't.

If it isn’t a two footed tackle and it hasn’t previously been described as one then it’s unclear why you referencing it??
Opinions are opinions and I’m not trying to change yours, just trying to highlight that you are seemingly pro tackle with studs showing and over the ball but that’s only an issue if you hurt someone, hence my pot luck reference. Your point so far seems to support that but you’re not convinced??
No i'm not pro tackling with studs but on this occasion i don't see it as a red card like many others on this thread have said.

41
General Discussion / Re: C KAVANAGH - Palace v Everton (FA)
« on: Fri 05 Jan 2024 10:54 »
Not a red for me. Yes the point of contact is high with studs showing however he only brushes the defender and there's minimal contact and so for me does not tick the boxes for a dangerous challenge and he isn't out of control either. If the contact had been more substantial then I would have accepted a red card.

So it’s pot luck for you then? Dive in however you want and see what happens?? Heads I get the ball tails I snap his leg.
That’s how it will be if these challenges are only sanctioned depending on how bad they turn out to be. Outlaw these type of challenges regardless and we won’t be spinning the coin.
No that's not what I'm saying. If he had flown in to the challenge and was out of control even if he had won the ball then I would have been fine with a red being produced. I just don't see the one tonight as a dangerous challenge or a red card. If you believe it should be a red then that's up to you.

With respect that is exactly what you are saying even if you didn’t mean to make that point. A studs up challenge with the foot off the floor over the top of the ball is dangerous and whether someone gets hurt as a result of it depends on which side the coin lands.
Well clearly you are misinterpreting what i'm saying. I did not say tackles like that are pot luck and that it's a flip of the coin on whether the player is injured and I never want to see someone get injured from any form of tackle especially a two-footed tackle. What I said is that i don't believe it's a red card for the reasons I have stated in my previous post.

You said he only brushes the defender with minimal contact. But that that happened is pot luck unless you are suggesting he deliberately only brushes him with minimal contact??
No that's not what i'm saying given i literally just said i don't want anyone to get injured from tackles that are two-footed which this certainly isn't.

42
General Discussion / Re: C KAVANAGH - Palace v Everton (FA)
« on: Fri 05 Jan 2024 09:44 »
Not a red for me. Yes the point of contact is high with studs showing however he only brushes the defender and there's minimal contact and so for me does not tick the boxes for a dangerous challenge and he isn't out of control either. If the contact had been more substantial then I would have accepted a red card.

So it’s pot luck for you then? Dive in however you want and see what happens?? Heads I get the ball tails I snap his leg.
That’s how it will be if these challenges are only sanctioned depending on how bad they turn out to be. Outlaw these type of challenges regardless and we won’t be spinning the coin.
No that's not what I'm saying. If he had flown in to the challenge and was out of control even if he had won the ball then I would have been fine with a red being produced. I just don't see the one tonight as a dangerous challenge or a red card. If you believe it should be a red then that's up to you.

With respect that is exactly what you are saying even if you didn’t mean to make that point. A studs up challenge with the foot off the floor over the top of the ball is dangerous and whether someone gets hurt as a result of it depends on which side the coin lands.
Well clearly you are misinterpreting what i'm saying. I did not say tackles like that are pot luck and that it's a flip of the coin on whether the player is injured and I never want to see someone get injured from any form of tackle especially a two-footed tackle. What I said is that i don't believe it's a red card for the reasons I have stated in my previous post.

43
General Discussion / Re: C KAVANAGH - Palace v Everton (FA)
« on: Thu 04 Jan 2024 23:41 »
Not a red for me. Yes the point of contact is high with studs showing however he only brushes the defender and there's minimal contact and so for me does not tick the boxes for a dangerous challenge and he isn't out of control either. If the contact had been more substantial then I would have accepted a red card.

So it’s pot luck for you then? Dive in however you want and see what happens?? Heads I get the ball tails I snap his leg.
That’s how it will be if these challenges are only sanctioned depending on how bad they turn out to be. Outlaw these type of challenges regardless and we won’t be spinning the coin.
No that's not what I'm saying. If he had flown in to the challenge and was out of control even if he had won the ball then I would have been fine with a red being produced. I just don't see the one tonight as a dangerous challenge or a red card. If you believe it should be a red then that's up to you.

44
General Discussion / Re: C KAVANAGH - Palace v Everton (FA)
« on: Thu 04 Jan 2024 22:52 »
Not a red for me. Yes the point of contact is high with studs showing however he only brushes the defender and there's minimal contact and so for me does not tick the boxes for a dangerous challenge and he isn't out of control either. If the contact had been more substantial then I would have accepted a red card.

45
I think it's safe to say that Sam Barrott and Josh Smith are sg1 even if they are listed as sg2. There are a few of the national list who are now sg2 even if they are listed as national group given the amount of championship games they are getting.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 ... 11