Arsenal Red Card

[Greenbeard]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ULj7ORh2MWY

Thoughts?
IMO we need more of this sort of strict refereeing in the game. It's blatant deliberate cheating (and with no play-acting from the Wolves player) to stop a fast break. Irrelevant rrespective where on the pitch. Glad to see it given as straight red. Different matter had it been a wee tug on his jersey and a "sack of potatoes" fall from the Wolves player.

[Paulie Walnuts]

I like it.

Nothing worse than players attempting to completely ruin games.

[GreenNWhiteArmy]

Hun (Lundstram?) Got sent off for this sort of tackle at ER once which i felt was the right decision.

Not 100% on the arsenal one tbh. It wasn't malicious

Any tackle that isn't aimed at the ball there is definitely an argument for a straight red imo

[BILLYHIBS]

Red

Deliberate premeditated violent act with no intention of playing the ball

Could not understand the MOTD pundits saying it deserved only a yellow

Red all day long in my book

Serious foul play

Will be interesting to see if there is any intervention from the powers that be

Worth it just to see Arteta’s greetin face but they still won in any case

[bingo70]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ULj7ORh2MWY

Thoughts?
IMO we need more of this sort of strict refereeing in the game. It's blatant deliberate cheating (and with no play-acting from the Wolves player) to stop a fast break. Irrelevant rrespective where on the pitch. Glad to see it given as straight red. Different matter had it been a wee tug on his jersey and a "sack of potatoes" fall from the Wolves player.

I’ve always thought if you kick someone with no attempt whatsoever to play the ball, it should be treated as violent conduct and don’t understand why it isn’t. It’s often referred to as a clever foul and things like that but for me, kicking someone with no attempt to play the ball is the same as punching someone.

Reminds me a bit of the John Lundstrum red card against us a few years ago that caused a fuss at the time and eventually got overturned.

I like that the ref gave a red for this one, I’m not sure if the current rules state it should be a red though?

[Eyrie]

Hun (Lundstram?) Got sent off for this sort of tackle at ER once which i felt was the right decision.

Not 100% on the arsenal one tbh. It wasn't malicious

Any tackle that isn't aimed at the ball there is definitely an argument for a straight red imo

I think Doyle-Hayes got booked for a similar incident in the first half of that game and should have seen red as well because it was a clear case of playing the man with no chance of getting the ball.

[J-C]

Standard professional foul that gets a yellow 99% of the time, shocked he got a red.

[Northernhibee]

I remember Lee Johnson describing one situation as an “orange card” and I think it kind of applies here.

[Callum_62]

It's an annoying foul against you but with today's rules it's never ever a red card

Lundstrum was red carded as it looked like he caught Boyle very high

The arsenal red card was a ridiculous decision and certainly will be overturned imo

Var should be definitely intervening there



Sent from my Pixel 7 Pro using Tapatalk

[overdrive]

Can see why it would be a red. However, in this specific case, it should have been play on and a word from the ref to the Arsenal player to hit Doherty even harder the next time :wink:

Still can’t stand the guy 13 years later

[Bostonhibby]

Pretty straight forward red for me, just because he never actually maimed the guy isn't a reason to let it slide.

If I was Arteta I'd have asked the ref if Haverz could take the red instead!

Sent from my SM-A750FN using Tapatalk

[Soldiersteve]

Can see why it would be a red. However, in this specific case, it should have been play on and a word from the ref to the Arsenal player to hit Doherty even harder the next time :wink:

Still can’t stand the guy 13 years later

Not sure what happened 13 years ago......am I getting old?

[Lancs Harp]

Going against the grain on this thread, He was sent off for a dangerous violent tackle which for me it wasnt.
This will 100 percent be overturned.

[Callum_62]

Going against the grain on this thread, He was sent off for a dangerous violent tackle which for me it wasnt.
This will 100 percent be overturned.Can't believe that opinion is going against the grain

It's a horrendous decision by the ref and var

Sent from my Pixel 7 Pro using Tapatalk

[hibsbollah]

Its all about how the rules are interpreted. Id love that kind of blatant (what we used to call ‘professional’ foul to get the straight red far more than the genuine attempt to win the ball that gets the red because of this bogus ‘out of control’ definition.

A bit of history but it was Wille Youngs ankle tap in the fa cup final arsenal west ham and surrounding outrage at the cheating element-think 1980 but could be wrong-that brought in the ‘professional foul’ straight red rule and the game is the worse for tweaking with it IMO.

But i also agree if i was an Arsenal fan id be raging at the lack of consistency.

[tamig]

It reminded me of Blair Alston’s kick at SJM when he was breaking away with the ball just outside our box away to St J. .No attempt to play the ball but a sly kick making sure he couldn’t go any further. Current rules don’t cover that as a straight red. Cynical, professional fouls should always be red imo, but the laws of the game need updating.

On a slightly different topic, the Wolves boy’s second yellow should have been a straight red for sure.

[overdrive]

Not sure what happened 13 years ago......am I getting old?

We signed that erse Matt Doherty. He was the one fouled by the Arsenal player

[EdinMike]

I’ve always stated that “professional” fouls should be a straight red.

There’s nothing professional about it it’s just kicking a player with no attempt to play the ball. And maybe, making it a straight red would remove it from the game and more counter attacks may end it goals.

[easty]

If you tackle someone with no intention of getting the ball it should be a red. If he’d taken him out with an attempt to get the ball then he’d have deserved a yellow.

It’s just a kick out at an opponent basically.

[Fergus52]

Standard professional foul that gets a yellow 99% of the time, shocked he got a red.

Yup,you never see red cards for that type of foul.

By the letter of the law the ref can, but it should be applied consistently

[wookie70]

It reminded me of Blair Alston’s kick at SJM when he was breaking away with the ball just outside our box away to St J. .No attempt to play the ball but a sly kick making sure he couldn’t go any further. Current rules don’t cover that as a straight red. Cynical, professional fouls should always be red imo, but the laws of the game need updating.

On a slightly different topic, the Wolves boy’s second yellow should have been a straight red for sure.

The SJM one was miles further up the park. To me if a player deliberately hacks down an opponent with absolutely no chance of playing the ball it should be a red. If you have two players stood and one kicks the other with the ball nowhere in sight then that is an obvious red and so should a hack when the ball is miles away from being played.

Your last sentence is exactly how I feel. It is anti-football and similar to standing in front of free kicks etc it should be punishable every time as harshly as rules allow

[Winston Ingram]

I’ve always thought if you kick someone with no attempt whatsoever to play the ball, it should be treated as violent conduct and don’t understand why it isn’t. It’s often referred to as a clever foul and things like that but for me, kicking someone with no attempt to play the ball is the same as punching someone.

Reminds me a bit of the John Lundstrum red card against us a few years ago that caused a fuss at the time and eventually got overturned.

I like that the ref gave a red for this one, I’m not sure if the current rules state it should be a red though?

My thoughts exactly.

[TrinityHFC]

Miles away from the ball and it also wasn’t just a trip. When you see the connection closely he’s got a full set of studs on him. Not surprised it’s a red but one of those not many would have complained about a yellow.

[Stevie Reid]

Delighted to see a red for that, and was surprised at the reaction to it on MOTD last night.

As cynical as it gets, stopped a very promising attack and had a look of studs on the ankle at one angle.

The only way to eliminate these types of challenges is to punish them severely.

[The Modfather]

I’ve long since advocated those professional fouls should be a red card. Alongside an automatic booking for stopping a quick free kick. However those aren’t the rules, or they are never enforced if they are. In that context a terrible decision.

[tamig]

The SJM one was miles further up the park. To me if a player deliberately hacks down an opponent with absolutely no chance of playing the ball it should be a red. If you have two players stood and one kicks the other with the ball nowhere in sight then that is an obvious red and so should a hack when the ball is miles away from being played.

Your last sentence is exactly how I feel. It is anti-football and similar to standing in front of free kicks etc it should be punishable every time as harshly as rules allow

Sorry to be pedantic. I was trying to find footage but it was inside our half - maybe ten yards outside our box. Here’s what the BBC live report said about it at the time -

YELLOW CARD Blair Alston
published at 58mins
58mins
St Johnstone 0-1 Hibernian
St Johnstone midfielder Blair Alston is fortunate not to be sent off for a cynical challenge that halts John McGinn in his tracks.
The home side pile on the pressure, but Hibs survive and the Scotland midfielder is racing clear towards the Saints half as he is blatantly tripped and Alston receives a booking.

All the online comments were similar to a lot on here in saying that those types of fouls should be an automatic red. I’ve no idea why it hasn’t been addressed by the authorities yet.

[tamig]

Miles away from the ball and it also wasn’t just a trip. When you see the connection closely he’s got a full set of studs on him. Not surprised it’s a red but one of those not many would have complained about a yellow.

What’s your opinion of the Wolves boy’s second yellow? A far more dangerous challenge and a potential leg breaker. Yet Oliver only brandishes a yellow. The inconsistency from the same ref in the same game is inexplicable.

[Carheenlea]

If you tackle someone with no intention of getting the ball it should be a red. If he’d taken him out with an attempt to get the ball then he’d have deserved a yellow.

It’s just a kick out at an opponent basically.

I agree, but the shirt pulls/grabs round waist which bring counter attacks to an abrupt halt would then require to be treated in a similar manner, but I wouldn’t have a big problem with that. They are hugely frustrating to watch when it’s your own players being deliberately pulled back by or hauled down with no intent of winning ball, and it’s uncomfortable to watch when one of your own players does it (was it Josh Campbell in recent weeks who did one?).

It’s not violent or dangerous play, but like deliberately handling the ball to prevent a goal, it’s cheating.

[TrinityHFC]

What’s your opinion of the Wolves boy’s second yellow? A far more dangerous challenge and a potential leg breaker. Yet Oliver only brandishes a yellow. The inconsistency from the same ref in the same game is inexplicable.

I’ve only seen the footage of the red, didn’t see the game!

[JohnM1875]

Hun (Lundstram?) Got sent off for this sort of tackle at ER once which i felt was the right decision.

Not 100% on the arsenal one tbh. It wasn't malicious

Any tackle that isn't aimed at the ball there is definitely an argument for a straight red imo

Could be wrong, but sure the red got downgraded to a yellow on appeal?

I agree though, I hate those types of tackles and have always thought they should be red cards. As blatent cheating as you’ll see.

[Speedy]

Never a red card

[easty]

I agree, but the shirt pulls/grabs round waist which bring counter attacks to an abrupt halt would then require to be treated in a similar manner, but I wouldn’t have a big problem with that. They are hugely frustrating to watch when it’s your own players being deliberately pulled back by or hauled down with no intent of winning ball, and it’s uncomfortable to watch when one of your own players does it (was it Josh Campbell in recent weeks who did one?).

It’s not violent or dangerous play, but like deliberately handling the ball to prevent a goal, it’s cheating.

A shirt pull and a kick are two different things though

If you swing a kick at someone off the ball it’s a red card. If you pull their shirt it’s not.

The Arsenal boy wasn’t going for the ball, he just kicks the man.

[heretoday]

I don't know why Lineker and his overpaid couch buddies were so adamant that it was a pen. The guy stamped on the Wolves boy's ankle clear as day. Red card and move on.
Same old Arsenal.

[Speedy]

A shirt pull and a kick are two different things though

If you swing a kick at someone off the ball it’s a red card. If you pull their shirt it’s not.

The Arsenal boy wasn’t going for the ball, he just kicks the man.

Don't think it is fair to conclusively say he wasn't going for the ball. He may just have been late

[easty]

Don't think it is fair to conclusively say he wasn't going for the ball. He may just have been late

I think it is fair to say he had zero intention of getting the ball

[Speedy]

I think it is fair to say he had zero intention of getting the ball

Fair enough. Can agree to disagree.

To me he's already committed to the challenge before the ball is away but I can't say for certain.

[Callum_62]

What’s your opinion of the Wolves boy’s second yellow? A far more dangerous challenge and a potential leg breaker. Yet Oliver only brandishes a yellow. The inconsistency from the same ref in the same game is inexplicable.The wolves boy is a clear yellow

He stands on the arsenal players foot

No where near breaking a leg imo?

Sent from my Pixel 7 Pro using Tapatalk

[tamig]

The wolves boy is a clear yellow

He stands on the arsenal players foot

No where near breaking a leg imo?

Sent from my Pixel 7 Pro using Tapatalk

It was on his ankle from what I saw. And stamping down on it. Lewis-Kelly’s studs grazed down the boy’s leg with virtually no force. No comparison between the two imo in terms of danger to the opponent. The Arsenal boy was kucky to escape with no serious injury.

[wookie70]

Sorry to be pedantic. I was trying to find footage but it was inside our half - maybe ten yards outside our box. Here’s what the BBC live report said about it at the time -

YELLOW CARD Blair Alston
published at 58mins
58mins
St Johnstone 0-1 Hibernian
St Johnstone midfielder Blair Alston is fortunate not to be sent off for a cynical challenge that halts John McGinn in his tracks.
The home side pile on the pressure, but Hibs survive and the Scotland midfielder is racing clear towards the Saints half as he is blatantly tripped and Alston receives a booking.

All the online comments were similar to a lot on here in saying that those types of fouls should be an automatic red. I’ve no idea why it hasn’t been addressed by the authorities yet.

My memory was he was around the half way line in the centre circle. The Arsenal on is just outside the box so I think we aren't far off in terms of our recollection. I was maybe a wee bit overboard with my discrepancy in terms of where they were on the pitch.

[wookie70]

Sorry to be pedantic. I was trying to find footage but it was inside our half - maybe ten yards outside our box. Here’s what the BBC live report said about it at the time -

YELLOW CARD Blair Alston
published at 58mins
58mins
St Johnstone 0-1 Hibernian
St Johnstone midfielder Blair Alston is fortunate not to be sent off for a cynical challenge that halts John McGinn in his tracks.
The home side pile on the pressure, but Hibs survive and the Scotland midfielder is racing clear towards the Saints half as he is blatantly tripped and Alston receives a booking.

All the online comments were similar to a lot on here in saying that those types of fouls should be an automatic red. I’ve no idea why it hasn’t been addressed by the authorities yet.

Pretty much as I remember it, in the centre circle around the half way line - https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=2074773695871842 (https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=2074773695871842)

[tamig]

Pretty much as I remember it, in the centre circle around the half way line - https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=2074773695871842 (https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=2074773695871842)

Ah fair enough. Its a lot worse seeing it again than I remembered - even though I was raging at the time. It was a shocker. Any foul of that type should be a straight red and the rules should be changed to resolve the issue. Cheers for finding the clip 👍

[Tambo]

Just seen it now and it does look as bad as people have made out, never a red for me, a yellow maybe. Can see why Arteta can be furious with the decision and should be appealing.

[Hibees1973]

Arteta's behaviour on the touchline is a disgrace.

He is a psycho.

Clearly this filters through to his players which is why Arsenal get so many red cards. Also filters through to the online Arsenal idiots who have abused the ref and his family.

This lack of calmness under pressure will be why Arsenal will fail to be champions.

[HibbyAndy]

Never in a million years is it a red card

[Corstorphine Hibby]

Arteta's behaviour on the touchline is a disgrace.

He is a psycho.

Clearly this filters through to his players which is why Arsenal get so many red cards. Also filters through to the online Arsenal idiots who have abused the ref and his family.

This lack of calmness under pressure will be why Arsenal will fail to be champions.

The amount of time they (Arsenal) take over set pieces is a nonsense too. Anything between 2 & 4 minutes can lapse between a free kick being awarded then taken

[tamig]

Arteta's behaviour on the touchline is a disgrace.

He is a psycho.

Clearly this filters through to his players which is why Arsenal get so many red cards. Also filters through to the online Arsenal idiots who have abused the ref and his family.

This lack of calmness under pressure will be why Arsenal will fail to be champions.

Red cards for second bookings given out for stopping free kicks being taken? They seem to be the only team this rule is applied to. He has a point. No excuses for online threats to Oliver and his family of course.

[wookie70]

Ah fair enough. Its a lot worse seeing it again than I remembered - even though I was raging at the time. It was a shocker. Any foul of that type should be a straight red and the rules should be changed to resolve the issue. Cheers for finding the clip 👍

We can agree on it being a red. I'd far rather tackles like that were red that some of the fairly tame reds we have seen for and against us where players just mistime a challenge and a stud goes into a shin guard. I'd far rather cheating was penalised than someone making an attempt to win the ball and getting it very slightly wrong. No issue with the tackles that are designed to hurt opponents being reds but it is all far too sanitised for my liking. Funny I watched this today and wished we could get back to this type of reaction to what would now be a definite red. Ronaldo looking to block the ball I think and Lampard passes it the other way and ends up with studs down the shin. If he has shin guards on that isn't an issue at all. - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bcOusPv4rrs&ab_channel=ManchesterUnited

[BILLYHIBS]

Arsenal red card from all angles

Will be interesting to see what today brings ?

https://www.skysports.com/football/video/36396/13296803/myles-lewis-skellys-red-card-at-wolves-from-all-angles

[Chorley Hibee]

I wonder what VAR would make of this? 😱

That tackle should be a police matter.

https://www.facebook.com/share/v/1A3i6isoaK/

[BILLYHIBS]

Oh dear !

That’s a red

[greenlex]

A red for me. He literally rakes his studs down his ankles. I’m sure he didn’t mean it but that’s what happened. It was anything but just a stopping the player breaking event.

[FilipinoHibs]

Red

Deliberate premeditated violent act with no intention of playing the ball

Could not understand the MOTD pundits saying it deserved only a yellow

Red all day long in my book

Serious foul play

Will be interesting to see if there is any intervention from the powers that be

Worth it just to see Arteta’s greetin face but they still won in any case

Not a violent action and a long way from the Arsenal goal with lots of Arsenal players in front of him. Never a red.

[BILLYHIBS]

Not a violent action and a long way from the Arsenal goal with lots of Arsenal players in front of him. Never a red.

Never even looked at the ball played the man to stop the break a cynical trip but caught him above the ankle

See my post 5 above 👆

Happy to go with what the FA decide

[Pretty Boy]

I wish there were more red cards for such blatant cheating. No attempt to play the ball, cynical, deliberate and stopping a promising break with no intent other than to do so.

In saying that refs can't just go making up the rules. Even allowing for the fact the tackle was worse than it first looked in real time I think it will be overturned.

[superfurryhibby]

A red for me. He literally rakes his studs down his ankles. I’m sure he didn’t mean it but that’s what happened. It was anything but just a stopping the player breaking event.

It's that rake which makes it a red, not a straight forward trip/professional foul for me. He brings the studs down the ankle. Seen much worse, received much worse, but that's always going to give the ref a decision to make re: straight red.

[Fergus52]

The ESPN reporter who does a VAR review every week (and nearly always backs the refs) said it should probably have been downgraded to a yellow, although he does provide caveats as to why it wasn't.


The VAR Review: Explaining the Lewis-Skelly red card controversy - ESPN (https://www.espn.in/football/insider/story/_/id/43518946/the-var-review-arsenal-myles-lewis-skelly-red-card)

[superfurryhibby]

The ESPN reporter who does a VAR review every week (and nearly always backs the refs) said it should probably have been downgraded to a yellow, although he does provide caveats as to why it wasn't.


The VAR Review: Explaining the Lewis-Skelly red card controversy - ESPN (https://www.espn.in/football/insider/story/_/id/43518946/the-var-review-arsenal-myles-lewis-skelly-red-card)

1st freeze frame image shows the initial contact well above the ankle level, with studs up.

2nd freeze frame image shows the boot, still studs up, making contact with the boot of Docherty

"Was the VAR too quick to support the on-field call once they had the freeze-frame image? After all, in isolation this appears damning -- but such pictures usually do, because it removes all the context of force and intensity. It gives the impression of serious foul play rather than a trip, which was a more accurate assessment. PGMOL will stand by this red card, as they did with the VAR dismissal of Christian Nørgaard at Everton, believing the contact was high (the Brentford player caught goalkeeper Jordan Pickford on his knee) and dangerous. Nørgaard, at least, was going for the ball while Lewis-Skelly's only intention was to bring down an opponent. But an appeal against the three-match ban will be decided by an independent panel of ex-players, and not PGMOL.

Though, even with the outcry, there's no guarantee Arsenal will win".

The thing is, once you make that kind of contact, you might know how much force you put in, but still can't really predict the outcome. It's not going to snap a leg in two, but it's hardly a trip. An off the ball rake or swipe with no attempt to make contact with the football, well the modern game means this will become a red card conundrum for a ref.

[Since452]

I hate that kind of "tackle". For me it's cheating and should be a red card every time.

It not a "professional foul" that doesn't exist. It's a player that's been absolutely done all ends up and has to resort to cynically scything down a player to stop an attack. Hate it.

Not only that but bringing down a player running at speed who isn't expecting it, from behind, is dangerous.

Well done ref. I'd buy you a ****ing beer.

Rant over.

[HoboHarry]

I hate that kind of "tackle". For me it's cheating and should be a red card every time.

It not a "professional foul" that doesn't exist. It's a player that's been absolutely done all ends up and has to resort to cynically scything down a player to stop an attack. Hate it.

Not only that but bringing down a player running at speed who isn't expecting it, from behind, is dangerous.

Well done ref. I'd buy you a ****ing beer.

Rant over.
I agree with what your saying and the thing that struck me was the age of the Arsenal player, I can't recall many teenagers through the years who'd do something that cynical so early in their careers? To me that's a whole new level of cynical and I have to wonder if that's something that Arsenal coaching staff are instructing them to carry out?

[BILLYHIBS]

I agree with what your saying and the thing that struck me was the age of the Arsenal player, I can't recall many teenagers through the years who'd do something that cynical so early in their careers? To me that's a whole new level of cynical and I have to wonder if that's something that Arsenal coaching staff are instructing them to carry out?

Was naive had to be cuter maybes a blatant Yam body check or a Hun shove in the back over the knee to halt Doherty’s progress

He will learn

[easty]

I agree with what your saying and the thing that struck me was the age of the Arsenal player, I can't recall many teenagers through the years who'd do something that cynical so early in their careers? To me that's a whole new level of cynical and I have to wonder if that's something that Arsenal coaching staff are instructing them to carry out?

Cochrane on McGinn

[Phil MaGlass]

We can agree on it being a red. I'd far rather tackles like that were red that some of the fairly tame reds we have seen for and against us where players just mistime a challenge and a stud goes into a shin guard. I'd far rather cheating was penalised than someone making an attempt to win the ball and getting it very slightly wrong. No issue with the tackles that are designed to hurt opponents being reds but it is all far too sanitised for my liking. Funny I watched this today and wished we could get back to this type of reaction to what would now be a definite red. Ronaldo looking to block the ball I think and Lampard passes it the other way and ends up with studs down the shin. If he has shin guards on that isn't an issue at all. - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bcOusPv4rrs&ab_channel=ManchesterUnited

Absolutely a red, watched it a few times, the boy could have been seriously injured.

[BILLYHIBS]

Arsenal to appeal

BBC Sport

[Dmas]

Arsenal to appeal

BBC Sport

Be interesting to see how that goes, a lot of pressure with media attention the ref is about hung drawn and quartered as well

Red for me and should stand far more dangerous than a little trip to stop a counter attack

[FilipinoHibs]

Justice done, a lot of people don't know the rules.

[HibbyAndy]

Justice done, a lot of people don't know the rules.

:agree: All the experts agreed as well :greengrin


Kin scandelous red card in the first place

[Sylar]

What's troublesome, for both the Arsenal and Rangers red card appeals that have both been upheld today, is that in both instances the referee had an opportunity to review the incidents and stood by their decisions.

To me, being overturned on appeal, suggests the referees were too stubborn to admit they got it wrong. I know decisions are overturned by VAR all of the time, but both of these situations were quite evidently not in the 'clear and obvious red card' categories...

If we're to continue with VAR like this, I'd like to see the assistants and VAR officials also contribute to the conversation and not just leave it to the referee to admit his mistake or otherwise.

[TrinityHFC]

What's troublesome, for both the Arsenal and Rangers red card appeals that have both been upheld today, is that in both instances the referee had an opportunity to review the incidents and stood by their decisions.

To me, being overturned on appeal, suggests the referees were too stubborn to admit they got it wrong. I know decisions are overturned by VAR all of the time, but both of these situations were quite evidently not in the 'clear and obvious red card' categories...

If we're to continue with VAR like this, I'd like to see the assistants and VAR officials also contribute to the conversation and not just leave it to the referee to admit his mistake or otherwise.

It is still down to interpretation and whilst all the video stuff is great, the referee is on the park, close to the incident and will retain his sense of what he saw and felt at the time.

[greenlex]

What's troublesome, for both the Arsenal and Rangers red card appeals that have both been upheld today, is that in both instances the referee had an opportunity to review the incidents and stood by their decisions.

To me, being overturned on appeal, suggests the referees were too stubborn to admit they got it wrong. I know decisions are overturned by VAR all of the time, but both of these situations were quite evidently not in the 'clear and obvious red card' categories...

If we're to continue with VAR like this, I'd like to see the assistants and VAR officials also contribute to the conversation and not just leave it to the referee to admit his mistake or otherwise.
Did the Arsenal one get reviewed by the ref? I thought VAR didn’t intervene in that one. I think it’s definitely endangering an opponent and the boy was lucky not to be hurt by it. A deliberate action to stop the player and endangering him.
The Rangers one is problematic. Having been given the opportunity and stuck by his original decision the upholding of that appeal is bonkers. It is subjective but IMO the hun definitely motions to slap the hun as he is being pushed. The intent is there even tho there was no contact. ( even Clement acknowledges this post match) so I cannot phathom why they have upheld this against one of their top refs opinions when he’s had a VAR look at it.

[ancient hibee]

What's troublesome, for both the Arsenal and Rangers red card appeals that have both been upheld today, is that in both instances the referee had an opportunity to review the incidents and stood by their decisions.

To me, being overturned on appeal, suggests the referees were too stubborn to admit they got it wrong. I know decisions are overturned by VAR all of the time, but both of these situations were quite evidently not in the 'clear and obvious red card' categories...

If we're to continue with VAR like this, I'd like to see the assistants and VAR officials also contribute to the conversation and not just leave it to the referee to admit his mistake or otherwise.


I’ve a feeling you’re not quite right. In the Arsenal game I don’t think he was asked to review which suggests VAR agreed with the decision or did not feel it was an obvious error.

[Sylar]

Did the Arsenal one get reviewed by the ref? I thought VAR didn’t intervene in that one. I think it’s definitely endangering an opponent and the boy was lucky not to be hurt by it. A deliberate action to stop the player and endangering him.
The Rangers one is problematic. Having been given the opportunity and stuck by his original decision the upholding of that appeal is bonkers. It is subjective but IMO the hun definitely motions to slap the hun as he is being pushed. The intent is there even tho there was no contact. ( even Clement acknowledges this post match) so I cannot phathom why they have upheld this against one of their top refs opinions when he’s had a VAR look at it.


I’ve a feeling you’re not quite right. In the Arsenal game I don’t think he was asked to review which suggests VAR agreed with the decision or did not feel it was an obvious error.

I only watched the MoTD clip but thought I'd read it was reviewed. Hands up and accepting if I'm wrong, gents.

I guess the general point still kinda remains - how do a team of officials on the day all review the decision and decide it's fine and doesn't even need review (in the Arsenal case), but a subsequent review/appeal panel afterward can come to a different conclusion? I'm not looking to engage in debate about the merits of the particular decisions here, rather the way the decisions are made where It makes a bit of a mockery of so many officials being there (4 in the ground and a VAR team watching on screen) interpreting something so differently from a review panel afterwards. Presumably they all have the same qualification/understanding of the rules?

I know they're not comparable as sports or situations, but I really like in rugby where the TMO comes in and you can clearly hear the conference between all officials that outline's the facts in accordance with the rules of the games and very rarely do they get it wrong. It's been excellent when audio has been released from previous decisions - I think that needs to become part of the process so everything is transparent.

[Speedy]

I only watched the MoTD clip but thought I'd read it was reviewed. Hands up and accepting if I'm wrong, gents.

I guess the general point still kinda remains - how do a team of officials on the day all review the decision and decide it's fine and doesn't even need review (in the Arsenal case), but a subsequent review/appeal panel afterward can come to a different conclusion? I'm not looking to engage in debate about the merits of the particular decisions here, rather the way the decisions are made where It makes a bit of a mockery of so many officials being there (4 in the ground and a VAR team watching on screen) interpreting something so differently from a review panel afterwards. Presumably they all have the same qualification/understanding of the rules?

I know they're not comparable as sports or situations, but I really like in rugby where the TMO comes in and you can clearly hear the conference between all officials that outline's the facts in accordance with the rules of the games and very rarely do they get it wrong. It's been excellent when audio has been released from previous decisions - I think that needs to become part of the process so everything is transparent.

Does the appeals panel have more discretion to overturn? E.g. VAR requires the decision to be 'obviously' wrong, whereas the appeals panel can decide yay or not based on their interpretation regardless of what the ref originally decided.

[ancient hibee]

I only watched the MoTD clip but thought I'd read it was reviewed. Hands up and accepting if I'm wrong, gents.

I guess the general point still kinda remains - how do a team of officials on the day all review the decision and decide it's fine and doesn't even need review (in the Arsenal case), but a subsequent review/appeal panel afterward can come to a different conclusion? I'm not looking to engage in debate about the merits of the particular decisions here, rather the way the decisions are made where It makes a bit of a mockery of so many officials being there (4 in the ground and a VAR team watching on screen) interpreting something so differently from a review panel afterwards. Presumably they all have the same qualification/understanding of the rules?

I know they're not comparable as sports or situations, but I really like in rugby where the TMO comes in and you can clearly hear the conference between all officials that outline's the facts in accordance with the rules of the games and very rarely do they get it wrong. It's been excellent when audio has been released from previous decisions - I think that needs to become part of the process so everything is transparent.
The reports never tell you enough. What has actually happened is the 3match suspension has been cancelled.Does this mean the ref was totally wrong and the red card comes off the player’s record or is it that sending off was enough punishment?

[Baader]

Arsenal one was never a red card. Some on here may want it be a red card, probably tend to agree but there is nothing in the laws of the game to advise that should be a straight red.

[tamig]

Does the appeals panel have more discretion to overturn? E.g. VAR requires the decision to be 'obviously' wrong, whereas the appeals panel can decide yay or not based on their interpretation regardless of what the ref originally decided.

The appeals panel is made up of former players so they’re looking at it from a different perspective. How many times do we hear officials getting slated with the comment that “they’ve never played the game”? I definitely think there’s a lot of merit in that.

[Greenbeard]

Arsenal one was never a red card. Some on here may want it be a red card, probably tend to agree but there is nothing in the laws of the game to advise that should be a straight red.
I think that's what a lot f folk have been saying i.e. it may have been borderline red by the laws but that sort of blatant deliberate cheating SHOUD be a red so change the laws, especially as it has become far more prevalent in the game across the globe. Maybe we notice that more in this country because the "continentals" always have been blatant cheating bar stewards.
If anyone doesn't agree with that outlook and think what the lad did was fine for just a yellow - "streetwise" or "taking one for the team" - then quite simply they condone blatant cheating. So no complaints please when the same happens to Boyle on the break v. The The Huns.