DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
RateTheRef
HTML https://ratetheref.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: General Discussion
*****************************************************
#Post#: 21551--------------------------------------------------
Jarred Gillett Coventry v Bournemouth 2-Oct-20
DIR By: Jim_AFCB
Date: October 3, 2020, 3:20 am
---------------------------------------------------------
First time I've watched a game with the Australian official in
charge.
Reasonably straightforward game in the most part, bar a spiky
five mins or so leading to a flashpoint in the 2nd half where a
cynical foul by AFCB's Adam Smith led to a fracas that ended up
with Coventry's Gustavo Hamer being dismissed. Game calmed down
after that.
At first sight the red card looked harsh, Steve Cook pushed
Hamer in the chest, Hamer then put his hand on the side of
Cook's face, if you do that you're giving the ref a decision to
make, though it did look relatively innocuous. Some reports
suggest Hamer also spat at Cook, I didnt see that but if he did,
then he 100% deserved to go.
As for Gillett, he hardly put a foot wrong all night - one foul
given against Sam Surridge which wasn't, but that was given by
the assistant. One reasonable penalty shout for handball in the
first half against a Coventry player during a goalmouch
scramble, but no way could the officials have seen it and it
would have been a bit harsh anyway.
The cautions - one to Coventry, three to Cherries players, all
looked fair. One challenge (albeit aborted) early on by
Jefferson Lerma would probably resulted in a booking in the
Prem last season, but Gillett just had a firm word.
The Coventry player Østigard who was booked early on could
easily have seen a 2nd yellow for a challenge just before
halftime, but Gillett opted to give a final warning; I'd have
been unhappy if a Bournemouth player had seen red under similar
circumstances, so i think the ref got it right. Østigard was
subbed at HT anyway.
Overall a really good assured performance, hopefully we will see
him in the Prem before long.
#Post#: 21555--------------------------------------------------
Re: Jarred Gillett Coventry v Bournemouth 2-Oct-20
DIR By: Ashington46
Date: October 3, 2020, 6:31 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I agree, it was a good steady performance without any real
drama.
So good, it would be a real shame for him to have to referee in
the PL and be pulled to bits by the opinion of someone operating
VAR.
#Post#: 21556--------------------------------------------------
Re: Jarred Gillett Coventry v Bournemouth 2-Oct-20
DIR By: LateTackle
Date: October 3, 2020, 7:11 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I will declare my interest as a long standing Coventry supporter
but I do have some thoughts on Gillett's performance last night.
He seemed to be doing fine until the game's major talking point
but seemed to have no idea what to do with that. The incident
came about because of a very nasty foul on Dabo by a Bournemouth
defender which would deserve a yellow card without question.
Hamer was in the vicinity and, although he should not got
involved, he protested verbally at the challenge. At that point
Cook then decided to get himself involved and instigated the
trouble by a quite violent push on Hamer, who only stayed on his
feet because Dabo was behind him getting to his feet. Hamer
reacted by putting his hand on Cook's face. Not a punch or a
slap, certainly not violent, but an opportunity for some
playacting. Cook's reaction was as if he had been thumped and
the referee fell for it. Bournemouth players were laughing,
presumably that their ploy had succeeded.
The referee showed Hamer a red card for, presumably, violent
conduct. Harsh in the extreme, but completely missing the point
that Cook had been the only player guilty of any violence. So
the whole incident was caused by Bournemouth players but they
end up with a man advantage. A very naive referee who was not
helped at all by his assistant. Mark Robins alluded to it being
a deliberate ploy by Bournemouth and I think he has a point,
given their players' reactions. Nothing new there I'm afraid,
Bournemouth have something of a reputation for such tactics.
Bournemouth were a class above Coventry and had no need to
resort to this, but I doubt they will worry one jot at their
deception. They will probably be promoted but they will win few
friends.
#Post#: 21557--------------------------------------------------
Re: Jarred Gillett Coventry v Bournemouth 2-Oct-20
DIR By: Ashington46
Date: October 3, 2020, 7:41 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I did not think that the tackle on Dabo was particularly nasty,
a foul committed with the intention that Dabo could not make
further progress and Smith was correctly cautioned.
However, I am fairly certain that the referee did not see Cook
push Hamer but was looking straight at the pair when Hamer
retaliated. Whether his AR had seen the original incident only
he knows.
I have no axe to grind at all because I was watching as a
neutral, however, the referee can only give what he sees and
that is not always what is seen on a TV screen. Hamer should
never have got involved, Cook was lucky that the referee did not
see his action but Hamer was ever more stupid to react as he did
----don't blame the referee for a player's stupidity.
#Post#: 21562--------------------------------------------------
Re: Jarred Gillett Coventry v Bournemouth 2-Oct-20
DIR By: LateTackle
Date: October 3, 2020, 9:18 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Ashington46 link ---
>
> I did not think that the tackle on Dabo was particularly
nasty, a foul committed with the intention that Dabo could not
make further progress and Smith was correctly cautioned.
> However, I am fairly certain that the referee did not see
Cook push Hamer but was looking straight at the pair when Hamer
retaliated. Whether his AR had seen the original incident only
he knows.
>
> I have no axe to grind at all because I was watching as a
neutral, however, the referee can only give what he sees and
that is not always what is seen on a TV screen. Hamer should
never have got involved, Cook was lucky that the referee did not
see his action but Hamer was ever more stupid to react as he did
----don't blame the referee for a player's stupidity.
>
--- End Quote ---
The referee saw quite clearly what Cook did, I watched the
replays several times. The linesman was watching it from very
close. It was violent conduct by Cook who started the incident.
What Hamer did was naive but he did not do anything violent.
Yes, he was stupid to fall for Bournemouth's well-rehearsed
aggression but the referee absolutely failed to act correctly.
A sensible referee would have settled for yellow cards all round
and got on with the game. Bournemouth are well versed at the
dark arts and their manager hinted at that afterwards when he
suggested Hamer 'played into their hands.'
#Post#: 21569--------------------------------------------------
Re: Jarred Gillett Coventry v Bournemouth 2-Oct-20
DIR By: PhiltheRef
Date: October 3, 2020, 12:54 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
How do you know what he saw?
You can only assume surely unless you have the ability to see
through someone else's eyes
#Post#: 21573--------------------------------------------------
Re: Jarred Gillett Coventry v Bournemouth 2-Oct-20
DIR By: DublinRef
Date: October 3, 2020, 2:16 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
On your point LateTackle - This may sound stupid - but I think
we all know that an act does not have to be violent for it to be
considered violent conduct.
The red card is correct, hand to the face and you are always in
big trouble, nailed on red? No. Have we seen yellow given for
similar before? Probably. Incorrect red? Not a chance.
The action by Cook looked to me to be a rough push to the chest,
yes with much more force than the "slap" that got red but
rightly or wrongly a push to the chest versus a hand to the face
will never be viewed the same.
I totally agree with PhiltheRef, just because someone seems to
be facing towards an incident does not at all mean that they saw
it, its very difficult on TV to see where ones eyes are focused.
#Post#: 21608--------------------------------------------------
Re: Jarred Gillett Coventry v Bournemouth 2-Oct-20
DIR By: LateTackle
Date: October 4, 2020, 11:29 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: DublinRef link ---
>
> On your point LateTackle - This may sound stupid - but I think
we all know that an act does not have to be violent for it to be
considered violent conduct.
>
> The red card is correct, hand to the face and you are always
in big trouble, nailed on red? No. Have we seen yellow given for
similar before? Probably. Incorrect red? Not a chance.
>
> The action by Cook looked to me to be a rough push to the
chest, yes with much more force than the "slap" that got red but
rightly or wrongly a push to the chest versus a hand to the face
will never be viewed the same.
>
> I totally agree with PhiltheRef, just because someone seems to
be facing towards an incident does not at all mean that they saw
it, its very difficult on TV to see where ones eyes are focused.
>
--- End Quote ---
I do take your point about what constitutes violent conduct but
what you say absolutely defines how ridiculous the game has
become. Hamer did nothing violent but gets a red for violent
conduct. Cook commits an obvious act of violence and stays on.
Absolutely ridiculous state of affairs! I would advocate that
a red card for violent conduct should be just that, not cobbled
together from the more and more farcical interpretations we are
seeing now. Just look at the handball situation.
I have long contended that making interpretations more arcane
and convoluted has the effect of allowing a decision at a given
situation justifiable, whichever way it is called. Football is
a simple game made complicated to protect the integrity and
credibility of referees. Another example is that of players
falling over to buy a penalty, usually with the slightest of
contact. Coaches 'expect' penalties when there is contact so
their players fall over at the slightest touch. An example was
Leicester's 3rd (!) penalty last week when Madison fell like a
hyperactive toddler at a mere touch. All pundits agree a
penalty is correct and he was 'entitled to go down'. (Madison
had a reputation for this at Coventry before he was 20.) It's
time that referees realised that football is a game of contact
and 'buying' penalties has no place in it.
Football loses credibility season by season, largely because of
the way referees are instructed to referee. They are like
robots, for which I don't hold them to blame. But I, like lots
of people I know, are done with the professional game now,
especially the sheer lunacy that is the Premier League.
As for what a referee can see, it is a reasonable assumption
that a professional referee can see what happens 5 yards in
front of his nose. If he didn't see it, what the hell was he
looking at? Maybe time for a career change. ;)
Rant over......for now! ::)
#Post#: 21637--------------------------------------------------
Re: Jarred Gillett Coventry v Bournemouth 2-Oct-20
DIR By: DublinRef
Date: October 4, 2020, 4:25 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: LateTackle link ---
>
> [quote author=DublinRef link=topic=1815.msg21573#msg21573
date=1601752607]
> On your point LateTackle - This may sound stupid - but I think
we all know that an act does not have to be violent for it to be
considered violent conduct.
>
> The red card is correct, hand to the face and you are always
in big trouble, nailed on red? No. Have we seen yellow given for
similar before? Probably. Incorrect red? Not a chance.
>
> The action by Cook looked to me to be a rough push to the
chest, yes with much more force than the "slap" that got red but
rightly or wrongly a push to the chest versus a hand to the face
will never be viewed the same.
>
> I totally agree with PhiltheRef, just because someone seems to
be facing towards an incident does not at all mean that they saw
it, its very difficult on TV to see where ones eyes are focused.
>
--- End Quote ---
I do take your point about what constitutes violent conduct but
what you say absolutely defines how ridiculous the game has
become. Hamer did nothing violent but gets a red for violent
conduct. Cook commits an obvious act of violence and stays on.
Absolutely ridiculous state of affairs! I would advocate that
a red card for violent conduct should be just that, not cobbled
together from the more and more farcical interpretations we are
seeing now. Just look at the handball situation.
I have long contended that making interpretations more arcane
and convoluted has the effect of allowing a decision at a given
situation justifiable, whichever way it is called. Football is
a simple game made complicated to protect the integrity and
credibility of referees. Another example is that of players
falling over to buy a penalty, usually with the slightest of
contact. Coaches 'expect' penalties when there is contact so
their players fall over at the slightest touch. An example was
Leicester's 3rd (!) penalty last week when Madison fell like a
hyperactive toddler at a mere touch. All pundits agree a
penalty is correct and he was 'entitled to go down'. (Madison
had a reputation for this at Coventry before he was 20.) It's
time that referees realised that football is a game of contact
and 'buying' penalties has no place in it.
Football loses credibility season by season, largely because of
the way referees are instructed to referee. They are like
robots, for which I don't hold them to blame. But I, like lots
of people I know, are done with the professional game now,
especially the sheer lunacy that is the Premier League.
As for what a referee can see, it is a reasonable assumption
that a professional referee can see what happens 5 yards in
front of his nose. If he didn't see it, what the hell was he
looking at? Maybe time for a career change. ;)
Rant over......for now! ::)
[/quote]
I very much take your point and agree with lots of what you say.
In my view I would question whether either player really needed
to be sent off, I think two yellow cards would have been fine -
I just don't think that would be allowed with the current
laws/interpretations.
I think the problem is lack of trust in the referees to deem
what is a fair sanction, everything is too heavily prescribed
and directed, its like for every situation the referee has to
fit it into a certain box or frame (even if it doesn't fit very
well) without being able to interpret it him/herself.
I think we need to go back to trusting referees to dish out a
fair sanction, the punishment should match the crime so to speak
and a red for Hamer was way too harsh imo - but totally correct
as the law currently stands.
#Post#: 21645--------------------------------------------------
Re: Jarred Gillett Coventry v Bournemouth 2-Oct-20
DIR By: Jackinthebox
Date: October 5, 2020, 5:22 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Decent Game by Gillet with all major decisions correct imo. If I
was to be very pickey I would say he could/should of cautioned
Lerma in the first half but as I said i think he got everything
else spot on.
With regards to the Red Card very similar to the Lemela/Martial
incident yesterday. Although the hand to the face wasn't
'forceful' you just can not make contact with an opponents face
like that i don't really see what other option Gillet had but to
produce a red card under the LOTG. The fact that Cook pushed
Hamer in the chest and not face is what a YC was issued again
correct decision imo.
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 2
DIR Next Page