DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
RateTheRef
HTML https://ratetheref.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: General Discussion
*****************************************************
#Post#: 27290--------------------------------------------------
Re: Chris Kavanagh - Liverpool v Everton
DIR By: Scally Bob
Date: February 21, 2021, 10:49 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: TVOS link ---
>
> [quote author=Scally Bob link=topic=2192.msg27243#msg27243
date=1613866169]
> How do you work that out? Calvert-Lewin didn’t have control of
the ball and there was a defender behind Alisson. He tripped
over Alexander-Arnold and it wasn’t even a foul.
>
> An atrocious decision magnified by the fact that all concerned
had adequate opportunity to correct it.
>
--- End Quote ---
"Atrocious"!
Really?
[/quote]
Yes really. It’s only the laughable events at Fulham that
stopped it being the worst of the weekend.
#Post#: 27293--------------------------------------------------
Re: Chris Kavanagh - Liverpool v Everton
DIR By: Beryl
Date: February 21, 2021, 11:03 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Scally Bob link ---
>
> [quote author=TVOS link=topic=2192.msg27288#msg27288
date=1613920570]
> [quote author=Scally Bob link=topic=2192.msg27243#msg27243
date=1613866169]
> How do you work that out? Calvert-Lewin didn’t have control of
the ball and there was a defender behind Alisson. He tripped
over Alexander-Arnold and it wasn’t even a foul.
>
> An atrocious decision magnified by the fact that all concerned
had adequate opportunity to correct it.
>
--- End Quote ---
"Atrocious"!
Really?
[/quote]
Yes really. It’s only the laughable events at Fulham that
stopped it being the worst of the weekend.
[/quote]
What decision should be given when an attacker is taken down by
the defender?
Bear in mind, deliberate or intent is not relevant to the
decision.
Deliberate comes into play when considering a sanction for a
trip, but not for the trip itself
Why did the attacker go down? Because he was upended by the
defender.
#Post#: 27295--------------------------------------------------
Re: Chris Kavanagh - Liverpool v Everton
DIR By: Ref Fan
Date: February 21, 2021, 11:39 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Ref Fan link ---
>
> [quote author=Whistleblower link=topic=2192.msg27256#msg27256
date=1613902645]
> It's really interesting how different people can look at the
same incident, several times, and with varying degrees of
certainty come to totally opposite conclusions. This goes for TV
pundits, RTR correspondents, everyone I suppose. Here's my
twopennyworth from having seen it on Match of the Day. I think
it is by no means clear cut either way but I tend to the view
that awarding a penalty kick was not wrong. I think VAR was
quite justified in asking Kavanagh to review his decision on the
monitor because there may have been some uncertainty in the mind
of the VAR also. Kavanagh goes over to the monitor and his
viewing confirms what he saw and in his opinion it is a penalty
kick. I don't see why he needed to spend ages viewing and
re-viewing the incident once he was assured that his original
decision was correct. Also I see no trace of arrogance in the
way Kavanagh conducted himself, rather an efficient way of
referee and VAR working.
>
--- End Quote ---
I must admit that I thought the protocol was that VAR only
advised the referee to look at the monitor if he felt there had
been a clear and obvious error, or has that changed? If it
still applies, I would have assumed the referee was duty bound
to consult the monitor, and it was based on this I felt
Kavanagh's check was rather cursory given that a very
experienced colleague believed he'd got it wrong. Of course, if
my understanding of the protocol is incorrect, then it's a
different matter.
[/quote]
I do agree with your first point about how people can reach
different conclusions having watched the same incident several
times. As it happens, I'm in the same boat as you Whistleblower
that it wasn't clear cut but not a wrong decision, so it is
interesting, and perhaps surprising, that some are dogmatically
asserting it was a stonewall penalty and others that
emphatically it was a poor decision.
My reference to arrogance in that earlier post wasn't to do with
Kavanagh's expression or manner, but I felt that such a brief
look at the monitor might give the impression of disrespect for
a very experienced and capable colleague on VAR. And that's on
the assumption that Marriner's advice that Kavanagh looked at
the monitor was because he believed it was a clear and obvious
error and for that reason alone he intervened.
As I've said, if that isn't the protocol any more, then
different scenarios could apply.
#Post#: 27303--------------------------------------------------
Re: Chris Kavanagh - Liverpool v Everton
DIR By: DublinRef
Date: February 21, 2021, 1:24 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Whistleblower link ---
>
> [quote author=TheThingFromLewes
link=topic=2192.msg27270#msg27270 date=1613909496]
> [quote author=Whistleblower link=topic=2192.msg27266#msg27266
date=1613906713]
> What is the protocol here? Does the VAR suggest to the referee
that they consult the pitch side monitor but the referee is in
no way obliged to act on the suggestion ? I suspect that in
this case Kavanagh was quite clear as to what he had seen and
was entirely comfortable in his award of a penalty kick. His VAR
is a very experienced and well regarded referee, far more
experienced than Kavanagh and therefore in due deference to his
colleague, Kavanagh does take up the invitation to view the
monitor whilst still being pretty sure about the rightness of
his decision. A viewing of the monitor then confirms his view.
If this is the scenario, rather than showing arrogance I think
Kavanagh comes out of this rather well.
>
--- End Quote ---
I have to agree Whistleblower. It’s refreshing to see that an
official despite Big Brother interfering only took seconds to
look at it and immediately stuck with his on field decision.
In my eye it shows confidence on a high level, which is notable
in the excellent performances he’s produced recently.
I would say he’s possibly number 3 in the pecking order behind
Oliver and Taylor.
[/quote]
I certainly think he has that potential but I wouldn't say he
has quite overtaken Pawson yet. It seems clear to me that
Kavanagh and Tierney are the best regarded outside of Taylor,
Oliver and Pawson and of them Kavanagh just shades it over
Tierney. In the season before Kavanagh's promotion to SG1, I
was at a match with a very senior Observer/Assessor. We weren't
actually watching Kavanagh but in the general conversation we
talked about who might be the next "star" and this
Observer/Assessor said " Without a doubt Kavanagh; at the
moment, outside SG1, he is absolutely in a class of his own and
considerably better than over half of the present SG1"
[/quote]
I think you are correct that he has not overtaken Pawson yet. I
still think he is thought of as one for the future, where as
Pawson seems to have reached his peak (a very respectable peak
one might add!!).
#Post#: 27304--------------------------------------------------
Re: Chris Kavanagh - Liverpool v Everton
DIR By: Scally Bob
Date: February 21, 2021, 1:56 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Beryl link ---
>
> [quote author=Scally Bob link=topic=2192.msg27290#msg27290
date=1613926191]
> [quote author=TVOS link=topic=2192.msg27288#msg27288
date=1613920570]
> [quote author=Scally Bob link=topic=2192.msg27243#msg27243
date=1613866169]
> How do you work that out? Calvert-Lewin didn’t have control of
the ball and there was a defender behind Alisson. He tripped
over Alexander-Arnold and it wasn’t even a foul.
>
> An atrocious decision magnified by the fact that all concerned
had adequate opportunity to correct it.
>
--- End Quote ---
Calvert-Lewin's momentum took him into a defender who was
"Atrocious"!
Really?
[/quote]
Yes really. It’s only the laughable events at Fulham that
stopped it being the worst of the weekend.
[/quote]
What decision should be given when an attacker is taken down by
the defender?
Bear in mind, deliberate or intent is not relevant to the
decision.
Deliberate comes into play when considering a sanction for a
trip, but not for the trip itself
Why did the attacker go down? Because he was upended by the
defender.
[/quote]
Calvert Lewin ran into an opponent who was on the ground. What
is the defender meant to do? it's a simple coming together and
not a foul. Suggesting the attacker was taken down is nonsense;
when a player is taken down punish it but that just wasn't what
happened here.
This forensic analysis of everything trying to find offences
where none exist is absolutely ruining the game. VAR is the
worst thing football has ever inflicted upon itself and the
robotic performances of officials looking for things that don't
exist is a consequence. They're terrified and it shows. Maybe
they just want football to be non-contact?
#Post#: 27305--------------------------------------------------
Re: Chris Kavanagh - Liverpool v Everton
DIR By: TVOS
Date: February 21, 2021, 2:09 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Scally Bob link ---
>
> [quote author=Beryl link=topic=2192.msg27293#msg27293
date=1613927001]
> [quote author=Scally Bob link=topic=2192.msg27290#msg27290
date=1613926191]
> [quote author=TVOS link=topic=2192.msg27288#msg27288
date=1613920570]
> [quote author=Scally Bob link=topic=2192.msg27243#msg27243
date=1613866169]
> How do you work that out? Calvert-Lewin didn’t have control of
the ball and there was a defender behind Alisson. He tripped
over Alexander-Arnold and it wasn’t even a foul.
>
> An atrocious decision magnified by the fact that all concerned
had adequate opportunity to correct it.
>
--- End Quote ---
Calvert-Lewin's momentum took him into a defender who was
"Atrocious"!
Really?
[/quote]
Yes really. It’s only the laughable events at Fulham that
stopped it being the worst of the weekend.
[/quote]
What decision should be given when an attacker is taken down by
the defender?
Bear in mind, deliberate or intent is not relevant to the
decision.
Deliberate comes into play when considering a sanction for a
trip, but not for the trip itself
Why did the attacker go down? Because he was upended by the
defender.
[/quote]
Calvert Lewin ran into an opponent who was on the ground. What
is the defender meant to do? it's a simple coming together and
not a foul. Suggesting the attacker was taken down is nonsense;
when a player is taken down punish it but that just wasn't what
happened here.
This forensic analysis of everything trying to find offences
where none exist is absolutely ruining the game. VAR is the
worst thing football has ever inflicted upon itself and the
robotic performances of officials looking for things that don't
exist is a consequence. They're terrified and it shows. Maybe
they just want football to be non-contact?
[/quote]
Some players would still find a way to make it look like they've
been fouled...
#Post#: 27306--------------------------------------------------
Re: Chris Kavanagh - Liverpool v Everton
DIR By: TVOS
Date: February 21, 2021, 2:10 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Scally Bob link ---
>
> [quote author=TVOS link=topic=2192.msg27288#msg27288
date=1613920570]
> [quote author=Scally Bob link=topic=2192.msg27243#msg27243
date=1613866169]
> How do you work that out? Calvert-Lewin didn’t have control of
the ball and there was a defender behind Alisson. He tripped
over Alexander-Arnold and it wasn’t even a foul.
>
> An atrocious decision magnified by the fact that all concerned
had adequate opportunity to correct it.
>
--- End Quote ---
"Atrocious"!
Really?
[/quote]
Yes really. It’s only the laughable events at Fulham that
stopped it being the worst of the weekend.
[/quote]
It was questionable, but I'm erring on the side of probably not
wrong and certainly not "atrocious".
#Post#: 27307--------------------------------------------------
Re: Chris Kavanagh - Liverpool v Everton
DIR By: Beryl
Date: February 21, 2021, 2:22 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Scally Bob link ---
>
> [quote author=Beryl link=topic=2192.msg27293#msg27293
date=1613927001]
> [quote author=Scally Bob link=topic=2192.msg27290#msg27290
date=1613926191]
> [quote author=TVOS link=topic=2192.msg27288#msg27288
date=1613920570]
> [quote author=Scally Bob link=topic=2192.msg27243#msg27243
date=1613866169]
> How do you work that out? Calvert-Lewin didn’t have control of
the ball and there was a defender behind Alisson. He tripped
over Alexander-Arnold and it wasn’t even a foul.
>
> An atrocious decision magnified by the fact that all concerned
had adequate opportunity to correct it.
>
--- End Quote ---
Calvert-Lewin's momentum took him into a defender who was
"Atrocious"!
Really?
[/quote]
Yes really. It’s only the laughable events at Fulham that
stopped it being the worst of the weekend.
[/quote]
What decision should be given when an attacker is taken down by
the defender?
Bear in mind, deliberate or intent is not relevant to the
decision.
Deliberate comes into play when considering a sanction for a
trip, but not for the trip itself
Why did the attacker go down? Because he was upended by the
defender.
[/quote]
Calvert Lewin ran into an opponent who was on the ground. What
is the defender meant to do? it's a simple coming together and
not a foul. Suggesting the attacker was taken down is nonsense;
when a player is taken down punish it but that just wasn't what
happened here.
This forensic analysis of everything trying to find offences
where none exist is absolutely ruining the game. VAR is the
worst thing football has ever inflicted upon itself and the
robotic performances of officials looking for things that don't
exist is a consequence. They're terrified and it shows. Maybe
they just want football to be non-contact?
[/quote]
Its not a case of what is the defender meant to do......what he
cant do however is be responsible for bringing down an opponent.
Its clearly accident, no qualms there.
Sadly tho, accident, is not part of the referee decision making
when it comes to awarding a foul
The striker, however we look at it, is upended by the defender.
A strange abnormal incident, we probably wont see it again for
years.
Harsh, yes. Accident, yes. Even seems unjust to give it,
yes
Was it the actions ( remember we dont consider intent’) of the
defender that brought down the attacker? Yes
Penalty.
#Post#: 27309--------------------------------------------------
Re: Chris Kavanagh - Liverpool v Everton
DIR By: Scally Bob
Date: February 21, 2021, 2:53 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
You’re looking for ways to justify a shocking decision. It’s a
coming together. Calver-Lewin ran into Alexander-Arnold nothing
more, nothing less. Anybody who has ever played to a reasonable
standard would appreciate that. You state it’s clearly an
accident and it seems unjust to give it so within the spirit of
the game-which the LOTG say should apply-it’s never in any
circumstance a penalty.
Referees in the Premier League are looking for things that just
aren’t there. A good friend of mine who is SG1 has always said
don’t go looking to be noticed and he’s right. Nobody expected a
penalty there.
#Post#: 27310--------------------------------------------------
Re: Chris Kavanagh - Liverpool v Everton
DIR By: rustyref
Date: February 21, 2021, 2:57 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Scally Bob link ---
>
> [quote author=Beryl link=topic=2192.msg27293#msg27293
date=1613927001]
> [quote author=Scally Bob link=topic=2192.msg27290#msg27290
date=1613926191]
> [quote author=TVOS link=topic=2192.msg27288#msg27288
date=1613920570]
> [quote author=Scally Bob link=topic=2192.msg27243#msg27243
date=1613866169]
> How do you work that out? Calvert-Lewin didn’t have control of
the ball and there was a defender behind Alisson. He tripped
over Alexander-Arnold and it wasn’t even a foul.
>
> An atrocious decision magnified by the fact that all concerned
had adequate opportunity to correct it.
>
--- End Quote ---
Calvert-Lewin's momentum took him into a defender who was
"Atrocious"!
Really?
[/quote]
Yes really. It’s only the laughable events at Fulham that
stopped it being the worst of the weekend.
[/quote]
What decision should be given when an attacker is taken down by
the defender?
Bear in mind, deliberate or intent is not relevant to the
decision.
Deliberate comes into play when considering a sanction for a
trip, but not for the trip itself
Why did the attacker go down? Because he was upended by the
defender.
[/quote]
This forensic analysis of everything trying to find offences
where none exist is absolutely ruining the game. VAR is the
worst thing football has ever inflicted upon itself and the
robotic performances of officials looking for things that don't
exist is a consequence. They're terrified and it shows. Maybe
they just want football to be non-contact?
[/quote]
Hardly relevant here, as the referee gave a penalty so even in
the days before VAR it would have been a penalty. I still think
that TAA has raised his leg to try and stop Calvert-Lewin, the
way that raised leg then moves to the left cannot be explained
any other way. Whether he made any contact or not is up for
debate, but the offence is "trips or attempts to trip". His
body language says it all for me, he knew what he had done and
had little complaint at the penalty award.
*****************************************************
Page 6 of 9
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page