DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
RateTheRef
HTML https://ratetheref.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: General Discussion
*****************************************************
#Post#: 28345--------------------------------------------------
Re: Jon Moss - Manchester City v Southampton
DIR By: Ashington46
Date: March 11, 2021, 8:57 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: nemesis link ---
>
> [quote author=Ashington46 link=topic=2247.msg28340#msg28340
date=1615461389]
>
> To be honest, it is not worth nit picking because it is all
consigned to history and the penalty was scored, no matter what
we think about it.
>
--- End Quote ---
Not discussing something that's happened because, "well it's
happened" is not a good recipe for learning from past mistakes.
[/quote]
Very true, however, I was referring to nit picking in that
particular case, which was not even scrutinised by VAR --so it
couldn't have been important. :D
I must admit that, at my age, the mistakes have all been
consigned to history and all I do now is wonder what the hell is
happening to this wonderful game that I have loved for years.
#Post#: 28346--------------------------------------------------
Re: Jon Moss - Manchester City v Southampton
DIR By: nemesis
Date: March 11, 2021, 9:02 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Ashington46 link ---
>
> [quote author=nemesis link=topic=2247.msg28344#msg28344
date=1615474244]
> [quote author=Ashington46 link=topic=2247.msg28340#msg28340
date=1615461389]
>
> To be honest, it is not worth nit picking because it is all
consigned to history and the penalty was scored, no matter what
we think about it.
>
--- End Quote ---
Not discussing something that's happened because, "well it's
happened" is not a good recipe for learning from past mistakes.
[/quote]
Very true, however, I was referring to nit picking in that
particular case, which was not even scrutinised by VAR --so it
couldn't have been important. :D
I must admit that, at my age, the mistakes have all been
consigned to history and all I do now is wonder what the hell is
happening to this wonderful game that I have loved for years.
[/quote]
One day we will wonder how we managed without VAR. It will seem
as unlikely as playing without crossbars and refereeing with a
handkerchief not a whistle. Today is not that day.
#Post#: 28347--------------------------------------------------
Re: Jon Moss - Manchester City v Southampton
DIR By: Ref Watcher
Date: March 11, 2021, 9:29 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: nemesis link ---
>
> [quote author=Ashington46 link=topic=2247.msg28340#msg28340
date=1615461389]
>
> To be honest, it is not worth nit picking because it is all
consigned to history and the penalty was scored, no matter what
we think about it.
>
--- End Quote ---
Not discussing something that's happened because, "well it's
happened" is not a good recipe for learning from past mistakes.
[/quote]
It's not an ideal philosophy for a discussion forum either. :)
#Post#: 28348--------------------------------------------------
Re: Jon Moss - Manchester City v Southampton
DIR By: ajb95
Date: March 11, 2021, 9:40 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Hendo link ---
>
> Debatable doesn’t come into it. This was a clear and obvious
error which VAR is supposed to be there to correct and quite
frankly failed.
> You can blame Moss - and let’s face it he gets more than his
fair share of criticism on here, some of it unjustified in my
opinion - but the real culprit undoubtedly is Andy Madley who
had access to umpteen camera angles and still didn’t see
anything wrong. I find it staggering that he came to this
conclusion and as others have said it makes a mockery of VAR,
especially when less obvious pens are given and we spend hours
watching borderline decisions about offside. This could not have
been more clear cut.
> I await an explanation from the PGMOL - whoops, me sees a
flying pig!
> Full marks to Foden, a rarity among his peers, in trying to
keep on his feet and not go down; honesty didn’t do him any good
sadly but morally he cannot be faulted. There are others who are
serial offenders - and we all know who they are - who would have
gone down whether touched or not to con the ref. In fact I could
name a couple who would probably be still flying through the air
or collapsing in a heap even now!
>
--- End Quote ---
Sterling or Jesus perhaps 😉🤣
#Post#: 28351--------------------------------------------------
Re: Jon Moss - Manchester City v Southampton
DIR By: Leggy
Date: March 11, 2021, 10:05 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Hendo link ---
>
> Debatable doesn’t come into it. This was a clear and obvious
error which VAR is supposed to be there to correct and quite
frankly failed.
> You can blame Moss - and let’s face it he gets more than his
fair share of criticism on here, some of it unjustified in my
opinion - but the real culprit undoubtedly is Andy Madley who
had access to umpteen camera angles and still didn’t see
anything wrong. I find it staggering that he came to this
conclusion and as others have said it makes a mockery of VAR,
especially when less obvious pens are given and we spend hours
watching borderline decisions about offside. This could not have
been more clear cut.
> I await an explanation from the PGMOL - whoops, me sees a
flying pig!
> Full marks to Foden, a rarity among his peers, in trying to
keep on his feet and not go down; honesty didn’t do him any good
sadly but morally he cannot be faulted. There are others who are
serial offenders - and we all know who they are - who would have
gone down whether touched or not to con the ref. In fact I could
name a couple who would probably be still flying through the air
or collapsing in a heap even now!
>
--- End Quote ---
I can offer two possible explanations, neither of which are
justified, but here goes:
1. Andy Madley, as a "junior" Premier League referee is
extremely unwilling to publicly say to a "senior" colleague that
a mistake may have taken place? Such deference to seniority has
been identified as a major contributory cause in more than one
serious plane crash. The junior pilot saw something wrong but
was afraid to "challenge" the captain - with disastrous results.
Fortunately, this was only a football match.
2. This is an example of a referee who can follow a protocol but
fails to have a genuine "feel" for the game. This is a version
of the saying that if something looks like a pig, smells like a
pig and eats like a pig, then calling it a sheep does not give
it a woolly coat. In this case, if it looks like a penalty of
the first camera angle, still looks like it on the second camera
angle and still looks like it on the third camera angle .......
you get my point.
#Post#: 28352--------------------------------------------------
Re: Jon Moss - Manchester City v Southampton
DIR By: Claretman
Date: March 11, 2021, 10:28 am
---------------------------------------------------------
in a situation like the foden penalty, i cant see why var cannot
say to the referee you might be right but you could
Be wrong so for sake of good order have another look yourself as
it is you has the final say.
If var was sure it def wasnt a penalty then the pgmol have a big
problem.
Var was brought in to correct errors not cover colleagues backs.
#Post#: 28353--------------------------------------------------
Re: Jon Moss - Manchester City v Southampton
DIR By: klhcms
Date: March 11, 2021, 10:30 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Could it be that the VAR couldn't get involved and give a
penalty as Jon Moss had identified the offence, but played an
attempted advantage? I was watching on Sky and clearly saw him
motion as if to say he'd played an advantage when questioned by
City players. In which case, I can't think of a category which
allows VAR involvement that can be applied here.
#Post#: 28360--------------------------------------------------
Re: Jon Moss - Manchester City v Southampton
DIR By: Leggy
Date: March 11, 2021, 12:54 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: klhcms link ---
>
> Could it be that the VAR couldn't get involved and give a
penalty as Jon Moss had identified the offence, but played an
attempted advantage? I was watching on Sky and clearly saw him
motion as if to say he'd played an advantage when questioned by
City players. In which case, I can't think of a category which
allows VAR involvement that can be applied here.
>
--- End Quote ---
If that were the case then Mr. Moss would need to go to
additional classes on playing advantage. The only justification
for playing advantage instead of awarding a penalty kick is if
an attacker is in such a place that he has a better chance of
scoring that a free shot at goal from 12 yards and only a
goal-keeper in the way. Last night was not such a case.
#Post#: 28369--------------------------------------------------
Re: Jon Moss - Manchester City v Southampton
DIR By: Hendo
Date: March 11, 2021, 1:52 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: ajb95 link ---
>
> [quote author=Hendo link=topic=2247.msg28343#msg28343
date=1615472812]
> Debatable doesn’t come into it. This was a clear and obvious
error which VAR is supposed to be there to correct and quite
frankly failed.
> You can blame Moss - and let’s face it he gets more than his
fair share of criticism on here, some of it unjustified in my
opinion - but the real culprit undoubtedly is Andy Madley who
had access to umpteen camera angles and still didn’t see
anything wrong. I find it staggering that he came to this
conclusion and as others have said it makes a mockery of VAR,
especially when less obvious pens are given and we spend hours
watching borderline decisions about offside. This could not have
been more clear cut.
> I await an explanation from the PGMOL - whoops, me sees a
flying pig!
> Full marks to Foden, a rarity among his peers, in trying to
keep on his feet and not go down; honesty didn’t do him any good
sadly but morally he cannot be faulted. There are others who are
serial offenders - and we all know who they are - who would have
gone down whether touched or not to con the ref. In fact I could
name a couple who would probably be still flying through the air
or collapsing in a heap even now!
>
--- End Quote ---
Sterling or Jesus perhaps 😉🤣
[/quote]
Thinking more of Fernandes, Salah, Mane and Grealish to be
honest, as probably most others are too
#Post#: 28382--------------------------------------------------
Re: Jon Moss - Manchester City v Southampton
DIR By: Microscopist
Date: March 11, 2021, 4:05 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
There was a 20 minute period, including the Foden non-penalty,
where there were six significant decisions. Five of these,
taken in isolation you could argue either way but the
non-penalty, I would say, was incorrect beyond reasonable doubt.
Each one went in Southampton's favour and at times you might
have thought that there had been a change in the laws whilst the
game was in progress.
On 12 minutes a foul was awarded against Fenandihno on Adams.
It was a close to 50:50 ball and Fernandihno was stretched to
get there first. He played the ball and Adams did not; so far
as I could see Fernandihno did not touch Adams with his feet or
legs but as he slid through Adams leg was caught in
Fernandihno's armpit and he fell over. OK you could argue that
it was Fernandihno's follow through that brought Adams down but
as both players were going for the ball you could equally argue
that Fernandihno simply got to the ball first.
In the 21st minute De Bruyne made a run inside the edge of the
penalty area towards the goal line. His progress was halted by
by Bednarek pushing an arm cross his chest at shoulder height
with no attempt to play the ball. De Bruyne sank to his knees.
No penalty was awarded. OK, these challenges happen all the
time and whilst it is technically a foul they are often not
given.
In the 23rd minute Laporte executes a similar manoeuvre to that
which Bednarek had accomplished, this time on Vestergaard. From
a standing start Vestergaard managed to lift both feet of the
ground as he flipped backward. Outcome penalty, technically
correct but no more so than the previous challenge on DeBruyne.
In the 30th minute there is the Foden - McCarthy non-penalty
incident.
In the 33rd minute two decisions happened. A Southampton corner
saw Vestergaard charging into the penalty area, leading with his
forearm and catching Laporte on the side of the head leaving him
on the floor holding his head. No foul given and no stoppage of
play for a potential head injury. OK it's a contact sport, Mr
Carroll gets away with these challenges all the time and blow to
the side of the head has a relatively small chance of being
serious, I suppose. Meantime play goes on and a foul about
10-12 yards outside the penalty area is awarded against DeBruyne
on Adams. This wasn't replayed so I only have one angle of
view. It seems to me that the ball is coming to Adams and
DeBruyne is behind Adams and moves to come round the side, as he
did so Adams backed into DeBruyne and then propelled himself to
the ground winning a free kick. Once again there was contact
between DeBruyne and Adams but I didn't see any arms involved
and DeBruyne did not seem to have the momentum to generate the
reaction from Adams.
So six incidents in 20 minutes, all debatable decisions, and
sure, during the rest of the game there were other debatable
decisions that went to both sides but this 20 minute period says
to me that many , if not most refereeing decisions are at best
random and bear very little relevance to any codified rules and
are not consistent with previous decisions, even within recent
minutes. By and large there is little accountability for the
most senior referees and their management.
Then we are told that the non-penalty award was not revised
because the referee thought/said that McCarthy had got a touch
on the ball and they could not disprove that. In spite of
missing that Fernandihno got an obvious touch on the ball
earlier, Mr Moss, from a considerable distance is able to
discern a touch that most people cannot detect on enlarged slow
motion replays. Incredible!
*****************************************************
Page 3 of 4
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page