DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
RateTheRef
HTML https://ratetheref.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: General Discussion
*****************************************************
#Post#: 41882--------------------------------------------------
M ATKINSON - Aston Villa v Chelsea
DIR By: TheThingFromLewes
Date: December 26, 2021, 1:23 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Excuse my ignorance but why wasn’t Konsa sent off for DOGSO?
I thought the regulation stated a genuine attempt for the ball
resulted in a yellow card?
He was no where near the ball and brought down Lukaku in a
cynical fashion and last man?
#Post#: 41890--------------------------------------------------
Re: M ATKINSON - Aston Villa v Chelsea
DIR By: James365
Date: December 26, 2021, 3:59 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
The ball was in playing distance. The defender jumped in low to
try and get the ball but brought the attacker down. There could
be an argument that the defender knew exactly what he was doing
but you cannot catagorically say he didn't try and get the ball.
A good decision.
#Post#: 41891--------------------------------------------------
Re: M ATKINSON - Aston Villa v Chelsea
DIR By: guest308
Date: December 26, 2021, 4:20 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
The fact that you are both right shows the problem mr Atkinson
had . Referees call IMO
#Post#: 41905--------------------------------------------------
Re: M ATKINSON - Aston Villa v Chelsea
DIR By: Leggy
Date: December 27, 2021, 4:53 am
---------------------------------------------------------
It could be argued that some referees are using this grey area
as a means of avoiding their responsibilities. DOGSO was
originally brought in to eliminate the "professional foul" and
because it was generally accepted that we wanted to see more
goals and goal opportunities than foul challenges. The object
of the game, after all, is to score goals.
The art of defending is knowing when (and when not to) make a
challenge. Reducing the sanction for what is deemed to be a
"genuine attempt to play the ball" was predicted by some to be a
mistake that would lead to more foul challenges and more areas
of doubt and confusion. And so it have proved to be. It is
also giving referees the opportunity to hide behind the "genuine
attempt to play the ball" clause to avoid making the correct
decision in law.
This was such a case yesterday and I have seen others recently
(although the Christmas fog means I cannot cite the actual
games). I suspect people will say that I am looking for reasons
to send player off and that a good referee does exactly the
opposite. While that is a commendable attribute, the Laws of
the game to not often permit this and the game would be better
served if the Laws were applied as written.
If you look at how Rugby Union is changing is Laws to reduce the
danger to players you will see an example of how a governing
body has set out what it wants to do maintained a steadfast
approach in the face of a significant increase in red and yellow
cards in high profile games. The same cannot be said of
Football.
#Post#: 41914--------------------------------------------------
Re: M ATKINSON - Aston Villa v Chelsea
DIR By: DublinRef
Date: December 27, 2021, 7:31 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I think the operating principle here appears to be that if it’s
a tackle with the legs it’s a DOGSO yellow and if it’s a tackle
with the arm/body it’s a DOGSO red. Genuine attempt to play the
ball seems to applied in all cases where the foul is made with
the legs other than a very obvious clip/kick or, as we saw last
season with Arsenal, an accidental clash of legs.
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 1