DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
RateTheRef
HTML https://ratetheref.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: General Discussion
*****************************************************
#Post#: 42851--------------------------------------------------
Re: A MARRINER - Tottenham v Chelsea EFL
DIR By: Ivanhoe
Date: January 13, 2022, 7:15 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Marriner once again a very poor advert for english officials.
I'd rather the less experienced referees on the way up get more
opportunities than these older officials who should be retired
and would have been not long ago.
Do we really need officials carrying on at the top level in
their fifties ?
#Post#: 42852--------------------------------------------------
Re: A MARRINER - Tottenham v Chelsea
DIR By: dave26
Date: January 13, 2022, 7:25 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Ref Watcher link ---
>
> [quote author=dave26 link=topic=3280.msg42831#msg42831
date=1642024335]
> [quote author=bruntyboy link=topic=3280.msg42829#msg42829
date=1642023582]
> [quote author=TheThingFromLewes
link=topic=3280.msg42824#msg42824 date=1642021252]
> Definitely not a penalty when Moura was fouled by Kepa. VAR
correct to override for the second time.
>
--- End Quote ---
I haven't seen the incident but if he was "fouled by Kepa" then
why wouldn't it be a penalty? Or are you saying he wasn't fouled
by Kepa?
[/quote]
There definately wasn’t a foul by Kepa , he took the ball
cleanly , Marriner would have been better to let play develop
and send the penalty appeal to VAR
[/quote]
I know they allow play to develop for VAR to check later when
there is an offside "just in case" but surely they are not
supposed to do that when a foul is involved. That seems like a
recipe for all sorts of retribution to take place.
[/quote]
But there wasn’t a foul the fact Kepa took the ball cleanly
backs that up and one can only assume that Marriner guessed or
was too quick with the whistle , No way Marriner could be 100%
sure it was a penalty
There definately wasn’t a foul by Kepa , he took the ball
cleanly , Marriner would have been better to let play develop
and send the penalty appeal to VAR
(edited to fix quote-hertsref)
#Post#: 42853--------------------------------------------------
Re: A MARRINER - Tottenham v Chelsea
DIR By: Ref Watcher
Date: January 13, 2022, 7:49 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: dave26 link ---
>
> [quote author=Ref Watcher link=topic=3280.msg42846#msg42846
date=1642068622]
> [quote author=dave26 link=topic=3280.msg42831#msg42831
date=1642024335]
> [quote author=bruntyboy link=topic=3280.msg42829#msg42829
date=1642023582]
> [quote author=TheThingFromLewes
link=topic=3280.msg42824#msg42824 date=1642021252]
> Definitely not a penalty when Moura was fouled by Kepa. VAR
correct to override for the second time.
>
--- End Quote ---
I haven't seen the incident but if he was "fouled by Kepa" then
why wouldn't it be a penalty? Or are you saying he wasn't fouled
by Kepa?
[/quote]
I know they allow play to develop for VAR to check later when
there is an offside "just in case" but surely they are not
supposed to do that when a foul is involved. That seems like a
recipe for all sorts of retribution to take place.
[/quote]
[/quote]
But there wasn’t a foul the fact Kepa took the ball cleanly
backs that up and one can only assume that Marriner guessed or
was too quick with the whistle , No way Marriner could be 100%
sure it was a penalty
There definately wasn’t a foul by Kepa , he took the ball
cleanly , Marriner would have been better to let play develop
and send the penalty appeal to VAR
(edited to fix quote-hertsref)
[/quote]
Whether there was a foul or not in this instance rather misses
the point. Andre Marriner thought there was a foul. You are
suggesting that despite that he should allow play to continue
and let VAR decide. My argument is that in general encouraging
referees to play on despite a foul being committed (in their
view) is dangerous.
#Post#: 42855--------------------------------------------------
Re: A MARRINER - Tottenham v Chelsea
DIR By: Claretman
Date: January 13, 2022, 8:02 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: dave26 link ---
>
> [quote author=Ref Watcher link=topic=3280.msg42846#msg42846
date=1642068622]
> [quote author=dave26 link=topic=3280.msg42831#msg42831
date=1642024335]
> [quote author=bruntyboy link=topic=3280.msg42829#msg42829
date=1642023582]
> [quote author=TheThingFromLewes
link=topic=3280.msg42824#msg42824 date=1642021252]
> Definitely not a penalty when Moura was fouled by Kepa. VAR
correct to override for the second time.
>
--- End Quote ---
I haven't seen the incident but if he was "fouled by Kepa" then
why wouldn't it be a penalty? Or are you saying he wasn't fouled
by Kepa?
[/quote]
There definately wasn’t a foul by Kepa , he took the ball
cleanly , Marriner would have been better to let play develop
and send the penalty appeal to VAR
[/quote]
I know they allow play to develop for VAR to check later when
there is an offside "just in case" but surely they are not
supposed to do that when a foul is involved. That seems like a
recipe for all sorts of retribution to take place.
[/quote]
But there wasn’t a foul the fact Kepa took the ball cleanly
backs that up and one can only assume that Marriner guessed or
was too quick with the whistle , No way Marriner could be 100%
sure it was a penalty
There definately wasn’t a foul by Kepa , he took the ball
cleanly , Marriner would have been better to let play develop
and send the penalty appeal to VAR
(edited to fix quote-hertsref)
[/quote]
I am sure that Andre from his position was 100 pct sure there
was a foul otherwise he wouldnt have given a penalty kick, the
fact that other camera angles available to the var proved there
wasnt a foul is exactly what var is there for to prevent a clear
and obvious error. If Andre wasnt 100 pct sure he would not have
give the penalty kick. Everyone makes mistakes or errors of
judgement.
#Post#: 42857--------------------------------------------------
Re: A MARRINER - Tottenham v Chelsea EFL
DIR By: rustyref
Date: January 13, 2022, 9:39 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Given where they happened it is entirely possible the AR had
involvement in both the penalty that was turned into a free kick
and the one that was overturned. Certainly I'd be wanting help
from my assistant there as to whether it was inside or outside.
This game demonstrated perfectly what benefit VAR can bring when
it is used correctly. Two mistakes, both very clear and
obvious, and they are correctly rectified.
#Post#: 42858--------------------------------------------------
Re: A MARRINER - Tottenham v Chelsea EFL
DIR By: ajb95
Date: January 13, 2022, 9:46 am
---------------------------------------------------------
On another rather cynical note, maybe this game showed why Andre
is not trusted with more big games?
#Post#: 42861--------------------------------------------------
Re: A MARRINER - Tottenham v Chelsea
DIR By: Carter
Date: January 13, 2022, 10:37 am
---------------------------------------------------------
There definately wasn’t a foul by Kepa , he took the ball
cleanly , Marriner would have been better to let play develop
and send the penalty appeal to VAR
[/quote]
I think there is too much of SG1 officals who in my view are
letting too much go to VAR rather tham making the difficult
decisions instantly, so in this instance even though he was
clearly wrong good on Andre Marriner.
Its just far too easy not giving penalties at the time, because
if they are 'very' wrong they get bailed out by VAR, as any
doubt goes in their favour.
#Post#: 42863--------------------------------------------------
Re: A MARRINER - Tottenham v Chelsea
DIR By: nemesis
Date: January 13, 2022, 11:33 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Ref Watcher link ---
>
> [quote author=dave26 link=topic=3280.msg42852#msg42852
date=1642080348]
> [quote author=Ref Watcher link=topic=3280.msg42846#msg42846
date=1642068622]
> [quote author=dave26 link=topic=3280.msg42831#msg42831
date=1642024335]
> [quote author=bruntyboy link=topic=3280.msg42829#msg42829
date=1642023582]
> [quote author=TheThingFromLewes
link=topic=3280.msg42824#msg42824 date=1642021252]
> Definitely not a penalty when Moura was fouled by Kepa. VAR
correct to override for the second time.
>
--- End Quote ---
I haven't seen the incident but if he was "fouled by Kepa" then
why wouldn't it be a penalty? Or are you saying he wasn't fouled
by Kepa?
[/quote]
I know they allow play to develop for VAR to check later when
there is an offside "just in case" but surely they are not
supposed to do that when a foul is involved. That seems like a
recipe for all sorts of retribution to take place.
[/quote]
[/quote]
But there wasn’t a foul the fact Kepa took the ball cleanly
backs that up and one can only assume that Marriner guessed or
was too quick with the whistle , No way Marriner could be 100%
sure it was a penalty
There definately wasn’t a foul by Kepa , he took the ball
cleanly , Marriner would have been better to let play develop
and send the penalty appeal to VAR
(edited to fix quote-hertsref)
[/quote]
Whether there was a foul or not in this instance rather misses
the point. Andre Marriner thought there was a foul. You are
suggesting that despite that he should allow play to continue
and let VAR decide. My argument is that in general encouraging
referees to play on despite a foul being committed (in their
view) is dangerous.
[/quote]
Is that more or less dangerous than Assistants who let clearly
offside attacks continue?
#Post#: 42864--------------------------------------------------
Re: A MARRINER - Tottenham v Chelsea EFL
DIR By: rustyref
Date: January 13, 2022, 11:37 am
---------------------------------------------------------
To be clear, aside from offsides they don't let play continue
and let VAR decide. Andre Marriner will get two incorrect KMIs
from last night as VAR correcting your decision doesn't count
with the observation. VAR protocols say it can only get
involved after the match referee has made a decision.
#Post#: 42865--------------------------------------------------
Re: A MARRINER - Tottenham v Chelsea
DIR By: nemesis
Date: January 13, 2022, 11:37 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Claretman link ---
>
> [quote author=dave26 link=topic=3280.msg42852#msg42852
date=1642080348]
> [quote author=Ref Watcher link=topic=3280.msg42846#msg42846
date=1642068622]
> [quote author=dave26 link=topic=3280.msg42831#msg42831
date=1642024335]
> [quote author=bruntyboy link=topic=3280.msg42829#msg42829
date=1642023582]
> [quote author=TheThingFromLewes
link=topic=3280.msg42824#msg42824 date=1642021252]
> Definitely not a penalty when Moura was fouled by Kepa. VAR
correct to override for the second time.
>
--- End Quote ---
I haven't seen the incident but if he was "fouled by Kepa" then
why wouldn't it be a penalty? Or are you saying he wasn't fouled
by Kepa?
[/quote]
There definately wasn’t a foul by Kepa , he took the ball
cleanly , Marriner would have been better to let play develop
and send the penalty appeal to VAR
[/quote]
I know they allow play to develop for VAR to check later when
there is an offside "just in case" but surely they are not
supposed to do that when a foul is involved. That seems like a
recipe for all sorts of retribution to take place.
[/quote]
But there wasn’t a foul the fact Kepa took the ball cleanly
backs that up and one can only assume that Marriner guessed or
was too quick with the whistle , No way Marriner could be 100%
sure it was a penalty
There definately wasn’t a foul by Kepa , he took the ball
cleanly , Marriner would have been better to let play develop
and send the penalty appeal to VAR
(edited to fix quote-hertsref)
[/quote]
I am sure that Andre from his position was 100 pct sure there
was a foul otherwise he wouldnt have given a penalty kick, the
fact that other camera angles available to the var proved there
wasnt a foul is exactly what var is there for to prevent a clear
and obvious error. If Andre wasnt 100 pct sure he would not have
give the penalty kick. Everyone makes mistakes or errors of
judgement.
[/quote]
I love this notion that referees only give things if they are
100% sure !
All manner of decisions are given on the balance of probability
and the majority of them are probably correct.
Players, by their duplicitous (is that okay?) behaviour, make
100% certainty very difficult indeed.
*****************************************************
Page 2 of 3
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page