DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
RateTheRef
HTML https://ratetheref.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: General Discussion
*****************************************************
#Post#: 53645--------------------------------------------------
Re: Michael Oliver and Darren England - Arsenal v Liverpool
DIR By: Ref Fan
Date: October 11, 2022, 9:44 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Claretman link ---
>
> Interesting to hear Dermot Gallagher thought the Gabriel
handball incident was an incorrect decision and also the Penalty
given to Arsenal was incorrect, the latter goes against the
guidelines on contact he stated.
> The handball incident he says var should have asked for an
OFR, if i remember rightly Oliver was struggling to get a clear
view of this incident, but his assistant ought to have been
looking straight at it.
>
> I am not sure i agree with Dermot, but then who am i to say
whats right and wrong.
>
--- End Quote ---
I do find that comments on RefWatch make me stop and think, and
make me wonder if I've misinterpreted what I've seen or what I
thought I'd seen.
Having been partly persuaded by others that on balance,
Liverpool should have been awarded a penalty for the Gabriel
handball, the 2 pundits (Smith & Warnock) in discussion with
Dermot both agreed with no penalty. Warnock suggested that
Gabriel was in the process of trying to move his arm behind him
and although out from the body was not raised. They both
mentioned proximity and speed as being key factors. They also
said the penalty given the previous week with the defender
jumping, his arm in the air but with his back to the ball in
close proximity, shouldn't have been a penalty either, although
Dermot felt that decision was correct. Dermot not for the first
time was confusing and contradictory yesterday it seemed to me.
Having explained why the Liverpool penalty wasn't given he ended
up arguing that both last week's and Gabriel's should both be
penalties for consistency. At least that was my interpretation.
On the Arsenal penalty, I was in the 'correct decision' view,
but even Dermot suggested the contact was not enough for a
penalty as did the 2 pundits.
What puzzles me is how from watching replays whether at full
speed, slo-mo, or stills, you can be sure what the force of
contact was. Maybe Jesus falling to the ground convinced Oliver
in this case which is a great shame if the contact was only
light.
I guess both fall into the 'subjective' category under the
present laws and interpretation. Hopefully, Oliver won't have
too many kmi's of that nature in Paris this evening to contend
with.
As others have said, it's fascinating how referees, former
referees, supporters, pundits and ex footballers can reach
different conclusions on the same incident but that make for
good debate.
#Post#: 53666--------------------------------------------------
Re: Michael Oliver and Darren England - Arsenal v Liverpool
DIR By: Scally Bob
Date: October 11, 2022, 3:51 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Regardless of any other incidents in this game I’m pleased that
we have evidence now that the VAR technology isn’t fit for
purpose and can’t be relied upon. Although the Assistant didn’t
raise his flag in the build-up to the first goal human error was
always accepted because officials are unbiased and doing their
job to the best of their ability. The television companies (with
the likes of the dislikeable Keys shouting loudly) demanded this
system, IFAB meekly accepted it fearing the tail that wags the
dog and football is the worse for it. This mistake has been
admitted and I suspect others have been identified but not
disclosed.
*****************************************************
Page 6 of 6
DIR Previous Page