DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
RateTheRef
HTML https://ratetheref.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: General Discussion
*****************************************************
#Post#: 74556--------------------------------------------------
Sheffield United v West Ham - Michael Salisbury
DIR By: Joecphillips
Date: January 21, 2024, 10:25 am
---------------------------------------------------------
How has he given a free kick for hand ball at the end there
instead of a penalty, this isn’t rugby.
Also another referee bottling a clear red card for serious foul
play by Brewster needing var to fix it.
#Post#: 74558--------------------------------------------------
Re: Sheffield United v West Ham - Michael Salisbury
DIR By: Jake the Peg
Date: January 21, 2024, 10:42 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Red the red card. What has the AR said to him - he was a couple
of yards away?
#Post#: 74559--------------------------------------------------
Re: Sheffield United v West Ham - Michael Salisbury
DIR By: Blade
Date: January 21, 2024, 11:00 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Big decisions all correct just about.
The red card for Brewster is one that annoys me. Don’t get me
wrong it is absolutely the correct decision with the current
interpretation of the laws, but I don’t think it should be, no
where near enough force or speed in it to hurt somebody, so in
my book not SFP.
The second WHU penalty shout is a great decision in my eyes,
Bowen is clever, he pulls the defender into him then releases to
try and draw a foul.
Salisbury allowed a hell of a lot of contact and let a lot go
which contributed to a really good game. At times maybe a tad
lenient with some fouls missed, but would much rather that than
the whistle be going for 90 minutes for not much, like is all
too often seen.
#Post#: 74562--------------------------------------------------
Re: Sheffield United v West Ham - Michael Salisbury
DIR By: Rhys147
Date: January 21, 2024, 11:59 am
---------------------------------------------------------
For me both red card decisions are correct with the 1st one
being totally out of control and nowhere near the ball. The 2nd
one is correct although haven't seen the 1st yellow but if your
on a booking then it is definitely a 2nd yellow. In regards to
the penalties, the only one that's correct is the 1st Sheffield
Utd one which is pretty clear cut. The 2nd one for them I don't
think is a penalty as he doesn't really catch the Sheffield Utd
player. The West Ham one is definitely a penalty as he gets
rugby tackled to the ground and the defender isn't even looking
at the ball.
#Post#: 74564--------------------------------------------------
Re: Sheffield United v West Ham - Michael Salisbury
DIR By: Joecphillips
Date: January 21, 2024, 12:09 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Rhys147 link ---
>
> For me both red card decisions are correct with the 1st one
being totally out of control and nowhere near the ball. The 2nd
one is correct although haven't seen the 1st yellow but if your
on a booking then it is definitely a 2nd yellow. In regards to
the penalties, the only one that's correct is the 1st Sheffield
Utd one which is pretty clear cut. The 2nd one for them I don't
think is a penalty as he doesn't really catch the Sheffield Utd
player. The West Ham one is definitely a penalty as he gets
rugby tackled to the ground and the defender isn't even looking
at the ball.
>
--- End Quote ---
The 1st yellow was for dissent after a yellow was given on the
pitch for the 1st red
#Post#: 74565--------------------------------------------------
Re: Sheffield United v West Ham - Michael Salisbury
DIR By: rustyref
Date: January 21, 2024, 12:30 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Blade link ---
>
> The red card for Brewster is one that annoys me. Don’t get me
wrong it is absolutely the correct decision with the current
interpretation of the laws, but I don’t think it should be, no
where near enough force or speed in it to hurt somebody, so in
my book not SFP.
>
--- End Quote ---
Are you joking? I don't really see how you could have any more
speed in a tackle, he's come flying in at full speed and
launched like a missile. It was incredibly dangerous and only
luck that the opponent wasn't badly injured.
#Post#: 74567--------------------------------------------------
Re: Sheffield United v West Ham - Michael Salisbury
DIR By: DublinRef
Date: January 21, 2024, 12:40 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Joecphillips link ---
>
> [quote author=Rhys147 link=topic=5624.msg74562#msg74562
date=1705859983]
> For me both red card decisions are correct with the 1st one
being totally out of control and nowhere near the ball. The 2nd
one is correct although haven't seen the 1st yellow but if your
on a booking then it is definitely a 2nd yellow. In regards to
the penalties, the only one that's correct is the 1st Sheffield
Utd one which is pretty clear cut. The 2nd one for them I don't
think is a penalty as he doesn't really catch the Sheffield Utd
player. The West Ham one is definitely a penalty as he gets
rugby tackled to the ground and the defender isn't even looking
at the ball.
>
--- End Quote ---
The 1st yellow was for dissent after a yellow was given on the
pitch for the 1st red
[/quote]
I suppose the argument being had the referee got it right in the
first instance (as he 100% should have) then the dissent
wouldn't have taken place? I would think its a lot easier for
players to just not argue (especially knowing there will be a
VAR review) and guarantee they won't get a yellow. Don't like
the idea of dissent being more tolerable in some way when a
decision is wrong. The law, surely, is there to protect the
referee, not the decision.
#Post#: 74570--------------------------------------------------
Re: Sheffield United v West Ham - Michael Salisbury
DIR By: Claretman
Date: January 21, 2024, 1:18 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: rustyref link ---
>
> [quote author=Blade link=topic=5624.msg74559#msg74559
date=1705856440]
> The red card for Brewster is one that annoys me. Don’t get me
wrong it is absolutely the correct decision with the current
interpretation of the laws, but I don’t think it should be, no
where near enough force or speed in it to hurt somebody, so in
my book not SFP.
>
--- End Quote ---
Are you joking? I don't really see how you could have any more
speed in a tackle, he's come flying in at full speed and
launched like a missile. It was incredibly dangerous and only
luck that the opponent wasn't badly injured.
[/quote]
Yet another shocking decision from the on field referee that
ticks all boxes for a red card. That type of challenge needs
totally eradicating from the game, i am all in favour of a four
or five game ban in such circumstances to help eradicate it.
I am sure SG1 officials are issuing cautions knowing that var is
there to intervene, if they arent then that raises even more
alarm bells.
#Post#: 74572--------------------------------------------------
Re: Sheffield United v West Ham - Michael Salisbury
DIR By: Leggy
Date: January 21, 2024, 1:41 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: DublinRef link ---
>
> [quote author=Joecphillips link=topic=5624.msg74564#msg74564
date=1705860566]
> [quote author=Rhys147 link=topic=5624.msg74562#msg74562
date=1705859983]
> For me both red card decisions are correct with the 1st one
being totally out of control and nowhere near the ball. The 2nd
one is correct although haven't seen the 1st yellow but if your
on a booking then it is definitely a 2nd yellow. In regards to
the penalties, the only one that's correct is the 1st Sheffield
Utd one which is pretty clear cut. The 2nd one for them I don't
think is a penalty as he doesn't really catch the Sheffield Utd
player. The West Ham one is definitely a penalty as he gets
rugby tackled to the ground and the defender isn't even looking
at the ball.
>
--- End Quote ---
The 1st yellow was for dissent after a yellow was given on the
pitch for the 1st red
[/quote]
I suppose the argument being had the referee got it right in the
first instance (as he 100% should have) then the dissent
wouldn't have taken place? I would think its a lot easier for
players to just not argue (especially knowing there will be a
VAR review) and guarantee they won't get a yellow. Don't like
the idea of dissent being more tolerable in some way when a
decision is wrong. The law, surely, is there to protect the
referee, not the decision.
[/quote]
It 100% is, although the "well if he had got the decision right"
defence is regularly rolled out .....
Its dissent ..... from a referee's decision. It is not dissent
..... from a referes's correct decision.
#Post#: 74589--------------------------------------------------
Re: Sheffield United v West Ham - Michael Salisbury
DIR By: Joecphillips
Date: January 21, 2024, 3:55 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: DublinRef link ---
>
> [quote author=Joecphillips link=topic=5624.msg74564#msg74564
date=1705860566]
> [quote author=Rhys147 link=topic=5624.msg74562#msg74562
date=1705859983]
> For me both red card decisions are correct with the 1st one
being totally out of control and nowhere near the ball. The 2nd
one is correct although haven't seen the 1st yellow but if your
on a booking then it is definitely a 2nd yellow. In regards to
the penalties, the only one that's correct is the 1st Sheffield
Utd one which is pretty clear cut. The 2nd one for them I don't
think is a penalty as he doesn't really catch the Sheffield Utd
player. The West Ham one is definitely a penalty as he gets
rugby tackled to the ground and the defender isn't even looking
at the ball.
>
--- End Quote ---
The 1st yellow was for dissent after a yellow was given on the
pitch for the 1st red
[/quote]
I suppose the argument being had the referee got it right in the
first instance (as he 100% should have) then the dissent
wouldn't have taken place? I would think its a lot easier for
players to just not argue (especially knowing there will be a
VAR review) and guarantee they won't get a yellow. Don't like
the idea of dissent being more tolerable in some way when a
decision is wrong. The law, surely, is there to protect the
referee, not the decision.
[/quote]
I was just advising on the reason for the yellow card as they
said they hadn't seen it
Edited to fix the quote thingamajigga, bmb
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 3
DIR Next Page