DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
RateTheRef
HTML https://ratetheref.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: General Discussion
*****************************************************
#Post#: 86395--------------------------------------------------
S BARROTT - Chelsea v Fulham
DIR By: TheThingFromLewes
Date: December 26, 2024, 9:58 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Pretty routine stuff for him so far, nothing really to quibble
about and both cards deserved.
He does have a real ability to keep in the background and to be
hardly noticeable when officiating.
#Post#: 86400--------------------------------------------------
Re: S BARROTT - Chelsea v Fulham
DIR By: Semi Retired
Date: December 26, 2024, 10:51 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Barrott has been absolutely fine.
The pundit on Amazon prime has not. Twice she has criticised the
referee for not allowing a quick free kick having (correctly)
stopped the game for a free kick and mandatory caution. She
reiterated that the referee should have allowed the quick free
kick, then returned to caution the player at the next break in
play. Beggars belief.
#Post#: 86401--------------------------------------------------
Re: S BARROTT - Chelsea v Fulham
DIR By: TheThingFromLewes
Date: December 26, 2024, 11:11 am
---------------------------------------------------------
A very accomplished performance from Barrott who controlled
things well.
A possible argument for Nkunku to get a card for delaying the
restart, but other than that, he was very good.
As a fan… what a cracking win for us.
#Post#: 86402--------------------------------------------------
Re: S BARROTT - Chelsea v Fulham
DIR By: ARF
Date: December 26, 2024, 11:41 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Semi Retired link ---
>
> Barrott has been absolutely fine.
>
> The pundit on Amazon prime has not. Twice she has criticised
the referee for not allowing a quick free kick having
(correctly) stopped the game for a free kick and mandatory
caution. She reiterated that the referee should have allowed the
quick free kick, then returned to caution the player at the next
break in play. Beggars belief.
>
--- End Quote ---
It's possible she may have been correct, if allowing a quick
free kick would have resulted in a clear goalscoring
opportunity, and providing SB hadn't already began the
cautioning procedure (not having watched it, I obviously can't
comment further on the particular situations; just clarifying
the LotG)
#Post#: 86403--------------------------------------------------
Re: S BARROTT - Chelsea v Fulham
DIR By: Semi Retired
Date: December 26, 2024, 11:46 am
---------------------------------------------------------
If he had chosen to ignore the cautions then yes, he could have
in theory allowed the free kick to be taken. But he certainly
couldn’t then have gone back to caution the player for something
that had happened before a previous stoppage in play…
Her argument was let it play quickly, then go back to caution.
This would have been wrong in law. Additionally, For the first
at least the card was already out before they took the kick.
#Post#: 86404--------------------------------------------------
Re: S BARROTT - Chelsea v Fulham
DIR By: UmpireIan49
Date: December 26, 2024, 11:55 am
---------------------------------------------------------
After that tough start to the season, Sam Barrott is repaying
the faith shown in him by the powers that be.
After watching him some years ago handle a really tricky FA Cup
live TV game at Stockport with coolness and aplomb, I had an
inkling he would reach the top of the tree. Sam has a relaxed,
understated style, the players respect him and has good fitness
to put him in credible positions to give accurate decisions.
Just look at the number of top games he has been doing of late -
that indicates to me he has overcome that tough start and has
settled in to become one of our leading officials thus far this
season.
And to those doubting Thomases who have called into question his
ability and competence, Sam Barrott has answered those questions
and has come on stronger for the experience.
On a separate note, a brilliant win by Fulham which will ensure
our West London correspondents a really Happy Christmas!
#Post#: 86415--------------------------------------------------
Re: S BARROTT - Chelsea v Fulham
DIR By: Marvin Grapevine
Date: December 26, 2024, 12:58 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Fulham were fantastic but IMO very lucky not to have Lukic sent
off in the first half. Had already been booked when he slid in
and tripped Caicedo when he was breaking forward. He played
advantage but it was an obvious second yellow.
The same player then also got away with dragging back a Chelsea
player in the second half to stop another break.
#Post#: 86425--------------------------------------------------
Re: S BARROTT - Chelsea v Fulham
DIR By: ARF
Date: December 26, 2024, 4:24 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Semi Retired link ---
>
> If he had chosen to ignore the cautions then yes, he could
have in theory allowed the free kick to be taken. But he
certainly couldn’t then have gone back to caution the player for
something that had happened before a previous stoppage in play…
>
> Her argument was let it play quickly, then go back to caution.
This would have been wrong in law. Additionally, For the first
at least the card was already out before they took the kick.
>
--- End Quote ---
--- Quote ---
> Once the referee has decided to caution or send off a player,
play must not be restarted until the sanction has been
administered, unless the non-offending team takes a quick free
kick, has a clear goal-scoring opportunity and the referee has
not started the disciplinary sanction procedure. The sanction is
administered at the next stoppage; if the offence was denying
the opposing team an obvious goal-scoring opportunity, the
player is cautioned; if the offence interfered with or stopped a
promising attack, the player is not cautioned.
--- End Quote ---
If the card was already out, then the procedure has begun.
However, it is absolutely correct in law to allow a quick free
kick and caution the offender at the next stoppage if the
circumstances allow.
#Post#: 86426--------------------------------------------------
Re: S BARROTT - Chelsea v Fulham
DIR By: Semi Retired
Date: December 26, 2024, 5:03 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Yes, thats fair. Though given both cautions were for stopping a
promising attack, my original point remains that he couldn’t
allow a quick free kick and caution later. It’s also vanishingly
rare to see a quick free kick and later caution regardless,
particularly at this level where the caution process is so fast.
Nonetheless your clarification is a good one, my point wasn’t
clear enough 😊
All in all in the circumstances I felt the referee was
absolutely correct in how he handled it and the criticism from
the pundit didn’t seem justified.
#Post#: 86431--------------------------------------------------
Re: S BARROTT - Chelsea v Fulham
DIR By: Failed Ref
Date: December 27, 2024, 3:35 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Fulham's first goal is interesting. Before the cross, the
Chelsea right back collides with the Fulham attacker and falls
to the ground with a head injury. Barrott plays on in spite of
the head injury. Chelsea player requires treatment.
I guess my question is how long do referees play on after a head
injury, how do they decide if it is exaggerated/ feigned? For
what it is worth, Barrott got it right, the defender exaggerated
shall we say the incident, and no-one says anything. He "got
away with it" by playing on but some day, a referee is going to
get into trouble when playing on through a serious head injury.
Players need to take responsibility for not feigning or
exaggerating head injuries. I would like to use the c word but I
thinks mods may object!
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 2
DIR Next Page