DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
RateTheRef
HTML https://ratetheref.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: General Discussion
*****************************************************
#Post#: 100213--------------------------------------------------
Re: Manchester Utd vs City- Anthony Taylor
DIR By: rustyref
Date: January 17, 2026, 8:32 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: El Referee link ---
>
> [quote author=rustyref link=topic=7619.msg100204#msg100204
date=1768656606]
> [quote author=El Referee link=topic=7619.msg100203#msg100203
date=1768656421]
> [quote author=rustyref link=topic=7619.msg100201#msg100201
date=1768656261]
> Not a red for me, and certainly not a clear and obvious error
to go with a caution. It was a glancing blow with very little
force, had it really planted into his leg then I would say red.
>
--- End Quote ---
The challenge makes Dokus leg buckle, I actually didn’t realise
that at the time. If there’s enough force to make it buckle,
there’s enough force for it to be a red.
Not that pundits are generally a good voice to listen to, the
fact that Keane thinks it was a red should maybe tell us
something. Mike Dean as well
[/quote]
The problem for me is you don't really see it real time, it only
looks bad when watched in slow motion and I would say that
challenges the clear and obvious criteria.
[/quote]
Well it’s lucky that VAR tend to watch everything in slow motion
then…….
If what you’re saying was correct, why do they put practically
every review into slow motion?
[/quote]
Because they have to be sure. But the VAR protocol states that
normal speed should be used to identify the intensity of an
offence. VAR is to correct clear and obvious errors by the
referee, can it really be a clear and obvious error if it is
pretty much impossible to identify real time.
#Post#: 100214--------------------------------------------------
Re: Manchester Utd vs City- Anthony Taylor
DIR By: Claretman
Date: January 17, 2026, 8:36 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Taylor going yellow for Dalot is Another decision and
explanation to clear the bully boys. How can contact on the knee
with the boot be anything but endangering an opponent now matter
at what speed or with what force.
We are going back to the seventies in allowing such incidents
not being punished correctly.
I dont blame Taylor fully but more the pgmol heads who are not
fit for purpose.
#Post#: 100215--------------------------------------------------
Re: Manchester Utd vs City- Anthony Taylor
DIR By: El Referee
Date: January 17, 2026, 8:59 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: rustyref link ---
>
> [quote author=El Referee link=topic=7619.msg100206#msg100206
date=1768656733]
> [quote author=rustyref link=topic=7619.msg100204#msg100204
date=1768656606]
> [quote author=El Referee link=topic=7619.msg100203#msg100203
date=1768656421]
> [quote author=rustyref link=topic=7619.msg100201#msg100201
date=1768656261]
> Not a red for me, and certainly not a clear and obvious error
to go with a caution. It was a glancing blow with very little
force, had it really planted into his leg then I would say red.
>
--- End Quote ---
The challenge makes Dokus leg buckle, I actually didn’t realise
that at the time. If there’s enough force to make it buckle,
there’s enough force for it to be a red.
Not that pundits are generally a good voice to listen to, the
fact that Keane thinks it was a red should maybe tell us
something. Mike Dean as well
[/quote]
The problem for me is you don't really see it real time, it only
looks bad when watched in slow motion and I would say that
challenges the clear and obvious criteria.
[/quote]
Well it’s lucky that VAR tend to watch everything in slow motion
then…….
If what you’re saying was correct, why do they put practically
every review into slow motion?
[/quote]
Because they have to be sure. But the VAR protocol states that
normal speed should be used to identify the intensity of an
offence. VAR is to correct clear and obvious errors by the
referee, can it really be a clear and obvious error if it is
pretty much impossible to identify real time.
[/quote]
Yes VAR protocol states that, but if we’re being 100% honest,
that’s not how it’s used. We have all sat through many a VAR
review in which it is slowed down to the nth degree. And the
certainly weren’t to identify point of contact. Tarkowski
challenge comes to mind
#Post#: 100217--------------------------------------------------
Re: Manchester Utd vs City- Anthony Taylor
DIR By: Microscopist
Date: January 17, 2026, 9:25 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Only managed to see about 2/3 rds of the game owing to
accompanying my wife for an urgent opticians appointment, Was
pretty clear from the team selection that City were never going
to cope with breakaways and then didn't show enough
inventiveness up front to compensate. So no complaints about
the result which was largely self inflicted.
Suppose I should be pleased that Dalot at least was shown a
yellow card, fairly similar early challenges on City players
haven't even resulted in cards at all. However, any time after
about 60 minutes and that would have been a red card in most
referees’ eyes, I think. I abhor this "amnesty' period in the
early stages of games, referees should start as they mean to go
on, otherwise they risk the game getting out of control or worse
serious injury.
Still doubt whether City would have got even a draw against 10
men.
#Post#: 100219--------------------------------------------------
Re: Manchester Utd vs City- Anthony Taylor
DIR By: NRUReferee
Date: January 17, 2026, 9:30 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Microscopist link ---
>
> Only managed to see about 2/3 rds of the game owing to
accompanying my wife for an urgent opticians appointment,
>
--- End Quote ---
Did she get a phone call from Stockley Park to head down at
short notice?
#Post#: 100222--------------------------------------------------
Re: Manchester Utd vs City- Anthony Taylor
DIR By: Ref Fan
Date: January 17, 2026, 10:13 am
---------------------------------------------------------
This United supporter finds himself in the camp that thinks
whatever colour card Taylor showed, VAR wouldn't have
intervened. Seeing it in slow motion highlights how high it was
but also shows the glancing nature of the contact.
That aside, considering United had 3 goals disallowed for
offside, at least 1 marginal, hit the woodwork twice and could
thank their goalkeeper for 2 excellent saves, City might be
relieved the score line wasn't far worse. Some United players
need to develop a greater awareness of the risk of being
offside.
Overall, I felt Anthony Taylor was ok, but I was a little
confused at times what was or was not a foul and when he was
playing advantage. There was a fair amount of dissent which as
far as I know didn't result in YCs. Maguire and Fernandes for
United and a couple of City players. I've only seen it once but
to Shaw's YC seemed a little harsh. Good contact with the ball
and it didn't look an excessive follow through - but then my
eyes could have deceived me. But he did have a moan at the AR
later which wasn't clever given he was on a YC.
#Post#: 100232--------------------------------------------------
Re: Manchester Utd vs City- Anthony Taylor
DIR By: Claretman
Date: January 17, 2026, 1:43 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
At city free kick late on Fernandes was allowed to pick up the
ball throw it about 20 yards thus delaying the start. The free
kick was taken from the original place.
No sanction for Fernandes, (Edited, Just NO)
#Post#: 100242--------------------------------------------------
Re: Manchester Utd vs City- Anthony Taylor
DIR By: ajb95
Date: January 17, 2026, 3:04 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Claretman link ---
>
> At city free kick late on Fernandes was allowed to pick up the
ball throw about 20 yards thus delaying the start. The free kick
was taken from the original place.
> No sanction for Fernandes, (Edited, Just NO)
>
--- End Quote ---
Was this the one where the offence happened 3 yards from the
corner flag? Yet the city keeper took it almost 20 yards further
forward. Something else Taylor let city get away with
Clearly no 5cm rule in operation for United’s 3rd disallowed
goal which looks onside on every replay
#Post#: 100244--------------------------------------------------
Re: Manchester Utd vs City- Anthony Taylor
DIR By: Claretman
Date: January 17, 2026, 3:15 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: ajb95 link ---
>
> [quote author=Claretman link=topic=7619.msg100232#msg100232
date=1768678995]
> At city free kick late on Fernandes was allowed to pick up the
ball throw about 20 yards thus delaying the start. The free kick
was taken from the original place.
> No sanction for Fernandes, (Edited, Just NO)
>
--- End Quote ---
Was this the one where the offence happened 3 yards from the
corner flag? Yet the city keeper took it almost 20 yards further
forward. Something else Taylor let city get away with
Clearly no 5cm rule in operation for United’s 3rd disallowed
goal which looks onside on every replay
[/quote]
Agreed very similar to a throw by a utd full back, shaw i think
it was, ball went out off the corner flag, throw in taken near
the edge of the 18 yard area and it wasnt a quick throw in
either.
#Post#: 100247--------------------------------------------------
Re: Manchester Utd vs City- Anthony Taylor
DIR By: flipmode
Date: January 17, 2026, 3:46 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Where is the “glancing nature” of Dalot’s challenge
written/interpreted in the Laws of the Game?
I’ve looked on the IFAB website and law 12 for SFP indicates
--- Quote ---
> Serious foul play
>
> A tackle or challenge that endangers the safety of an opponent
or uses excessive force or brutality must be sanctioned as
serious foul play.
>
> Any player who lunges at an opponent in challenging for the
ball from the front, from the side or from behind using one or
both legs, with excessive force or endangers the safety of an
opponent is guilty of serious foul play.
--- End Quote ---
Whilst I agree the second paragraph doesn’t apply, the first
most certainly does. Any challenge where contact is made by the
studs on the opponents knee would, imo, endanger the opponent.
This is taking nothing from Un*ted, they were by far the better
team and deserving of their win
*****************************************************
Page 3 of 7
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page