|
Post by franthetownfan on Aug 30, 2014 17:14:07 GMT 1
We always moan when the refs do bad, so I'd just like to say I thought the referee today was absolutely brilliant. Kept the game going forward and in my opinion got all the decisions right. Hopefully it can continue.
|
|
|
Post by davycrockett on Aug 30, 2014 17:41:09 GMT 1
didn't notice him so must have done a good job
|
|
|
Post by ssshrew on Aug 30, 2014 18:06:00 GMT 1
True. I was just about to say he hasn't booked anyone yet when out popped a red card!!! Such a welcome change today after last week.
|
|
|
Post by weststandshrew on Aug 30, 2014 18:10:27 GMT 1
Yer the ref was half decent though I wouldn't say he got everything right. Connelly could have seen yellow much earlier in the match for countless fouls though I think he was right to give the lad the benefit of the doubt over the owd elbow
|
|
|
Post by bobbytheblock19er on Aug 30, 2014 18:12:12 GMT 1
As soon as that tackle was made I thought red card. Although I thought he let Collins off with one early second half
|
|
|
Post by lenny on Aug 30, 2014 19:09:24 GMT 1
Personally didn't think it was a red card.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 30, 2014 19:37:07 GMT 1
Personally didn't think it was a red card. Then you need a trip to specsavers. Foot coming down, lunge. Horror challenge. Could have seriously hurt Gayle.
|
|
|
Post by QuorndonShrew on Aug 30, 2014 19:42:14 GMT 1
Not a red from my angle.
|
|
|
Post by lenny on Aug 30, 2014 19:51:40 GMT 1
Personally didn't think it was a red card. Then you need a trip to specsavers. Foot coming down, lunge. Horror challenge. Could have seriously hurt Gayle. One foot, not out of control or off the floor. Reckless ("with complete disregard for danger to... his opponent") is a yellow card. Nothing wrong with my eyesight, thankyou.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 30, 2014 19:53:35 GMT 1
Then you need a trip to specsavers. Foot coming down, lunge. Horror challenge. Could have seriously hurt Gayle. One foot, not out of control or off the floor. Reckless ("with complete disregard for danger to... his opponent") is a yellow card. Nothing wrong with my eyesight, thankyou. It was a violent lunge and the foot came down. You cant tackle like that. The challenging foot was off the ground and came DOWN on Gayles leg. Red.
|
|
|
Post by lenny on Aug 30, 2014 20:02:38 GMT 1
www.isrscork.com/7.%20law%2012_miscounduct_557.pdfViolent? He went for the ball ffs. The challenging foot was off the ground, yes. Impossible not to tackle without that happening, the fact his foot was coming down is in fact to his benefit - it's a red if it's high, but he wasn't over the ball. Having only seen it once I don't want to pretend I can conclusively discern one way or the other, but my first impression was that it was a hard tackle, within control but outside the rules and worthy of a booking. Nobody around me initially appealed for the red, only when the ref was thinking as a joke. Evidently I'm not alone in my view.
|
|
|
Post by vanner on Aug 30, 2014 20:07:55 GMT 1
A welcome change after the past few games... He actually let the game flow nicely which suited us no end. I thought it was a very bad yellow for the red but he got most decisions right.
|
|
|
Post by weststandshrew on Aug 30, 2014 20:55:25 GMT 1
My eyes must have been playing tricks as I thought the lad jumped in with both feet airbourne.
|
|
|
Post by mysticsdad on Aug 30, 2014 21:07:10 GMT 1
Thought the ref had a decent game. Didn't realise he was on the pitch until the red card!
|
|
|
Post by MartinB on Aug 30, 2014 21:19:11 GMT 1
www.isrscork.com/7.%20law%2012_miscounduct_557.pdfViolent? He went for the ball ffs. The challenging foot was off the ground, yes. Impossible not to tackle without that happening, the fact his foot was coming down is in fact to his benefit - it's a red if it's high, but he wasn't over the ball. Having only seen it once I don't want to pretend I can conclusively discern one way or the other, but my first impression was that it was a hard tackle, within control but outside the rules and worthy of a booking. Nobody around me initially appealed for the red, only when the ref was thinking as a joke. Evidently I'm not alone in my view. Excessive force and endangering an opponent. Easy red card
|
|
|
Post by eggyshrew on Aug 30, 2014 21:24:18 GMT 1
We always moan when the refs do bad, so I'd just like to say I thought the referee today was absolutely brilliant. Kept the game going forward and in my opinion got all the decisions right. Hopefully it can continue. Best ref in years down the Meddah.
|
|
slatsy
Midland League Division One
Posts: 349
|
Post by slatsy on Aug 30, 2014 21:39:45 GMT 1
www.isrscork.com/7.%20law%2012_miscounduct_557.pdfViolent? He went for the ball ffs. The challenging foot was off the ground, yes. Impossible not to tackle without that happening, the fact his foot was coming down is in fact to his benefit - it's a red if it's high, but he wasn't over the ball. Having only seen it once I don't want to pretend I can conclusively discern one way or the other, but my first impression was that it was a hard tackle, within control but outside the rules and worthy of a booking. Nobody around me initially appealed for the red, only when the ref was thinking as a joke. Evidently I'm not alone in my view.
Read page 10 of your own link. "A player is guilty of serious foul play if he uses excessive force or brutality against an opponent when challenging for the ball when it is in play." Which is a sending off offensive. If the ref is of the opinion that excessive force was used then its a sending off. One footed or high makes no difference IF the ref has interpreted the challenge in this way.
Have to add he had a good game, although he could have let Mikey D back on earlier after receiving treatment and probable booked Connelly a lot earlier!
|
|
|
Post by Exkeeper on Aug 30, 2014 22:00:04 GMT 1
Tackle on Gayle was pretty well directly in front of us in Block 14. My instant reaction was that it was a certain red, and lots of folk around me seemed to share that opinion. The elbow on Mickey D was spiteful but the ref was not in a position to see it clearly - the lino was but didn't want to know. As stated by many last week, a good ref rarely gets noticed, and that was the case today.
|
|
|
Post by ThrobsBlackHat on Aug 30, 2014 22:13:35 GMT 1
I was amazed at that Connolly's career history because he looked like a talentless thug and a coward.
|
|
|
Post by MartinB on Aug 30, 2014 22:38:39 GMT 1
www.isrscork.com/7.%20law%2012_miscounduct_557.pdfViolent? He went for the ball ffs. The challenging foot was off the ground, yes. Impossible not to tackle without that happening, the fact his foot was coming down is in fact to his benefit - it's a red if it's high, but he wasn't over the ball. Having only seen it once I don't want to pretend I can conclusively discern one way or the other, but my first impression was that it was a hard tackle, within control but outside the rules and worthy of a booking. Nobody around me initially appealed for the red, only when the ref was thinking as a joke. Evidently I'm not alone in my view.
Read page 10 of your own link. "A player is guilty of serious foul play if he uses excessive force or brutality against an opponent when challenging for the ball when it is in play." Which is a sending off offensive. If the ref is of the opinion that excessive force was used then its a sending off. One footed or high makes no difference IF the ref has interpreted the challenge in this way.
Have to add he had a good game, although he could have let Mikey D back on earlier after receiving treatment and probable booked Connelly a lot earlier!
Couldn't let Demitrou back on quicker as ball was in area he would have come on
|
|
|
Post by jamo on Aug 30, 2014 22:48:28 GMT 1
Very decent performance all round by the Ref in my opinion. And he got the red card absolutely right, if the Lawrence decision of last week is the benchmark
|
|
|
Post by Matster on Aug 30, 2014 22:48:37 GMT 1
JLAA should have had a three match ban in previous game then?
|
|
slatsy
Midland League Division One
Posts: 349
|
Post by slatsy on Aug 30, 2014 23:05:41 GMT 1
Read page 10 of your own link. "A player is guilty of serious foul play if he uses excessive force or brutality against an opponent when challenging for the ball when it is in play." Which is a sending off offensive. If the ref is of the opinion that excessive force was used then its a sending off. One footed or high makes no difference IF the ref has interpreted the challenge in this way.
Have to add he had a good game, although he could have let Mikey D back on earlier after receiving treatment and probable booked Connelly a lot earlier!
Couldn't let Demitrou back on quicker as ball was in area he would have come on Good point. Maybe we could have done better and moved the play away from there quicker then!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 30, 2014 23:06:04 GMT 1
www.isrscork.com/7.%20law%2012_miscounduct_557.pdfViolent? He went for the ball ffs. The challenging foot was off the ground, yes. Impossible not to tackle without that happening, the fact his foot was coming down is in fact to his benefit - it's a red if it's high, but he wasn't over the ball. Having only seen it once I don't want to pretend I can conclusively discern one way or the other, but my first impression was that it was a hard tackle, within control but outside the rules and worthy of a booking. Nobody around me initially appealed for the red, only when the ref was thinking as a joke. Evidently I'm not alone in my view.
Read page 10 of your own link. "A player is guilty of serious foul play if he uses excessive force or brutality against an opponent when challenging for the ball when it is in play." Which is a sending off offensive. If the ref is of the opinion that excessive force was used then its a sending off. One footed or high makes no difference IF the ref has interpreted the challenge in this way.
Have to add he had a good game, although he could have let Mikey D back on earlier after receiving treatment and probable booked Connelly a lot earlier!
Agree on Connelly. Was wondering if the ref would even book the lad for the red card after what he let Connelly get away with.
|
|
|
Post by hibbosrightpeg on Aug 30, 2014 23:43:47 GMT 1
Never a red card (although I might change my mind watching the football league show) the games gone backwards when nobody can tackle anymore. Even if the lad has gone slightly over the ball his only intention was to win it.
|
|
|
Post by MartinB on Aug 31, 2014 8:28:15 GMT 1
Never a red card (although I might change my mind watching the football league show) the games gone backwards when nobody can tackle anymore. Even if the lad has gone slightly over the ball his only intention was to win it. So if a player goes slightly over the ball and just slightly breaks someone's leg that is OK then?
|
|
|
Post by ThrobsBlackHat on Aug 31, 2014 8:31:04 GMT 1
I felt a bit sorry for the lad who got sent off.
He ran his socks off like a headless chicken all game, clearly lacking the quality to make any level of difference but trying very, very hard.
|
|
Shrewsfan1985
The Loggerheads
Posts: 23,713
My first team is..: Shrewsbury
|
Post by Shrewsfan1985 on Aug 31, 2014 15:44:35 GMT 1
In my opinion i thought that the ref had a brilliant game yesterday.
|
|
|
Post by MartinB on Sept 1, 2014 17:34:41 GMT 1
Can't believe Luton have appealed sending off. Looked even worse on the highlights
|
|
|
Post by hibbosrightpeg on Sept 1, 2014 17:58:45 GMT 1
Never a red card (although I might change my mind watching the football league show) the games gone backwards when nobody can tackle anymore. Even if the lad has gone slightly over the ball his only intention was to win it. So if a player goes slightly over the ball and just slightly breaks someone's leg that is OK then? Have seen it back and the lad has only gone in with one foot. Althought it was a lot harder challenge than I first thought I still don't feel its a red card. The lad has definitely tried winning the ball just mistimed it slightly. I'd be devastated to get sent off for that on a Sunday however, I can see both sides and have seen people walk for less. Nobody slightly broke anything did they? Plus, it's quite often the innocuous challenges that relate in injuries. Should they be punished even if they're not deemed intentional or reckless?
|
|