stupot07
Well-Known Member
It wasn't a foul, but he got booked for the way he kicked the ball away, dissent
Sent from my Pixel 7 using Tapatalk
Ref (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter Sky Blue Pete
- Start date
Sent from my Pixel 7 using Tapatalk
eastwoodsdustman
Well-Known Member
I reckon the ref thought that the crying bitch got the ball and Thomas took him out at first. Then saw a replay at half time and said it was a high challenge to cover his arse. I think he was directly behind them so couldn’t see that Thomas got the ball.
stupot07
Well-Known Member
To be fair. 2 yellows were for dissent, and 1 yellow for "inciting" the crowd. Only 1 yellow for an actual foul.
Sent from my Pixel 7 using Tapatalk
stupot07
Well-Known Member
He’s kicked the ball and DH has ran into him as much as Thomas slid into him. Initially I thought it was probably a pen but from that angle no.
I said the same at half time. He tried too hard to let the game flow then effectively lost control of the game which is what led to their red.
Warwickhunt
Well-Known Member
Calista
Well-Known Member
This really isn't true, even under the new stricter rules.
Adge
Well-Known Member
Pen was the right call (even though I was surprised at the time) and I wondered why England was quick to get the yellow card out aswell so knew that something else had been seen by him regarding the challenge.
For those who are interested the Laws of the game will point to this-
Obviously it was the follow through-reckless challenge=caution (Yellow card).
The red was correct-excessive force=Dismissed from the field of play (Red Card)
Didn’t have a great game but got the 2 big major calls right (which is usually the case).
For those who are interested the Laws of the game will point to this-
Obviously it was the follow through-reckless challenge=caution (Yellow card).
The red was correct-excessive force=Dismissed from the field of play (Red Card)
Didn’t have a great game but got the 2 big major calls right (which is usually the case).
Terry Gibson's perm
Well-Known Member
It’s no good having these prem refs as they are used to their mistakes being sorted(sometimes) by var. They are also very pally with the ex prem players like Wanks (no idea how he ever played in the prem).
Adge
Well-Known Member
Yep-a very fair point. VAR can give the Referee a get out if he makes an honest mistake-does that mean that they become a bit lazy and take their eye off the ball a bit and see it as a bit of an insurance policy?
Sky Blue Pete
Well-Known Member
Room of refs always says an orange should be given as a red
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
It looked pretty dangerous in real time to be honest. The penalty however looked ridiculous in real time and more so in the replay.
Sky Blue Pete
Well-Known Member
The behind the goal looked pretty reckless but it’s subjective all you can say is the ref was close to not guess
And the ref was looking right at it, he was gash
MalcSB
Well-Known Member
What serious injury did he cause?
D
Deleted member 9744
Guest
Penalty was debatable. I can see why it was given.
Red was absolutely a red. Totally out of control and dangerous. Bidwell could have been seriously injured. It was an outrageous challenge.
Sky Blue Pete
Well-Known Member
None doesn’t mean it couldn’t be deemed reckless
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
Dewsbury-Hall was left with a broken heart
MalcSB
Well-Known Member
So then you should have said can’t follow through and potentially cause serious injury. Didn’t seem to be a mark in his leg.
MalcSB
Well-Known Member
That was after 94 minutes, the tosser.
David O'Day
Well-Known Member
it wasn't reckless and contact with an opponent doesn't equal a foul
he won the ball and then their was a coming together
awful decision but thankfully it didn't cost us
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
The red card challenge reminded me a lot of Kisnorbo getting sent off for them against us ages ago, in basically the same part of the pitch.
Great_Expectations
Well-Known Member
I actually thought he started quite well and seemed to want to let the game flow, but in doing so become too lenient and then lost control.
The big ones for me;
1) Not a pen. No idea what Thomas is supposed to do with his leg/foot after making contact with the ball, his momentum was carrying him that way, there’s no change of direction. I also don’t think his leg is particularly high, especially considering…
2) Their keeper has to at least be booked for the high foot, but the Ref didn’t even give a foul! Also means - if he’s consistent - Thomas’ leg definitely was not high.
3) Definite red card - late and reckless. He’d lost his head about 15 minutes prior to this tackle.
4) Palmer booked for kicking the ball away and MVE booked for inciting the crowd, their player kicks the ball into our fans. That’s a booking for either kicking the ball away or inciting the fans.
5) Their players - especially Winks - constantly moaning so dissent surely? We get Sakamoto booked for ‘dissent’ post penalty decision. Huh?!
Still, we won and that’s that really matters!
The big ones for me;
1) Not a pen. No idea what Thomas is supposed to do with his leg/foot after making contact with the ball, his momentum was carrying him that way, there’s no change of direction. I also don’t think his leg is particularly high, especially considering…
2) Their keeper has to at least be booked for the high foot, but the Ref didn’t even give a foul! Also means - if he’s consistent - Thomas’ leg definitely was not high.
3) Definite red card - late and reckless. He’d lost his head about 15 minutes prior to this tackle.
4) Palmer booked for kicking the ball away and MVE booked for inciting the crowd, their player kicks the ball into our fans. That’s a booking for either kicking the ball away or inciting the fans.
5) Their players - especially Winks - constantly moaning so dissent surely? We get Sakamoto booked for ‘dissent’ post penalty decision. Huh?!
Still, we won and that’s that really matters!
Haven't read much on the thread, but the penalty really confused me. It seemed really reckless, in the context of Thomas's high foot connecting with KDH. But Thomas was going for the ball, easily got there first, and KDH was not in the line of Thomas's direction of travel when Thomas committed to clearing the ball. KDH moved in front of Thomas's travelling foot once Thomas was already committed, at no point did he aim his studs in KDH's direction. If you start saying footballers can't commit like that, then you're changing the dynamics of the game.
Martin180
Well-Known Member
Probably the most sensible post on this .Clearly Thomas has to firstly challenge and secondly get good purchase on the ball . From a defensive point he does both very effectively
The aftermath of the challenge is where the FA and current guidelines muddy the waters . What is he supposed to do when he is fully committed? Where does he need to position his trailing limbs and body ?
The modern game and guidelines don't make the game flow they complicate
SkyblueDad
Well-Known Member
Do you think var would have given a red, one problem nowadays is a lot of major decisions are given by var.
Games have two refs now var and an individual with a whistle.
Skyblue Bangkok
Well-Known Member
I can see why the pen was given although I did not think it was. Both Robins and Pearson thought it was. Taggart ex Leicester play on highlights commentary said he was not sure about it and looked surprised. With VAR who knows , if they couldn't even spot the foul on Burnley's keeper or the ludicrous pen given against Inter Milan then I have no idea.
Cally Fedora
Well-Known Member
Think about someone like Lloyd McGrath. How whole career built around tackling. Good, hard, legal tackling. If he comes along nowadays he simply doesn’t have a career. It’s a block, jockey and head game for defenders now. You just can’t risk tackling. Look no further than the Leicester pen today for evidence of that.
Could you not say this about any time someone kicks the ball hard?
Anyone who says it was a penalty is talking nonsense, Robins included.