Balbuena Red Card (VAR) - West Ham v Chelsea

[Gio]

Another example of decisions taken by officials who haven’t experienced that situation enough to know the difference between ‘leaving one in on the opponent’ and a normal clearance with natural follow through. There is a threshold between the two situations and this one falls clearly in the normal category.

It’s also another example of VAR clouding judgement through introducing uncertainty and clouding judgement through slow motion and mid-movement stills.

 

[kouroux]

So so harsh, giving a red card to this just shows how completely out of touch some referees are with the intricaties of football. It's not a even tackle where the player's momentum made him clatter with his opponent.
@Gio I swear I didn't read your post

 

[Ixion]

Clearly not a red card.

 

[Berbasbullet]

Clear red for me, thought that the moment I saw the first replay of it. Balbeuna studs Chillwell and I'm 50/50 on if he's also left it in to do him. Doesn't matter anyway though, it's dangerous. Won't get away with that in modern football.

As I said in the other thread, if one of our players does that against Real Madrid and doesn’t get a red, I'd be amazed.

Not sure why there is controversy about it or a separate thread. Maybe it's a good sign though, if cages are being rattled to this extent .

What exactly do you expect Balbuena to do after he’s kicked the ball? He literally can’t do anything as his momentum is taking him one way and his back leg is slipping?

It was a bleeding clearance, not a tackle, ridiculous take. Not to mention that it happened about a second after he kicked the ball.

People expect players to have super human reactions, in reality players will constantly collide with each other due to the pace of the game, and they can’t all be fouls.

How can a clearance be dangerous?

 

[Member 101269]

All I’m saying is TAA on Richarlison was far worse

 

[yumtum]

 

[48 hours]

Wtf are you even saying right now. Any sort of kick to the face is a red card offence

not so according to VAR as neither of these were

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[calodo2003]

not so according to VAR as neither of these were

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

His post is so wrong, it’s almost a piss take.

 

[Barnslig]

not so according to VAR as neither of these were

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

And I think is what most people have grievances with - the inconsistencies. VAR was supposed to make decisions more even throughout the season, it was supposed to be there to weed out the horrendous 'clear and obvious' errors, but it's creating more confusion (and with confusion, anger) for everyone involved. You can see the frustration in the managers and the players.

 

[48 hours]

And I think is what most people have grievances with - the inconsistencies. VAR was supposed to make decisions more even throughout the season, it was supposed to be there to weed out the horrendous 'clear and obvious' errors, but it's creating more confusion (and with confusion, anger) for everyone involved. You can see the frustration in the managers and the players.

very true, it seems to change on a weekly basis.

 

[Barnslig]

very true, it seems to change on a weekly basis.

Not even weekly. Within the same game.

 

[SilentWitness]

What a surprise that 2/3 posters that think it’s a red are Chelsea fans.

 

[Berbasbullet]

His post is so wrong, it’s almost a piss take.

So weird people are trying to defend it, no one wants a sending off for incidents like this! Talk about killing the game.

 

[Coops73]

Chris Kavanagh shouldn’t ref in the prem for a long time, bloody awful referee.

 

[Alan Partridge]

As soon as VAR check it for ages then call the ref over to have a look the doubt in the refs mind starts, then he watches it 4 times in slow motion from the most damning angle. He’s very much persuaded to give the red.

That’s maybe my biggest issue with VAR, it’s used almost exclusively to encourage negative decisions to take place. Namely disallowing goals for the strangest, tiniest reasons and getting players sent off.

 

[Jev]

No referee is going to give a red card for that in normal play. Only when you slow it down and watch it over and over again can you convince yourself that there was intent and that the player had time to think about his actions. Which he didn't. It's an example of how VAR has made the decisions worse, and if the charade is going to continue, referees need to be educated on how not to be influenced wrongly by slow-motion.

 

[Regulus Arcturus Black]

No referee is going to give a red card for that in normal play. Only when you slow it down and watch it over and over again can you convince yourself that there was intent and that the player had time to think about his actions. Which he didn't. It's an example of how VAR has made the decisions worse, and if the charade is going to continue, referees need to be educated on how not to be influenced wrongly by slow-motion.

Yup, utterly bonkers.

This is a situation that would’ve been miles better if VAR only showed the ref in real time speed. As you say, slow anything down enough and you can start to convince yourself that the player had time to kick the ball think about leaving his foot in et cetera, when in real time he cleared the ball and hit Chilwell’s leg within a fraction of a second.

If anything Chilwell is the one coming in late and is not in control of his body.

 

[Marwood]

No but that's the premise he is arguing. He's cleared the ball so it doesn't matter where he lands. He's high He's studded his calf. I fail to see what the outrage is about.

How do you belt a ball and on the follow through keep your foot lower than mid calf level?

 

[11101]

Awful decision. Are West Ham appealing it?

It's not really VAR's fault though is it. It's the referee who has looked at it and though yeah, that's a red.

Theres a reason we didnt have any referees at the last World Cup for the first time since the 30s.

 

[CallyRed]

I hope Balbuena has learnt his lesson and in future doesn't bother doing his job as a defender.

 

[Annihilate Now!]

You can really distinguish here between the posters that have actually played football and those that haven't. That is never, ever a red.

I usually hate the argument of "you must have never played football before"... (usually cos people wang it out when talking about bad defending or something) but in this specific instance it's actually a valid argument.

Anyone who suggests this was intentional or that Balbuena could do anything about it need to go kick a football as hard as possible and see what their leg does afterwards.

Fact is he does withdraw his foot as soon as he humanly is able to (right at the end)

 

[Lappen]

I actually think he has good control of his body movement in that situation. I "believe" there is a small holding back the movement when he feels this is going wrong. I think he try to protect himself but it ends up unesseserly and it looks worse. I think its a yellow, not red!

 

[crossy1686]

You could make a case that any foul slowed down and taken out of the context of the game could be a red card tackle. If we know this, how can referee's, who work with this every day, not comprehend it?

You can't even blame VAR, that's just a video reply of what happened, the referee is the one that made the decision. The quality of the refs and their decision making is being exposed by VAR if anything.

 

[Fridge chutney]

the only thing more tragic than that horrendous decision are the arguments defending it.

 

[Grande]

As mentionned by a previous post, you can if you don't end up kicking anyone at nearly full power, otherwise it's a clear foul.

It's even stated clearly in the FA rules :

"PLAYING IN A DANGEROUS MANNER

Playing in a dangerous manner is any action that, while trying to play the ball, threatens injury to someone (including the player themself) and includes preventing a nearby opponent from playing the ball for fear of injury. "

You are well off on this one IMO, and the crucial point is underlined in the quote you brought: It’s the Chelsea player who infringes upon the West Ham player getting too close trying to block him. It’s like if a player lowers his head too much and gets kicked - he gets a yellow for dangerous play, not the kicker of the ball. A player is allowed to kick the ball at his feet.

For those few who thinks that the way Balbuena kicks the ball is in a dangerous, unreasonably forceful way, or that setting his foot down after the clearance is undoubtedly needless, intentional an aggressive, I don’t think they can ever have kicked a ball at speed.

 

[Mickeza]

I actually think he has good control of his body movement in that situation. I "believe" there is a small holding back the movement when he feels this is going wrong. I think he try to protect himself but it ends up unesseserly and it looks worse. I think its a yellow, not red!

I’m very much in the not a red camp because it’s impossible to know for sure but there is a part of me that thinks he’s extended the leg motion deliberately to catch him. Now I’ve watched it 16 times slowed down there’s something unnatural and exaggerated about it.

 

[Dan_F]

the only thing more tragic than that horrendous decision are the arguments defending it.

Nah, we’re clearly all just rattled.

 

[christinaa]

Not even a yellow card let alone red.
Ridiculous.

 

[Adisa]

I think it's a red.
Edit: On second viewing, I am not so sure.

 

[Mike Phelan's Former Tash]

Did Chilwell break his leg or did he get up once the West Ham player got sent off?

I imagine he was up unhurt a minute or two later.

Players need to be more honest, I'm sure Chilwell has been kicked harder than that in his career and stayed on his feet.

No doubt like Son vs United he stayed down longer than necessary to get the decision.

Pathetic

 

[Grande]

You could make a case that any foul slowed down and taken out of the context of the game could be a red card tackle. If we know this, how can referee's, who work with this every day, not comprehend it?

You can't even blame VAR, that's just a video reply of what happened, the referee is the one that made the decision. The quality of the refs and their decision making is being exposed by VAR if anything.

The idea - supposedly - of VAR - is to take out the serious AND obvious errors of the game. Thus to have two instances - first the ref in the VAR room be convinced it was an error, and then the ref on the pich must be. If one is in doubt, the decision should stand.

They’ve managed to feck that up. Constantly we see ref’s called over evidently to ‘double check’ on a decision where there is no way a referee with a VAR could have concluded it’s a clear and obvious error. And several time we have seen ref’s change their decision even though they by the looks of it are slightly uncertain if the new decision is undoubtedly correct.

There are only two explanations: Engliah ref’s don’t really know football and the rules, or, more likely, there is so much fear and cowardice in the Collegiate that refs make decisions more out of fear of criricism than out of understanding of the rules and intetion of VAR use.

I say it’s too complicated for them, botch it.

 

[Lappen]

I’m very much in the not a red camp because it’s impossible to know for sure but there is a part of me that thinks he’s extended the leg motion deliberately to catch him. Now I’ve watched it 16 times slowed down there’s something unnatural and exaggerated about it.

Yes I see it to, but I also think he pulls back a bit when he hits the leg. Therefore I kind of think he did the movement to protect himself from the clash at first, and then tried to pull back...
It could have gone a lot worse and i doesn't because he avoids it. Like you, I don't like the red card!

 

[duffer]

Did Chilwell break his leg or did he get up once the West Ham player got sent off?

Option 3; He was up and walking about long before the player got sent off.

 

[KjaAnd]

This, however, wasn't even a booking according to Jonathan Moss.

 

[VorZakone]

I agree with the general sentiment here. A red card is very harsh.

 

[Mike Smalling]

This, however, wasn't even a booking according to Jonathan Moss.

Absolute shambles.

 

[duffer]

This, however, wasn't even a booking according to Jonathan Moss.

It was offside, wasn't it? He can't give a foul for that if he's given the offside.

 

[roonster09]

What a surprise that 2/3 posters that think it’s a red are Chelsea fans.

Obviously cages are rattled

 

[terraloo]

Ridiculous decision, its clearly not intentional. VAR is really doing an awful job at making the game better. What about New Castle today against LFC? That was insane. There has had been a lot of questionable VAR decisions lately...

The word deliberate or intentional were removed from the rule re fouls many years ago.

It was harsh but by the letter of the law you can see why it’s been given.

Similarly the Newcastle goal was correctly, according to the laws, chalked off.

The thing is that without VAR the sending off wouldn’t have happened nor would the Newcastle goal been disallowed.

People craved for VAR suggesting it would lead to less incorrect decisions it has done that but a lot of those borderline calls that in the past the ref wasn’t sure about so let go are now being subjected to replay after replay and yes VAR may get some wrong but most of the overturns are actually correct according to the laws it’s just the law we in truth don’t like.

 

[UncleBob]

It was offside, wasn't it? He can't give a foul for that if he's given the offside.

He can certainly send someone off