If Chilwell had his foot lifted and the WH player hit his foot, Its a WH fk and Chilwell yellow for a late challenge.
It's a mental red card, it's just his natural follow-through and Chilwell runs into him.
Last edited:
Balbuena Red Card (VAR) - West Ham v Chelsea
- Thread starter Green_Red
- Start date
It's a mental red card, it's just his natural follow-through and Chilwell runs into him.
I have read it hence my response.
Both of them were clear reds too. Just because refs are inconsistent as shit doesn't mean anything.
Or the pogba one half way up the back of calf on his planted foot
I'm all for opposition fans on this board like yourself, but when they can't be impartial it's maddening and think we'd be better of without those particular ones.What a surprise that 2/3 posters that think it’s a red are Chelsea fans.
He can still give a red like pick ford should have seen red against vvd who was offside.
But yes, no foul or yellow.
Chilwell was the one doing the challenging
Thank you for a bit of common sense from a Chelsea fan. It was maddening reading those other posts.
That's not be a red, a yellow or even a foul. The bias from Chelsea fans is understandable, but it's not a foul, and the card should be rescinded.
Intent works both ways, if an idiot runs straight into a clearance and he gets booted, he should be the one getting the card.
Literally! He catches the player who is clearing the ball late.
Nail on head. It's maddening that VAR, Kavanagh and some blinkered Chelsea oppos on here just cannot see that.
Hope it gets overturned on appeal, assuming they are appealing (anyone know?)
A negative of VAR seems to oddly enough be giving the referees to much time to think about decisions.
You can also apply the dangerous play rule to what Chilwell did, his physical motion in the play, where he put himself.
This comes down to common sense.
And being a Chelsky fan.
It's understandable for Chelsea fans to want to believe it's a legitimate red, it's farcical that VAR and the ref also believe it is.
Exactly, say that Balbuenas studs don’t go into Chillwell, then surely it’s just a West Ham free kick? Balbuena plays it and Chillwell goes crashing into him late.
The way that Chilwell attacked Balbuenas studs with his calf was disgusting.
But seriously, if you endanger yourself, you can’t blame the other guy
But seriously, if you endanger yourself, you can’t blame the other guy
It's not even, I don't think. If they can't be be impartial what do they add to the board as an opposition fan
There's always going to be disagreements between oppo fans, it's the nature of the beast. The back and forth is what makes it fun!
I don't mind that being a red if the same standard was being applied to other challenges of that ilk as well. I think a big reason, shitbags like Burnley get away with a lot of it is that they start the game committing those fouls and do it regularly enough to normalize the referee's thinking for what he can and cannot whistle without turning the pace of the game to a crawl.
In fairness, I had a quick look at a Chelsea forum yesterday and most were saying it shouldn’t have been a red card. It’s not one that’s in any sort of grey area where there’s really room for fan bias - it’s just not a foul.
People saying it is a foul seem to just be looking at the ultimate outcome and not understanding that it is possible to kick someone at a football match without it being intentional, reckless or careless.
Refs in general, but this one in particular, need to grow a pair and say "no foul" or whatever. Two weeks in a row now this ref has screwed up, what censure will he get and why isn't it made public?
So @11101 was right, it's the ref who makes the decision whether to refer or not. Glad we cleared that up.
Last edited:
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
That’s all well good but the biggest problem is that West Ham could lose out on Champions League and therefore millions of dollars because the FA employs an incompetent referee.
Obviously. Chelsea are a very fortunate club.
Exactly. Rescinding doesn't solve the problem created during the game. No mention of repercussions for the referee's incompetence either. Anyway, I'm just happy such a ludicrous decision has been overturned.
I don't think the red card really impacted the outcome of the game. Good decision to overturn it though. Laughable sending off to begin with.
Last edited:
How many people sit on the panel that decide whether or not to overturn these decisions? Because clearly at least two highly paid officials failed to get it right at the weekend
Absolutely scandalous decision that may have cost West Ham UCL football
Rescinding it is the worst outcome really.
Surely you stick with the decision of both the on field ref and VAR ref, who have both had numerous looks at a camera, or you make a mockery of both of them.
And it cost West Ham a chance of a comeback (although unlikely the way they were playing), and ruined the game totally (albeit late on)
Surely you stick with the decision of both the on field ref and VAR ref, who have both had numerous looks at a camera, or you make a mockery of both of them.
And it cost West Ham a chance of a comeback (although unlikely the way they were playing), and ruined the game totally (albeit late on)
Common sense that the red card was rescinded.
So the original referee didn’t see any foul.
The VAR decided that there was a clear and obvious error in a red card not being given, after watching several replays.
The original referee watched it on video and agreed it was a sending off.
An FA panel then concludes that the sending off was a clear and obvious error so rescinds the red card.
Basically, I think we can conclude that the referees don’t have a clue what they are doing!
The VAR decided that there was a clear and obvious error in a red card not being given, after watching several replays.
The original referee watched it on video and agreed it was a sending off.
An FA panel then concludes that the sending off was a clear and obvious error so rescinds the red card.
Basically, I think we can conclude that the referees don’t have a clue what they are doing!
Tbf to the ref, the procedure they're taught to follow makes it extremely unlikely that he'd stick with his original decision once he's told to look at it by the VAR.
I think the stat I saw earlier in the week is that the refs have only rejected the VAR's call at that point 5 times out of 120 referrals. That's because while they technically could make their own call at that point, the process they're told to follow basically makes it a token confirmatory gesture.
So really it was the VAR's subjective call that made the big difference here. You could argue that the ref should have been strong enough to reject it but that's tough when they're being actively encouraged to go along with the VAR's decision. It's a waste of the sideline monitors, really.
West Ham having to play 10mins + extra time with one less player probably had feck all of an effect...I reckon Chelsea should start doing that, just finish the remaining 14 mins with 1 less player, because it won't really impact the outcome
Just saying the way the previous 80 minutes had gone, West Ham didn't really look like scoring. We'll never know of course, but don't think they would have got anything out of the game with or without the red card.
Well, they certainly didn't get much out of it finishing it with 1 player less.
Well yes. Don't think I'm saying anything controversial here. We held them at arms length pretty comfortably before and after the red card. Unfortunate decision, and I'm happy it's been overturned, but I think we would have held on to the 1-0 regardless.
I may be in the minority, but I’m not as sold on this ‘anyone who has ever played the game’ garb and not convinced that Balbuena didn’t leave a but on. I’ve seen people do it before, I’ve also seen people withdrawing last second when they see they are going to hurt someone.
I remember Felipe Melo had a habit of challenging/clearing the ball in this manner. Especially in the World Cup in 2010, he had a habit of clearing the ball and following through with his foot to head height, clearly aimed at taking whatever extras he could get along with the ball. I don’t think he was penalised for it, but commentators/pundits also noticed. Only example I could find is at 53 seconds in this video:
He typically followed through clearances of 50/50 balls in this manner, then of course pleaded his innocence as his opponents looked to the ref.
EDIT: another example at 01:18 in this video from the same tournament -
I remember Felipe Melo had a habit of challenging/clearing the ball in this manner. Especially in the World Cup in 2010, he had a habit of clearing the ball and following through with his foot to head height, clearly aimed at taking whatever extras he could get along with the ball. I don’t think he was penalised for it, but commentators/pundits also noticed. Only example I could find is at 53 seconds in this video:
He typically followed through clearances of 50/50 balls in this manner, then of course pleaded his innocence as his opponents looked to the ref.
EDIT: another example at 01:18 in this video from the same tournament -
Last edited:
Weird to think that the Melo clearance in the first clip in any way is relatable to the Balbuena clearance.
This is amazing coming from Utd fans. We all know it takes a few seconds to turn the game.
What if Ole had been red carded in 1999 or City had one player less in 2012.
Feck all difference yeah.