KjaAnd
Full Member
You can't run around and two-foot opponents just because the ref has blown the whistle.It was offside, wasn't it? He can't give a foul for that if he's given the offside.
You can't run around and two-foot opponents just because the ref has blown the whistle.It was offside, wasn't it? He can't give a foul for that if he's given the offside.
According to the vid you posted, yes you can!You can't run around and two-foot opponents just because the ref has blown the whistle.
Nah, we’re clearly all just rattled.
I really don't understand this take by so many people. Of course it is VAR's fault - all the VAR needed to do was inform the referee that there was no foul there. In fact, he made the mind up for the ref by asking him to go over and look at the screen. VAR is 100% at fault here - and it's killing the game.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.
This is the reason that the ref and VAR thought their should be a sending offIt’s never a red, the game is called football. You use your feet to kick a ball around. Of course there will be times when players come together like this, it’s a natural result of players kicking a football around.
It's not a tackeThis is the reason that the ref and VAR thought their should be a sending off
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.
Yes he cleared the ball but the force he went into that tackle was the issue not the fact that he cleared the ball or come to that you could argue caught Chillwell although it sort of emphasis the point
As I said earlier was harsh and still think it was but when you go in full on like that and catch a player you run that risk.
Of course he can send him off or give a yellow - do you think when the ref blows a whistle and stops the play, players are free to do whatever they want during that time?It was offside, wasn't it? He can't give a foul for that if he's given the offside.
Pickford managed to get away with it alsoAccording to the vid you posted, yes you can!
Your missing the very point that according to the law the fact that he kicked Chillwell it was a foul.I really don't understand this take by so many people. Of course it is VAR's fault - all the VAR needed to do was inform the referee that there was no foul there. In fact, he made the mind up for the ref by asking him to go over and look at the screen. VAR is 100% at fault here - and it's killing the game.
There was absolutely nothing ’excessive’ about it though. It’s a fecking side-footer.This is the reason that the ref and VAR thought their should be a sending off
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.
Yes he cleared the ball but the force he went into that tackle was the issue not the fact that he cleared the ball or come to that you could argue caught Chillwell although it sort of emphasis the point
As I said earlier was harsh and still think it was but when you go in full on like that and catch a player you run that risk.
Did he kick be it intentionally or unintentionally?It's not a tacke
He doesn't go in "full on"
Christ.
Did he kick be it intentionally or unintentionally?
That is a foul
Direct free kick
A direct free kick is awarded if a player commits any of the following offences against an opponent in a manner considered by the referee to be careless, reckless or using excessive force:
The fact it was then a foul brings the tackle, challenge or the manner he played the ball into the equation.
- charges
- jumps at
- kicks or attempts to kick
- pushes
- strikes or attempts to strike (including head-butt)
- tackles or challenges
- trips or attempts to trip
Look I think it’s a harsh one but thems the rules
No it doesn'tYour missing the very point that according to the law the fact that he kicked Chillwell it was a foul.
Direct free kick
A direct free kick is awarded if a player commits any of the following offences against an opponent in a manner considered by the referee to be careless, reckless or using excessive force:
- charges
- jumps at
- kicks or attempts to kick
- pushes
- strikes or attempts to strike (including head-butt)
- tackles or challenges
- trips or attempts to trip
If we go my this then there are 0 controversial decisions since VAR was introduced.This is the reason that the ref and VAR thought their should be a sending off
Now this is something I agree 100% with. There should be at most one replay when the matter is subjective at even they should not be-in SLO moNo 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.
The point is it's not the technology that's the problem, it's the people running it. If they cant get it right it points to a bigger problem as they are same people out on the field the following week.I really don't understand this take by so many people. Of course it is VAR's fault - all the VAR needed to do was inform the referee that there was no foul there. In fact, he made the mind up for the ref by asking him to go over and look at the screen. VAR is 100% at fault here - and it's killing the game.
It wasn’t even a tackle, it was hoofing the ball away, which is absolutely fine.This is the reason that the ref and VAR thought their should be a sending off
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.
Yes he cleared the ball but the force he went into that tackle was the issue not the fact that he cleared the ball or come to that you could argue caught Chillwell although it sort of emphasis the point
As I said earlier was harsh and still think it was but when you go in full on like that and catch a player you run that risk.
I get that you support Chelsea and are spamming the shit out of this thread but please do play football once in your life.Your missing the very point that according to the law the fact that he kicked Chillwell it was a foul.
I actually believe VAR shouldn't have slow-motion or the ability to pause at all. I genuinely believe that would fix almost all the problems with it:Now this is something I agree 100% with. There should be at most one replay when the matter is subjective at even they should not be-in SLO mo
I’m pretty sure there would have been, but zero chance I’m bothering to search from them
Any other threads been created outside of the main VAR and referee one, in football forum, for specific incidents not involving Utd this season?
There have been loads of awful decisions but can't recall any. Even the Lo Celso stamp last year didn't get a thread iirc. Should we judge all red cards by the fact this wasn't one, from 1:30 here:
A newbie only has 5 main posts IIRC. He's done for today.I get that you support Chelsea and are spamming the shit out of this thread but please do play football once in your life.
https://www.redcafe.net/threads/vardys-challenge-on-mustafi-deserved-red.456043/
Any other threads been created outside of the main VAR and referee one, in football forum, for specific incidents not involving Utd this season?
There have been loads of awful decisions but can't recall any. Even the Lo Celso stamp last year didn't get a thread iirc. Should we judge all red cards by the fact this wasn't one, from 1:30 here:
There are plenty of threads.I’m pretty sure there would have been, but zero chance I’m bothering to search from them
One person making a thread, and then all the spill over chat being discussed in there can’t be surprising. Not to mention there’s Chelsea fans defending it. I doubt anyone was trying to defend that Lo Celso stamp.
He didn’t go into a tackle, he is clearing a ball, Chilwell on the other hand is the one trying to tackle and terribly mistimed it.A tackle or challenge that endangers the safety of an opponent or uses excessive force or brutality must be sanctioned as serious foul play.
Yes he cleared the ball but the force he went into that tackle
Come on mate, this is utter Bollox. Should players stop kicking the ball entirely? just incase like.It doesn't matter if he couldn't negate the contact. That's irrelevant. The fact is there is contact. He's high. And he's studded him in the calf.
Players should follow simple tactic, when player 1 goes for header, opponent should just plant his leg in the landing area and then cry for red card for player 1. Serious foul play, studs in the calf, knee wherever opponent wants.He didn’t go into a tackle, he is clearing a ball, Chilwell on the other hand is the one trying to tackle and terribly mistimed it.
Why the feck would we be rattled? Who the feck are Chelsea to us? If anything, we want you to win this season, if only to stop Liverpool and City.
Any other threads been created outside of the main VAR and referee one, in football forum, for specific incidents not involving Utd this season?
There have been loads of awful decisions but can't recall any. Even the Lo Celso stamp last year didn't get a thread iirc. Should we judge all red cards by the fact this wasn't one, from 1:30 here:
Ofcourse he should've been fecking sent off, it's a reckless challenge that endangers the safety of the opponent.So the Burnley lad that two footed Henderson should have gone, right?
maybe read what I was replying to and you’ll see the relevance? I don't get your point.
Showing me two wrong decisions both of which should have also been red has no bearing on this incident. Its just means refs are inconsistent as shit