The Refereeing Thread

[Prydzopolis]

[Paul01]

 

He did exactly the same tackle in the second half right on the goal line but got away with it because his studs missed the players leg. Ignoring his generally grubby fouling it looks like he has a technique problem with his tackling.

Actually should have got a second yellow last week and shouldn't have played this week. But misses out playing the tards with 5 yellows.

Could we hope that the MRP finds an obvious error in NOT awarding a straight red?

Will be interesting to see what filters down to our level at pre season refs meetings over next few weeks.

We might be getting Kris Griffiths-Jones for our opening meeting for the pre-season which covers the LOTG changes.

If he turns up, I don't think he'll get any heat buy there are always heaps of Wanderers jerseys at every meeting.

We had the MRP's Simon Micallef at one meeting last year and his observation in a room of 150 that there were a lot of WSW supporters in our Referees group. I am still thinking that I will change into my WSW in case KGJ turns up.

[Paul01]

Heard Robbie Cornthwaite on a podcast talking about the referee in the Sydney Derby. Apparently, Robbie had called for a penalty and a few minutes later Peter Green admitted it should have been a penalty. The penalty would have been awarded with a VAR😣

[WestSyd]

Heard Robbie Cornthwaite on a podcast talking about the referee in the Sydney Derby. Apparently, Robbie had called for a penalty and a few minutes later Peter Green admitted it should have been a penalty. The penalty would have been awarded with a VAR

Not necessarily. A lot of people I speak to still don't think it was a penalty (i.e. he had his tucked in). This is why we should not go to a video referee ever. People still won't be happy because a lot of incidents are based on people's interpretations on how they see something. But worst of all you will completely stop the flow of the game, and we will end up like NFL or NRL, playing for 3 hours with the game stopping every few minutes to look at video screens. **** that.

[tardotz]

 

Heard Robbie Cornthwaite on a podcast talking about the referee in the Sydney Derby. Apparently, Robbie had called for a penalty and a few minutes later Peter Green admitted it should have been a penalty. The penalty would have been awarded with a VAR

Not necessarily. A lot of people I speak to still don't think it was a penalty (i.e. he had his tucked in). This is why we should not go to a video referee ever. People still won't be happy because a lot of incidents are based on people's interpretations on how they see something. But worst of all you will completely stop the flow of the game, and we will end up like NFL or NRL, playing for 3 hours with the game stopping every few minutes to look at video screens. **** that.

With Var does the ref ask for video descion (like NRL) ? Because if they do then he wouldn't have asked as he didn't even see the ball hit him for a corner.

[Gazmon]

 

 

Heard Robbie Cornthwaite on a podcast talking about the referee in the Sydney Derby. Apparently, Robbie had called for a penalty and a few minutes later Peter Green admitted it should have been a penalty. The penalty would have been awarded with a VAR

Not necessarily. A lot of people I speak to still don't think it was a penalty (i.e. he had his tucked in). This is why we should not go to a video referee ever. People still won't be happy because a lot of incidents are based on people's interpretations on how they see something. But worst of all you will completely stop the flow of the game, and we will end up like NFL or NRL, playing for 3 hours with the game stopping every few minutes to look at video screens. **** that.

With Var does the ref ask for video descion (like NRL) ? Because if they do then he wouldn't have asked as he didn't even see the ball hit him for a corner.

 

 

There's a few systems under trial. One is that the referee will discuss quickly with the VAR, the other is that the VAR operates independently and makes a decision without the referee, but then informs them what is the case. I think the first option was used in Japan for the WCW.

[StringerBellend]

 

 

 

 

Heard Robbie Cornthwaite on a podcast talking about the referee in the Sydney Derby. Apparently, Robbie had called for a penalty and a few minutes later Peter Green admitted it should have been a penalty. The penalty would have been awarded with a VAR

Not necessarily. A lot of people I speak to still don't think it was a penalty (i.e. he had his tucked in). This is why we should not go to a video referee ever. People still won't be happy because a lot of incidents are based on people's interpretations on how they see something. But worst of all you will completely stop the flow of the game, and we will end up like NFL or NRL, playing for 3 hours with the game stopping every few minutes to look at video screens. **** that.

With Var does the ref ask for video descion (like NRL) ? Because if they do then he wouldn't have asked as he didn't even see the ball hit him for a corner.

There's a few systems under trial. One is that the referee will discuss quickly with the VAR, the other is that the VAR operates independently and makes a decision without the referee, but then informs them what is the case. I think the first option was used in Japan for the WCW.

If it was the first one for the derby then probably would have been play on, he was clueless that it even hit a defender let alone handball. Would they be allowed a glance at the big screen, most of the really crap decisions this year you can see the error (or at least that it's worth a look) on the big screen before play resumes

 

Actually sometimes feel sorry for referee he has made a honest mistake, it's then shown in replay on a massive screen in front of 40k people and the rules means that he has to pretend he couldn't see the error despite at Allianz it is on a screen that you can see from space

Edited January 22, 2017 by StringerBellend

[Paul01]

According to Strebre Delovski who will one of the first Video Assistant Referees, the VAR will indicate to the central referee if there is an Obvious Error

[Prydzopolis]

[GunnerWanderer]

Horseshit 

 

he should have been cleared. 

[StringerBellend]

Watched the highlight show. Why is it every referee decision like this Cahill has to go up to both the referee and the opposition player. Inflame the situation then do that look where he pretends he is a UN diplomat mediating a peace deal. I'm sick of looking at his narky head, and he used to be my third favourite player

[Gazmon]

Watched the highlight show. Why is it every referee decision like this Cahill has to go up to both the referee and the opposition player. Inflame the situation then do that look where he pretends he is a UN diplomat mediating a peace deal. I'm sick of looking at his narky head, and he used to be my third favourite player

 

It's disgusting.

 

I completely understand an initial reaction, an instinctual comment or gesture. But, when you go out of your way to crowd and remonstrate with the referee then you should be at least be cautioned... personally, sending them off would be a quick way to stop it.

 

The captain should be the only one to talk to the referee, unless the referee requests to speak to a specific player--even then, having a captain present is always handy.

 

They were trying to clamp down on it in the EPL, but then went soft.

[Paul01]

 

 

Watched the highlight show. Why is it every referee decision like this Cahill has to go up to both the referee and the opposition player. Inflame the situation then do that look where he pretends he is a UN diplomat mediating a peace deal. I'm sick of looking at his narky head, and he used to be my third favourite player

It's disgusting.

 

I completely understand an initial reaction, an instinctual comment or gesture. But, when you go out of your way to crowd and remonstrate with the referee then you should be at least be cautioned... personally, sending them off would be a quick way to stop it.

 

The captain should be the only one to talk to the referee, unless the referee requests to speak to a specific player--even then, having a captain present is always handy.

 

They were trying to clamp down on it in the EPL, but then went soft.

The update the FFA issued for this season was in line with the FA

"..when three or more players surround a match official in an act of dissent, the referee will caution at least one of the players."

[theguyyouwishyouwere]

Watched the highlight show. Why is it every referee decision like this Cahill has to go up to both the referee and the opposition player. Inflame the situation then do that look where he pretends he is a UN diplomat mediating a peace deal. I'm sick of looking at his narky head, and he used to be my third favourite player

 

its amazing how you can look past the fact he's a gigantic douchebag when he's playing for your team.

 

imagine if bridgey returns to someone besides us and it turns out he's cahill-level tossbag - i don't know what i'd do

[StringerBellend]

 

 

Watched the highlight show. Why is it every referee decision like this Cahill has to go up to both the referee and the opposition player. Inflame the situation then do that look where he pretends he is a UN diplomat mediating a peace deal. I'm sick of looking at his narky head, and he used to be my third favourite player

its amazing how you can look past the fact he's a gigantic douchebag when he's playing for your team.

 

imagine if bridgey returns to someone besides us and it turns out he's cahill-level tossbag - i don't know what i'd do

I could never dislike Bridge just looking at his generously proportioned head and smile, makes me happy

[theguyyouwishyouwere]

 

 

Watched the highlight show. Why is it every referee decision like this Cahill has to go up to both the referee and the opposition player. Inflame the situation then do that look where he pretends he is a UN diplomat mediating a peace deal. I'm sick of looking at his narky head, and he used to be my third favourite player

its amazing how you can look past the fact he's a gigantic douchebag when he's playing for your team.

 

imagine if bridgey returns to someone besides us and it turns out he's cahill-level tossbag - i don't know what i'd do

I could never dislike Bridge just looking at his generously proportioned head and smile, makes me happy

 

 

[StringerBellend]

 

 

 

 

Watched the highlight show. Why is it every referee decision like this Cahill has to go up to both the referee and the opposition player. Inflame the situation then do that look where he pretends he is a UN diplomat mediating a peace deal. I'm sick of looking at his narky head, and he used to be my third favourite player

its amazing how you can look past the fact he's a gigantic douchebag when he's playing for your team.

 

imagine if bridgey returns to someone besides us and it turns out he's cahill-level tossbag - i don't know what i'd do

I could never dislike Bridge just looking at his generously proportioned head and smile, makes me happy

That's the one

 

You could never stay angry at that smile

[Prydzopolis]

https://twitter.com/deanrosario/status/824807780926124032

 

Consistency

[StringerBellend]

https://twitter.com/deanrosario/status/824807780926124032

 

Consistency

Harper said it was ok

 

 

Harper is a nob

[Prydzopolis]

Red? Yellow? Thoughts?

[ColdRock]

Definite red, that was toe to the side foot at full swing. He's a definite hot head

[torcida90]

Red? Yellow? Thoughts?

 

My head still isn't around the new law but as i currently understand it:

 

CCM won the ball and were running in for a 2v1 inside the box.

So it was definitely DOGSO.

 

However, i feel the Reddy made a genuine attempt to play the ball as he did not see the player come in from the side.

So because it was outside the area it is still a red.

But if it was inside it would have been a yellow and pen because it was a genuine attempt to clear the ball (albeit a very poor and embarrassing one).

 

Right?

[Unlimited]

After thinking about it a bit, I'm inclined to say red

 

Let's say you're hugging the goal line with the ball and you have a team-mate completely unmarked waiting for the tap-in, nearest defender is like 10m away or whatever, and the goalkeeper trips you over. That would be an obvious goal scoring opportunity. But then you have that new "no triple penalty" thing and that just complicates stuff, and I haven't read the new rules yet... 

 

 

 

I'd say something more interesting to discuss is the new rule that says the kick-off can go in any direction - it's led to these kick-offs where one guy is in the centre circle and kicks it backward. It's less aesthetic than the previous pre-match two person discussion before the kick-off. I don't like that rule change

[mack]

It's a red card for me.

 

Reddy loses the ball, if he doesn't kick the Mariners player he will get the ball before the Perth player, and it would've been 3 on 1 with no keeper, hence an obvious goal scoring opportunity.

 

Inside the box, I'd still be giving it a red, because I wouldn't consider taking too long on a clearance to be a 'challenge' for the ball.

[mack]

Additional question.

 

 

This to me looks like a clear red card. He's in 1v1 with the keeper if not for the handball, this would be a red card & penalty.

[Unlimited]

I think what saves Risdon there is the direction of the ball when he flicked it up

 

 

Also just read the new rules:

 

 

Red? Yellow? Thoughts?

 

My head still isn't around the new law but as i currently understand it:

 

CCM won the ball and were running in for a 2v1 inside the box.

So it was definitely DOGSO.

 

However, i feel the Reddy made a genuine attempt to play the ball as he did not see the player come in from the side.

So because it was outside the area it is still a red.

But if it was inside it would have been a yellow and pen because it was a genuine attempt to clear the ball (albeit a very poor and embarrassing one).

 

Right?

 

 

Yeah pretty much, the new rules prevent the 'triple punishment' of red card and suspension and penalty.

[ColdRock]

There's a moment where his eyes widen as the ball is stolen, he thinks about the consequences of allowing the player to get past. Then he he swings no where near the ball, his jagged movements give him away. Much easier to see on live stream than tv

[mack]

I think what saves Risdon there is the direction of the ball when he flicked it up

 

 

Also just read the new rules:

 

 

Red? Yellow? Thoughts?

 

My head still isn't around the new law but as i currently understand it:

 

CCM won the ball and were running in for a 2v1 inside the box.

So it was definitely DOGSO.

 

However, i feel the Reddy made a genuine attempt to play the ball as he did not see the player come in from the side.

So because it was outside the area it is still a red.

But if it was inside it would have been a yellow and pen because it was a genuine attempt to clear the ball (albeit a very poor and embarrassing one).

 

Right?

 

 

Yeah pretty much, the new rules prevent the 'triple punishment' of red card and suspension and penalty.""if you make a rules say that it's a red card if "there is no possibility for the player making the challenge to play the ball".

 

"Genuine attempt" is part of the explanation for the rule change, not the actual wording of the rule. The full wording in the actual laws is:

 

Where a player commits an offence against an opponent within their own penalty area which denies an opponent an obvious goal-scoring opportunity and the referee awards a penalty kick, the offending player is cautioned unless:

 

* The offence is holding, pulling or pushing

* The offending player does not attempt to play the ball or there is no possibility for the player making the challenge to play the ball

* The offence is one which is punishable by a red card wherever it occurs on the field of play (e.g. serious foul play, violent conduct etc.)

 

In all the above circumstances the player is sent off.

 

----

 

Reddy had the ball taken away from him and he had no chance of actually making a challenge for the ball, so red card (if it was in the area, which is what this hypothetical is about, and it doesn't matter outside the area).

[ColdRock]

The connection was sickening, must have hurt like hell. Like being hit in the side of the foot with a hammer

[Davo]

 

I think what saves Risdon there is the direction of the ball when he flicked it up

 

 

Also just read the new rules:

 

 

Red? Yellow? Thoughts?

 

My head still isn't around the new law but as i currently understand it:

 

CCM won the ball and were running in for a 2v1 inside the box.

So it was definitely DOGSO.

 

However, i feel the Reddy made a genuine attempt to play the ball as he did not see the player come in from the side.

So because it was outside the area it is still a red.

But if it was inside it would have been a yellow and pen because it was a genuine attempt to clear the ball (albeit a very poor and embarrassing one).

 

Right?

 

 

Yeah pretty much, the new rules prevent the 'triple punishment' of red card and suspension and penalty.""if you make a rules say that it's a red card if "there is no possibility for the player making the challenge to play the ball".

 

"Genuine attempt" is part of the explanation for the rule change, not the actual wording of the rule. The full wording in the actual laws is:

 

Where a player commits an offence against an opponent within their own penalty area which denies an opponent an obvious goal-scoring opportunity and the referee awards a penalty kick, the offending player is cautioned unless:

 

* The offence is holding, pulling or pushing

* The offending player does not attempt to play the ball or there is no possibility for the player making the challenge to play the ball

* The offence is one which is punishable by a red card wherever it occurs on the field of play (e.g. serious foul play, violent conduct etc.)

 

In all the above circumstances the player is sent off.

 

----

 

Reddy had the ball taken away from him and he had no chance of actually making a challenge for the ball, so red card (if it was in the area, which is what this hypothetical is about, and it doesn't matter outside the area).

 

 

So based on this what are people's thoughts on our game where Santa was stretching for a back post tap in and was dragged back by the Roar player?