Search results

Why do they have to agree? Referee has authority, he can override the other officials. As he has done, as he will do going forward. Re: the time, that was the first use of the technology in a competitive game so I'd expect the process & technology to improve in efficacy. Also, if less than a...

How long does it take you to pause and rewind the tv like? And if they've any sense, they'll use a dial, rather than buttons to the 4th official can better manipulate the incident frame by frame. Why? Straight reds for tackles from behind hasn't lead to red cards for any tackle, getting rid of...

That's an argument for reviews. It doesn't remove the human instinct, insight and judgement. It remains the decision of the referee as you can't yet rely on technology to say whether a collision was illegal or not. The Referee will benefit from seeing the incident, in slow motion, from (I'm...

Well, the panel of experts judged that Shelvey wasn't guilty of a red card offence, the gif clearly shows he's not guilty of violent behaviour (it's a tangle of legs, not a stamp or a kick), nor serious foul play. So I fail to see exactly why you think the panel got it wrong? You seem to suggest...

The video-technology won't be used for fouls, for throw-ins, for goal kicks man. It'll be used for the big decisions that the ref isn't sure on. Also, bear in mind that referees are egomaniacs, so even if there's a highly contentious decision there'd be no rule that the Ref a ) will review, b )...

Which contentious decisions don't result in a break of play and can't be pulled back after brief consultation during play? We've all seen refs put their hand to their ear as the linesman advises on an incident, how would this be different?

I'm not sure I follow, why would play go on for 2 minutes before the review takes place? If the contentious decision is followed by open play, the ref can still immediately ask the 4th official "Is that worth a review?" and when there's a stoppage in play either bring the ball back or carry on...

To send off you have to be sure that Shelvey was kicking at Lansbury. I don't think you can be sure of that, and the review board agree.

The fluid nature of football is often used as an argument against the introduction of video-technology, but hasn't the goalline system proven that it needn't be so? I certainly wouldn't have a number of challenges available to either team. Surely teams would simply begin to use those reviews...

Kicking without hitting anyone isn't a red card offence. What you mean is kicking with the intent to strike someone is violent behaviour or serious foul play and I don't disagree. What's happened though is another Brighton fan has miquoted me (in what I can only assume is) an effort to...

Don't want to get a reputation for being ornery, but if video technology can be used as a tool that the referee can choose to use or not, choose to ignore or not, I don't have a problem. Referee's decision is final during the match, so it's not like he and the 4th official will be on the...

It fundamentally doesn't. It shows a tangle of legs and Shelvey pushing out to get untangled. It's clearly an error to send Shelvey off for that and the officials have clearly been duped by Lansbury's cheating. I can only assume the officials didn't see the issue clearly, saw only the reaction...

You best tell that to every football, rugby and American Football player ever then. They seem to be operating under entirely different rules. :) You're implying that it's possible for the referee to be wrong in sending him off and that the FA are wrong to say he shouldn't have been sent off...

I've never said Shelvey isn't a horrible prick. He is. However, he didn't kick Lansbury, as the slow-motion replays show, and the red card for this incident was justifiably rescinded. What's more likely; the referee got it wrong in the heat of the moment, or the review panel got it wrong after...

Well, answer me this, if the red was justified, why was it rescinded?

"Shelvey kicked out of a tangle of legs", cherry picking part of a quote can lead to misunderstanding. Shelvey didn't kick at Lansbury, he was trying to untangle his legs, after being fouled by Lansbury. Then Lansbury (who had not been struck) feigns injury in a successful attempt at cheating a...

Penalty scored - attacking team encroach - retake Penalty missed - attacking team encroach - IDFK Penalty scored - defending team encroach - Goal Penalty missed - Defending team encroach - retake Penalty scored - both teams encroach - retake Penalty missed - both teams encroach - retake What...

I should probably clarify, RE: the reds which were both rescinded. Shelvey's was rescinded because the narrative of Shelvey kicking Lansbury in the face is utter rot. Shelvey kicked out of a tangle of legs and that kick hit Lansbury's chest. Lansbury then playacted (as Lansbury is wont to do) to...

Referees have been poor for everyone*. If you win the title it's because, over 46 games, you've deserved to. Hughton has earned a shot at a Premier League season, God knows he earned it when he was with us. Knockaert and Dunk have been very good this year too. Changing subject a second, what's...

No, it's fundamentally not. A "clear penalty" remains subjective. The penalty had already been awarded, clear or otherwise, and then the referee failed in his job because of a lack of knowledge a lack of basic competence. It would be like a referee awarding a goal after a team puts the ball in...