No he didn't, he was running and Ederson took him out. Take the blue tinted specs off.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Ref Watch
- Thread starter Chi-town blues
- Start date
Ederson took him out. Fraser did not take Ederson out. Easy decision, only one player committed a foul and that wasn't FraserNor does Ederson need to take evasive action to avoid a challenge from Fraser - so how do you decide which is which?
Wrong. They do not have to take that into consideration at all.The refs have to consider if the player has any chance of creating or scoring a goal. In the Ederson example the player had zero chance of scoring or creating a goal as Walker had full control of the situation so why would he be awarded a free shot at goal 12 yards out for an off-the-ball situation?
Example below of an off the ball incident where 2 players from the same team get sent off.
Also it was Cancelo not Walker
Have you looked at the freeze frame yet?I completely agree, the decisions we get are the ones there's not really much to argue about. The only genuine 50/50 call we have had in our favour I can think of was the Odergaard penalty shout in the Arsenal game.
BerkshireBlue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 19 Jan 2015
- Messages
- 4,516
Wrong. They do not have to take that into consideration at all.
Example below of an off the ball incident where 2 players from the same team get sent off.
Also it was Cancelo not Walker
lol ask any ref what goes through his head when deciding if a penalty should be given and I guarantee you it will be part of his thoughts. Your vid doesn't work but I'm guessing it's a video of violent conduct rather than a mis timed challenge. Oh and grow up with you Cancelo/Walker comment
Last edited:
JRockBlues
Well-Known Member
Only a throw-in...fuck me anyone see that tackle on harwood bellis and not even a yellow i dont think.hes lucky hes not in hospital with his leg in 2 pieces refs are fucking horrific
Chris in London
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 21 Sep 2009
- Messages
- 13,887
No, but you are arguing a different point. We got the benefit of a 50/50 call because in real time it's a call that the referee might well have given because he doesn't get to view it in freeze frame. He might have given it, and if he had it is doubtful VAR would have overturned it.Have you looked at the freeze frame yet?
The good news for you is that someone crunched the numbers for the Premier League and this season the ball is in play longer in City games than any others - and by some distance.I As a season ticket holder and paying in advance,I pay for 90minutes football,and at the moment we get between 60/65 mins.I blame the refs,Keepers taking for ever over goal kicks,start booking them from the first minute,same with ball in hand,going walk about,book them.free kicks why are refs so involved,opposition players know the rules,they are athletes 2/3 seconds and still within 10 yards book them,same at corners.Throw ins,hold on whilst I read a chapter of War &Peace, Players with “injuries” shall waitoff the pitch for the amount of time they have waisted,including who ever committed the foul.The refs in 2/3 games will stop all the liberty taken ,and perhaps we might get close to 90 mins,we pay for.If only the refs had the BALLS.
Sorry for rant pissed off with gutless refs.
City were 60mins+, whereas the next highest were 57m and Villa Fans got just 49mins!
I suspect we notice it more because we control so much of the possession - a few seasons ago we had a game against Chelsea with 68 mins of play, whereas a Stoke/Watford game the same season had 42mins. The difference is likely that less controlled/scrappy games have more fouls, more passes going out of play etc.
Ultimately, as a City fan I wouldn't worry about time wasting, as we have easily enough of the ball to make chances and win a match.
Ederson took him out. Fraser did not take Ederson out. Easy decision, only one player committed a foul and that wasn't Fraser
Well that's your opinion and that's fine but the only fact is that Ederson and Fraser collided,
If you will indulge me, perhaps I can suggest some hypothetical situations that might have occurred had Cancello not been involved at all and the ball had continued on its trajectory?
Scenario A - Ederson catches the ball and then Ederson and Fraser collide.
Scenario B - Ederson parries the ball towards the corner flag and then Ederson and Fraser collide.
Scenario C - Ederson misses the ball which continues moving forward and Fraser and Ederson collide as Fraser tries to jump over Ederson.
Scenario D - Fraser plays the ball first and then collides with Ederson
Scenario E - Ederson and Fraser reach the ball simultaneously and collide.
What would be your decision in each of these cases and how likely do you think each scenario would have been had Cancello not intervened?
halfcenturyup
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 12 Oct 2009
- Messages
- 15,036
A: PenaltyWell that's your opinion and that's fine but the only fact is that Ederson and Fraser collided,
If you will indulge me, perhaps I can suggest some hypothetical situations that might have occurred had Cancello not been involved at all and the ball had continued on its trajectory?
Scenario A - Ederson catches the ball and then Ederson and Fraser collide.
Scenario B - Ederson parries the ball towards the corner flag and then Ederson and Fraser collide.
Scenario C - Ederson misses the ball which continues moving forward and Fraser and Ederson collide as Fraser tries to jump over Ederson.
Scenario D - Fraser plays the ball first and then collides with Ederson
Scenario E - Ederson and Fraser reach the ball simultaneously and collide.
What would be your decision in each of these cases and how likely do you think each scenario would have been had Cancello not intervened?
B: Penalty
C: Penalty
D: Penalty
E: Penalty
Any other scenario: Penalty
It is CIty, after all. I am surprised you needed to ask.
I am amazed it wasn't given, even though I think Ederson didn't commit an infringement and Fraser deliberately initiated the collision.
Yes, I should have emphasized the your decision rather than what the referee might have given! If it were Mr Atwell on a bad day you forgot to add what colour of card it would be.A: Penalty
B: Penalty
C: Penalty
D: Penalty
E: Penalty
Any other scenario: Penalty
It is CIty, after all. I am surprised you needed to ask.
I am amazed it wasn't given, even though I think Ederson didn't commit an infringement and Fraser deliberately initiated the collision.
I'll admit that on first viewing I thought a penalty would be given; it was only when I went through it slowly on City + that I couldn't find any criteria that would justify it.
salfordbluetrue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 2 Jul 2013
- Messages
- 4,318
Fraser was behind Cancelo, Fraser had more than enough time to change the contact with Ederson, as he had the time it took Cancelo to take a touch of the ball and move in the opposite direction, i have not got blue specs on, it was an off the ball coming together that did not change/gain advantageNo he didn't, he was running and Ederson took him out. Take the blue tinted specs off.
the-ecstacy-of-eight
Well-Known Member
I agree 100% about the VAR. ZERO accountability and Friend's been hung out to dry as a result of being sent over to the monitor as we all know that pretty much means he's been told to change his initial decision by "the powers that be".So kevin friend got dropped from the games next week after his master piece against crystal palace. Funny thing is the var ref should also get some heat
Did Jon Moss get suspended for NOT giving a pen last year at Southampton?
Did Simon Hooper get any heat for not seeing any foul when DeBruyne was brought down outside or inside the box this year at Southampton? What about his VAR mate who didn't send him to the monitor for either this OR the studs into Laporte's thigh?
Either of these two/three incidents had just as much impact on the outcome of the match as Friends/the VAR's actions at Palace.
I just KNEW that all the attention would be switched onto the Liverpool penalty and the "general poor standard of refereeing" rather than "manchester city are refereed differently to other clubs".
It's all smoke and mirrors.
The Future’s Blue!
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 17 Dec 2019
- Messages
- 13,663
- Team supported
- City
Just trying to show the football world that they will take action when needed, even though the score still stands.I agree 100% about the VAR. ZERO accountability and Friend's been hung out to dry as a result of being sent over to the monitor as we all know that pretty much means he's been told to change his initial decision by "the powers that be".
Did Jon Moss get suspended for NOT giving a pen last year at Southampton?
Did Simon Hooper get any heat for not seeing any foul when DeBruyne was brought down outside or inside the box this year at Southampton? What about his VAR mate who didn't send him to the monitor for either this OR the studs into Laporte's thigh?
Either of these two/three incidents had just as much impact on the outcome of the match as Friends/the VAR's actions at Palace.
I just KNEW that all the attention would be switched onto the Liverpool penalty and the "general poor standard of refereeing" rather than "manchester city are refereed differently to other clubs".
It's all smoke and mirrors.
He’ll be back soon, doing the PLs bidding.
cleavers
Moderator
No idea who was today's buffoon, but I actually thought he was very refreshing in the way he handled most things, seemed to actually know the "advantage" rule for a change, and didn't seem to have any agenda to me. I did think 3 minutes added after 2 goals and 10 subs was a bit under done, but he was maybe just sick of the weather ? I know I was.
It was that Richie Benaud blokeNo idea who was today's buffoon, but I actually thought he was very refreshing in the way he handled most things, seemed to actually know the "advantage" rule for a change, and didn't seem to have any agenda to me. I did think 3 minutes added after 2 goals and 10 subs was a bit under done, but he was maybe just sick of the weather ? I know I was.
Gray
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 30 May 2004
- Messages
- 28,895
- Team supported
- ABU & The Bus Wreckers
Thanks cobber.It was that Richie Benaud bloke
M
M
mat
Guest
Let's see how he refs in a PL game.No idea who was today's buffoon, but I actually thought he was very refreshing in the way he handled most things, seemed to actually know the "advantage" rule for a change, and didn't seem to have any agenda to me. I did think 3 minutes added after 2 goals and 10 subs was a bit under done, but he was maybe just sick of the weather ? I know I was.
eyalluvitt
Well-Known Member
61% possession and 9 fouls v 39% possession and 6 fouls. Very dubious for all other teams in world football but about as good as it ever gets for us.