Ref Watch City Games - 2023/24

[Chris in London]

Nah, not having that and you wouldn’t use that in court. Totally circumstantial.

The evidence is plain to see. What you are doing is inventing reasons to avoid the most probable conclusion.

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

The evidence is plain to see. What you are doing is inventing reasons to avoid the most probable conclusion.

And yet that wouldn’t secure a conviction in court and I put it to you that your emotional involvement has clouded your judgment. ;-)

 

[Chris in London]

And yet that wouldn’t secure a conviction in court and I put it to you that your emotional involvement has clouded your judgment. ;-)

Wrong standard

not the only thing you’re wrong about
;)

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

Wrong standard

not the only thing you’re wrong about
;)

That’s fine. You’ve not proven anything. You’ve melded your argument to what you think happened, not actually what did happen.

We’d need to get Hooper in the dock to find that out.

 

[meltonblue]

Did the ref in the Villa game not mean to signal advantage either?

is that the hill you want to die on?

Well you were on the hill earlier in the thread that it was prohibited in the rules so I assumed you were still going off that.

If you’re going off what Webb said about it, then like I’ve already said that makes Hooper look a moron at best. It’s ultimately still irrelevant though, it’s not an error whether he signalled or not.

 

[Chris in London]

That’s fine. You’ve not proven anything. You’ve melded your argument to what you think happened, not actually what did happen.

We’d need to get Hooper in the dock to find that out.

And since that won’t happen I go with the most probable explanation.

you give him the benefit of the doubt if you want.

 

[Kippax77]

BBC story:

Premier League: Man City vs Spurs referee Simon Hooper 'devastated' by late mistake, says Howard Webb​

He's devastated in the same way we're all devastated by the united result tonight.

Absolute clowns. He did it on purpose and no one will ever convince me otherwise.

I can still see Webb grinning at Wembley as the ref pointed to the spot for the rags penalty.
Smarmy corrupt ****

 

[Chris in London]

Well you were on the hill earlier in the thread that it was prohibited in the rules so I assumed you were still going off that.

If you’re going off what Webb said about it, then like I’ve already said that makes Hooper look a moron at best. It’s ultimately still irrelevant though, it’s not an error whether he signalled or not.

No, the mistake I was referring to was the explanation that he made a signal when he didn’t mean to

if you don’t think that’s an error, you Crack on

 

[meltonblue]

No, the mistake I was referring to was the explanation that he made a signal when he didn’t mean to

if you don’t think that’s an error, you Crack on

Which is like I said, what Webb said and I’ve already given criticism of him for that. It’s still ultimately irrelevant and Webb should have pointed that out himself. He did retrospectively try to by saying about him not calling it out vocally.

 

[the-ecstacy-of-eight]

The tackle/assault on Foden doesn't make any sense, but how many decisions against us this season have?

A 2-footed jump and stamp attack is seen by the referee and not even deemed to be a foul.

Play continues and after a minute or so the game stops and we are told that VAR is looking at the incident.

Here's where I'm confused.

After the VAR intervention, a free kick is awarded to us, so the fact we arrive at here is that the ref MISSED the foul. He saw the incident but didn't deem it to be anything other than a fair tackle...

So surely that's a clear and obvious error(?)

They have checked to see if it's a red card offence that has been missed, so does this not lead us to infer that it's definitely a yellow card offence?

I know VAR has limitations on its usage, but if they were playing fair surely common sense should lead the protocol that this is the PERFECT example of when a ref should be asked to look at the monitor?
Or maybe even a ref with even a shred of integrity would demand to see a replay of the event?
He knows by this point that he has missed a possible red card offence, he also knows that he has missed a definite yellow card, the VAR knows that he has missed a red card offence and also a definite yellow card offence, so WHY would they both be OK with not issuing that yellow card?

Refs often go and see the monitor when they've made a wrong call, and after the event has been shown to them they often issue cards or rescind cards. Why not this time?