Ref Watch

[FantasyIreland]

Just rewatched the first half.....its unbelievable that Fabinho,Arnold and Salah all walked off the pitch without a caution.

 

[Stephen230]

Just rewatched the first half.....its unbelievable that Fabinho,Arnold and Salah all walked off the pitch without a caution.

Not seen any replays yet but pretty sure Salah got booked for booting the ball against the advertising hoarding over a disputed throw in.

 

[exiled-blue]

Our 1st. In the build up, the pass from De Bruyne to Mahrez. It was tight but not off. He's claiming it may have been off if they had bothered to check it.

I believe they have a check on all goals, and so didn't think it was that close.

 

[Dave Ewing's Back 'eader]

Just rewatched the first half.....its unbelievable that Fabinho,Arnold and Salah all walked off the pitch without a caution.

It's quite understandable when you consider who has the whistle and the cards in their pocket. I posted on the post-match thread that it seems inconceivable that the LotG mandate a caution for a player attempting to grab hold of someone and prevent them from making forward progress whilst finding nothing wrong with a player who persistently chops an opponent down and, er. prevents them from making forward progress. The first is likely to 'annoy' the recipient, whilst the latter is more than likely to put a player out of the game or even out of the season. Hooper was the epitome of dereliction in the first half, particularly when the Dippers thought they had a foothold in the game and could 'persuade' the ref to be lenient whilst they employed the usual 'rough house'! I never fail to be totally bemused, annoyed and frustrated with the performance of a ref, and the next match just conjures up a specimen who was infinitely worse than the previous one.

One could also pose the question that if Rodri was booked for holding the Dipper why was he not sent off when he tried it again!

Inconsistence and/or incompetence when applying the LotG. Surely it couldn't be utter confusion in attempting to apply judgement, PiGMOL directives, and a safe passage for those wearing red shirts?

 

[Bozzie]

It's quite understandable when you consider who has the whistle and the cards in their pocket. I posted on the post-match thread that it seems inconceivable that the LotG mandate a caution for a player attempting to grab hold of someone and prevent them from making forward progress whilst finding nothing wrong with a player who persistently chops an opponent down and, er. prevents them from making forward progress. The first is likely to 'annoy' the recipient, whilst the latter is more than likely to put a player out of the game or even out of the season. Hooper was the epitome of dereliction in the first half, particularly when the Dippers thought they had a foothold in the game and could 'persuade' the ref to be lenient whilst they employed the usual 'rough house'! I never fail to be totally bemused, annoyed and frustrated with the performance of a ref, and the next match just conjures up a specimen who was infinitely worse than the previous one.

One could also pose the question that if Rodri was booked for holding the Dipper why was he not sent off when he tried it again!

Inconsistence and/or incompetence when applying the LotG. Surely it couldn't be utter confusion in attempting to apply judgement, PiGMOL directives, and a safe passage for those wearing red shirts?

Rodri was apparently booked not only for the holding offence but also under the 'totting up' process. Hooper made a point of demonstrating this at the time and Dermott Gallagher mentioned it on Ref Watch. I'm quite happy with players who have committed persistent fouls receiving yellow cards, however when Rodri was booked (minute 33) the foul tally according to the BBC match report was:
5' Fabinho
7' Fabinho
13' Henderson
19' Stones
23' Stones
33' Rodri - yellow card
Make of that what you will but unless Rodri was booked because of John Stones' 2 previous fouls, then he was booked for his first foul and not as a result of persistent fouls.

 

[jjctid]

Even by RAWK’s demented standards, that’s some serious lunacy. What offside goal? What DeBruyne dive? I can only recall him even being fouled once, which was when Henderson clearly trod across the bridge of his foot for the free kick Mahrez then pinged just wide in the 1st half. Special

What game were you watching la? Dat de bruyne is a right cheatin **** and is not fit to lace Hendo's boots. All dem goals were miles offside mate. Dat rodderi could of broke Gakpo's collarbone the dirty twat. It just wasn't our day and to top it all you lot destroyed the coach and should replay the game.

 

[bluenova]

Rodri was apparently booked not only for the holding offence but also under the 'totting up' process. Hooper made a point of demonstrating this at the time and Dermott Gallagher mentioned it on Ref Watch. I'm quite happy with players who have committed persistent fouls receiving yellow cards, however when Rodri was booked (minute 33) the foul tally according to the BBC match report was:
5' Fabinho
7' Fabinho
13' Henderson
19' Stones
23' Stones
33' Rodri - yellow card
Make of that what you will but unless Rodri was booked because of John Stones' 2 previous fouls, then he was booked for his first foul and not as a result of persistent fouls.

I think Rodri had pulled someone back earlier in the game when the ref played on, so not recorded as a foul.

 

[the-ecstacy-of-eight]

Bantam-tish.

;)

 

[eyalluvitt]

Just rewatched the first half.....its unbelievable that Fabinho,Arnold and Salah all walked off the pitch without a caution.

The red cloak of invisibility strikes again

 

[the-ecstacy-of-eight]

It just wasn't our day...

...bud next yeeeeeeeeeeear will be aaaaaaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr yeeeeeeeeeeear lad!