Ref Watch

[cheekybids]

Do you think that was enough for a penalty in these times since the Euros last year where the bar was raised for what is given for fouls and penalties?

I’m not sure it is.

But I suppose if Arsenal were given that one against Liverpool then it definitely is!

I’ve no idea what the rules are from week to week;)

I thought it was a foul anywhere else on the pitch & therefore a penalty. It’s shit defending if they want to change the rules to an indirect free kick then it could stop “soft” pens but why should the attacker be penalised for a deliberate foul.

 

[Deleted member 77198]

On the blue moon podcast this week, the guest journo confirmed that broadcasters can hear the chatter between the officials in real time. I'd have to go back and check if he was talking about Stockley park or the referee and assistants, but that was something I didn't actually realise happened. The hope is that this becomes audible to audiences at home too.

Be interesting to see if the have sky sports or bt on live at Stockley Park too. You'd hope not but on a few occasions the co commentator ex footballer, ie Neville, can be heard seemingly appealing to someone unseen to convince them of what just happened on the pitch.

Meanwhile, in rugby league:


The entire world can hear every word the ref says. Fans at the game can even buy an ear piece which is on the same radio frequency as the ref’s mic.

 

[ZanteWeatherman]

No, and it should be added back, as the whole play in that time is pointless, and lost.

Yep. It was like a Bobby Ewing in the shower moment.

 

[Vic]

He could easily have blown to disallow Haaland’s first goal though. There was a similar challenge in the second half and he blew for that one.

That was an obvious shove in the back.

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

That was an obvious shove in the back.

Agreed. Similar to the goal then.

 

[bluetonium]

I thought the referee performance was typical of what we face. LOTG seemed to be changed to how to manage the game, effectively adding weight to a horse to even up the field.

Advantages are played when no advantage is there, under the guise of allowing it to flow. The disadvantage of this is fouls go unpunished, yellows aren’t awarded, fouls can continue & the flow of City’s attacks are affected.
At the other end any misdemeanour seems to be rewarded to allow the game to slow & provide the opportunity of dead-ball situation. This means fouls are awarded so obviously yellows are given & adds an edge.

Good point on the advantages. There were at least two occasions yesterday where we were fouled as they pressed, ref put his arms up to signal foul but play on, ball pushed back to the centre back or ederson who then launches it and within 5 seconds it's Brighton's ball

One occasion we lost possession, the other we actually conceeded a foul seconds later as we were only just retaining the ball under much physical pressure. Both times the city player fouled being down meant one less player as an option to pass to.

I think there is an assumption that city play football in a certain way so prefer the advantages. Maybe that is true out of our own half, but not on the edge of our D! I think this also clearly contributes to the odd stats in our games on fouls vs possession, as the opposition are perceived to want every free kick for the respite.

According to the stats we must be commiting a foul something like every twenty seconds we're not in possession, whilst a run by Bernie in which he gets his shirt pulled and his ankles and shins tapped several times, is often waved on and not recorded as a foul at all.

 

[jim tolmies perm]

"One occasion we lost possession, the other we actually conceeded a foul seconds later as we were only just retaining the ball under much physical pressure. Both times the city player fouled being down meant one less player as an option to pass to."

I'm certainly no conspiracy theorist but I find this idea plausible and for that reason quite disconcerting

 

[bluemoon1981]

I thought Pawson was poor (City v Brighton) and the inconsistency between matches was irritating. Pretty much any contact was given as a foul and certainly shoulder to shoulder was barely allowed. What was worse for me was VAR today. Clear and obvious mistake on Haaland, penalty should have been given, not called to the monitor. Yet Bernardo's was not clear and obvious to me. Personally I don't think it should have been given but the main issue is it will be clearly subjective which means VAR is re-refereeing the match. MOTD didn't make it clear that a substantial amount of time elapsed before they called it for review. Having such a delay shows it was not clear and obvious. Pawson clearly didn't want to give it but probably felt he had to given the minutes that elapsed and play being brought back. Imagine if Brighton had scored in that time!

 

[The slaughtered lamb]

on a few occasions the co commentator ex footballer, ie Neville, can be heard seemingly appealing to someone unseen to convince them of what just happened on the pitch.

Absolutely this. Beseeching Stockley Park to take action in line with how an incident has been perceived in the studio. Bloomin obvious.

 

[Gordyola]

Absolutely this. Beseeching Stockley Park to take action in line with how an incident has been perceived in the studio. Bloomin obvious.

Stockley Park cannot hear the commentary and the communication is one way only