The last line was my 'tongue in cheek' line! The rest is 100% core belief! Cn' yer get five sent off? When I was reffin' on the swamps of the Gorton 'n District Sunday League once yer got down to 7 left the LotG required you to abandon the game. Has that gone now? Used to be on the basis of 7 v 11 would result in something disreputable. Mind, nowhere near as disreputable as 11 v 12!This is the crux of the issue and makes the stats of yellow cards per foul as useless as our attack was at the Emirates yesterday.
A team could have 5 sent off and concede the game without committing a foul, should 5 players punch the opposition when the ball wasn’t in play, whereas a team could commit 50 fouls and not tot up enough cards for a sending off if they were small fouls that didn’t meet the criteria to warrant a booking.
Football is emotive in its core and that means every action is viewed differently by every single player, referee and spectator.
Your last line sums up the partisan element of football that makes balanced debate hard.
It was just showing a team could concede the game without committing a foul as as you say, they’d be down to 6 players.The last line was my 'tongue in cheek' line! The rest is 100% core belief! Cn' yer get five sent off? When I was reffin' on the swamps of the Gorton 'n District Sunday League once yer got down to 7 left the LotG required you to abandon the game. Has that gone now? Used to be on the basis of 7 v 11 would result in something disreputable. Mind, nowhere near as disreputable as 11 v 12!
I would expect any ref in the way of 'player management' to have informed both teams pre-match that she was going to 'arbitrate' the game in this particular manner. The look and reaction of bewilderment by so many City players made it clear to me that neither the FAWSL nor the referee had indicated how the game was to be 'managed'. It makes it more shocking that I suspect refs will now be told again how to do the job, and we won't see a performance like that again this season. The RDAHMeedya seemed to be of the same opinion that she made a balls of the job - BBC, Mirror, Grauniad, Torygraph. Bit of a chuckle that those four would share the same opinion.It was just showing a team could concede the game without committing a foul as as you say, they’d be down to 6 players.
City were in a perfect storm yesterday. They felt aggrieved by the ref, who decided to card every bit of dissent she had directed at her.
It was nothing to do with the number of fouls committed.
We don’t know if that has happened or not.I would expect any ref in the way of 'player management' to have informed both teams pre-match that she was going to 'arbitrate' the game in this particular manner. The look and reaction of bewilderment by so many City players made it clear to me that neither the FAWSL nor the referee had indicated how the game was to be 'managed'. It makes it more shocking that I suspect refs will now be told again how to do the job, and we won't see a performance like that again this season. The RDAHMeedya seemed to be of the same opinion that she made a balls of the job - BBC, Mirror, Grauniad, Torygraph. Bit of a chuckle that those four would share the same opinion.
But if refs apply the exact letter of the law, and yesterday's ref did that and also added every last punctuation mark to the nth degree, I would regard them as 'law zealots' who shouldln't be reffing and those who ignore time wasting or booting the ball away then I charge them with cheating. Would we have any refs left?We don’t know if that has happened or not.
Refs will be told to do different things as PGMOL decide which area to clamp down.
The one in our game has obviously gone too far and destroyed the game it should have been.
By the letter of the law, she won’t have made errors, but the unwritten “managing of the game” ethos was certainly broken.
Total consistency is an abstract perfection. It can never fully be achieved when humans are part of the process.But if refs apply the exact letter of the law, and yesterday's ref did that and also added every last punctuation mark to the nth degree, I would regard them as 'law zealots' who shouldln't be reffing and those who ignore time wasting or booting the ball away then I charge them with cheating. Would we have any refs left?
This sums up the woman exactly. I can't help but think she might have set out to become the headline of the game rather than the result or the talent of an individual player.With or without VAR, refs have and always will be pantomime villains. The ref for our womens’ game was so obtuse that she became even more than that.
Kicking the ball away is a booking because it prevents the restart, in this case it didn't, as the restart wasn't for 15 more minutes, and I seriously doubt she could kick it that far, unless it landed on a tram of course.I'd really like to know what the "dissent" amounted to. Roord seemed to be booked for kicking the ball up in the air when the half time whistle went.
Could argue it happened yesterday with Greenwood for wasting 26 seconds (well it was less than that in reality because about 10 seconds of that were the player fouled getting up, and you can't restart until that happens anyway). Again beyond ridiculous.No doubt someone will get a harsh second booking in a fortnight.
I don’t disagree. “Common sense” isn’t a uniform thing though. That ref woke up yesterday and chose violence.Kicking the ball away is a booking because it prevents the restart, in this case it didn't, as the restart wasn't for 15 more minutes, and I seriously doubt she could kick it that far, unless it landed on a tram of course.
It was beyond ridiculous if that is what it was for.
Could argue it happened yesterday with Greenwood for wasting 26 seconds (well it was less than that in reality because about 10 seconds of that were the player fouled getting up, and you can't restart until that happens anyway). Again beyond ridiculous.