Premier League 2013-2014

[dtaai-maai]

If it was going in yes, but it wasn't, so intent can't really be an issue.

That's not right is it. He thought it was going in and made a great save - the best of the day - to prevent a goal. The fact it was going wide doesn't change his intent.

Sorry, RZR, but this is a no-brainer!

[Terry]

McWenger - I'm lovin' it...............

[JimmyGreaves]

Never mind the Champion's League, we'll be hard put to qualify for Europa next season - and maybe just as well.

Well I hope that they don't qualify for the Europa!!

[Zidane]

For sure,now the title is a 3 horse race....
Chelsea 7 to play but only 1 difficult....Liverpool (a)......could be a title decider ?
Liverpool 8 to play,including Chelsea, Man City and Spurs,but they are all at Anfield.
City 10 to play,maybe the favourites,but they still have to play Liverpool,Arsenal,Everton and Man United all away.

Everton to qualify for the Europa League is a decent option.

Gibbs will receive 100k in damages and Marriner and Oxlade-Chamberlain will foot the bill !

[redzonerocker]

Sorry, RZR, but this is a no-brainer!

Yes, but maybe more of a fuzzy brainer at the point of posting!

The point I'm making is that because of the ineptitude of the officials, the incident has created an unnecessary and unusual case.
Had the ref sent of the Ox, end of story.
The actual case of mistaken identity is unbelievable, not just for the ref but the assistant too.

Now we have a scenario where the FA has to use video evidence to review & solve the matter.
I fully agree that they will use the 'intent' option, but that does open up the possibility of a challenge.
I don't expect one, nor do I particularly want one.


Deliberate handball denying an obvious goal = red card.
Thinking the ball was going in could become irrelevant because the video review they are now forced to use shows it wouldn't have prevented a goal.
It's become more complex and the 'intent' does get trumped by the fact, if legally challenged.

Just highlighting an odd set of circumstances and generally debating the matter in an offhand way.

[caller]

The FA has decided!

Very interesting.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/26711403

Apparently, UEFA view this incident as proof of the need for more goal line officials, but I'm not so sure that from the goal line, an official would have been any wiser in this incident?

[redzonerocker]

The FA has decided!

Very interesting.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/26711403

Yep, it was a no brainer!

Apparently, UEFA view this incident as proof of the need for more goal line officials, but I'm not so sure that from the goal line, an official would have been any wiser in this incident?

Apparently, the ref wasn't even giving a penalty, and there was no flag from the assistant it appears that Marriner was made aware of the incident via his earpiece (probably from Mourinho ).

It could possibly have been the other assistant or the fourth official??
Whoever it was, between the four of them, they couldn't work out the difference between number 28 & 15

As for an extra official, he would have been able to identify the offender, but probably not the fact that the shot was heading wide.

That was the point I was making.
The video evidence clearly shows the shot heading wide, hence making it not a red card offence, had the officials not made the mistaken identity error, video evidence wouldn't have come into the equation and the ox would be serving a one match ban.

[dtaai-maai]

Interesting indeed. Not only was the wrong man sent off, but the red card shouldn't have been shown at all!

If it was going in yes, but it wasn't, so intent can't really be an issue.

That's not right is it. He thought it was going in and made a great save - the best of the day - to prevent a goal. The fact it was going wide doesn't change his intent.

Sorry, RZR, but this is a no-brainer!

Apparently not a no-brainer after all...

The sport's rules, drawn up by world governing body Fifa, state that while a player should be booked for deliberately handling the ball, a red card should only be shown for "the unacceptable and unfair intervention that prevented a goal being scored"

Absolute bloody nonsense. The player obviously wouldn't have handled it if he'd known it was going wide. This rule definitely needs changing so that an outfield player acting as an illegal 2nd keeper is sent off regardless of the trajectory of the ball.

And as for a goal line official, do we really need another pillock in black prancing around trying to look alert while desperately trying not to fall asleep?

I wonder if there would have been any appeal if the right man had been sent off?

(I started writing this before rzr's post).

[caller]

At least the penalty decision was correct, however it was arrived at!

[redzonerocker]

Absolute bloody nonsense. The player obviously wouldn't have handled it if he'd known it was going wide. This rule definitely needs changing so that an outfield player acting as an illegal 2nd keeper is sent off regardless of the trajectory of the ball.

Still believe if you get a penalty for whatever offence, you haven't been denied a goal scoring opportunity. (unless it's Soldado clean through on goal )
The penalty is your clear scoring opportunity [unless Ozil is taking it ) & a yellow card for the offender.
Should only be a red card if it's outside the box.

Maybe for the deliberate handball offence, a penalty goal should be given and a yellow card?
That then makes it pointless doing it, unless you want to show off your goalkeeping skills

And as for a goal line official, do we really need another pillock in black prancing around trying to look alert while desperately trying not to fall asleep?

No, from what i've seen of them, they don't add much to the running of the game.

I wonder if there would have been any appeal if the right man had been sent off?

(I started writing this before rzr's post).

Then you know that would have most likely been a no then

[dtaai-maai]

Still believe if you get a penalty for whatever offence, you haven't been denied a goal scoring opportunity. (unless it's Soldado clean through on goal )
The penalty is your clear scoring opportunity [unless Ozil is taking it ) & a yellow card for the offender.
Should only be a red card if it's outside the box.

Maybe for the deliberate handball offence, a penalty goal should be given and a yellow card?
That then makes it pointless doing it, unless you want to show off your goalkeeping skills

I'm not interested in the technicalities of whether or not there was a goalscoring opportunity, and I'm definitely not making a Spurs/Arsenal point.

The cheating that is an intrinsic and accepted part of the game really gets my goat. It seems to me that if an outfield player hurls himself across the goal line in an attempt to tip a shot round the bar with his hand, he should be off. Pure and simple.

[JimmyGreaves]

The cheating that is an intrinsic and accepted part of the game really gets my goat. It seems to me that if an outfield player hurls himself across the goal line in an attempt to tip a shot round the bar with his hand, he should be off. Pure and simple.

Agree

[caller]

The problem with the interpretation as it stands is that it becomes very subjective. Ok, in this incident, it was clear the shot was going wide, but what if it's really close and impossible to tell, what's the referee going to do? And whatever he did decide will be open to scrutiny and howl's of protest both on and off the pitch. Far better to have a rule that is clear and unambiguous as sod's law dictates that this will happen again!

[redzonerocker]

I'm not interested in the technicalities of whether or not there was a goalscoring opportunity, and I'm definitely not making a Spurs/Arsenal point.

The cheating that is an intrinsic and accepted part of the game really gets my goat. It seems to me that if an outfield player hurls himself across the goal line in an attempt to tip a shot round the bar with his hand, he should be off. Pure and simple.

It's not exactly a common offence is it?
There are far worse cases of cheating in the game that gets my goat

The problem with the interpretation as it stands is that it becomes very subjective. Ok, in this incident, it was clear the shot was going wide, but what if it's really close and impossible to tell, what's the referee going to do? And whatever he did decide will be open to scrutiny and howl's of protest both on and off the pitch. Far better to have a rule that is clear and unambiguous as sod's law dictates that this will happen again!

.

It's a completely unique case where the ref made a mistake and sent off the wrong player.
Again not a common occurrence.

The fact that it was not a goal scoring opportunity and the ball was going wide wouldn't have been highlighted without video evidence and we wouldn't even be debating it had the officials done their job properly.
That's the only reason Chamberlain got away with it, a technicality brought about because of the officials error.
It was sorted out within the guideline of the rules.

Anyway, enough of that, we were woeful again last night
Had we been playing anyone decent, we would have been stuffed again.

Swansea's late equaliser, what a comedy of errors

[Pagey]

RZR : Don't forget your first choice midfield are out injured; Wilshire, Ramsay, Ozil. Add to that Walcott and Abu Diaby. Then there's the chap you bought in the January transfer window, I presume he's still injured ?