Lessons of the Giannoulis red.

[nutty nigel 7,532]

Tackles like this are let go as often as they are punished. It's a bit "luck of the draw" with the refs.

However 27,000 fans in the ground would maybe have seen the ref even it up. And would definitely seen Pearson get at least a yellow during the game.

 

 

[Petriix 2,835]

I'm not sure how you can claim that Giannoulis touched the ball. If he did get a tiny piece of it, it was between frames but there is no doubt that he got there second.

I wouldn't have sent either player off because I don't think either were genuinely out of control. But I can easily understand why Giannoulis appeared more culpable in real time.

I actually think that Pearson's tackle is right on the border between a really decent, robust (and perfectly timed) tackle and being too forceful. Imagine Skipp putting that in: we'd all be cheering. And imagine Giannoulis is a Bournemouth player...we'd all be screaming for a red card.

[Jim Smith 2,317]

2 minutes ago, Petriix said:

I'm not sure how you can claim that Giannoulis touched the ball. If he did get a tiny piece of it, it was between frames but there is no doubt that he got there second.

I wouldn't have sent either player off because I don't think either were genuinely out of control. But I can easily understand why Giannoulis appeared more culpable in real time.

I actually think that Pearson's tackle is right on the border between a really decent, robust (and perfectly timed) tackle and being too forceful. Imagine Skipp putting that in: we'd all be cheering. And imagine Giannoulis is a Bournemouth player...we'd all be screaming for a red card.

Where I would agree with you is that next time Dimi should fling himself on the floor and scream rather than go through with the tackle. I don’t think that’s a great endorsement of modern football though. 

[Crabbycanary3 994]

9 minutes ago, Petriix said:

The simple reason that one of them got sent off and the other didn't is that one of them 1. played the ball and the other caught the man. If you're going to jump in then you have to be sure you're winning the ball. It's disappointing from a Norwich point of view and it's easy to point the finger at the 'cheating' Pearson or the 'awful' referee, but Giannoulis got it wrong and paid the price. 2. He needs to quickly learn what he *should* do if a lunatic comes flying in because he's going to experience a lot more tackles like that next season. Hint, the answer isn't to raise your studs. 

1. The ball would have crawled out of play, yet, you would have expected , with the force that Pearson played the ball, that he would have broken a couple of seats in the South Stand, surely?

 

2. You are being naive with that comment because you have studied it many times, yet, at the time, live, many people said Pearson should have got sent off, because (paraphasing - the lunatic went flying in). Next season, VAR will make sure, those sort of tackles, will almost certainly get the lunatic sent off. He doesn't need to learn quickly, he just needs protection from the Refs, who apply the Laws. Any player can reasonably expect to make a 50/50 challenge like that yesterday (see the distance thing again) and expect the Laws to be applied if required .

[Crabbycanary3 994]

8 minutes ago, Petriix said:

I'm not sure how you can claim that Giannoulis touched the ball. If he did get a tiny piece of it, it was between frames but there is no doubt that he got there second.

I wouldn't have sent either player off because I don't think either were genuinely out of control. But I can easily understand why Giannoulis appeared more culpable in real time.

I actually think that Pearson's tackle is right on the border between a really decent, robust (and perfectly timed) tackle and being too forceful. Imagine Skipp putting that in: we'd all be cheering. And imagine Giannoulis is a Bournemouth player...we'd all be screaming for a red card.

We are finally(!) getting to common ground Petriix 🙂 . I perhaps am old school, but old school are not the rules these days. Pearson's challenge is deemed out of control these days. There's no protecting that. 

[Petriix 2,835]

There's no way that VAR is sending Pearson off for that. It looked worst in real time, compounded by the commentary (by the way, after half time, Hucks conceded that the red card was correct if a little harsh, which is all I'm saying). On scrutinising the replay, Pearson looks more and more like the victim.

The savvy thing from Giannoulis would have been to plant his foot where it would have been caught by Pearson's trailing leg then roll around a bit. The way he put his foot in will never look right.

[Crabbycanary3 994]

4 minutes ago, Petriix said:

There's no way that VAR is sending Pearson off for that. It looked worst in real time, compounded by the commentary (by the way, after half time, Hucks conceded that the red card was correct if a little harsh, which is all I'm saying). On scrutinising the replay, Pearson looks more and more like the victim.

The savvy thing from Giannoulis would have been to plant his foot where it would have been caught by Pearson's trailing leg then roll around a bit. The way he put his foot in will never look right.

Oh come on, with the ferocity that Pearson came into that, do you really expect Giannoulis to make such a calculated decision, so as to con the Ref? He could easily have had his leg broken if he had got that wrong. You really are not giving any appreciation of time. You are presenting your thoughts and decision making with a frame by frame breakdown. This was a split second decision, coupled with a thought, that, by distance, made it look a 50/50 tackle in the first place. 

? I am not saying that Giannoulis did not make contact with Pearson, but it certainly wasn't a leg breaker or hatchet job, but absolutely, with the contact alone, you could see why a red card was given, but , that's not the whole story is it?

Any of this apply just to Giannoulis and not Pearson?;

SERIOUS FOUL PLAY

A tackle or challenge that endangers the safety of an opponent or uses excessive force or brutality must be sanctioned as serious foul play.

Any player who lunges at an opponent in challenging for the ball from the front, from the side or from behind using one or both legs, with excessive force or endangers the safety of an opponent is guilty of serious foul play.

If an offence involves contact it is penalised by a direct free kick or penalty kick.
 

• Careless is when a player shows a lack of attention or consideration when making a challenge or acts without precaution. No disciplinary sanction is needed
   
• Reckless is when a player acts with disregard to the danger to, or consequences for, an opponent and must be cautioned
   
• Using excessive force is when a player exceeds the necessary use of force and endangers the safety of an opponent and must be sent off

 VAR will absolutely send off players for those Pearson type challenges.

Pearson was a victim? Please, give me a break, don't get suckered in.

[Graham Paddons Beard 2,431]

Let’s just be clear . The red card was given because of the reaction of their 22. The ref bought the writhing in agony , near death , multiple fracture , pantomime act. If both players get up , and shake hands , it doesn’t happen. 
 

[Hank shoots Skyler 2,094]

***Edited to say I no longer agree with the first paragraph below.***

***Having watched it back a few times, I don't even think it's even a foul by Pearson to be honest. He comes in fairly strong but is comfortably at the ball before Giannoulis is and looks like his foot is along the ground the whole time, yes his momentum takes him into Giannoulis but that was way after he'd already won the ball fairly, its far from reckless or dangerous IMO. Its the kind of tackle we've absolutely loved seeing Hanley and Skipp make all season and we'd be fuming if it was given against them! ***

At the same time though I still don't think a red was at all fair. It was basically the equivalent kind of tackle from Giannoulis that we see all the time where players end up accidentally stamping on another's foot, only as Pearson slides in he is caught higher up the leg (but not actually high off the ground) - as below.

If Pearson had just nipped in with his toe instead of sliding, then it would've been an accidental stamp on his foot, and clearly just a foul and a yellow card to Giannoulis - if that! Perhaps there was a lapse in concentration from Giannoulis where he was not expecting him to slide, but I'm not really sure if he could get away from it after shaping to block the ball with his left foot. 

Ultimately as others have said it was Pearson's reaction that did it, would be really interesting to see what would've happened if he didn't milk it so bad, or if Giannoulis tried to milk it equally as bad too...

So IMO it was a freekick for Bournemouth and a yellow card for Giannoulis, and that should've been the end of it. Followed by a sumptuous 4-0 dismantling of this ****house Bournemouth team, which now seems an even more enjoyable outcome than it did before kick off...

Edited April 18, 2021 by Hank shoots Skyler

[Hank shoots Skyler 2,094]

33 minutes ago, Petriix said:

The savvy thing from Giannoulis would have been to plant his foot where it would have been caught by Pearson's trailing leg then roll around a bit. The way he put his foot in will never look right.

I don't think he has anything close to that kind of thinking time to make such a decision, unfortunately!

[Hank shoots Skyler 2,094]

22 minutes ago, Hank shoots Skyler said:

Having watched it back a few times, I don't even think it's even a foul by Pearson to be honest. He comes in fairly strong but is comfortably at the ball before Giannoulis is and looks like his foot is along the ground the whole time, yes his momentum takes him into Giannoulis but that was way after he'd already won the ball fairly, its far from reckless or dangerous IMO. Its the kind of tackle we've absolutely loved seeing Hanley and Skipp make all season and we'd be fuming if it was given against them! 

At the same time though I still don't think a red was at all fair. It was basically the equivalent kind of tackle from Giannoulis that we see all the time where players end up accidentally stamping on another's foot, only as Pearson slides in he is caught higher up the leg (but not actually high off the ground) - as below.

If Pearson had just nipped in with his toe instead of sliding, then it would've been an accidental stamp on his foot, and clearly just a foul and a yellow card to Giannoulis - if that! Perhaps there was a lapse in concentration from Giannoulis where he was not expecting him to slide, but I'm not really sure if he could get away from it after shaping to block the ball with his left foot. 

Ultimately as others have said it was Pearson's reaction that did it, would be really interesting to see what would've happened if he didn't milk it so bad, or if Giannoulis tried to milk it equally as bad too...

So IMO it was a freekick for Bournemouth and a yellow card for Giannoulis, and that should've been the end of it. Followed by a sumptuous 4-0 dismantling of this ****house Bournemouth team, which now seems an even more enjoyable outcome than it did before kick off...

Actually I'm going to disagree with myself here...

This shot of the replay, before the stamp, shows Pearson's foot making contact with the upper half of the ball, so not along the ground as I had previously thought - and indeed a potentially dangerous tackle if it goes wrong and catches an ankle!

His standing left leg is clearly still on the ground however, it seems more like he is reaching for the ball rather than snapping through it totally with excessive force, and I think given he does get the ball cleanly before Giannoulis gets there, it certainly is not a red card for Pearson. 

This shot also clearly shows Giannoulis' foot in a position as to block the ball - not stud Pearson's leg. So again, never a red!

I think in retrospect I would agree with @Petriix that both players should've been booked:

- Pearson for a potentially dangerous tackle, but given the benefit of the doubt as he is clearly stretching, wins the ball cleanly and his foot isn't THAT high. 

- Giannoulis for arriving late after the ball has gone and catching Pearson with his studs, but given the benefit of the doubt as it is clearly not reckless or dangerous. 

And a freekick for the referee midway in our half since players from both team have committed a foul at the same time. 

 

 

Edited April 18, 2021 by Hank shoots Skyler

[Petriix 2,835]

19 minutes ago, Crabbycanary3 said:

Oh come on, with the ferocity that Pearson came into that, do you really expect Giannoulis to make such a calculated decision, so as to con the Ref? He could easily have had his leg broken if he had got that wrong. You really are not giving any appreciation of time. You are presenting your thoughts and decision making with a frame by frame breakdown. This was a split second decision, coupled with a thought, that, by distance, made it look a 50/50 tackle in the first place. 

? I am not saying that Giannoulis did not make contact with Pearson, but it certainly wasn't a leg breaker or hatchet job, but absolutely, with the contact alone, you could see why a red card was given, but , that's not the whole story is it?

Any of this apply just to Giannoulis and not Pearson?;

SERIOUS FOUL PLAY

A tackle or challenge that endangers the safety of an opponent or uses excessive force or brutality must be sanctioned as serious foul play.

Any player who lunges at an opponent in challenging for the ball from the front, from the side or from behind using one or both legs, with excessive force or endangers the safety of an opponent is guilty of serious foul play.

If an offence involves contact it is penalised by a direct free kick or penalty kick.
 

• Careless is when a player shows a lack of attention or consideration when making a challenge or acts without precaution. No disciplinary sanction is needed
   
• Reckless is when a player acts with disregard to the danger to, or consequences for, an opponent and must be cautioned
   
• Using excessive force is when a player exceeds the necessary use of force and endangers the safety of an opponent and must be sent off

 VAR will absolutely send off players for those Pearson type challenges.

Pearson was a victim? Please, give me a break, don't get suckered in.

By those definitions I'd say that they were both 'reckless' and neither used 'excessive force', it's definitely not clear cut.

The point I'm trying to make is that, if they were equidistant from the ball at the moment they both committed to the tackle, Giannoulis was always going to be late because the ball was moving *away* from him. His mistake was to jump up so as to bring his foot down onto Pearson's leg: that kind of tackle always looks bad.

I'm not expecting that he would have figured out the best way to con the ref in a fraction of a second; just that he should have done something more 'normal' than to jump in the air and stamp down with his studs, albeit not exceptionally hard. If he'd just keept running or even slid in on the ground then he wouldn't have risked a red card. Hence my assertion that he made a mistake.

[TheGunnShow 5,940]

This is a classic example, at least amongst fans, of refereeing by frame instead of the incident as it came. Seeing the highlights again Dimi did well to jump out of the way, but any notion that it was a "stamp" or deliberately endangering Pearson is absurd beyond belief.

Pearson wasn't cheating with the tackle, he was cheating with his histrionics. If you want to cause damage to an opponent flying in like that, it's very easy to do so as you literally stamp. Dimi was jumping out of the way to minimise the risk of being hit whilst in contact with the floor, which could have been a serious injury (think Keane on Haaland, as it was his standing leg that got injured, not the leg that got hit).

[Hucks6 169]

Even on the Bournemouth fans website they are saying he is always playing to referee, Ands it’s getting embarrassing 

[Jim Smith 2,317]

58 minutes ago, Petriix said:

By those definitions I'd say that they were both 'reckless' and neither used 'excessive force', it's definitely not clear cut.

The point I'm trying to make is that, if they were equidistant from the ball at the moment they both committed to the tackle, Giannoulis was always going to be late because the ball was moving *away* from him. His mistake was to jump up so as to bring his foot down onto Pearson's leg: that kind of tackle always looks bad.

I'm not expecting that he would have figured out the best way to con the ref in a fraction of a second; just that he should have done something more 'normal' than to jump in the air and stamp down with his studs, albeit not exceptionally hard. If he'd just keept running or even slid in on the ground then he wouldn't have risked a red card. Hence my assertion that he made a mistake.

He didn’t jump up so as to bring his foot down. See the picture above. He didn’t change the trajectory of his boot/leg which was trying to stop the ball. Pearson basically slid under his foot. 

[Creative Midfielder 1,996]

1 hour ago, Petriix said:

The simple reason that one of them got sent off and the other didn't is that one of them played the ball and the other caught the man.

No it isn't because it is abundantly clear under the modern\current rules that touching the ball is no defence for a tackle which is violent, reckless or out or control.

Pearson's tackle was clearly violent and out of control, and the fact that he touched the ball is irrelevent in that situation - it was a clearly red card tackle, so if Giannoulis was going to go for a gentle tap (even with his studs) then both should have gone. But given that it was so early in the game and the ref clearly didn't have a clue what actually happened then a yellow each would have been a muchmore pragmatic decision.

Virtually all the focus is on this incident quite understandably as it was not only controversial but completely changed the course of the game, but I think it is worth pointing out that it was only one of a whole series of extremely poor decisions by the ref all of which as far as I can remember went in Bournemouth's favour.

We really have got a major problem in the game with the combination of cheats like Pearson and very incompetent officials - yesterday was a particularly bad example but in truth it wasn't radically different to many of our games this season which IMO has seen a new low in terms of very poor refereeing performances -  but I still wouldn't advocate your approach of playing the cheats at their own game, I'd rather just give up watching altogther which actually I'm well on the way to already - genuinely cannot remember how many years it is now since I watched a game in which City weren't involved.

Didn't used to be that way, but I'm afraid unless it's us playing I can't see any point any more in spending an hour and half watching a supposedly professional competitive sport in which the result is so regularly determined by cheating and/or incompetent officiating, and TBH it baffles me why football and football authorities continue run the game in such an inept way - no doubt some one will point out one but I can't think of another major sport that tolerates the kind of shambles that we see in professional footbal on a regular basis.

[unique 435]

8 minutes ago, Creative Midfielder said:

No it isn't because it is abundantly clear under the modern\current rules that touching the ball is no defence for a tackle which is violent, reckless or out or control.

Pearson's tackle was clearly violent and out of control, and the fact that he touched the ball is irrelevent in that situation - it was a clearly red card tackle, so if Giannoulis was going to go for a gentle tap (even with his studs) then both should have gone. But given that it was so early in the game and the ref clearly didn't have a clue what actually happened then a yellow each would have been a muchmore pragmatic decision.

Virtually all the focus is on this incident quite understandably as it was not only controversial but completely changed the course of the game, but I think it is worth pointing out that it was only one of a whole series of extremely poor decisions by the ref all of which as far as I can remember went in Bournemouth's favour.

We really have got a major problem in the game with the combination of cheats like Pearson and very incompetent officials - yesterday was a particularly bad example but in truth it wasn't radically different to many of our games this season which IMO has seen a new low in terms of very poor refereeing performances -  but I still wouldn't advocate your approach of playing the cheats at their own game, I'd rather just give up watching altogther which actually I'm well on the way to already - genuinely cannot remember how many years it is now since I watched a game in which City weren't involved.

Didn't used to be that way, but I'm afraid unless it's us playing I can't see any point any more in spending an hour and half watching a supposedly professional competitive sport in which the result is so regularly determined by cheating and/or incompetent officiating, and TBH it baffles me why football and football authorities continue run the game in such an inept way - no doubt some one will point out one but I can't think of another major sport that tolerates the kind of shambles that we see in professional footbal on a regular basis.

Absolutely this.

Having watched it numerous times it is clear that Pearson was sliding in recklessly, prepared to clean out anyone in his way.

Giannoulis had no such intent. You get the impression that stamping on an opponent is not in his makeup.I’m not sure he had time to adjust where his foot went. You can usually tell when a player intentionally stamps on an opponent ,and this certainly wasn’t the case in this instance.

[Petriix 2,835]

I'm going to try one more time before I give up...

Giannoulis jumped *into* not out of the tackle. You can't land on someone who slides under your foot unless you've lifted your foot in the first place. Whatever way you interpret the action it was an unnatural movement. The reason he was unable to avoid bringing his foot down on Pearson was because he wasn't in control at that point, having already jumped.

For me this is the most telling snapshot: both of Giannoulis's feet are about 10 inches off the ground while Pearson is just extending one leg towards the ball. There was absolutely no need to leave the ground like that. He should have taken another step then jumped *out* of the tackle.

It's obviously harsh on Giannoulis and lenient on Pearson. As I've said many times, I'd give a Yellow apiece because they've both jumped in, neither with real excessive force. Pearson went in stronger but with more precision; Giannoulis was higher, later and less accurate but with less force.

If it was as obvious a refereeing error as everyone is claiming then the club will appeal the decision and it will be overturned. It's not, they won't and the ban will stand. Harsh but fair.

You can moan about it all you like but I'm absolutely certain that someone on the coaching staff will stit down with Giannoulis, analyse the footage and help him to learn from his mistake.

[Creative Midfielder 1,996]

19 hours ago, Petriix said:

If it was as obvious a refereeing error as everyone is claiming then the club will appeal the decision and it will be overturned. It's not, they won't and the ban will stand. Harsh but fair.

They have done, according to the Pink Un anyway  - "Dimitris Giannoulis is suspended after his red card on Saturday but Farke revealed an appeal is underway to get his three-game ban reduced"

[Big O 225]

On 18/04/2021 at 21:15, Hank shoots Skyler said:

Actually I'm going to disagree with myself here...

This shot of the replay, before the stamp, shows Pearson's foot making contact with the upper half of the ball, so not along the ground as I had previously thought - and indeed a potentially dangerous tackle if it goes wrong and catches an ankle!

His standing left leg is clearly still on the ground however, it seems more like he is reaching for the ball rather than snapping through it totally with excessive force, and I think given he does get the ball cleanly before Giannoulis gets there, it certainly is not a red card for Pearson. 

This shot also clearly shows Giannoulis' foot in a position as to block the ball - not stud Pearson's leg. So again, never a red!

I think in retrospect I would agree with @Petriix that both players should've been booked:

- Pearson for a potentially dangerous tackle, but given the benefit of the doubt as he is clearly stretching, wins the ball cleanly and his foot isn't THAT high. 

- Giannoulis for arriving late after the ball has gone and catching Pearson with his studs, but given the benefit of the doubt as it is clearly not reckless or dangerous. 

And a freekick for the referee midway in our half since players from both team have committed a foul at the same time. 

 

 

Maybe I’m missing something in all of this but look at the first picture and that shows Pearson out of control and his follow through with his trailing leg going into the defenders leg at pace. If that leg is on the ground it’s got a reasonable chance of snapping

 

Edited April 19, 2021 by Big O
Add pic

[Crabbycanary3 994]

20 hours ago, Petriix said:

I'm going to try one more time before I give up...

Giannoulis jumped *into* not out of the tackle. You can't land on someone who slides under your foot unless you've lifted your foot in the first place. Whatever way you interpret the action it was an unnatural movement. The reason he was unable to avoid bringing his foot down on Pearson was because he wasn't in control at that point, having already jumped.

For me this is the most telling snapshot: both of Giannoulis's feet are about 10 inches off the ground while Pearson is just extending one leg towards the ball. There was absolutely no need to leave the ground like that. He should have taken another step then jumped *out* of the tackle.

There 

It's obviously harsh on Giannoulis and lenient on Pearson. As I've said many times, I'd give a Yellow apiece because they've both jumped in, neither with real excessive force. Pearson went in stronger but with more precision; Giannoulis was higher, later and less accurate but with less force.

If it was as obvious a refereeing error as everyone is claiming then the club will appeal the decision and it will be overturned. It's not, they won't and the ban will stand. Harsh but fair.

You can moan about it all you like but I'm absolutely certain that someone on the coaching staff will stit down with Giannoulis, analyse the footage and help him to learn from his mistake.

There you go again. "Both feet 10 inches off the floor"? What are you watching? They were not. If it was, surely that would counter your 'not with excessive force' comment? You can't have it both ways. 

It's also laughable that you think Pearson was not using excessive force.

Pearson was also not 'extending one leg towards the ball'. If he was extending his leg in that picture, he wouldn't get anywhere near it. The only way he was going to win the ball by extending his leg at that stage, was to launch himself , like a lunatic. If he was anywhere near the same as Giannoulis, in a more vertical position, he wasn't winning that ball anytime soon.

You also commented on the ball moving away from Giannoulis. It wasn't going towards Pearson either. It was pretty much a 50/50 challenge (Giannoulis was that close to the tackle that the ball hit his foot) . Look at it at fullspeed, rather than hide behind a photograph and say with surety what 'should' have happened. Funny enough Giannoulis has to lift his feet off the floor to move forwards. He moved to create a block tackle type situation. It's not an un natural movement. It's a perfectly legitimate tackling process. Pearson's mad dive in, created the situation, but it was a situation, that Giannoulis rightly  thought, he would be protected from, if Pearson was to try and tackle in an out of control manner. He wasn't because the Ref was conned by Pearson (watch it from the camera angle near the away fans section). 

We ain't changing your mind anytime soon, but you are in the minority.

Time for Watford

[ged in the onion bag 855]

On 18/04/2021 at 22:36, Creative Midfielder said:

No it isn't because it is abundantly clear under the modern\current rules that touching the ball is no defence for a tackle which is violent, reckless or out or control.

Pearson's tackle was clearly violent and out of control, and the fact that he touched the ball is irrelevent in that situation - it was a clearly red card tackle, so if Giannoulis was going to go for a gentle tap (even with his studs) then both should have gone. But given that it was so early in the game and the ref clearly didn't have a clue what actually happened then a yellow each would have been a muchmore pragmatic decision.

Virtually all the focus is on this incident quite understandably as it was not only controversial but completely changed the course of the game, but I think it is worth pointing out that it was only one of a whole series of extremely poor decisions by the ref all of which as far as I can remember went in Bournemouth's favour.

We really have got a major problem in the game with the combination of cheats like Pearson and very incompetent officials - yesterday was a particularly bad example but in truth it wasn't radically different to many of our games this season which IMO has seen a new low in terms of very poor refereeing performances -  but I still wouldn't advocate your approach of playing the cheats at their own game, I'd rather just give up watching altogther which actually I'm well on the way to already - genuinely cannot remember how many years it is now since I watched a game in which City weren't involved.

Didn't used to be that way, but I'm afraid unless it's us playing I can't see any point any more in spending an hour and half watching a supposedly professional competitive sport in which the result is so regularly determined by cheating and/or incompetent officiating, and TBH it baffles me why football and football authorities continue run the game in such an inept way - no doubt some one will point out one but I can't think of another major sport that tolerates the kind of shambles that we see in professional footbal on a regular basis.

Thanks for that... eloquently put and spot on!    Game is gone, only way back is a fans revolt!    

[TheGunnShow 5,940]

On 19/04/2021 at 01:21, Petriix said:

I'm going to try one more time before I give up...

Giannoulis jumped *into* not out of the tackle. You can't land on someone who slides under your foot unless you've lifted your foot in the first place. Whatever way you interpret the action it was an unnatural movement. The reason he was unable to avoid bringing his foot down on Pearson was because he wasn't in control at that point, having already jumped.

For me this is the most telling snapshot: both of Giannoulis's feet are about 10 inches off the ground while Pearson is just extending one leg towards the ball. There was absolutely no need to leave the ground like that. He should have taken another step then jumped *out* of the tackle.

It's obviously harsh on Giannoulis and lenient on Pearson. As I've said many times, I'd give a Yellow apiece because they've both jumped in, neither with real excessive force. Pearson went in stronger but with more precision; Giannoulis was higher, later and less accurate but with less force.

If it was as obvious a refereeing error as everyone is claiming then the club will appeal the decision and it will be overturned. It's not, they won't and the ban will stand. Harsh but fair.

You can moan about it all you like but I'm absolutely certain that someone on the coaching staff will stit down with Giannoulis, analyse the footage and help him to learn from his mistake.

If Giannoulis didn't jump, he'd have taken the brunt of the tackle, full force, on his standing leg and in all likelihood with Pearson's studs being up. This is a classic example of refereeing by freeze-frame instead of taking a holistic look at the incident, and this is a problem we're seeing with VAR where referees then think there's malice when there isn't.

Put simply, Dimi took evasive action to avoid being hit. There wasn't remotely a hint of malice in what he was doing.

[CANARYKING 637]

When do we hear about the appeal ?

[AJ 1,218]

51 minutes ago, CANARYKING said:

When do we hear about the appeal ?

In most cases the appeal is heard and a decision made prior to the clubs next game. I assume they might hear it today, but it would probably be too late for Dimi to play tonight would be my understanding

[Petriix 2,835]

I think what everyone is missing is that Giannoulis jumped too early so he was unable to avoid the tackle. He takes both feet off the ground then lands on his right foot while putting his left foot in, presumably trying to win the ball, but late and high.

You can call it a mistimed block or whatever, and there's almost certainly no malice (although it's possible he wanted to make sure there was contact, it's impossible to know).

In my opinion, Pearson is deserving of a yellow card because he's 'reckless' but it's right on the edge of acceptable. A Leeds player made an identical tackle last night, Alexander-Arnold jumped out of the way, no foul was given and the game went on.

I also think that Giannoulis deserves a yellow because he's late and high. However, the way he jumped made it look bad. Watch it back. He's not jumping out of the way. To avoid contact he would have needed to take another step before jumping.

It comes down to interpretation but I don't think I've ever encountered such a yellow-spectacled reaction. I'm normally pretty scathing of referees but it's blindingly obvious to me exactly why he made that decision. I was incensed at first, until I saw the replay.

The thing I'm finding most baffling is that people keep insisting that Giannoulis took evasive action or won't acknowledge that he jumped in. Weird.

[ncfcstar 291]

I agree with Petriix, although I'd just emphasise that I don't think either player is being intentionally reckless here.  Pearson is putting in a tackle which 10 years ago would have been seen as perfectly acceptable, but by todays standard could be seen as excessive.  Giannoulis thinks he is going to get the ball and doesn't anticipate a crunching tackle from Pearson (and I'd assume the players would have been made aware of him before the game so he should have considered that Pearson might be full blooded here), and therefore gets there slightly late because of the speed of Pearson's challenge.

I understand why the ref gave a red because ultimately the only player who made contact with another is Giannoulis (and Pearson rolls around like he is seriously injured).  VAR wouldn't overturn it because of that, it's not a clear and obvious error.  There is a danger that the ref might have given it after reviewing the video because in isolation, frame by frame, it looks like a red.  In real time, and considering all of the other aspects as Petriix says, yellow apiece.

If Giannoulis had taken the full brunt of Pearson's challenge, it's a different story, Pearson is off and Giannoulis probably has a broken leg (meaning he misses far more than the 3 he currently will!) - but that didn't happen, Pearson won the ball cleanly if forcefully.  Two yellows, move on, Pearson is nullified for the rest of the game because he can't afford to lunge in like that again.

Edited April 20, 2021 by ncfcstar

[Don’t be Krul 399]

Appeal rejected 3 game ban stands

[TheGunnShow 5,940]

The problem isn't Pearson's tackle. It's his reaction to being accidently hit. In fact, when watching the whole thing again without pausing it, I don't think EITHER are worth a yellow card and it's worth a free-kick to Bournemouth at most. Pearson clearly got the ball first to his credit - at most there's an argument for dangerous play on his part as he has led with his studs.

It is blatantly obvious that Dimi is taking evasive action as a tackle like Pearson's hitting legs that are on the floor is a potential leg-snapper even after playing a ball first. As I said before, think Keane / Haaland - it wasn't the leg that was hit that got the injury, it was the load going through his standing leg that caused the problems resulting in Haaland's retirement.

The referee here bought the reaction, that's all.

[Ward 3 372]

On 18/04/2021 at 20:57, Hank shoots Skyler said:

***Edited to say I no longer agree with the first paragraph below.***

***Having watched it back a few times, I don't even think it's even a foul by Pearson to be honest. He comes in fairly strong but is comfortably at the ball before Giannoulis is and looks like his foot is along the ground the whole time, yes his momentum takes him into Giannoulis but that was way after he'd already won the ball fairly, its far from reckless or dangerous IMO. Its the kind of tackle we've absolutely loved seeing Hanley and Skipp make all season and we'd be fuming if it was given against them! ***

At the same time though I still don't think a red was at all fair. It was basically the equivalent kind of tackle from Giannoulis that we see all the time where players end up accidentally stamping on another's foot, only as Pearson slides in he is caught higher up the leg (but not actually high off the ground) - as below.

If Pearson had just nipped in with his toe instead of sliding, then it would've been an accidental stamp on his foot, and clearly just a foul and a yellow card to Giannoulis - if that! Perhaps there was a lapse in concentration from Giannoulis where he was not expecting him to slide, but I'm not really sure if he could get away from it after shaping to block the ball with his left foot. 

Ultimately as others have said it was Pearson's reaction that did it, would be really interesting to see what would've happened if he didn't milk it so bad, or if Giannoulis tried to milk it equally as bad too...

So IMO it was a freekick for Bournemouth and a yellow card for Giannoulis, and that should've been the end of it. Followed by a sumptuous 4-0 dismantling of this ****house Bournemouth team, which now seems an even more enjoyable outcome than it did before kick off...

On the picture, pearsons follow through is high, I know his leg is bent but he couldve seriously injured Gianni. Anybody else agree? Gianni stretched for the ball and Pearson just flew in like a nutter... look at his cards at Preston