Lessons of the Giannoulis red.

[Petriix 2,835]

2 minutes ago, TheGunnShow said:

That's even more reason to be critical of the officiating then, particularly in such a big game. Making such a decision based on "instinct" certainly ranks as brave, but often can end up as misguided.

Here's something: I was a qualified referee for years (stopped in 2005-6 due to a litany of ankle injuries) and even got as far as refereeing county finals at junior level. And arguably the biggest dictum I refereed by was this: if it was about a card or a penalty, if I wasn't 100% certain, I would not give it. I had a reputation as a referee that kept his cards in his pocket and didn't give many penalties. The only time I ever showed a red card was a handball on the line. Couldn't miss it, I was stood on the same post that defender was, just the other side of it!

If, and I appreciate that it is a fair old "if", Scott's giving a red card based on a combination of hearsay and trying to read the players instead of a great view of the incident (or speaking with his assistants) then that's another justified reason to be critical of the decision he made.

That's totally fair. I don't think his decision was right, and I can't understand why he didn't speak to the linesman. My intention is not to defend the referee. I just wanted to point out that Giannoulis has caused his own problem by making it objectively true to say that he a) left the ground with both feet and b) brought his studs down on to Pearson's leg. That factual information is enough reason to explain the red card and, if he'd not done those two things then he would have stayed on the pitch (or perhaps been removed on a stretcher).

The rest of the incident isn't in much doubt, aside from the hyperbole around Pearson being out of control. I'm still waiting for a link to a credible person claiming that Pearson deserved a red card. But done is done and it's time to move on. Farke has shown his usual level of class about the incident. Ultimately, while slightly diminishing the records that we might have set, it's had minimal impact on our season.

[Creative Midfielder 1,996]

14 hours ago, ged in the onion bag said:

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

Completely agree, in fact doubly so in the light of the developments of the last few days!

[Crabbycanary3 994]

You have seen what you want to see out of this Petriix, and you claim the same for me and a few others. Your expectations of what Giannoulis should have done are unrealistic in the football world. You have, as others have said, taken it frame by frame and expecting a speed of thought to have the luxury of that. I have offered a plausible explanation (that others agree with) as to why what happened, happened. You say he jumped into the tackle, using various measurements. The picture shows, on impact his right foot was planted and the left foot deviated no more than 1 or 2 inches from the horizontal until 'impact'. You say Giannoulis jumped, but , using that phraseology, Pearson 'launched' (aka reckless?)  into it, no?

You even think Pearson's challenge was perhaps, too much for the modern game. If so, the Laws say a certain punishment should be administered. It wasn't 

The Ref got lucky (and influenced) 

 

[Branston Pickle 3,657]

Shock horror, the appeal was turned down.  Whoever would have thought....the ref guessed and imo was far too harsh (cheating of their player helped).   The FA was never going to overturn it as it admits the mistake.

I’d have thought/expected referees should rely on more than guesswork for important decisions, but what do I know - I’m only someone who has paid through the nose for football over the last 40 years.

[hogesar 9,671]

I love Hugills honesty

 

[ged in the onion bag 855]

2 hours ago, Petriix said:

The photo proves my point. Someone denied that Giannoulis ever jumped, that photo show that he did. It was a mistake which got him (harshly) sent off.

It's embarrassing seeing all these claims of being the victim of a refereeing howler when it was simply a marginal call that went against us. It shows a real lack of class. We're better than that.

Stop digging!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!   That's a big big hole youve dug on this one...... and completely misses the point! 

[Petriix 2,835]

4 minutes ago, ged in the onion bag said:

Stop digging!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!   That's a big big hole youve dug on this one...... and completely misses the point! 

There's nothing more irritating when people try to negate a valid argument without addressing any of the actual points raised. It's fine if you hold a different opinion. This is a question of fact. Giannoulis jumped. You might not think that's relevant, but I posted the frame capture in direct response to someone claiming that he didn't. I am baffled as to what you think 'the point' is when it's clear to me that the jump is the main reason for the red card.

[Petriix 2,835]

2 hours ago, Crabbycanary3 said:

You have seen what you want to see out of this Petriix, and you claim the same for me and a few others. Your expectations of what Giannoulis should have done are unrealistic in the football world. You have, as others have said, taken it frame by frame and expecting a speed of thought to have the luxury of that. I have offered a plausible explanation (that others agree with) as to why what happened, happened. You say he jumped into the tackle, using various measurements. The picture shows, on impact his right foot was planted and the left foot deviated no more than 1 or 2 inches from the horizontal until 'impact'. You say Giannoulis jumped, but , using that phraseology, Pearson 'launched' (aka reckless?)  into it, no?

You even think Pearson's challenge was perhaps, too much for the modern game. If so, the Laws say a certain punishment should be administered. It wasn't 

The Ref got lucky (and influenced) 

 

Look, it's pretty simple: if you give the ref a decision to make then he might make the wrong one. If you stay on feet then you can't be sent off.

[shruk4 60]

I personally dont think you should ever pretend to be in pain when you arent. I find it a bit distasteful. Of course I appreciate that you sometimes go down easily etc to get a foul. But in general i feel like pretending you are in pain when you arent is over the line.

 

Sportsmanship is important, sometimes more important than winning

[chicken 2,624]

Still not convinced. Both players tackle, one that is standing upright is closer to the ball when the situation starts. Which is largely why he is still on his feet. Pearson's tackle is out of control. You can barely even say that Giannoulis is late. His foot is there at the same time, but the way Pearson goes in puts his body where the ball was, Giannoulis doesn't even have a chance to pull out.

Sad that it wasn't overturned, but hardly surprising considering the FA's ridiculous stance of being perfectly happy with VAR undermining referees multiple times in a game in the Premier League but not being willing to overturn a red themselves.

Like Farke said, if Giannoulis had been there a fraction earlier it's a red for Pearson - I would add he would likely have a broken ankle as well considering studs first.

It wasn't malicious from Giannoulis' approach. Not only that but you couldn't get a better definition of a 50/50 ball. One player goes in full blooded and gets hurt. The other actually goes in standing upright and gets sent of for presumably having the ball nicked off his toe and instead making contact with the player. Sorry state of affairs.

[Crabbycanary3 994]

31 minutes ago, Petriix said:

Look, it's pretty simple: if you give the ref a decision to make then he might make the wrong one. If you stay on feet then you can't be sent off.

Yes you can, and he was, and the player nearer the ground wasn't.

[ged in the onion bag 855]

3 hours ago, Petriix said:

There's nothing more irritating when people try to negate a valid argument without addressing any of the actual points raised. It's fine if you hold a different opinion. This is a question of fact. Giannoulis jumped. You might not think that's relevant, but I posted the frame capture in direct response to someone claiming that he didn't. I am baffled as to what you think 'the point' is when it's clear to me that the jump is the main reason for the red card.

I'm the op on this one.... I don't post that much but the point of the post was the reason Giannoulis got sent off.     The point is he got sent off for what could be argued, a naive response after the tackle..... In real time, I thought (as did many) that Pearson was out of control.... there is absolutely no way the ref saw an offence by Giannoulis in that split second to merit the red, (not sure if you know this but they don't have the benefit of 'frames' when making decisions on the pitch).    There was no malice in Giannoulis's actions.   

As for justifying an argument, I can guarantee you that anything I post on here is backed up by argument, I agree there is nothing more irritating than an unsubstantiated opinion but all you need to do is actually read my posts on this topic... think there are 3.   The last one was simply my opinion that your point is off target..... if you see a jump by Giannoulis, you only see it in slow motion, the ref would not have seen that..... and further, if Giannoulis did jump, then be sure that was due to the ferocity of the challenge and probably not a surprising reaction.      He certainly can't decide in that split second to react anything other than instinctively which is not worthy of criticism.     I believe that explains why you are barking about the wrong tree.... watch it only in real time and then explain how the ref saw any jump!!!!!!!!!!!!      There you go, a valid argument.  

[Petriix 2,835]

1 hour ago, ged in the onion bag said:

I'm the op on this one.... I don't post that much but the point of the post was the reason Giannoulis got sent off.     The point is he got sent off for what could be argued, a naive response after the tackle..... In real time, I thought (as did many) that Pearson was out of control.... there is absolutely no way the ref saw an offence by Giannoulis in that split second to merit the red, (not sure if you know this but they don't have the benefit of 'frames' when making decisions on the pitch).    There was no malice in Giannoulis's actions.   

As for justifying an argument, I can guarantee you that anything I post on here is backed up by argument, I agree there is nothing more irritating than an unsubstantiated opinion but all you need to do is actually read my posts on this topic... think there are 3.   The last one was simply my opinion that your point is off target..... if you see a jump by Giannoulis, you only see it in slow motion, the ref would not have seen that..... and further, if Giannoulis did jump, then be sure that was due to the ferocity of the challenge and probably not a surprising reaction.      He certainly can't decide in that split second to react anything other than instinctively which is not worthy of criticism.     I believe that explains why you are barking about the wrong tree.... watch it only in real time and then explain how the ref saw any jump!!!!!!!!!!!!      There you go, a valid argument.  

The jump is obvious in real time, I just used the still to show how high he actually jumped. I'm genuinely baffled as to why people are denying that it happened or claiming that it's only visible in slow motion. It was a strange thing to do and I'm absolutely certain that it's why he was sent off, precisely because the ref didn't have a chance to look at it again; he just saw someone jump then lead with their studs in a downward motion which he said "is a red every time". We're not going to agree, but thanks for taking the time to reply in a more reasonable manner.

[Crabbycanary3 994]

45 minutes ago, Petriix said:

The jump is obvious in real time, I just used the still to show how high he actually jumped. I'm genuinely baffled as to why people are denying that it happened or claiming that it's only visible in slow motion. It was a strange thing to do and I'm absolutely certain that it's why he was sent off, precisely because the ref didn't have a chance to look at it again; he just saw someone jump then lead with their studs in a downward motion which he said "is a red every time". We're not going to agree, but thanks for taking the time to reply in a more reasonable manner.

I don't think anyone has been unreasonable in their replies all the way through this thread, have they? For example, you haven't been asked if you are on drugs, like I was🤷‍♂️