Frame by Frame slo-mo

[nutty nigel 7,528]

I wonder what the great man would have thought about the frame by frame slo-mo and trial by photo-bucket[:O]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ite2W4_kJHk

 

[Camuldonum 0]

[quote user="ncfcstar"][quote user="Camuldonum"]

[:|][quote user="SimonOTBC"]I''m sure you can see though cam, why everyone is annoyed by what seems to be an incorrect decision which turned the game on it''s head.[/quote]

Nope, not really.  What I see is what the Ref gave.  He''s in charge, not the people in the stands nor in the Press Box.

If people in the stands or the Press Box think they could do it better they need to sign up to the next local Ref''s course and take it from there.

That''s what I think.

They also have message boards and discuss things.

http://www.footballreferee.org/forum/viewforum.php?f=6&sid=5b67ef0f7545858564acaed26cf2d039

[:|]

 

[/quote]

So you''d be impartial and take this view say if Lincoln were bossing a game, were 1-0 up, just about to gain promotion and someone went through, dived, got a pen, and cost Lincoln promotion?  Come off it.
[/quote]

Yes I would.  Without the officials the match at FL level cannot take place.  I repeat: if you think you can do it better then get out there and do it.

The game needs you, providing you can do it better that is.

[Camuldonum 0]

You are talking to the person who gave two penalties against his own son.

[:|]

[Camuldonum 0]

PS: If you are stupid enough to be officiating in the first place you give it as you see it whoever it upsets in the process.  We are there to faciliate the game, not to make friends.

[ncfcstar 289]

[quote user="Camuldonum"][quote user="ncfcstar"][quote user="Camuldonum"]

[:|][quote user="SimonOTBC"]I''m sure you can see though cam, why everyone is annoyed by what seems to be an incorrect decision which turned the game on it''s head.[/quote]

Nope, not really.  What I see is what the Ref gave.  He''s in charge, not the people in the stands nor in the Press Box.

If people in the stands or the Press Box think they could do it better they need to sign up to the next local Ref''s course and take it from there.

That''s what I think.

They also have message boards and discuss things.

http://www.footballreferee.org/forum/viewforum.php?f=6&sid=5b67ef0f7545858564acaed26cf2d039

[:|]

 

[/quote]So you''d be impartial and take this view say if Lincoln were bossing a game, were 1-0 up, just about to gain promotion and someone went through, dived, got a pen, and cost Lincoln promotion?  Come off it.[/quote]

Yes I would.  Without the officials the match at FL level cannot take place.  I repeat: if you think you can do it better then get out there and do it.

The game needs you, providing you can do it better that is.

[/quote]Ok and in a world without emotion I would agree with you, but that is not how a fan behaves.I don''t doubt what you have done for Lincoln so don''t come back with that, but as a fan of a club I don''t understand how you can take this stance.

[Romantic 0]

Having been at the game and watched this over and over - I''d say there''s no possible appeal. Weston was ''professional'' in drawing a keeper who now must wish he''d stood him up, Forster goes to ground, Weston''s ''momentum'' takes him over the keeper. I''m certain that at that point Weston did not expect to continue to play the ball but to go to ground, but it''s a fait accompli. Pen and a yellow for me.My biggest problem is that the Holt pen wasn''t given later in the game. It was absolutely dead on. We should have won the game 2-1.

[Canary Man of Kent 0]

Cam you don''t half talk garbage. You just like to look like the big clever man rising above it all, I don''t believe it for a second.

[Gingerpele 0]

I don''t think that was a Goal scoring chace, he kicked the ball the other way......

[canary cherub 1]

Personally I feel a pen is harsh enough in these situations without sending the keeper off as well, but them''s the rules.

I think Adams was arguing that because Weston had knocked the ball away, Forster didn''t deny him a clear goalscoring opportunity and therefore a yellow would have been sufficient. 

 

[paul moy 235]

What goes around comes around. Let''s hope that this guy wins ''unfair'' penalties against our main rivals for promotion.

[Clint 221]

Penalty or not I don''t think its a red card. 

For Forster to be sent off he has to deny a clear goal scoring opportunity and/or be the last man.  Had Weston stayed on his feet, he would have collected the ball at a pretty acute angle and from this angle, would still have to get the ball past Semmy who was inbetween him and the goal.  To my mind, thats not a clear goal scoring opportunity to anyone at this level and nor was Forster the last man.   

I could have understood the ref giving a penalty based on what he saw but not the red card and it was the dismissal that completely changed the match, not the penalty.

[Canary Man of Kent 0]

I agree, but equally the rules are so wooly I think there is an argument to say it was a red card offence. Whether or not it would be a difficult chance is not factored in to the rules, it merely says "denied a clear goal scoring opportunity", what constitutes clear is obviously going to be the main discussion topic, some may argue that having a man to beat on the line from an acute angle still constitutes a clear opportunity.

These rules cannot be read as if they are legal provisions, there is far too much ambiguity and far too many moving parts for a rule to encompass all eventualities. Fact is, it comes down to the judgement of the referee to decide what is a reasonable approach to adopt in the circumstances using the guidance provided by the rules of the game.

[Clint 221]

[quote user="SimonOTBC"]

Fact is, it comes down to the judgement of the referee to decide what is a reasonable approach to adopt in the circumstances using the guidance provided by the rules of the game.

[/quote]

That, my friend, is unfortunately appears to be the problem.

 

[Dronny Canary 0]

[quote user="SimonOTBC"]

I agree, but equally the rules are so wooly I think there is an argument to say it was a red card offence. Whether or not it would be a difficult chance is not factored in to the rules, it merely says "denied a clear goal scoring opportunity", what constitutes clear is obviously going to be the main discussion topic, some may argue that having a man to beat on the line from an acute angle still constitutes a clear opportunity.

These rules cannot be read as if they are legal provisions, there is far too much ambiguity and far too many moving parts for a rule to encompass all eventualities. Fact is, it comes down to the judgement of the referee to decide what is a reasonable approach to adopt in the circumstances using the guidance provided by the rules of the game.

[/quote]

The rules allow interpretation which is reasonable, given that no two situations are absolutely identical.  The phrase "clear" or "obvious" "goalscoring opportunity"  implies more likely to score than not.  You can''t argue that there was a 1% chance of scoring so there still was a goalscoring opportunity.  The Gillingham player knocked the ball past Forster in such a way that it was unlikely that he could have caught it anyway (which seemed to me why he decided to go to ground).  From the referee''s position I can understand why he gave a penalty but he did seem very quick to decide to give the red card.  The real problem isn''t the referee in these situations but players who are happy to dive (ie cheat).  Until the authorities enforce some meaningful punishments for this sort of thing it will just continue.