Our pen on saturday....

[Canary Man of Kent 0]

Just out of interest, can anyone clarify the rule re red cards.

I can''t see the difference between what their defender did, and a player having his heels clipped when through on goal.

So why is one a red card offence and not the other? Was the ref of the opinion that Holt wouldn''t have been on the end of it?

Certainly to my mind, that seemed to be more of a clear goal scoring opportunity than when Fraser took out (ignoring the dive) Weston at Gills.

[Nuff Said 5,966]

AFAIK it''s only an automatic red card if the defender who commits the foul is the last man between the striker and the goal (not counting the keeper obviously). There were loads of other Col U players inthe box when it happened.

[Canary Man of Kent 0]

Maybe that''s right, but I''m not sure how he isn''t the last man to be honest. Yes, there were other defenders in the box, but they never would have had a chance to stop Holt scoring.

 

[Gingerpele 0]

wasn''t the angle to tight?

[Pete Raven 276]

I think it was punishment enough for Colchester that he remained on the pitch....

[emmaroyds 0]

It`s hard to say because the defender was chalenging for the ball as well, although not very well .

The rules state that to be sent off the player must have denied his opponent a clear goal scoring opportunity, regardless of whether he is the last defender or not.

now we can argue all day that it was a clear goal scoring opportunity because we all know that the horse would have just nodded that into the net. But it`s the ref has to make the interpritation and I think he got it about right.

Incidently before the game I had my reservations about having a premier league ref for this but in the end he was the right man. a less experienced ref may have lost control of it as it did threaten to boil over at times

[WeAreYellows49 0]

[quote user="Sports Desk Pete"]I think it was punishment enough for Colchester that he remained on the pitch....[/quote]

 

Hahahaha too right

[Canary Man of Kent 0]

[quote user="emmaroyds"]It`s hard to say because the defender was chalenging for the ball as well, although not very well . The rules state that to be sent off the player must have denied his opponent a clear goal scoring opportunity, regardless of whether he is the last defender or not. now we can argue all day that it was a clear goal scoring opportunity because we all know that the horse would have just nodded that into the net. But it`s the ref has to make the interpritation and I think he got it about right. Incidently before the game I had my reservations about having a premier league ref for this but in the end he was the right man. a less experienced ref may have lost control of it as it did threaten to boil over at times[/quote]

I think what you say is exactly right.

It just leaves me perplexed when Curtis Weston booted the ball of the pitch as he went down yet it was deemed more of a goalscoring opportunity than Holt on Saturday.

Whilst I think the correct decision in both cases would have been a booking, the inconsistency irritates me.

[LinkNR9 0]

The foul that led to the penalty wasn''t a red, but the one where Holty was hauled down on his way to goal, having bundled past their centre back, definitely was - I can''t see how Dean could say there was cover! Holt went ballistic and rightly so!

[0ridgemanddMMyyyy0Falseen-USTrue 0]

[quote user="LinkNR9"]The foul that led to the penalty wasn''t a red, but the one where Holty was hauled down on his way to goal, having bundled past their centre back, definitely was - I can''t see how Dean could say there was cover! Holt went ballistic and rightly so![/quote]

 

I think Dean pointed out to Holt that he was going away from goal if thats what his hand gesture meant.

[yellow blood 0]

[quote user="LinkNR9"]The foul that led to the penalty wasn''t a red, but the one where Holty was hauled down on his way to goal, having bundled past their centre back, definitely was - I can''t see how Dean could say there was cover! Holt went ballistic and rightly so![/quote]

 

Was going to say the same...was in line with it and was definitely a sending off offence. Having seen a couple on the tv over the w-e, it was a piss-poor refereeing decision

[Ghost of Davie Ross 0]

There is so much inconsistency in applying this rule, not just in England but country by country. I was watching the Bari v Inter Milan game on Saturday night and on at least two occasions players were let off with a booking after they appeared to deny the opposition clear goalscoring chances - both times the referee seemed to decide that a penalty was sufficient punishment. Personally this is how I would like things to be in this country - I cannot understand why teams have to be punished twice with a penalty AND a red card.

[eddy melito 0]

[quote user="yellow blood"]

[quote user="LinkNR9"]The foul that led to the penalty wasn''t a red, but the one where Holty was hauled down on his way to goal, having bundled past their centre back, definitely was - I can''t see how Dean could say there was cover! Holt went ballistic and rightly so![/quote]

 

Was going to say the same...was in line with it and was definitely a sending off offence. Having seen a couple on the tv over the w-e, it was a piss-poor refereeing decision

[/quote]

agree with that, he was very lucky. i would have been happier if he had been sent off to be honest as we would miss him for 3 games. he gets turned by any striker with half a brain that boy.

i did think there was a hint of offside on the penalty decision at the time, and i havent been convinced otherwise by the replays i have seen.

[Yobocop 1,444]

it''s all about interpretation of the rules....and how much a referee wants to use his discretion.

Has the defender stopped an obvious goal scoring opportunity? Probably not as the ball wasn''t at Holt''s feet, I think if he had controlled it, gone for the shot and the defender took his legs out it may of been a very different story.