Why can’t a red card be issued retrospectively and with a review…I’m sure its been done before…or am I living in hope…
1 Like
This sort of comment is exactly why people find it so unpleasant being caught in any engagement with you.
Gallagher’s comment says that he thought it was a red card offense. That is not a comment about where VAR can and cannot get involved and so has no bearing on the discussion of what the remit is for VAR. My point was that if the VAR didn’t think it amounted to a red card, and there will always be reasonable disagreements on subjective decisions, there is no other avenue for it to get involved on that play.
Unpleasant insofar as you just night have to admit you are wrong? Just this once?
Gallagher said Taylor should have been sent to the screen by VAR and that he would certainly have given a red card.
You set yourself up as the resident expert on VAR, and I humbly admit you seem to know a lot more than most of us. In this instance it isn’t really a subjective decision?
It constitutes violent conduct, Taylor and VAR got it wrong.
1 Like
@Limiescouse
Gallagher says VAR should send him to the screen.
Also VAR can only look back at that phase of play. The fact that Chelsea turned the ball over, then lost it ment it went through several phases of play, so VAR can’t go back to look at the foul, unless as you pointed out it is for a possible red card
It was for a possible red card
Nailed on red card that they missed.
2 Likes
Was a poor tackle, and a foul on Havertz, but no way was it a red
I meant the hair pull
My bad, go mixed up on challanges
The hair pull, yes that was a red card, and there was a case a few years ago, when someone did something similar and ended up getting a retrospective ban, so I wouldn’t be surprised if that gets brought up in the next day or 2 and a ban will be incomming
2 Likes
Yes, because in his opinion it was a red card offense. Nothing I have said disagrees with that being the course of action in the event the VAR agreed with this opinion. You seem though to be unable to distinguish the difference between a discussion on whether it was a red card offense, and what VAR is left to do in the event they didnt think it was.
1 Like
I’d imagine the potential for retrospective bans to be almost zero in the VAR age unless the authorities change their attitude to them. Currently the authorities will only consider it in cases where the officials either missed it entirely, or didn’t see it well enough to appreciate the seriousness of it. I think it’ll be really hard with VAR to meet that threshold. There was a big debate over whether this needed to be revisited in the aftermath of the Pickford Virgil incident but to my knowledge it didnt go anywhere.
1 Like
No, you are wrong, and the method of discussion you use doesn’t make you right.
I can differentiate in what the course of action is, and the incorrect decision by VAR.
I pointed out Gallaghers view, not specifically aimed at you, though you decided to have a go.
Which leads to the question about the competence of both refs and VAR then.
One look at it and you can see the violence needed to throw a player around like that.
3 Likes
I’m not sure why you’re getting so wound up over @Limiescouse correcting you?
I don’t think there’s anything wrong with what he has said so far, particularly about the experience of engaging with you. You’re so blinkered at this moment, you really need to take a break and take a step back to what is being said.
The counter points you are making towards me aren’t actually counter the points Im making. Telling me that a referee expert thinks it was a red card offense, something you did actually address to me directly, twice, is simply not relevant to the point I was making. If you can point to me where in my argument you think there is a flaw then cool Id be glad to hear it. I’d appreciate it though if you keep it to the things Ive actually said.
It was a total mess. Their report and subsequent public comments indicated that they saw the incident clearly. Instead though they got it wrong because they just confused themselves with the number of different things they were trying to consider at the same time. It was an issue of a broken thought process rather than not seeing it properly. And so the FA decided it didnt fit within their parameters for retrospective bans, despite the officials saying the got it wrong and should have sent him off.
Why do you feel the need to get involved?
Seriously, what the fuck did I do to deserve your attention.
How can VAR not see it is as a red card it is a DELIBERATE ACT, and therefore violent conduct in its action.
BTW I do normally like your level headed view and understanding of VAR, however, VAR in this is undefensible or should I say the people responsible for making the non decision are
You’re pathetic.
I’m calling out your behaviour because you can’t seem to accept when you’re wrong. This is coming from someone who thinks referees in England are almost all incompetent, with some having an unfathomable bias, which has been backed up by analysis even by people who aren’t Liverpool fans.
Ten minutes ago, during the first half of a PL game… you respond?
And you call me pathetic?
Whether something is violent conduct is a subjective opinion where there are seemingly differences of opinion. You can feel very strongly about something while still acknowledging someone else might see it differently. That is seemingly what we have in this case.
2 Likes