Treble winners vs $murfs - 8 Dec 6pm

[Big Al]

1 game is fair it wasn't that bad

Agree. I think it was one of those ones if Ref doesn’t send him off VAR doesn’t over rule.

 

[pjennings]

Agree. I think it was one of those ones if Ref doesn’t send him off VAR doesn’t over rule.

I suspect he would have been sent even if the ref didn't send him. It is one thing to commit to getting the ball - but he didn't. He committed to stopping Alou getting the ball.

Violent conduct Violent conduct is when a player uses or attempts to use excessive force or brutality against an opponent when not challenging for the ball, or against a team-mate, team official, match official, spectator

 

[Capn Gus Bloodbeard]

It wasn't violent conduct.it was just DOGSO, and 1 week is all DOGSO ever is.
If it wasn't given as red immediately, who knows if var would have intervened

 

[pjennings]

It wasn't violent conduct.it was just DOGSO, and 1 week is all DOGSO ever is.
If it wasn't given as red immediately, who knows if var would have intervened

I know what it was- but even if VAR deemed that the Sydney players were covering why would they overturn the ref's red card only to replace it with a violent conduct red card. It was a send off offence and he got one week which is the result it deserved.

 

[Capn Gus Bloodbeard]

I know what it was- but even if VAR deemed that the Sydney players were covering why would they overturn the ref's red card only to replace it with a violent conduct red card. It was a send off offence and he got one week which is the result it deserved.

Did I miss something? You're the only one talking about VC

 

[pjennings]

Did I miss something? You're the only one talking about VC

The commentators and people on the Sydney forum both claimed red should have been rescinded.

Simple question - if you were the VAR would you have upheld the DOGSO send off given the proximity of the defenders. In reality the keeper took Alou out with excessive force while not playing for the ball. He was going to be sent either way.

At the end of the day it was a red - one way or the other. It deserved a week and got a week.

 

[Allreet?]

The commentators and people on the Sydney forum both claimed red should have been rescinded.

Simple question - if you were the VAR would you have upheld the DOGSO send off given the proximity of the defenders. In reality the keeper took Alou out with excessive force while not playing for the ball. He was going to be sent either way.

At the end of the day it was a red - one way or the other. It deserved a week and got a week.

The commentators seriously questioning the red was a disgrace.

Sydney bias much?

 

[JoyfulPenguin]

The commentators and people on the Sydney forum both claimed red should have been rescinded.

Simple question - if you were the VAR would you have upheld the DOGSO send off given the proximity of the defenders. In reality the keeper took Alou out with excessive force while not playing for the ball. He was going to be sent either way.

At the end of the day it was a red - one way or the other. It deserved a week and got a week.

I have seen DOGSO for less, and also for more.

The bigger issue I think is the one sided commentary about it, it's within the realm of referee interpretation but Hill and Harper acted as if it could have never have been given.

Paramount's near complete lack of commentators/pundits outside Sydney is really starting to show this season.

 

[FFC Mariner]

I have seen DOGSO for less, and also for more.

The bigger issue I think is the one sided commentary about it, it's within the realm of referee interpretation but Hill and Harper acted as if it could have never have been given.

Paramount's near complete lack of commentators/pundits outside Sydney is really starting to show this season.

Hill is City and Harper is Sydney. Both have an anti Mariner bias.

 

[Corsair]

The commentators and people on the Sydney forum both claimed red should have been rescinded.

Simple question - if you were the VAR would you have upheld the DOGSO send off given the proximity of the defenders. In reality the keeper took Alou out with excessive force while not playing for the ball. He was going to be sent either way.

At the end of the day it was a red - one way or the other. It deserved a week and got a week.

Clear red. Keeper can't headbutt a player and he did move his head with intent but regardless you can't poleaxe the opposition in that position and not get sent. Any neutral would agree.

 

[Ironbark]

Definite red. Sydney forumites have always been a deluded bunch

 

[marinermick]

The commentators and people on the Sydney forum both claimed red should have been rescinded.

Simple question - if you were the VAR would you have upheld the DOGSO send off given the proximity of the defenders. In reality the keeper took Alou out with excessive force while not playing for the ball. He was going to be sent either way.

At the end of the day it was a red - one way or the other. It deserved a week and got a week.

It’s a fair point. If it is not DOGSO then it is violent conduct.

 

[Stuartmcateer]

It’s a fair point. If it is not DOGSO then it is violent conduct.

Does it fully meet the conditions for violent conduct though? I think there is enough doubt on violent conduct that it's DOGSO or a foul and yellow.

I didn't think that the challenge was excessively forceful. The sliding challenge that marguis got booked for had much more force in it than that one. yeah he knocks him over but that had as much to do with the fact alou was in the air than the actual contact.

Possibly enough doubt in the "challenge for the ball" to not be a lay down misere that it's a red. He doesn't clean him out like Neuer did the other morning. He doesn't lead with the elbow or shoulder (he turns when he realised he wasn't near the ball). He isn't just flying out, he stops and steadies to try and read the flight of the ball and then is leaning head first.

If that challenge was in the centre circle by kaltak on lolley would it be talked about as violent conduct?

 

[Capn Gus Bloodbeard]

It’s a fair point. If it is not DOGSO then it is violent conduct.

It wouldn't be

Being a challenge for the ball, it's serious foul play, if anything. But, it wasn't bad enough for that. A little late, but still a challenge for the ball.

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/or endangers the safety of an opponent and must be sent off

On it's own, reckless sure (YC) but definitely DOGSO. The more I watch it, the more certain I am that dogso is indisputable. The nearest player was a few yards behind, leaving 1 defender who might be able to get back to block a shot.

But too many people don't realise that, typically speaking, 1 defender able to intercept usually means OGSO. Usually that defender is a gk. When it's not the gk, another defender is still just 1 play (and they actually have less capacity to stop the ball than a gk. So often I see people who don't think say "can't be dogso! There's a player behind the gk!")

Harper rabbiting on like a broken record about a footballing challenge...wtf does that even mean? Absolute moron.

 

[true believer]

i'll make an observation here .
i think when meares got red carded .talay made a mistake and took the wrong player off.
while lolly,the pol are quality high paid mercenaries , neither are play makers
Anas Ouahim the player they took off has a pass to die for and i believe would of allowed greater control of the football under 10 men conditions .

 

[Stuartmcateer]

i'll make an observation here .
i think when meares got red carded .talay made a mistake and took the wrong player off.
while lolly,the pol are quality high paid mercenaries , neither are play makers
Anas Ouahim the player they took off has a pass to die for and i believe would of allowed greater control of the football under 10 men conditions .

He should have taken Costa off. Lolley works hard and can score a goal.

But that's the issue with paying massive cash for a has been - you feel pressured to keep them on the park to get some value out of it.

Having said that, the free kick on 3 minutes that hit the post and the pass up the channel with the outside of his left peg were glimpses of the quality he has as a player.

 

[Capn Gus Bloodbeard]

I had the idle thought that I wonder if they will eventually tinker with GK sendoffs.
They're more significant than anything else because not only does the team have to play with their 2nd best GK but they also lose a player to sub the gk on.

So, gk being sent off is kind of like losing 1.5 players, as well as losing a sub. Much harsher than, say, if the sweeper gets sent

Idle thoughts.

 

[turbo]

I had the idle thought that I wonder if they will eventually tinker with GK sendoffs.
They're more significant than anything else because not only does the team have to play with their 2nd best GK but they also lose a player to sub the gk on.

So, gk being sent off is kind of like losing 1.5 players, as well as losing a sub. Much harsher than, say, if the sweeper gets sent

Idle thoughts.

It should be though. If a keeper is sent off you're almost certainly looking at a goal being denied illegitimately. Only way to restore that disadvantage is to look at something like a penalty try in league where the try is awarded even though it wasnt completed.

I'd also suggest in the majority of occasions where a defender is sent you tend to burn a sub there as well to keep the structure. I dont think the system needs messing with.

 

[FFC Mariner]

I'm not sure Alou would have scored if he wasn't fouled and had got the ball.
Would have had a lot of work to do.

 

[Stuartmcateer]

It should be though. If a keeper is sent off you're almost certainly looking at a goal being denied illegitimately. Only way to restore that disadvantage is to look at something like a penalty try in league where the try is awarded even though it wasnt completed.

I'd also suggest in the majority of occasions where a defender is sent you tend to burn a sub there as well to keep the structure. I dont think the system needs messing with.

They already softened the rules around giving away a penalty if it's a legit challenge for the ball and removing the double consequence of a dot shot and a send off.

They have tinkered too much with handball and offside and nobody knows anymore. Just leave it alone.