Football

[Haywain]

I doubt it. Most contracts have a clause about brining the company into disrepute - which this would do.

Although that would require a formal disciplinary process to be followed in order to be watertight. Whether United's 'investigation' would allow dismissal without consequence is not clear.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

I doubt it. Most contracts have a clause about brining the company into disrepute - which this would do.

Possibly, but as the justice system chose not to prosecute, and the alleged victim withdrew the allegations, I would expect that MUFC's legal team would be reluctant to go down that route.

Although that would require a formal disciplinary process to be followed in order to be watertight. Whether United's 'investigation' would allow dismissal without consequence is not clear.

There's also money at stake- if a season-long loan to a foreign team could generate income, that's probably the choice the club will make. If they were to terminate his contract they lose that, even if they were entitled to do so under the terms of his contract. Morals have a price in football.

 

[Haywain]

There's also money at stake- if a season-long loan to a foreign team could generate income, that's probably the choice the club will make. If they were to terminate his contract they lose that, even if they were entitled to do so under the terms of his contract. Morals have a price in football.

Indeed. The consequence I referred to was the potential for having to pay up the remainder of his contract and possibly even damages on top. Although I doubt whether there's any money to be made from loaning out a player who has been out of action for over a year - more a case of limiting their losses.

 

[75A]

My worst pundit is Alan Shearer with his constant criticism of match officials.

Once, just once, I’d love to see him attempt to referee a Premier League game. I’d guess he’d never do it again.

I don't blame him for criticizing some of the match officials, he's only saying what we are thinking. Look at the complete clown refeereing last nights Palace / Arsenal game. A yellow card for timewasting, ok you could argue he took that for the team because teammates were doing it as well, but the second yellow was for what? resulting in a red for the poor bloke, luckily it didn't affect the result, just the credability of the Ref.

 

[dangie]

I don't blame him for criticizing some of the match officials, he's only saying what we are thinking. Look at the complete clown refeereing last nights Palace / Arsenal game. A yellow card for timewasting, ok you could argue he took that for the team because teammates were doing it as well, but the second yellow was for what? resulting in a red for the poor bloke, luckily it didn't affect the result, just the credability of the Ref.

He may often have a point but I still stand by my thought. I’d like to see him try to referee a Premiership match.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

He may often have a point but I still stand by my thought. I’d like to see him try to referee a Premiership match.

To referee at that level, it would be difficult at his age starting with entering into all that is involved when a person trains to be a referee and has their performance during the training under scrutiny and the knowledge of fully understanding the Laws of the Game and their comprehension of same. There then will follow officiating at low level matches and gradually moving from level to level with fitness levels and past performance being scutinied. It is only then, after much progression will a miniscule percentage ever reach the level of refereeing in the top echelons of English football.

 

[sprunt]

I don't blame him for criticizing some of the match officials, he's only saying what we are thinking. Look at the complete clown refeereing last nights Palace / Arsenal game. A yellow card for timewasting, ok you could argue he took that for the team because teammates were doing it as well, but the second yellow was for what? resulting in a red for the poor bloke, luckily it didn't affect the result, just the credability of the Ref.

What's your criticism of the second yellow? I'm not convinced there was actually a foul there, but if it was a foul it was definitely a bookable one as it prevented a counter-attack developing.

The first yellow was fair enough - referees will presumably have some idea of how long is reasonable to take a throw-in in the situation without it being time wasting, and teams shouldn't be able to get round that by playing pass the parcel with the ball. I suppose you could make a case that the player who was pretending he was going to take the throw before he chucked it to Tomiyasu should have been booked instead, but between the two of them they definitely took too long.

 

[75A]

As you say yourself you weren't convinced there was actually a foul there, so why the yellow card?
Don't the clowns have any common sense these days.
Note I was a qualified referee myself between 1974 & 1998 an era when thinking was acceptable.

 

[sprunt]

As you say yourself you weren't convinced there was actually a foul there, so why the yellow card?

Because if it were a foul - and the referee obviously thought it was - then it was a bookable one. Do you dispute that?

 

[75A]

I just think common sense should have prevailed.

 

[sprunt]

That's a non-answer. Why is it common sense that a player who's committed a bookable offence should be let off without a booking?

Do you agree that fouls which prevent a counter-attack developing are commonly regarded and punished as bookable offences?

 

[SteveM70]

I don't blame him for criticizing some of the match officials, he's only saying what we are thinking. Look at the complete clown refeereing last nights Palace / Arsenal game. A yellow card for timewasting, ok you could argue he took that for the team because teammates were doing it as well, but the second yellow was for what? resulting in a red for the poor bloke, luckily it didn't affect the result, just the credability of the Ref.

I just think common sense should have prevailed.

I've got a bit of sympathy for the ref last night.

First yellow - Arsenal had been time wasting since they scored, and the players are fresh from a referees meeting where the new season guidance was made clear. The ref should probably have booked Havertz, as he wasted plenty of time before leaving the ball for Tomiyasu

Second yellow - there was a bit of a pull by Tomiyasu on the Palace player's shorts, and these are exactly the offences that seem to always result in a booking, whereas foul tackles often don't. Yes, it was harsh, but on the other hand it was stopping a break. The ref saw it and booked him for it.

Both are at the softer end of the scale, but if the ref didn't book him for the foul, we'd have people saying "another set of rules for the big clubs” or the utterly insane “it was worth a first yellow but not a second”

Tomiyasu took two risks, and got away with neither

 

[75A]

That's a non-answer. Why is it common sense that a player who's committed a bookable offence should be let off without a booking?

Do you agree that fouls which prevent a counter-attack developing are commonly regarded and punished as bookable offences?

Yes, if they are fouls, which the one he got his second caution for wasn't, whatever the Ref thought he saw.

 

[SteveM70]

Yes, if they are fouls, which the one he got his second caution for wasn't, whatever the Ref thought he saw.

OK, but the point is that from his perspective (a lot closer than your's or mine) he believed it was a foul, and as others have said it was exactly the sort of foul that gets a yellow card. Once he gave the foul, sending him off was right

I think there are three valid points to make:

1 - the ref was inconsistent, eg Ayew was on a yellow card and then committed a bookable foul on Saka but got away with it

2 - the ref disregarded the directive to automatically book any player who waves an imaginary yellow card - Eze and Partey both did it and got away with it

3 - the scope of VAR could be extended to include yellow cards that lead to a red card, although (i) it opens a bit of a Pandora's box, eg the second yellow was clear cut but the first wasn't and (ii) the line between nothing and a yellow is harder to draw than between yellow and red

 

[dangie]

3 - the scope of VAR could be extended to……

The scope of VAR should be extended to where it belongs……. in the bin.
VAR is/has ruining football.

 

[75A]

OK, but the point is that from his perspective (a lot closer than your's or mine) he believed it was a foul, and as others have said it was exactly the sort of foul that gets a yellow card. Once he gave the foul, sending him off was right

I think there are three valid points to make:

1 - the ref was inconsistent, eg Ayew was on a yellow card and then committed a bookable foul on Saka but got away with it

2 - the ref disregarded the directive to automatically book any player who waves an imaginary yellow card - Eze and Partey both did it and got away with it

3 - the scope of VAR could be extended to include yellow cards that lead to a red card, although (i) it opens a bit of a Pandora's box, eg the second yellow was clear cut but the first wasn't and (ii) the line between nothing and a yellow is harder to draw than between yellow and red

i agree with you, especially the 3 valid points, although I'm with 'dangie' about VAR.
The concern I have is that come the end of season or a Cup final, a player could get 2 dubious yellow cards and their sending off could have a material effect on the result and maybe the whole season.
I'm lucky (?) as the team I support are in Division 1, so VAR is a long way in the distance.

 

[DarloRich]

The scope of VAR should be extended to where it belongs……. in the bin.
VAR is/has ruining football.

is the correct answer - i said it would. The whole thing is driven by media hype and nonsense

 

[SteveM70]

The concern I have is that come the end of season or a Cup final, a player could get 2 dubious yellow cards and their sending off could have a material effect on the result and maybe the whole season.
I'm lucky (?) as the team I support are in Division 1, so VAR is a long way distance

You could get to the Papa John's Trophy final or the playoff final * and have someone sent off for two soft yellows.

* maybe the semi final, I think the finals have VAR now

Not sure how the lack of VAR makes you any luckier?

 

[75A]

so we all agree on something then.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Yes, if they are fouls, which the one he got his second caution for wasn't, whatever the Ref thought he saw.

Bookings can and are made for other committed offences, not purely for fouls.

 

[75A]

You could get to the Papa John's Trophy final or the playoff final * and have someone sent off for two soft yellows.

* maybe the semi final, I think the finals have VAR now

Not sure how the lack of VAR makes you any luckier?

We got to the final 2 years running!

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

You could get to the Papa John's Trophy final or the playoff final * and have someone sent off for two soft yellows.

In the Laws of the Game, is there any official definition of a "soft yellow" or is that phrase just something used by supporters using their alternative version of the Laws of the Game?

 

[61653 HTAFC]

2 - the ref disregarded the directive to automatically book any player who waves an imaginary yellow card - Eze and Partey both did it and got away with it

As the Bard of Birkenhead Nigel Blackwell (of Half Man Half Biscuit) said in "The Referee's Alphabet":

S is for the suggestion that I should have shown a card of some sort to a player who’s just been awarded a free kick
(Sorry I got all that wrong the S again, OK the S)
The S is the suggestion that I should show a card to an opponent
By a player who’s been awarded a free kick
He himself is more in danger of getting one for that

 

[75A]

In the Laws of the Game, is there any official definition of a "soft yellow" or is that phrase just something used by supporters using their alternative version of the Laws of the Game?

Referees and Club Officials have used the phrase for as long as I can remember.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Referees and Club Officials have used the phrase for as long as I can remember.

That may well be the case, but it does not occur in the actual Laws of the Game.

 

[Haywain]

That may well be the case, but it does not occur in the actual Laws of the Game.

So what? It's a phrase that's in common usage by people talking about the game, from officials through pundits to coaches and fans.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

So what? It's a phrase that's in common usage by people talking about the game, from officials through pundits to coaches and fans.

If that be the case, why have the Laws of the Game still never been amended on that particular matter. Pundits (of the Sanskit learning and the football type), coaches and fans have no over-arching powers that obviate the Laws of the Game, they just live in a parallel universe....

 

[Haywain]

If that be the case, why have the Laws of the Game still never been amended on that particular matter. Pundits (of the Sanskit learning and the football type), coaches and fans have no over-arching powers that obviate the Laws of the Game, they just live in a parallel universe....

Why do the laws need to change so that people can talk about the game? This sort of thing happens in all walks of life.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Why do the laws need to change so that people can talk about the game? This sort of thing happens in all walks of life.

You may also say that people talk of the Laws on the Statute Book in a similar manner, but that is all that is...just talk...

The Laws still remain the Laws until they are officially changed.

 

[Haywain]

The Laws still remain the Laws until they are officially changed.

Nobody is arguing otherwise, other than you. You seem to have a problem with the way football is being discussed on an internet forum!