That picture of the Havertz tackle is also weird, given he only touched him with the left leg. Don’t know why that should be a clear red tbh, even if he had some speed
He absolutely did not only hit Longstaff with his left leg. His right leg catches Longstaff, it was pure luck it didn’t hit him hard enough to do serious damage.
That’s always the case when they use single frames to discuss events of the game. Joelintons push looks a lot worse in the photos that everyone uses than it does in video form. That’s not me saying it isn’t a foul, more so that the photos make it look a lot worse.
Thats what I thought about the Havertz tackle too.
I mean it was a rough tackle no doubt. But he didnt try to ‘get him’ with his leading foot. He clipped him with the trailing foot and because of that I dont think it was reckless.
If he had made contact though (and it was a matter of inches) there was every chance of a career-ending (or limiting) injury. That would have been a lot of force into a planted leg.
And to see they’re trying to dust their hands with the Havertz tackle, when if we look across 10 matches it was clear that the ref’s on field and VAR were systemically not interested in giving straight reds for harsh challenges that weekend.
Only one player got a straight red for an equivalent dangerous challenge and it was in the box and after he already should’ve gotten one for violent conduct.
Would love to know how “independent” these folks are. What’s the point of making their identities hidden? They could have side hustles in the middle-east for all we know…
I dunno, expecting 100% unanimous is not how things work though. That’s why you have multiple people on a panel. Came to the right decision at least now
This sounds pedantic but they weren’t voting on whether it was a red or not, they were voting on whether the VAR intervention was correct. And yes, for the record I think it makes very little difference here and I’m surprised it wasn’t unanimously agreed as wrong. But I can only assume they disagreed on the basis of whether its ‘clear and obvious red’ as opposed to red card at all.
Referee didn’t see it at all, meaning any potential red should refer the referee to thr screen so he can make a judgement, let alone such a blatant one.
But the thing is, football laws are subjective for the most part to the individual interpretation. That game was anomaly, not the norm. I will always be a firm believer that if you need to watch the play more than once to make a decision, whatever ref decided is the correct call.
If we keep playing and replaying these instances, and yet we have major divide on the correctness of the calls, then these arguments are invalid.
Arsenal was unfortunate because of the end result, but the whole disgrace to football is just bullshit to make their fans feel better about the loss.
I feel like this so called “PL Independent Key Match Incident” committee proceeded purely to discredit Arteta’s statement. Sky Sports & PGMOL are all both in cahoots to protect each other & prop each other’s interests. This is why they can suddenly conjure Howard Webb for a cheeky little guest appearances on MNF.
Also the screenshot provided for the havertz tackle is completely misrepresenting the point of contact. AFAIK the only foot that made contact was the trailing left foot that stayed on the ground. The right high foot completely missed.
I mean they voted that Havertz tackle was a red 5-0 and that Bruno’s was a red 3-2… their findings are hard to deem credible.
That picture of the Havertz tackle is also weird, given he only touched him with the left leg. Don’t know why that should be a clear red tbh, even if he had some speed
He absolutely did not only hit Longstaff with his left leg. His right leg catches Longstaff, it was pure luck it didn’t hit him hard enough to do serious damage.
That’s always the case when they use single frames to discuss events of the game. Joelintons push looks a lot worse in the photos that everyone uses than it does in video form. That’s not me saying it isn’t a foul, more so that the photos make it look a lot worse.
Thats what I thought about the Havertz tackle too.
I mean it was a rough tackle no doubt. But he didnt try to ‘get him’ with his leading foot. He clipped him with the trailing foot and because of that I dont think it was reckless.
If he had made contact though (and it was a matter of inches) there was every chance of a career-ending (or limiting) injury. That would have been a lot of force into a planted leg.
Red without any hesitation.
And to see they’re trying to dust their hands with the Havertz tackle, when if we look across 10 matches it was clear that the ref’s on field and VAR were systemically not interested in giving straight reds for harsh challenges that weekend.
Only one player got a straight red for an equivalent dangerous challenge and it was in the box and after he already should’ve gotten one for violent conduct.
Would love to know how “independent” these folks are. What’s the point of making their identities hidden? They could have side hustles in the middle-east for all we know…
These fucks are trying to make us root for Arsenal over Newcastle
Football is as subjective as boxing now,
I dunno, expecting 100% unanimous is not how things work though. That’s why you have multiple people on a panel. Came to the right decision at least now
This sounds pedantic but they weren’t voting on whether it was a red or not, they were voting on whether the VAR intervention was correct. And yes, for the record I think it makes very little difference here and I’m surprised it wasn’t unanimously agreed as wrong. But I can only assume they disagreed on the basis of whether its ‘clear and obvious red’ as opposed to red card at all.
Referee didn’t see it at all, meaning any potential red should refer the referee to thr screen so he can make a judgement, let alone such a blatant one.
But the thing is, football laws are subjective for the most part to the individual interpretation. That game was anomaly, not the norm. I will always be a firm believer that if you need to watch the play more than once to make a decision, whatever ref decided is the correct call.
If we keep playing and replaying these instances, and yet we have major divide on the correctness of the calls, then these arguments are invalid.
Arsenal was unfortunate because of the end result, but the whole disgrace to football is just bullshit to make their fans feel better about the loss.
If the Joelinton tackle isn’t a foul either then it’s going to be really easy to defend crosses if you can just push over the attackers.
I feel like this so called “PL Independent Key Match Incident” committee proceeded purely to discredit Arteta’s statement. Sky Sports & PGMOL are all both in cahoots to protect each other & prop each other’s interests. This is why they can suddenly conjure Howard Webb for a cheeky little guest appearances on MNF.
Also the screenshot provided for the havertz tackle is completely misrepresenting the point of contact. AFAIK the only foot that made contact was the trailing left foot that stayed on the ground. The right high foot completely missed.
Why are people so hung up on the voting results? Isn’t the outcome the same?
They are dishonest to their federation.
R/soccers obsession with the Havertz one not being red is bonkers to me. It’s the definition of reckless.