Jump to content

🔵⚪️Saints v Buddies ⚫️⚪️ 25/02/23


Recommended Posts

Christ this is getting all a bit repetative and the respective supports are never going to agree on it -

Was it intentional or Reckless - No

Was it a natural movement and a normal place to land - Yes

Did it catch Flynn high on the ankle - Yes

Was it unlucky - Yes

Was it a stick on red card with VAR - Absolutely it was, whether it should be is another debate

Either way, no point in appealing, it won't go anywhere and 99/100 the referee gives the red card when he sees the slowmo that VAR provides, therefore I'm sure if the roles were reversed there would probably be the same arguements. I can get over the fact Phillips got sent off, the only thing to blame here is the pitch, as it caused the poor first touch in the first place and accidently led to him landing on Flynn's ankle in a manner that meant it was a red card.

Maybe after this first year of VAR there will be a review of the many inconsitencies and issues with it, but whlist it's here we know what to expect, no point in arguing about it now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Widge said:

Christ this is getting all a bit repetative and the respective supports are never going to agree on it -

Was it intentional or Reckless - No

Was it a natural movement and a normal place to land - Yes

Did it catch Flynn high on the ankle - Yes

Was it unlucky - Yes

Was it a stick on red card with VAR - Absolutely it was, whether it should be is another debate

Pretty much everything I said during the match and at half time with the benefit of the replay. Not dirty or intentional but almost certainly had to be a red.

We got caught for something similar a few weeks ago against Hearts where Marcus Fraser vaulted his own player, Olusanya and in coming down, landed glancingly on a Hearts player's leg and several Saints fans were saying it wasn't a red as he didn't know he was there. Doesn't matter, it had to be 100% given as a red just as this did.

For the record, I do think some interpretation and consideration of the ebb and flow of the match has to be taken into these decisions and this should be the case in future but unfortunately, whether all refs play it straight by the letter of the law or interpret on a case-by-case basis, there will always be inconsistency and people asking 'but what about that time when...' and justifiably so.

VAR being present simply doesn't matter. It works and it's proven to work. The technology isn't the issue...the technology works. You could put the complete works of Charles Dickens in front of a fucking baboon and ask them to read it, they aren't going to tell you a compelling, captivating story, they'll just make a load of daft noises and smear it in their own jobby, making it look bad. Those interpreting the technology are horrendously incompetent and simply will not or cannot apply common sense. It doesn't matter if VAR works, while those running it are so hopeless and feckless, it will be made to look bad by human idiocy.

Edited by djchapsticks
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I may be missing something bleedin’ obvious, but I saw an incident this weekend on TV whereby a player tried an overhead kick, never knew a defender was coming in to try to head the ball clear, and got a boot in the puss’ for his trouble. No intent whatsoever, no red card, but still, accidental or not, he booted an opponent in the face. No-one from the defending team surrounded the opposing player or the ref as everyone knew it was accidental. Intent seemed to matter there. We all seem to agree that the St Johnstone player never tried to ‘do’ Flynn, but got a red. Surely then the overhead kick boy should have received a red?

If I’m missing something in regard to intent or accident and how it affects the dishing out of reds in this VAR age, then I’ll be more than happy to be put straight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Widge said:

Christ this is getting all a bit repetative and the respective supports are never going to agree on it -

Was it intentional or Reckless - No

 

Fakes aren't appealing the decision because it will be seen as "reckless" . Red every day of the week !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...