Matty-RCFC Posted March 5, 2023 Author Share Posted March 5, 2023 As @Busta Nut previously stated above though, isn’t VAR getting involved there what it’s meant to do? Like, if there was no VAR in that game yesterday and Baldwin got away with a booking, would we not all be sitting here saying that it should be a red card? I don’t know, I just thought at the time that it was an absolute certain red and I’m generally surprised at the number of people that don’t. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YassinMoutaouakil Posted March 6, 2023 Share Posted March 6, 2023 For me we got the rub of the green in two 50:50 decisions. Which I think is a 25:75. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete the Jakey Posted March 6, 2023 Share Posted March 6, 2023 8 hours ago, Matty-RCFC said: As @Busta Nut previously stated above though, isn’t VAR getting involved there what it’s meant to do? Like, if there was no VAR in that game yesterday and Baldwin got away with a booking, would we not all be sitting here saying that it should be a red card? I don’t know, I just thought at the time that it was an absolute certain red and I’m generally surprised at the number of people that don’t. For me its all wrong that the match day ref saw the incident, awarded a yellow and free kick and was then completely undermined by another ref somewhere else who thinks he knows better. They should have just sat on their hands and respected the original decision. The distance from goal, the covering defender, the goalie off is line for me makes it a remote goalscoring opportunity, not an obvious goalscoring opportunity. Van Veen has an awful lot to do to score from there. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antiochas III Posted March 6, 2023 Share Posted March 6, 2023 People are making a lot about the goal scoring opportunity, and totally ignoring the whole making absolutely no attempt of going for the ball on top of that... 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Busta Nut Posted March 6, 2023 Share Posted March 6, 2023 7 minutes ago, Antiochas III said: People are making a lot about the goal scoring opportunity, and totally ignoring the whole making absolutely no attempt of going for the ball on top of that... I think the attempt was there for the ball but it was high and wild and I think that would have been worthy of checking itself. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete the Jakey Posted March 6, 2023 Share Posted March 6, 2023 53 minutes ago, Busta Nut said: I think the attempt was there for the ball but it was high and wild and I think that would have been worthy of checking itself. Yellow every day of the week. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ropy Posted March 6, 2023 Share Posted March 6, 2023 1 hour ago, Pete the Jakey said: . The distance from goal, the covering defender, the goalie off is line for me makes it a remote goalscoring opportunity, not an obvious goalscoring opportunity. Van Veen has an awful lot to do to score from there. He seems to score from most of his opportunities in Dingwall so it was a fair decision 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Comrie Posted March 6, 2023 Share Posted March 6, 2023 1 hour ago, Antiochas III said: People are making a lot about the goal scoring opportunity, and totally ignoring the whole making absolutely no attempt of going for the ball on top of that... He attempts to play the ball, but it's just slow, clumsy and shite. Said before Baldwin has hit a wobbly patch at totally the wrong time. Sunderland fans warned us of this. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capt_oats Posted March 6, 2023 Share Posted March 6, 2023 1 hour ago, Pete the Jakey said: The distance from goal, the covering defender, the goalie off is line for me makes it a remote goalscoring opportunity, not an obvious goalscoring opportunity. Van Veen has an awful lot to do to score from there. I mean, we'll never know since Baldwin wiped him out before he got the chance to be 1 v 1 with the 'keeper. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete the Jakey Posted March 6, 2023 Share Posted March 6, 2023 22 minutes ago, capt_oats said: I mean, we'll never know since Baldwin wiped him out before he got the chance to be 1 v 1 with the 'keeper. I dispute that he would have been 1 v 1 with the keeper given Randall was not a million miles away. He might have been able to force a near post shot. 28 minutes ago, ropy said: He seems to score from most of his opportunities in Dingwall so it was a fair decision Yeah, true! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoF Posted March 6, 2023 Share Posted March 6, 2023 14 hours ago, thisGRAEME said: This is very much my view. I thought it was a stick on red card, and thought it was a poor decision to book him. That said, I don't really agree with VAR being involved in it either. Had he played on, then yes I'd expect action on that front, but he saw it, judged it to be a booking, fine. Maybe I'm just an argumentative p***k. Isn't a stick on red card and poor decision just another way of saying clear and obvious error? So, VAR should be involved? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Busta Nut Posted March 6, 2023 Share Posted March 6, 2023 3 hours ago, Pete the Jakey said: I dispute that he would have been 1 v 1 with the keeper given Randall was not a million miles away. He might have been able to force a near post shot. So he managed to force a goal scoring opportunity ? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete the Jakey Posted March 6, 2023 Share Posted March 6, 2023 18 minutes ago, Busta Nut said: So he managed to force a goal scoring opportunity ? With a defender in close attendance and keeper to beat at near post. Nothing clear and obvious about that. I maintain it was a shitebag decision, made by a spineless ref who should have stuck with his first inclination. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capt_oats Posted March 6, 2023 Share Posted March 6, 2023 (edited) 5 hours ago, Pete the Jakey said: I dispute that he would have been 1 v 1 with the keeper given Randall was not a million miles away. He might have been able to force a near post shot. I mean, fair play making this your hill but again you can dispute whether he'd have been 1 v 1 all you like - we don't know how it'd have played out because your boy Baldwin cleaned him out as last man so it's a moot point as to whether Connor Randall would have had any influence. You could make the argument re: Randall being a "covering" defender if he was in line with Baldwin, but he's clearly not. Regardless of whether Randall was running at "100 mph" ( very good Malky) he was still a good few yards behind the incident and had KVV not been wiped out in the manner he was he'd have been through on goal. As I say, I have sympathy with the argument that VAR wasn't supposed to be about refereeing by proxy so the original card should have stood, but since that doesn't seem to be what we're doing then I'm not surprised someone's had a word in Robertson's ear and said "are you sure about that?". Edited March 6, 2023 by capt_oats 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Busta Nut Posted March 6, 2023 Share Posted March 6, 2023 11 minutes ago, Pete the Jakey said: With a defender in close attendance and keeper to beat at near post. Nothing clear and obvious about that. I maintain it was a shitebag decision, made by a spineless ref who should have stuck with his first inclination. You said it yourself he stopped a goal scoring opportunity. Add in any imaginary parts that you think could have happened after that all you want along with the buzzwords. The refereeing team won't care about the fantasy could have happened stuff. They look at the fact he stopped a goal scoring opportunity. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doctor Manhattan Posted March 6, 2023 Share Posted March 6, 2023 18 minutes ago, Busta Nut said: The refereeing team won't care about the fantasy could have happened stuff. They look at the fact he stopped a goal scoring opportunity. https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/av/football/64860745 From 11:19. Former referee on the BBC basically saying that the Sportscene pundits don't know their arses from their elbows. (Who knew?) 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete the Jakey Posted March 6, 2023 Share Posted March 6, 2023 1 hour ago, Doctor Manhattan said: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/av/football/64860745 From 11:19. Former referee on the BBC basically saying that the Sportscene pundits don't know their arses from their elbows. (Who knew?) Jesus that is a grim production. It has a touch of Between Two Ferns about it, without meaning to. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete the Jakey Posted March 6, 2023 Share Posted March 6, 2023 1 hour ago, Busta Nut said: You said it yourself he stopped a goal scoring opportunity. Add in any imaginary parts that you think could have happened after that all you want along with the buzzwords. The refereeing team won't care about the fantasy could have happened stuff. They look at the fact he stopped a goal scoring opportunity. By that logic any time anyone in possession of the ball is fouled it is denying a goal scoring opportunity as theoretically they could score from anywhere on the park. The key word (buzzword) in the SFA laws is "obvious". I accept your view, but I disagree that this was an obvious goalscoring opportunity, as in my mind it was far from obvious. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage Henry Posted March 6, 2023 Share Posted March 6, 2023 1 hour ago, Pete the Jakey said: By that logic any time anyone in possession of the ball is fouled it is denying a goal scoring opportunity as theoretically they could score from anywhere on the park. The key word (buzzword) in the SFA laws is "obvious". I accept your view, but I disagree that this was an obvious goalscoring opportunity, as in my mind it was far from obvious. Well, County agree with you and have appealed. I’m not convinced at all, but we’ve seen patently clear red cards successfully overturned, so who knows? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flatulent Gannet Posted March 6, 2023 Share Posted March 6, 2023 Surely appealing the Red Card is an exercise in futility ?. A successful appeal would be tantamount to saying VAR is a pile if sh1te, and they ain’t going to say that. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.