Arsenal v Man Utd 2nd leg (first leg 1-0 utd)

Nalz

Should be an interesting reply to that. Hopefully it wont all kick off!

But yes you are right I believe Pool did get the rules changed, but it would have been extremely harsh if they champions werent in the competition that season! My heart went out to Fletcher got to say. Hopefully something can be done

I seriously doubt it though

Mr. Presentable

chalkitdown1 wrote: »

Scissor tackle my arse.



It's a shame he'll miss what would've been the biggest game of his career because of this.

The vid indicates a penalty. Hand on shoulder, leg thrown across the thigh of opponent. Tackle was also from behind. That said, however, it didn't look a professional foul and a red seems harsh to me.

Overall the tie went according to the script. Arsenal lost it in the first leg and were never getting back in after the first comedy goal last night. Second goal was daft also, but the third was good, even allowing for the fact that at that stage Arsenal had to throw everything forward and leave themselves exposed to just that kind of possible counter goal.

_blank_

that gif is the first time I've seen this incident.

Um, red card looks extremely harsh, unless he was the last defender...was he?

If he WAS the last defender, then it WAS definitely a foul, for the hand on the shoulder if nothing else, then a red card was the correct decision.

Spud83

Superb performance from United in both legs.

Last night we were gifted two goals but Arsenal never really threatened us either. Even if we had not been gifted those goals I firmly believe United would have still sat there soaked up anything Arsenal threw at them and hit them on the break.

I think the Fletcher incident was caused by a few players going asleep in the United team.

As for the incident. From the refs perspective/view I can see why he gave the peno, and once he had done that Fletcher had to go. They are the rules the refs have to stick to them. However IMO he should have consulted his assistant as he had a better view. I don't what decision they would have come to then.

It will come down to this. Did the ref see Fletcher getting the ball last night?. If he did then its case over as he still gave the peno and therefore the red card. If he didn't see Fletcher get the ball then the second question is. Does the ref still think it is a penalty even though Fletcher got the ball. If he does then its case closed again, if not then he should be decent enough to say so and have the red rescinded.

Mitch Connor

Hand on the shoulder? Seriously, a hand ON the shoulder is a foul? Do you see Fletcher grip his shoulder and haul him back? NOPE. Do you see his hand slide down Fabregas' arm, indicating no grip or pressure being applied? erm.... yeah. The hand on the shoulder is never a fraking foul there.

LuckyLloyd

Eamon Dunphy wrote: »

that gif is the first time I've seen this incident.

Um, red card looks extremely harsh, unless he was the last defender...was he?

If he WAS the last defender, then it WAS definitely a foul, for the hand on the shoulder if nothing else, then a red card was the correct decision.

He was the last man, yes.

Wreck

I think it's a shame that he'll miss the final as he was excellent over the two legs, but that is definitely a foul. He touches the ball but Fabregas still has a chance to control it or shoot and Fletcher then brings him down.

A7X

Ive thought more and more about this peno and I've gone from thinking yes it was a red to no it's not.

I can't believe how much of the contact is taken out of the sport now-a-day's. I mean He clearly got the ball (to replays) and he did take down the man, but he got the ball first? There's not many tackles where ur going to cleanly get the ball without touching the other player.

It may have been a peno, but not a red.

Mitch Connor

Wreck wrote: »

I think it's a shame that he'll miss the final as he was excellent over the two legs, but that is definitely a foul. He touches the ball but Fabregas still has a chance to control it or shoot and Fletcher then brings him down.

I thought we had all realised after the Spurs game that getting the ball is all that needs to be done. As for Fabregas still being able to control the ball if Fletcher hadn't taken him down, he could have with a change of direction, taking him away from a direct path at goal (Same as Carrick). Also, Fabregas never touched the ball, he never gained control of it in the first place.

BaZmO*

Boggles wrote: »

Houghton screaming, "what did he do it for, just let him score."

Ray the reason he will be missed so much in the final is that he would always try and make that tackle.

Was thinking at the time it was a stupid comment for Ray Houghton to make. As if Flethcher's gonna just stand there and let Fabregas score. :rolleyes:

But I suppose once again it just shows that Hindsight Houghton is a contrary fecker.

LuckyLloyd

Giles actually made a cracking suggestion on RTE last night. He said that in a case like this - where a penalty is awarded for a foul by the last man (i.e. preventing a direct goalscoring opportunity) - the red card should only be awarded if the penalty is missed. So, if the penalty is scored, the transgressor stays on. If it is missed, he heads off. As Giles put it, the current 'double whammy' of goal conceded + red card is too harsh.

Now, there is no doubt you would have to clarify that rule somewhat, and make it more flexible (though to be fair I think the rules of the game as a whole should be more flexible). Because if a foul was dangerous and would carry a red card if committed elsewhere on the field, it should follow that it would result in a dismissal in this hypothetical. And you may even want to just automatically send off in cases where there was no genuine attempt to play the ball - and the intent was simply to take a free shot at preventing a goal. If you didn't, players wouldn't be receiving adequate protection.

But ultimately, Giles' suggestion would result in fairer treatment of players like Fletcher in last night's scenario - where the player is making an honest effort to get the ball and is unlucky to commit a foul (and it was a foul imo, contact before he touches the ball, and impeding the attacker's opportunity to go for the ball after the touch).

---

However, if you want significant rule changes (something like the above, wider and more transparent appeals process, video refereeing and challenge flags) football fans must avoid an a la carte application of their sense of injustice. Are UEFA really to take Utd seriously when the manager, players, fans, etc argue the Gomes incident was a penalty, but then argue that last night's play by Fletcher wasn't? I certainly wouldn't blame them if they don't. All fans need to learn how to be more objective and disparage clear cock ups in unison - irrespective of when their team benefits if those that make the rules are ever to stretch themselves towards significant change.

Mitch Connor

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Giles actually made a cracking suggestion on RTE last night. He said that in a case like this - where a penalty is awarded for a foul by the last man (i.e. preventing a direct goalscoring opportunity) - the red card should only be awarded if the penalty is missed. So, if the penalty is scored, the transgressor stays on. If it is missed, he heads off. As Giles put it, the current 'double whammy' of goal conceded + red card is too harsh.

Now, there is no doubt you would have to clarify that rule somewhat, and make it more flexible (though to be fair I think the rules of the game as a whole should be more flexible). Because if a foul was dangerous and would carry a red card if committed elsewhere on the field, it should follow that it would result in a dismissal in this hypothetical. And you may even want to just automatically send off in cases where there was no genuine attempt to play the ball - and the intent was simply to take a free shot at preventing a goal. If you didn't, players wouldn't be receiving adequate protection.

But ultimately, Giles' suggestion would result in fairer treatment of players like Fletcher in last night's scenario - where the player is making an honest effort to get the ball and is unlucky to commit a foul (and it was a foul imo, contact before he touches the ball, and impeding the attacker's opportunity to go for the ball after the touch).

---

However, if you want significant rule changes (something like the above, wider and more transparent appeals process, video refereeing and challenge flags) football fans must avoid an a la carte application of their sense of injustice. Are UEFA really to take Utd seriously when the manager, players, fans, etc argue the Gomes incident was a penalty, but then argue that last night's play by Fletcher wasn't? I certainly wouldn't blame them if they don't. All fans need to learn how to be more objective and disparage clear cock ups in unison - irrespective of when their team benefits if those that make the rules are ever to stretch themselves towards significant change.

I think it would be fairer to say that United fans, or a high number, argued that the Gomes incident could be seen to be a penalty, it could be understood why it was given and was simply a poor decision by Webb as opposed to biased reffing and cheating as many opposition fans claimed. I would say the same of last nights decision, it was not a penalty imo, but I can understand the circumstances in which the ref gave it, making a poor decision but not a deliberate one.

LuckyLloyd

Mitch Connor wrote: »

I think it would be fairer to say that United fans, or a high number, argued that the Gomes incident could be seen to be a penalty, it could be understood why it was given and was simply a poor decision by Webb as opposed to biased reffing and cheating as many opposition fans claimed. I would say the same of last nights decision, it was not a penalty imo, but I can understand the circumstances in which the ref gave it, making a poor decision but not a deliberate one.

Within the current rulebook though, poor decisions like that will be repeated ad nauseum. Challenging and reversing one individual decision will not ensure that the next crucial refereeing blunder before the end of this season is fixed. Last night's incident was a matter of interpretation, as was the Gomes incident. They are both tight decisions, on which people fail to reach a universal consensus even after viewing them from numerous times from loads of different camera angles. In both cases a ref is forced to make an instant judgement call from the one viewing. What needs to be changed is that - the ignorance of available technology to have a rugby style video ref.

But then, if you're going to not do that and instead keep things as they are there needs to be a consistency within the current framework. As such, to rescind a non clear cut dismissal like last night's just because they player involved may miss a final doesn't make sense. As far as I am aware, no other decision by a ref in this year's Champions League has been revoked in such a fashion. It puts Utd at a competitive disadvantage in the final (like Masch missing out on the first leg of the Chelsea game, I'm sure there are many other examples across various teams) and it is a shame that he will miss the final (like it was a travesty in some ways that Keane missed the final in 99, I'm sure there are other similar scenarios like that) - but if this card were to be rescinded, it would give Utd an advantage that is highly questionable.

kida

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Within the current rulebook though, poor decisions like that will be repeated ad nauseum. Challenging and reversing one individual decision will not ensure that the next crucial refereeing blunder before the end of this season is fixed. Last night's incident was a matter of interpretation, as was the Gomes incident. They are both tight decisions, on which people fail to reach a universal consensus even after viewing them from numerous times from loads of different camera angles. In both cases a ref is forced to make an instant judgement call from the one viewing. What needs to be changed is that - the ignorance of available technology to have a rugby style video ref.

But then, if you're going to not do that and instead keep things as they are there needs to be a consistency within the current framework. As such, to rescind a non clear cut dismissal like last night's just because they player involved may miss a final doesn't make sense. As far as I am aware, no other decision by a ref in this year's Champions League has been revoked in such a fashion. It puts Utd at a competitive disadvantage in the final (like Masch missing out on the first leg of the Chelsea game, I'm sure there are many other examples across various teams) and it is a shame that he will miss the final (like it was a travesty in some ways that Keane missed the final in 99, I'm sure there are other similar scenarios like that) - but if this card were to be rescinded, it would give Utd an advantage that is highly questionable.

Was Gomes yellow card rescinded when webb admitted the error?

If the referree admits he made an incorrect decision this needs to be adhered to in the same manner that it would be ahdered to if he doesn't. From what I have read this morning the referee in CL games review major decisions with the 4th official and I am sure this incident will be looked at.

Utd cannot challenge it, the referee has to decide if he thinks he was correct.

Apparently this same referree in an Italian league game changed a red into a yellow when he realised he had made an error.

Mitch Connor

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Within the current rulebook though, poor decisions like that will be repeated ad nauseum. Challenging and reversing one individual decision will not ensure that the next crucial refereeing blunder before the end of this season is fixed. Last night's incident was a matter of interpretation, as was the Gomes incident. They are both tight decisions, on which people fail to reach a universal consensus even after viewing them from numerous times from loads of different camera angles. In both cases a ref is forced to make an instant judgement call from the one viewing. What needs to be changed is that - the ignorance of available technology to have a rugby style video ref.

But then, if you're going to not do that and instead keep things as they are there needs to be a consistency within the current framework. As such, to rescind a non clear cut dismissal like last night's just because they player involved may miss a final doesn't make sense. As far as I am aware, no other decision by a ref in this year's Champions League has been revoked in such a fashion. It puts Utd at a competitive disadvantage in the final (like Masch missing out on the first leg of the Chelsea game, I'm sure there are many other examples across various teams) and it is a shame that he will miss the final (like it was a travesty in some ways that Keane missed the final in 99, I'm sure there are other similar scenarios like that) - but if this card were to be rescinded, it would give Utd an advantage that is highly questionable.

Good points, but if the ref were to review the incident and admit he got it wrong (i believe that he did) I don't think it would be fair on Fletcher, or any player in that situation, to miss the final for a poor call that the ref admited was such.

Yes, there is the obvious sentimental argument that is being used, with regards to it being the final he misses as opposed to a semi, but that is just the way it is. Had that been the semi-final first leg last night, i don't think people would particularly care - even if they did think it was a bad call. It is the simple fact that he will miss the final for a poor call that annoys some people.

Maybe the best thing that could come out of this, and possibly the only good thing that could come out of it, is that Uefa might put an appeals process together, for Red cards, for next season on.

I think it is a disgrace that a refs decision can not be appealed, yet Uefa can revisit incidents the ref didn't make a call on, and retrospectively ban people after the game. The ref is always right, unless he is wrong - but ssssssssshhhhhhh.

Dave!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/europe/8035053.stm

Fletcher red card to stand - Uefa


boooooooooooooo

deisedevil

kida wrote: »

Was Gomes yellow card rescinded when webb admitted the error?

If the referree admits he made an incorrect decision this needs to be adhered to in the same manner that it would be ahdered to if he doesn't. From what I have read this morning the referee in CL games review major decisions with the 4th official and I am sure this incident will be looked at.

Utd cannot challenge it, the referee has to decide if he thinks he was correct.

Apparently this same referree in an Italian league game changed a red into a yellow when he realised he had made an error.

That's good to hear, glimmer of hope for Fletch if that's the case.

Nalz

Skysports wrote:

Uefa - Fletcher red stands
United midfielder out of UEFA Champions League final


Manchester United have been told that Darren Fletcher's UEFA Champions League red card will not be overturned.

The Red Devils midfielder was dismissed 15 minutes from time in Tuesday night's 4-1 aggregate victory over Arsenal in the semi-final second leg at Emirates Stadium, ruling him out of the final in Rome later this month.

Replays showed that the Scotland international had touched the ball before bringing down Cesc Fabregas in the area but referee Roberto Rosetti had no hesitation in sending a downcast Fletcher from the field.

Uefa has now confirmed that the only grounds for an appeal against the decision would be if there was a case of mistaken identity, meaning Fletcher is certain to miss out on the showpiece against either Chelsea or Barcelona.

Uefa head of communications Rob Faulkner said: "Manchester United have the right to file a protest within 24 hours of the match, however a protest against a caution or sending off is only admissible if the referee's error was to mistake the identity of the player."
Distraught

United boss Sir Alex Ferguson admitted after the game that he hoped referee Rosetti would admit his mistake, but was already resigned to being without Fletcher for the final.

Ferguson said: "He's (Fletcher) disappointed and he should be disappointed. He's one of the most honest players in the game and to miss the final, it's a tragedy. He was distraught.

"In respect to the referee in this situation he might look at it himself without anyone asking him.

"We shouldn't ask him. He's competent and fair enough to look at it himself possibly. Apparently, you can't appeal and if that's the case it's disappointing for the boy."

http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528,11095_5288096,00.html

Mitch Connor

Dave! wrote: »

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/europe/8035053.stm

Fletcher red card to stand - Uefa


boooooooooooooo

Yeah, no appeal can be made, but that does not mean (or doesn't clarify that it means) the decision can not be overturned by the ref. An appeal, to me, would indicate a formal procedure. While that may not be possible, it might be possible for the ref, when reviewing the game with the 4th official, to admit a mistake and recommend himself for the card to be rescinded. Of course, it could also mean the card stands no matter what, but a clarification that we can not appeal is not the same thing, imo.

kida

Could the Court of Arbitration for Sport be used? Heard this mentioned on the radio? Surely every disciplinary action needs to have an appeals process. This could be the grounds used.

Boggles

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

But ultimately, Giles' suggestion would result in fairer treatment of players like Fletcher in last night's scenario - where the player is making an honest effort to get the ball and is unlucky to commit a foul (and it was a foul imo, contact before he touches the ball, and impeding the attacker's opportunity to go for the ball after the touch).

In that situation VDS would have made no effort to save the peno or if Van Persie had a mean streak in him he could have missed on purpose.

Both scenarios would make a mockery of the game.

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

They are both tight decisions, on which people fail to reach a universal consensus even after viewing them from numerous times from loads of different camera angles. In both cases a ref is forced to make an instant judgement call from the one viewing. What needs to be changed is that - the ignorance of available technology to have a rugby style video ref.

Video suits Rugby perfectly, fine margins of over the line or not and 15 bodies piled on top of the ball call for such technology, also the down time suits such a physical game.

Football simply doesn't need this during the course of a game, in fact football does use technology to review incidents but after the game. Which I think it is perfectly sound, it is Champions League rules that determine Fletchers case can't be reviewed, something that is due to change next year as far as I am aware.

We can all agree Uniteds 3rd goal last night was magical, counter attacking football at it's finest, what you are suggesting could limit such play as managers take advantage of white flags or whatever video challenges you propose.

Football is not perfect, but fúck tis not half bad either.

Keep Vid Refs well away from the game we all love and leave it to games it suits like tennis, cricket and egg chasing.

Mitch Connor

Sully wrote: »

Uefa pretty much said it wont be overturned, even if the ref requests it. Unless its a mistaken identity which they cant see how it would be.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/europe/8035053.stm

Shame really. The system clearly isnt working and needs to be fixed.

That is not what Uefa have said, unless you can point out where I have missed it. They have said United can not appeal against the decision. Now, it may be the case that they also mean the ref can't make it known to them that he feels he made a mistake and have the card rescinded, but Uefa have not specifically said that.

Boggles

Absoutely 0% chance Red card will be overturned.

The Ref can only admit to one mistake and that is mistaken Identity.

He can admit everything else he wants but it will not be taken into consideration.

Mitch Connor

kida wrote: »

Could the Court of Arbitration for Sport be used? Heard this mentioned on the radio? Surely every disciplinary action needs to have an appeals process. This could be the grounds used.

Personally, i wouldn't like United to go this route. If there is no process for appeal, and the ref can't review it and ammend it after the fact, then I would leave it at that and move on and let the matter die. Going to the CAS over a red card seems way over the top and would go against the rules United agreed to abide by when entering the competition. If the red can be gotten rid of, within the rules already laid out, then great. But I wouldn't go further.

I do think this situation (appealing red cards) should be looked at for future seasons.

BaZmO*

Mitch Connor wrote: »

Yes, there is the obvious sentimental argument that is being used, with regards to it being the final he misses as opposed to a semi, but that is just the way it is. Had that been the semi-final first leg last night, i don't think people would particularly care - even if they did think it was a bad call. It is the simple fact that he will miss the final for a poor call that annoys some people.

You're stating the obvious there. Of course the only reason why people and annoyed/disappointed at the sit-ee-ayshun is because he'll miss the final.

Nalz

Boggles wrote: »

Absoutely 0% chance Red card will be overturned.

The Ref can only admit to one mistake and that is mistaken Identity.

He can admit everything else he wants but it will not be taken into consideration.

Thats weally weally Silly I think

Sully

Mitch Connor wrote: »

That is not what Uefa have said, unless you can point out where I have missed it. They have said United can not appeal against the decision. Now, it may be the case that they also mean the ref can't make it known to them that he feels he made a mistake and have the card rescinded, but Uefa have not specifically said that.

Third paragraph..

Uefa has confirmed that no appeal can be made against the decision, no matter what the referee says in his report.

There was speculation that if the ref claimed he made a mistake, it would be reversed. But Uefa are saying it will only be reversed if its a case of mistaken ID..

Manchester United have the right to protest the decision within 24 hours of the match," said a Uefa spokesman.

"However, the protest is only admissible if the referee made an error and mistakenly identified and cautioned or sent off the wrong player.

"There cannot be an appeal against a factual decision taken by the referee and there is nothing to indicate that the referee made a mistake in identifying Fletcher as the player he penalised last night."

LuckyLloyd

Boggles wrote: »

In that situation VDS would have made no effort to save the peno or if Van Persie had a mean streak in him he could have missed on purpose.

Both scenarios would make a mockery of the game.

'Mockery'? Nah, don't agree with that. Might bring an interesting new strategic element to the table - nothing wrong with that.

Boggles wrote: »

Video suits Rugby perfectly, fine margins of over the line or not and 15 bodies piled on top of the ball call for such technology, also the down time suits such a physical game.

Football simply doesn't need this during the course of a game, in fact football does use technology to review incidents but after the game. Which I think it is perfectly sound, it is Champions League rules that determine Fletchers case can't be reviewed, something that is due to change next year as far as I am aware.

wat

There are tons of bad calls across Europe every season that are clearly shown as such by the first replay you see. Football is crying out for ways of improving the accuracy of refereeing decisions. Saying 'oh well, video review takes place after the fact' is irrelevant, as such review fails change the result that has been adversely affected by poor decisions.

Boggles wrote: »

We can all agree Uniteds 3rd goal last night was magical, counter attacking football at it's finest, what you are suggesting could limit such play as managers take advantage of white flags or whatever video challenges you propose.

It was a good goal. Nothing I have ever suggested would have provided Wenger with an opportunity to stop that passage of play.

Boggles wrote: »

Football is not perfect, but fúck tis not half bad either.

Keep Vid Refs well away from the game we all love and leave it to games it suits like tennis, cricket and egg chasing.

football isn't half bad != don't dare try to improve it

The point is that video refereeing would suit football very well, and significantly improve increase it's fairness.

L'prof

deisedevil wrote: »

Imagine what people would be saying about him if he had just left him go clear through.

30 minutes left with Arsenal needing 5 goals??? Absolutely nothing!!! Point is the tackle was unneccessary, he was the last man back...could have kept the pressure on Fabregas, who probably would have missed the way the tie was going!

Great tackle, but I honestly believe whether you get the ball or not it's too risky to slide in inside the penalty area when you're the last man back!

Boggles

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

'Mockery'? Nah, don't agree with that. Might bring an interesting new strategic element to the table - nothing wrong with that.

VDS not making an effort to save a peno would not make a mockery of the game?

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

The point is that video refereeing would suit football very well, and significantly improve increase it's fairness.

It would exploit the game in my opinion and dull the edge of a game which at times is the most exciting thing on the planet.

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

It was a good goal. Nothing I have ever suggested would have provided Wenger with an opportunity to stop that passage of play.

I used it as an example.

What if United won the ball in their own box with a tough but 100% legit tackle, oppositon question it and play comes to a halt. No cracking goal.

LuckyLloyd

Boggles wrote: »

VDS not making an effort to save a peno would not make a mockery of the game?

No more than fielding a deliberately weakened team for a deprioritzed cup competition. It would simply be a strategic decision to emphasize (or not) a potential game or play in a game for the benefit of the team's bigger picture outlook.

SlickRic

ShooterSF wrote: »

If only I could go back in time and quote that. Not to you specifically but non-United fans going mental in a past match thread.

i know. and at the end of that other match day thread, personally, i acknowledged that it was just a frustratingly bad decision that went your way.

and at the end of the day fletcher got unlucky last night with the straight red as a result of another frustratingly bad decision.

unfortunately, we've got to take the good decisions as well as the bad until 'modern' football catches up with the modern world, as someone else alluded to.

LuckyLloyd

Boggles wrote: »

What if United won the ball in their own box with a tough but 100% legit tackle, oppositon question it and play comes to a halt. No cracking goal.

Is the whole point of the flag system. The coach throws a flag onto the pitch so that it can be reviewed, and the referee comes back to that at the next stoppage of play. So, Wenger could have tried to prevent the breakaway with a hopeful type of challenge (in the hypotetical where the passage began with such a tackle), but after the goal is scored, his challenge is quickly dismissed and play resumes with an Arsenal kickoff - them a goal and a challenge down.

Boggles

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

No more than fielding a deliberately weakened team for a deprioritzed cup competition. It would simply be a strategic decision to emphasize (or not) a potential game or play in a game for the benefit of the team's bigger picture outlook.

You can't compare team selection with what actually goes on in the 90 minutes of play, not saving a peno on purpose is cheating, blantent disregard for the game.

If a scenario popped up like this season that Liverpool were 4-1 up on United, Gerrard was taken down by Vidic in the box, Gerrard misses the penalty because it benefits his team more, because Vidic misses 2 games.

Thats exploiting rules. Giving a player the power to make a decision like that is not good for any game.

Boggles

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Is the whole point of the flag system. The coach throws a flag onto the pitch so that it can be reviewed, and the referee comes back to that at the next stoppage of play. So, Wenger could have tried to prevent the breakaway with a hopeful type of challenge (in the hypotetical where the passage began with such a tackle), but after the goal is scored, his challenge is quickly dismissed and play resumes with an Arsenal kickoff - them a goal and a challenge down.

What if it were a bad challenge?

Goal ruled out and penalty awarded?

What makes you think it would be a quick decision, some of those Rugby decisions can reach 3 minutes plus.

Again it comes down to the opinion of one man infront of a telly, like the decision last night has many split on here, doesn't necessarily mean it would be the right decision.

deisedevil

jasonorr wrote: »

30 minutes left with Arsenal needing 5 goals??? Absolutely nothing!!! Point is the tackle was unneccessary, he was the last man back...could have kept the pressure on Fabregas, who probably would have missed the way the tie was going!

Great tackle, but I honestly believe whether you get the ball or not it's too risky to slide in inside the penalty area when you're the last man back!

Out of the commentary, after match analysis, papers today, sky sports, bbc sports and here on boards, basically anything I have read or heard you are the only one who is saying that Fletcher was wrong to do what he did.

How can you turn around and say that a player who trains every day to do everything not to concede goals is so wrong when he makes a split second decision to take a clean tackle in the box to save a goal. There's no way he would have had the time to weigh up the possible outcomes of the decision and what it might mean if the ref made a mistake. He did what he's programmed to do and within the rules, that's not a poor decision on his part and he should be commended for it not belittled!

Draupnir

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Is the whole point of the flag system. The coach throws a flag onto the pitch so that it can be reviewed, and the referee comes back to that at the next stoppage of play. So, Wenger could have tried to prevent the breakaway with a hopeful type of challenge (in the hypotetical where the passage began with such a tackle), but after the goal is scored, his challenge is quickly dismissed and play resumes with an Arsenal kickoff - them a goal and a challenge down.

If this ever happens, if anyone ever introduces flags for managers to throw on pitches, I will give up on football completely. It's bad enough as it is.

Imagine the mayhem the first time a manager throws the flag on the pitch and hits Ronaldo or Drogba by accident, they'll roll half way across the pitch in agony!

L'prof

deisedevil wrote: »

Out of the commentary, after match analysis, papers today, sky sports, bbc sports and here on boards, basically anything I have read or heard you are the only one who is saying that Fletcher was wrong to do what he did.

How can you turn around and say that a player who trains every day to do everything not to concede goals is so wrong when he makes a split second decision to take a clean tackle in the box to save a goal. There's no way he would have had the time to weigh up the possible outcomes of the decision and what it might mean if the ref made a mistake. He did what he's programmed to do and within the rules, that's not a poor decision on his part and he should be commended for it not belittled!

I make my mind up for myself, I'm not influenced by what other people say, think, write.

I didn't say he was wrong, just that it didn't make any sense at all and as a the last man back, sticking his leg accross Fabregas to win the ball he had to know there was a strong possibility he would concede a penalty and be sent off! The game was over, it didn't make any sense. He took a risk and it blew up in his face.

If there was an appeal system, the red card would probably be recinded. Maybe the ref will say he made a mistake, but probably not!

I just think that sliding in on a player in the box is dangerous, whether it comes off or not.

monkey9

Boggles wrote: »

If the Ref is not 100% sure, he can't give the peno. Ref fúcked up, 2 quick with the decision, linesman not consulted or copped out.

Tell that to Howard Webb!!

Boggles

jasonorr wrote: »

I just think that sliding in on a player in the box is dangerous, whether it comes off or not.

Of course it is dangerous, mistimed and it is a peno and a possible sending off.

Personally I prefer Fletcher to miss the final then him not to make the effort to provent a goal, 5-0, 10-0, doesn't matter.

L'prof

Boggles wrote: »

Of course it is dangerous, mistimed and it is a peno and a possible sending off.

Personally I prefer Fletcher to miss the final then him not to make the effort to provent a goal, 5-0, 10-0, doesn't matter.

Right :rolleyes:

Boggles

jasonorr wrote: »

Right :rolleyes:

Yes, I personally don't like players that can switch on/off determination or their winning mentality.

Fair enough you do by the sounds of it.

Fletchers tackle last night sums up United the past 15-20 years, never give an inch, its what makes them the best team on the planet.

Maybe you can't understand that, you don't have to, tis just my opinoin.

monkey9

I switched off after the second goal, but did turn it back on to see Utd's third goal which is a contender for goal of the season. Absolutely brilliant goal. It was football at it's most simple and pure best!!

Feel sorry for Fletcher! It was definately a red card once the ref gave the peno, but obviously it was no peno. It's a joke that he's gonna miss the final. Players should only miss finals for violent conduct and such like, not a build up of yellows. As a neutral (not that i'll be now that Utd are in it, c'mon Barca!!), you want to see teams at full strength go for it.

This professional foul thing is another example of a rule being invented that has lost it's way. It was brought in as a punishment for deliberately bringing down a player who's through on goal and the the attacking team ending up getting only a free kick and being at a disadvantage. I just cannot understand why a player is sent off when a penalty has been given. It doesn't make sense. It's a double punishment. A card should only be produced depending on the foul, the same way as if the tackle occured in the centre circle.

And why are people comparing the tackle to Solskjars?? It was nothing like it. Fletcher didn't martyr himself. Febregas was through on goal and Fletcher attempted to win the ball, which he did!!

L'prof

Boggles wrote: »

Yes, I personally don't like players that can switch on/off determination or their winning mentality.

Fair enough you do by the sounds of it.

Fletchers tackle last night sums up United the past 15-20 years, never give an inch, its what makes them the best team on the planet.

Maybe you can't understand that, you don't have to, tis just my opinoin.

I just don't understand anybody lunging in in the box is all. Referee is always much more likely to give it against you.

As for best team on the planet, win the double again this season and I'll concede that.

Mitch Connor

Sully wrote: »

Third paragraph..



There was speculation that if the ref claimed he made a mistake, it would be reversed. But Uefa are saying it will only be reversed if its a case of mistaken ID..

Again, show me where UEFA say that, not BBC/Sky Sports. Uefa have not said that, unless both news organizations chose to leave that vital part of the quote out.

deisedevil

jasonorr wrote: »

I just don't understand anybody lunging in in the box is all. Referee is always much more likely to give it against you.

As for best team on the planet, win the double again this season and I'll concede that.

We haven't done enough already no?

EPL, CL and World not good enough for ya? Has to be done twice in a row or you can't claim to be No. 1? So no ones the best until they do it twice?

That sounds like a wind up in fairness!

deisedevil

Mitch Connor wrote: »

Again, show me where UEFA say that, not BBC/Sky Sports. Uefa have not said that, unless both news organizations chose to leave that vital part of the quote out.

Your right there, I think I said that on the Man Utd thread, BBC made that assumption but there is no quote from UEFA to confirm that.
Could still be a case of being down of not being allowed appeal the red but Ref himself can still change decision in his match report on his own and I'd say that's exactly the reason why fergie made his comments afterwards. We'll see anyways but at this stage I wouldn't hold my breath.

L'prof

deisedevil wrote: »

We haven't done enough already no?

EPL, CL and World not good enough for ya? Has to be done twice in a row or you can't claim to be No. 1? So no ones the best until they do it twice?

That sounds like a wind up in fairness!

If you want to include friendlies, then by all means do!

Personally, I think Barcelona are a better team at the moment, so beat them (if they get past Chelsea of course) and there can be no doubt I suppose!

LuckyLloyd

Boggles wrote: »

You can't compare team selection with what actually goes on in the 90 minutes of play, not saving a peno on purpose is cheating, blantent disregard for the game.

If a scenario popped up like this season that Liverpool were 4-1 up on United, Gerrard was taken down by Vidic in the box, Gerrard misses the penalty because it benefits his team more, because Vidic misses 2 games.

Thats exploiting rules. Giving a player the power to make a decision like that is not good for any game.

Why would it be 'cheating'? It would be manipulating the rules for the advantage of your team. Your psychological problem with it seems to stem from the idea that players wouldn't be honestly trying their hardest to score or prevent a score, because there is a bigger potential strategic payoff available to them. Again, how is that different from not selecting your strongest eleven players for a particular game because you do not feel it as important as other games?

Boggles wrote: »

What if it were a bad challenge?

Goal ruled out and penalty awarded?

What makes you think it would be a quick decision, some of those Rugby decisions can reach 3 minutes plus.

Again it comes down to the opinion of one man infront of a telly, like the decision last night has many split on here, doesn't necessarily mean it would be the right decision.

A video review will not always be 100% accurate. But it allow for a lot more accuracy in respect of crucial decisions a lot more of the time. So what if it took three minutes? How long does it take anyway between a penalty being awarded, the waving away of pointless protests, etc. The idea that:

A) football matches go off seamlessly with no interruptions;
there aren't consistent stoppages in the aftermath of controversial decisions;

is misfounded. The difference is that rather than pointless protests that achieve nothing, we would be spending the time wasted having a review that may actually reverse a poor decision. If you look at the relationship between officials and players in sports that have introduced video review and the higher levels of communication and mutual respect, and compare it to the current status quo in soccer - surely one has to conclude that we need to be moving soccer from where it is to where they are?

Addressing last night's incident directly. This is what I would imagine happening under a challenge system (and with an increased flexibility with the laws of the game):

- Fletcher makes the challenge on Fabregas, ref makes that same initial decision;
- Ferguson throws a challenge flag;
- We go to a 2 - 3 minute review;
- Video ref communicates that player made contact before and after he touched the ball and in doing so fouled the attacker within the penalty box;
- However, he notes that the defender made a genuine attempt to play the ball and did get a touch;
- As such, it is a penalty, but most certainly not a red card;

Fletcher probably gets to start the Champions league final and Arsenal get awarded a probable penalty. Whammo, everyone is happier.

Smegball

Personally I think the introduction of in game video reviews would take away from the drama and spectacle which makes football great, but also more importantly would take away some potential debates like last nights tackle or Gomes tackle on Carrick