Aston Villa -V- Man United - 28th Feb

Holsten

Saw it there again, the minute the peno was given, Martin O'Neil "He must be off".

Hate that.

JPA

Holsten wrote: »

Saw it there again, the minute the peno was given, Martin O'Neil "He must be off".

Hate that.

Why?

Nalz

last man and pulling to the grown plus little trip = blatant penalty and 100% red card sending off offense.

Best team won however.

Nalz

OPENROAD wrote: »

Might have had a very different match had Vidic been rightly sent off, have to feel for Villa.

Could argue Collins should have seen red for last man tackle too, but that was after the Vidic tackle so............

I felt for Villa today, they're tough to crack at the back and good counter attacking side. Need someone better in there than Petrov imo

JPA

Trilla wrote: »

Could argue Collins should have seen red for last man tackle too, but that was after the Vidic tackle so............

I felt for Villa today, they're tough to crack at the back and good counter attacking side. Need someone better in there than Petrov imo

Collins on Owen was hardly an obvious goal scoring opportunity but he did get a yellow, bizarrely Vidic didn't even get that for the incident.

kryogen

JPA wrote: »

Collins on Owen was hardly an obvious goal scoring opportunity but he did get a yellow, bizarrely Vidic didn't even get that for the incident.

well, Collins was last man back and Owen was clean through so technically he denied him a clear goalscoring opportunity

bizarre refereeing all day tbh

JPA

kryogen wrote: »

well, Collins was last man back and Owen was clean through so technically he denied him a clear goalscoring opportunity

bizarre refereeing all day tbh

No owen was outside the box wide of the goal, he wasn't clean through at all.

kryogen

JPA wrote: »

No owen was outside the box wide of the goal, he wasn't clean through at all.

he was not that wide to be fair, he was within the dimensions of the box about 7 yards outside the box to my memory

and no other defender would have been able to get back in time

he was through one on one whichever way you look at it

Vidic should have gone, but if you will apply the letter of the law so should Collins

Why else was Vidic sent off when he brought Torres down just inside the united half before?

Same thing

Mitch Connor

kryogen wrote: »

he was not that wide to be fair, he was within the dimensions of the box about 7 yards outside the box to my memory

and no other defender would have been able to get back in time

he was through one on one whichever way you look at it

Vidic should have gone, but if you will apply the letter of the law so should Collins

Why else was Vidic sent off when he brought Torres down just inside the united half before?

Same thing

Nah, no way was owen through on goal. By the time he got the ball he would have been around 12 yards from the end line and need a very quick change of directions, Villa players would have been back by then. No way should it have been a red. It isn't simply last man back = red card, the attacking player has to be heading towards the goal, and Owen wasn't.

kippy

People trying to compare the collins and vidic incident are totally off the mark in my opinion. Totally different areas of the pitch, Owens was by no means a goalscoring opportunity from where he was.
The ref bottled it with Vidic, absolutely stonewall red card. Even seeing some United fans defending it is hilarious but expected, there are always a section of fans from any club who will claim black is white out of pure "blinkeredness" but in this case as in many more it completey ridiculous to defend the ref.
It was early in the game, and thats perhaps the only reason (despite it being wrong) that he wasnt sent off in my opinion.

Mitch Connor

kippy wrote: »

People trying to compare the collins and vidic incident are totally off the mark in my opinion. Totally different areas of the pitch, Owens was by no means a goalscoring opportunity from where he was.
The ref bottled it with Vidic, absolutely stonewall red card. Even seeing some United fans defending it is hilarious but expected, there are always a section of fans from any club who will claim black is white out of pure "blinkeredness" but in this case as in many more it completey ridiculous to defend the ref.
It was early in the game, and thats perhaps the only reason (despite it being wrong) that he wasnt sent off in my opinion.

Seriously, what United fans have seriously defended the refs decision to not red card vidic? I haven't seen any, at all.

PHB

In relation to Valencia, Warnock was showing him inside massively, like massively. He was effectively hedging his bets and letting him go inside rather than risk him going onto his right. Valencia pretty mich had to come inside. For him to become a truly world class winger, he needs to add something when he comes inside. Whether that's a shot with his left foot or the killer pass, its needed. More and more defenders like Warnock will just consistantly show him inside as it's a fairly good way to neutralise him.

cournioni

JPA wrote: »

No owen was outside the box wide of the goal, he wasn't clean through at all.

:rolleyes:

Collins denied a goalscoring opportunity, however Vidic didn't as a penalty was given. To flip your logic around a little.

JimsAlterEgo

PHB wrote: »

I think the reason the ref didn't give the red was because he thought Agbonlahor had overrun his touch and it wasn't a clear goal scoring opportunity. How it wasnt a booking though is beyond me.

Totally agree, had he took him on the first run it would have been a red, but his turn back and next touch took him a lot wide. Need to look in detail but I think he would have needed another touch to actually be able to shoot. Shoudl have been a yellow though.

kippy

Mitch Connor wrote: »

Seriously, what United fans have seriously defended the refs decision to not red card vidic? I haven't seen any, at all.

I'm not sure, maybe your not a United fan.........but you did say this:
"are you honestly trying to say agbonlahor would have beaten Kuszczak with a shot? There mere fact Kuszczak was in goal mean it simply can not have been a goal scoring opportunity, hence no red card. I fail to see what the problem is. Villa were lucky to get a penalty out of it. "

Theres been a few more as well.

Headshot

kippy wrote: »

I'm not sure, maybe your not a United fan.........but you did say this:
"are you honestly trying to say agbonlahor would have beaten Kuszczak with a shot? There mere fact Kuszczak was in goal mean it simply can not have been a goal scoring opportunity, hence no red card. I fail to see what the problem is. Villa were lucky to get a penalty out of it. "

Theres been a few more as well.

Lol

Peyton Manning

kippy wrote: »

I'm not sure, maybe your not a United fan.........but you did say this:
"are you honestly trying to say agbonlahor would have beaten Kuszczak with a shot? There mere fact Kuszczak was in goal mean it simply can not have been a goal scoring opportunity, hence no red card. I fail to see what the problem is. Villa were lucky to get a penalty out of it. "

Theres been a few more as well.

Whoooooooooosh

JPA

PORNAPSTER wrote: »

:rolleyes:

Collins denied a goalscoring opportunity, however Vidic didn't as a penalty was given. To flip your logic around a little.

:rolleyes: What? The key word is OBVIOUS goalscoring opportunity. You don't make sense.

SlickRic

PORNAPSTER wrote: »

:rolleyes:

Collins denied a goalscoring opportunity, however Vidic didn't as a penalty was given. To flip your logic around a little.

ludicrous logic.

i'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you're joking or biased.

Nalz

IF Owen runningTowards(villaGoal)
AND Owen has(ball)
AND Collins = lastVillaman
AND Collins naughtyNaughtyBringsDown(Owen)
= SendingOff

It doesnt matter if Owen is on the halfway line, he was denied taking on the keeper and a chance of a clear shot on goal one one.

Vidic should have got the line. So should have Collins. End of

JPA

Trilla wrote: »

IF Owen runningTowards(villaGoal)
AND Owen has(ball)
AND Collins = lastVillaman
AND Collins naughtyNaughtyBringsDown(Owen)
= SendingOff

It doesnt matter if Owen is on the halfway line, he was denied taking on the keeper and a chance of a clear shot on goal one one.

Vidic should have got the line. So should have Collins. End of

Unless you're on a wind up, you don't understand the rules.

Liam O

I might have to see it again but didn't Agbonlahor hit his final touch right into Kusczak's arms? But I said at the time it should've been red and I still feel it probably should've been red.

tbh, sometimes you see refs not give cards early in games to try and let it settle a bit, I think this may be similar.

cournioni

SlickRic wrote: »

ludicrous logic.

i'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you're joking or biased.

I am joking of course, I just find it funny how JPA sees Vidic's tackle as denying a more obvious goalscoring opportunity than Collins' tackle. Owen was clean through on Friedel but for Collins' tackle on him that basically stopped that goalscoring opportunity, and yet he see's Vidic's challenge as denying Agbonlahor a more obvious goalscoring opportunity even though the ball was going away from him when Vidic made his challenge.

It's either a goalscoring opportunity or it isn't. In my opinon both were, and both should have resulted in red cards, the referee bottled it because it was a cup final at Wembley.

Classic case of tinted specs. Fact is, 11 vs. 11, Villa couldn't match United on the pitch yesterday and there is some serious straw clutching going on here from some Villa fans and some ABU's.

cournioni

JPA wrote: »

Unless you're on a wind up, you don't understand the rules.

I'd be interested in hearing your version of the rules so...

messrs

everyone can aruge here as long as the like whether phil dowd made the right or wrong decision on vidic, its never going to change the fact - he didnt red card vidic - and man u won
end of storey - deal with it

SlickRic

PORNAPSTER wrote: »

Owen was clean through

yes, but he had a long way to turn and go before having a definite clear goalscoring opportunity.

PORNAPSTER wrote: »

It's either a goalscoring opportunity or it isn't. In my opinon both were, and both should have resulted in red cards, the referee bottled it because it was a cup final at Wembley.

bullcr*p.

Collins' was a yellow.

Utd were definitely the better the team on the day, but there's a mile of difference between the opportunity Owen had and the one Gabby had. one was definitely resulting in a shot on goal, the other would probably have resulted in a cross.

CSF

Where can I purchase a set of these lovely red goggles?

cournioni

SlickRic wrote: »

yes, but he had a long way to turn and go before having a definite clear goalscoring opportunity.



bullcr*p.

Collins' was a yellow.

Utd were definitely the better the team on the day, but there's a mile of difference between the opportunity Owen had and the one Gabby had. one was definitely resulting in a shot on goal, the other would probably have resulted in a cross.

I'm sorry, there is no way I am going to agree with you there. Both were clear goalscoring opportunities and both should have resulted in red cards. I'm glad they didn't to be honest, no one likes to see players sent off.

You are completely deluded if you think that Owens run would have only resulted in a cross. He was clean through and the angle he was at was actually not much different to that of Agbonlahor's, except for the fact that Owen had control of the ball.

SlickRic

PORNAPSTER wrote: »

You are completely deluded if you think that Owens run would have only resulted in a cross. He was clean through and the angle he was at was actually not much different to that of Agbonlahor's, except for the fact that Owen had control of the ball.

Owen was 25 yards out at an angle of 45 degrees to the goal, and had just touched the ball to the side of the area.

Gabby was in the area no more than 10 yards out.

there's a world of difference.

it doesn't matter a jot, so i've no idea why you insist they were the same.

just say you got fortunate and be done with it, rather than deflecting to an incident that was a clear yellow. it's ok. nobody will think less of you if you admit utd were a little fortunate with refereeing decisions. it doesn't mean utd didn't deserve it thereafter.

because as i say, it doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things. the trophy is in the cabinet.

JPA

PORNAPSTER wrote: »

I am joking of course, I just find it funny how JPA sees Vidic's tackle as denying a more obvious goalscoring opportunity than Collins' tackle. Owen was clean through on Friedel but for Collins' tackle on him that basically stopped that goalscoring opportunity, and yet he see's Vidic's challenge as denying Agbonlahor a more obvious goalscoring opportunity even though the ball was going away from him when Vidic made his challenge.

It's either a goalscoring opportunity or it isn't. In my opinon both were, and both should have resulted in red cards, the referee bottled it because it was a cup final at Wembley.

Classic case of tinted specs. Fact is, 11 vs. 11, Villa couldn't match United on the pitch yesterday and there is some serious straw clutching going on here from some Villa fans and some ABU's.

I hate these arguments because the game is lost and that won't change.
But Owen was not heading for goal so that is why it was just a yellow. Agbonlahor being in the box was obviously a better chance to score.
Why Vidic got away without even a yellow is still unknown.

Nalz

JPA wrote: »

Unless you're on a wind up, you don't understand the rules.

Explain to me where I got it wrong then. Don't just say Owen wasn't going in on goal and running away/side of the goal/box. That wasn't specified in my post that you quoted because I thought Owen was on route to goal.

Also there is no rules as such, they are laws of the game.

From what I remember if he had beaten Collins "tackle" then he would have ended up one on one with the keeper in the penalty area seconds after that.

As said it doesn't matter now as the game has finished, but I'd like to know where you think I'm going wrong in my post.

thanks

Mitch Connor

Trilla wrote: »

Explain to me where I got it wrong then. Don't just say Owen wasn't going in on goal and running away/side of the goal/box. That wasn't specified in my post that you quoted because I thought Owen was on route to goal.

Also there is no rules as such, they are laws of the game.

From what I remember if he had beaten Collins "tackle" then he would have ended up one on one with the keeper in the penalty area seconds after that.

As said it doesn't matter now as the game has finished, but I'd like to know where you think I'm going wrong in my post.

thanks

At the time of the tackle, Owen was not moving towards the goal. it is that simple. He was headed down the side of the pitch, outside the box. Maybe he would have gotten in a shot at goal, but not without changing direction.

JPA

Trilla wrote: »

Explain to me where I got it wrong then. Don't just say Owen wasn't going in on goal and running away/side of the goal/box. That wasn't specified in my post that you quoted because I thought Owen was on route to goal.

Also there is no rules as such, they are laws of the game.

From what I remember if he had beaten Collins "tackle" then he would have ended up one on one with the keeper in the penalty area seconds after that.

As said it doesn't matter now as the game has finished, but I'd like to know where you think I'm going wrong in my post.

thanks

Because Owen was wide of the goal it is not an obvious goal scoring opportunity, he wasn't heading for the goal, he was straight for the byline. Now you can say he would have turned and headed towards goal but it is not the referees job to interpret how things might have happened, just how things did happen and Owen was not in an obvious goal scoring position when he was fouled.

Nalz

JPA wrote: »

Because Owen was wide of the goal it is not an obvious goal scoring opportunity, he wasn't heading for the goal, he was straight for the byline. Now you can say he would have turned and headed towards goal but it is not the referees job to interpret how things might have happened, just how things did happen and Owen was not in an obvious goal scoring position when he was fouled.

Ok if this is the case then ok. I seem to remember Owen running towards the goal, I will look at it again. If I'm wrong apologies. At the time it looked like

However with this logic, and going slightly Off topic here, but lets say for agruement sake Agbonlahor turns his back on goal with the ball (during his incident) then Vidic takes him down, is that a red card?

SantryRed

The most hilarious thing about this argument is that if Vidic did get sent off Owen would probably have been sacrificed to get four at the back.

Peyton Manning

Trilla wrote: »

However with this logic, and going slightly Off topic here, but lets say for agruement sake Agbonlahor turns his back on goal with the ball (during his incident) then Vidic takes him down, is that a red card?

Like he actually did - I see what you've done here

JPA

Archimedez wrote: »

Like he actually did - I see what you've done here

That didn't happen though, he didn't turn his back.

Nalz

Archimedez wrote: »

Like he actually did - I see what you've done here

Did he? Dont think he did. He kinda turned to the side alright but Vidic was pulling away at his shirt.

It is interesting though that if he had have turned away that would be the difference between red and yellow/none.

Peyton Manning

He kind of turned away from his original direction. He was running straight towards goal, then had a poor touch and ended up facing a good bit wide of the goal. Still, I do agree it was an obvious red card, and had Vidic stayed on his feet and got goal side of him after the poor touch, who knows what would have happened.

JimsAlterEgo

IMO - rather that compare with the owen incident yesterday it is more comparible with the Carragher Own incident earlie this season


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BnkTHJsSK1o

ball goes to 6 yard box line

L'prof

Here's Poll's opinion.

SlickRic

jasonorr wrote: »

Here's Poll's opinion.

he should really tell us what the law says then.

then tell us why it wasn't a sending off.

smart arse.

Peyton Manning

jasonorr wrote: »

Here's Poll's opinion.

Graham "3 yellow cards = 1 red" Poll?

Mitch Connor

SlickRic wrote: »

he should really tell us what the law says then.

smart arse.

Really wierd article.

headline says he was right not to give Vidic a red card, but doesn't actually explain that reasoning (really) within the article.

As said on red cafe, Poll would have given him two yellows.

L'prof

SlickRic wrote: »

he should really tell us what the law says then.

then tell us why it wasn't a sending off.

smart arse.

I think he kind of did, that to deny a goalscoring opportunity, the player must be heading towards goal and that there is no mention of last man back in the rules.

JPA

Seems to ignore that the direction Gabby was heading was changed by Vidic pulling the shirt off his back.

L'prof

Archimedez wrote: »

Graham "3 yellow cards = 1 red" Poll?

You can make a mistake in a game but, getting to review an incident multiple times while knowing the rules is a completely different thing!

Doodee

The arguement that he was not denying him a goal scoring opportunity is invalid as Vidic committed 2 fouls, the first was the shirt pulling which started when Abby was through on goal, the second was the outstretched leg to take the player down.

L'prof

JPA wrote: »

Seems to ignore that the direction Gabby was heading was changed by Vidic pulling the shirt off his back.

He didn't, he mentioned that that could be argued but, he still didn't see a red!

SlickRic

jasonorr wrote: »

I think he kind of did, that to deny a goalscoring opportunity, the player must be heading towards goal and that there is no mention of last man back in the rules.

so anyone within 50 yards, facing goal, can, within the laws, be sent off if the refs wants? seen as by his interpretation then, it's completely up to the ref to judge the goalscoring opportunity.

the area gets depressingly grey if that's the case.