Chelsea vs Arsenal, 12:45, BT Sport

TimeToShine

This is depressing. I'm turning it off. And I've only been watching for 5 minutes

un-f*cking real.

Shambolic from the arsenal and "referee".

GotTheTshirt

Quazzie wrote: »

It was going wide so how is it a red?

Lol, it was a diving save. That's a red all day . Obv sending off the wrong player was a cock up but no denying that ox should have got a red.

copacetic

Quazzie wrote: »

It was going wide so how is it a red?

Until it goes wide it's a goalscoring opportunity.

superfurry1

I think arsenal should walk off the pitch. Gibbs would have been a game changer :P

greendom

witnessmenow wrote: »

its not like it was going out for a throw, it was a deliberate attempt to prevent a goal. its a red all day long

no its denying a goal scoring opportunity - he denied a goal kick opportunity!

Nuri Sahin

Only just tuning in now.. o_0

Quazzie

fullstop wrote: »

It was going maybe 6 inches wide before he touched it. You can't expect an official to call that unless they're in a direct line with the path of the ball. He knew when he did it that it was a red.

You said it was clearly a red. It wasn't even if he sent off Ox it would've been a wrong call as it was going wide. It would've been an understandable call by the ref based on an assumption, but the assumption would be wrong and the red was the wrong decision.

Far from "clearly" as you put it.

GavRedKing

Matic and Luiz has to be our CM pairing for every league game

Agueroooo

Blatter wrote: »

I don't think they can do that for decisions like this. I reckon they'll just overturn the Gibbs red card and that'll be that.

That is how the rule will be applied IF the red is overturned.

Arsenal already out of this one so ironically could work out better for Arsenal.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

only half saw rthe incident, so:

It looked like the penalty was not initially given, but only after consultation with the linesman - then is it possible, the linesman's pointed out the wrong person?

Still doesnt explain Marrinier not accepting Chamberlain's confessino...

greendom

copacetic wrote: »

Until it goes wide it's a goalscoring opportunity.

So it was a goal scoring opportunity before he hit the ball?

GavRedKing

Shocking call by Marriner, sending off the wrong player between 4 officials

Duck Soup

I dunno, you pop down the shops for 25 minutes...

Crann na Beatha

This post has been deleted.

fullstop

Quazzie wrote: »

You said it was clearly a red. It wasn't even if he sent off Ox it would've been a wrong call as it was going wide. It would've been an understandable call by the ref based on an assumption, but the assumption would be wrong and the red was the wrong decision.

Far from "clearly" as you put it.

Ah will you get out of it. It's a red card ffs. A shot on goal and the defender dives and handles the ball. How would it not be a red?

daRobot

There's a fairly large racial aspect to this sending off aswell.

GavRedKing

Phoenix wrote: »

We want four we want four

Anything to up the goals for columns

TheFullDuck

shamelessly stolen from reddit

Ref: "Gibbs, you're off!"
Ox: "But ref, it was me!"
Ref: "Shut up Walcott, get on with the game"

Oranage2

Looks like the bus has been subbed on.

Boskowski

just reviewing the red card, wtf is going on? I mean red card all day long but the wrong man sent off?

greendom

fullstop wrote: »

Ah will you get out of it. It's a red card ffs. A shot on goal and the defender dives and handles the ball. How would it not be a red?

It wasn't on goal - it was going wide

ctrl-alt-delete

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

only half saw rthe incident, so:

It looked like the penalty was not initially given, but only after consultation with the linesman - then is it possible, the linesman's pointed out the wrong person?

Still doesnt explain Marrinier not accepting Chamberlain's confessino...

He had already sent Gibbs off at that stage, I doubt he has the power to rescind the red?

Will I Amnt

Quazzie wrote: »

You said it was clearly a red. It wasn't even if he sent off Ox it would've been a wrong call as it was going wide. It would've been an understandable call by the ref based on an assumption, but the assumption would be wrong and the red was the wrong decision.

Far from "clearly" as you put it.

Ox thought it was going in, he attempted to stop a goal.
I can't imagine anybody else will agree with you. As clear as they come.

irishmover

Quazzie wrote: »

You said it was clearly a red. It wasn't even if he sent off Ox it would've been a wrong call as it was going wide. It would've been an understandable call by the ref based on an assumption, but the assumption would be wrong and the red was the wrong decision.

Far from "clearly" as you put it.

For Ox the ball was goal bound, he did not know it was going wide. He deliberately handled the ball to prevent (what he thought) a goal bound ball.

Red all day.

GavRedKing

Jaysus :eek:

Johner

What a save.

Quazzie

fullstop wrote: »

Ah will you get out of it. It's a red card ffs. A shot on goal and the defender dives and handles the ball. How would it not be a red?

But it was going wide. You can't just ignore that fact. If the player took a shot and it was going that far wide that it was going for a throw then would it be a red card?

No. So if it's going wide, it's going wide. It doesn't matter to what degree it was going wide.

As was already stated it wasn't a goalscoring opportunity, it was a goal kick opportunity,.

ctrl-alt-delete

greendom wrote: »

It wasn't on goal - it was going wide

Ox did not know that, he was clearly trying to deny a goalscoring opportunity and he should have been sent off for it.

Big Pussy Bonpensiero

Arsenal will get the red rescinded and Ox won't get a ban. Silver lining and all that.

Agueroooo

Cazorla is your ultimate luxury player.

rips averaged teams a new on week-in-week out, but against any team with a bit of steel and class kinda goes missing.

citytillidie

Was never giving it until he was surrounded by Chelsea players

greendom

Can we try and string just 3 passes together maybe... perhaps ?

fullstop

Will I Amnt wrote: »

Ox thought it was going in, he attempted to stop a goal.
I can't imagine anybody else will agree with you. As clear as they come.

The only 2 people arguing that it wasn't a red are Arsenal fans, hardly a coincidence.

Amirani

daRobot wrote: »

There's a fairly large racial aspect to this sending off aswell.

Not necessarily.

copacetic

daRobot wrote: »

There's a fairly large racial aspect to this sending off aswell.

No, really?

GavRedKing

WTF is Ivanovic doing that for :rolleyes:

Quazzie

citytillidie wrote: »

Was never giving it until he was surrounded by Chelsea players

Maybe he was reminded who was paying his wages?

Amirani

citytillidie wrote: »

Was never giving it until he was surrounded by Chelsea players

Or until the assistant ref had a word with him?

prettyboy81

Good win for CFC & week off until next fixture.

bad2dabone

TheFullDuck wrote: »

shamelessly stolen from reddit

Ref: "Gibbs, you're off!"
Ox: "But ref, it was me!"
Ref: "Shut up Walcott, get on with the game"

Andre Marriner's just been picked to Ref the final of the Africa Cup of Nations too!

Boskowski

daRobot wrote: »

There's a fairly large racial aspect to this sending off aswell.

Thats the first thing that came into my mind. 'Sure they all look the same':pac:
But really there isn't, don't make something out of nothing.

Fudge You

greendom wrote: »

Can we try and string just 3 passes together maybe... perhaps ?

Em.... No!!!!!

jonneymendoza

NiallSparky wrote: »

Or until the assistant ref had a word with him?

The assistant did not raise his flag

Quazzie

NiallSparky wrote: »

Or until the assistant ref had a word with him?

Linesman made no indiciation of a penalty. He was swayed by the players

GavRedKing

Quazzie wrote: »

Maybe he was reminded who was paying his wages?

LOL

It was a penalty all day long

fullstop

Quazzie wrote: »

Maybe he was reminded who was paying his wages?

The premier league? Or are you trying to suggest Chelsea are paying the referee?

Blatter

NiallSparky wrote: »

Could they take the point of view that the ref hasn't acted on Oxlade-Chamberlain's offence though?

I don't think so because he did technically act on the actual offense, just selected the wrong player!

I also don't ever remember a retrospective decision based on an incident that wasn't violent conduct/bringing the game into disripute?

If a player handles the ball on the goal line with clear deliberate intent and gets away with it, they never get punished afterwards. Or at least I've never seen it anyway.

citytillidie

NiallSparky wrote: »

Or until the assistant ref had a word with him?

Assistant did not even raise his flag for it

greendom

ctrl-alt-delete wrote: »

Ox did not know that, he was clearly trying to deny a goalscoring opportunity and he should have been sent off for it.

so is the wording

"denying what the offending player believes to be a goalscoring opportunity"

or

"denying a clear goal scoring opportunity"