Calvert Lewin red card

[chickenrunner]

Again though, this isn't VARs fault. VAR has provided great evidence for the referees to make the correct decision. These are the top referees. If the referees are making incorrect decisions then it is the referees that are the problem, not the technology.

V.A.R. - Video Assistant Referee. VAR isn't technology, VAR is a person, another referee sat in a room. So many decisions in football are subjective that we can have all the technology in the world but absolute consistency and 'correct' decisions will never be achieved because in so many cases they are a matter of opinion.

 

[Paulroddam7]

Over the top of the ball with studs up. Endangering an opponent. Red card.

Probably get rescinded.

 

[GibbosEmpire]

Personally I think a referees judgement should be taken into account and overule the rule. If its not malicious, and the intent isn't there to injure the player, and he just clipped him, personally just have a word, tell him needs to be careful with studs up, next time you're off and give a yellow. Makes a mockery of the game

 

[MickaelDebevePhenomenal]

The level of contact is irrelevant.

If someone threw a punch and missed they’d still be off, they couldn’t argue that they hadn’t actually made contact.

So you think someone trying to retrieve the ball and making minor, accidental contact with his studs up should be a red card? Absolute lunacy.

Throwing a punch is completely different action to trying to slide and gather the ball, that is always violent conduct, a slide tackle often isn't, so that makes ZERO sense.

All the replays and slowing down of incidents is skewing peoples thoughts on what red card offences should be. Minor, accidental contact should never be a red card in football.

 

[MickaelDebevePhenomenal]

Over the top of the ball with studs up. Endangering an opponent. Red card.

Probably get rescinded.

The game is so far removed from what it should be if that tackle is considered endangering an opponent.

 

[sherlock]

So you think someone trying to retrieve the ball and making minor, accidental contact with his studs up should be a red card?

Makes no difference what I think, it’s what the rules say that matters.

 

[MickaelDebevePhenomenal]

Makes no difference what I think, it’s what the rules say that matters.

Which is exactly what I said in my first post. The rules, and referees interpretation of words like excessive force, endangering an opponent etc, are nonsense.

 

[sherlock]

Which is exactly what I said in my first post. The rules, and referees interpretation of words like excessive force, endangering an opponent etc, are nonsense.

This was still a red though under the current laws, so VAR didn’t get it wrong

 

[MickaelDebevePhenomenal]

This was still a red though under the current laws, so VAR didn’t get it wrong

I disagree.

'Dangerous' 'reckless' 'excessive force' etc and all the other red card buzz words are being interpreted as any type of contact.

Its a minor glancing blow with studs up. The rules are nonesense with the people applying them clueless

I never said VAR was wrong. Far from it, if applied correctly I'm fan. What I'm saying is the actual tackle by DCL bares no resemblance to the wording in the rules for what constitutes a red card.

 

[sambaDTR]

Looks like a red to me

Looking at that photo, one person out of eight in the background thought it was a red card!

 

[Paintolerance]

I don't think it was reckless. It certainly was not dangerous and there was no excessive force. Even if he had made full contact it wouldn't have hurt...his foot was just hanging there, he hardly stamped it in to the tackle.

Ridiculous decision.

 

[Paulroddam7]

I don't think it was reckless. It certainly was not dangerous and there was no excessive force. Even if he had made full contact it wouldn't have hurt...his foot was just hanging there, he hardly stamped it in to the tackle.

Ridiculous decision.

You don’t think going in with a straight leg and studs up is dangerous?

 

[The Card Cheat]

VAR is implemented like that uptight autocrat of a teacher we all had at school slavishly following the rules desperately looking for any tiny infraction and making everyone miserable like Mr Bronson from Grange Hill.
It needs to be more like a cool laid-back teacher who understands there's more important things than rigidly following silly rules and only very very occasionally steps in to ensure everyone stays happy and fair play wins the day. Like the lad played by Robin Williams in Dead Poets Society. Or Walter White....

 

[1finny]

I can see why it was given.
On another day - he breaks the lad’s leg
If we are prepared to wait until the potential consequences become a reality then - no red

 

[BlindBoyGrunt]

Looks like a red card to me. He goes in higher than the ball with his studs up. If he had hit him on his standing leg he could have broke it.

 

[Scrote]

Two things to take away from this.

1. VAR is awful and should be burned down.

2. Managers, players and fans have no idea how VAR is supposed to work.

Dyche states that he's in favour of VAR and then complains that going to the monitor is almost a fait accompli. That's exactly how VAR is meant to work. So he's in favour of something but doesn't want it to be used correctly.

The fact we've got people here arguing about how the LotG should be interpreted shows that it's virtually impossible for VAR to ever be seen to be working. People will always disagree with subjective decisions. It's why intent isn't part of the rules.

If the ref had given a red card would anyone be complaining about VAR not overturning it?

 

[festa5]

Looks like a red card to me. He goes in higher than the ball with his studs up. If he had hit him on his standing leg he could have broke it.

Not at that pace he couldn't. He had very little momentum.

Different if he was sliding in at high speed. Red card all day long if it was. But the speed and force is a key factor. There wasn't really any.

 

[dickyjim78]

Not only was it not a red, nor even a foul, it wasn't even a tackle.

He lifted his foot over the ball to hook it back with absolutely no force or momentum. It wouldn't have broke Clyne's leg even if it was made of glass.

 

[Scrote]

Not only was it not a red, nor even a foul, it wasn't even a tackle.

They weren't even playing football.

 

[Heam44]

The level of contact is irrelevant.

If someone threw a punch and missed they’d still be off, they couldn’t argue that they hadn’t actually made contact.

That’s irrelevant I’m afraid.

That’s violent conduct. The definition of violent conduct includes “attempts”. Serious foul play does not.

“VIOLENT CONDUCT

Violent conduct is when a player uses or attempts to use excessive force or brutality against an opponent when not challenging for the ball”.

“SERIOUS FOUL PLAY

A tackle or challenge that endangers the safety of an opponent or uses excessive force or brutality must be sanctioned as serious foul play”.