Dogawful Officiating

 

The law is denying a team the opportunity, not the player though.

 

Would have been interesting if Bale had accidentally missed it!

What if Bale stops to claim for the Penalty....or if he decides to NOT score to take the Penalty/Red card??  Does that still mean that the opportunity was denied?

Agree....you wonder if Spurs wish that they could have said no thanks, I'll take the Red card/penalty and take my chance. But then again, you would look really stupid if your did and then had the new keeper save the Penalty.

 

As the the goal line goal.....the AR was completely blocked off by the defender on the post (and the mass of humanity on the goal line) so it was down to the referee. He "thought" he had seen enough to give the goal....he though wrong. Guaranteed that he was wishing he could have called the video replay judge for a second opinion.

The strange thing is, if Bale had missed i'm 100% certain the ref would have given the penalty and then sent Cezh off as no advantage had been gained, oh its such a talking point GK and DOGSO's, so many different point of views

The over the line one is simple for me, use the technology, as we dont the ref should explain how from 6 or so yards away he gave a goal when it clearly didn't cross the line. I'm afraid it boils down to one thing, a poor decision (by a poor ref), so back to technology for me, the decision would have been cleared up within seconds, it can only help the ref's. Sooner its brought in the better.

Can I request my username to be changed to DOGSO?

Please mods? ta

 

The law is denying a team the opportunity, not the player though.

 

Would have been interesting if Bale had accidentally missed it!

 

What if Bale stops to claim for the Penalty....or if he decides to NOT score to take the Penalty/Red card??  Does that still mean that the opportunity was denied?

 

I'd argue that was him not using the advantage and wouldn't pull it back (remember he has five/six seconds according to the law), tough call though!

http://img51.imageshack.us/img51/4490/58058533474607991386613.jpg

And that's pretty much Martin Atkinson's view from his position.  Looks much more like a goal from there than the replays showed.

In this instance the referee was right (although it doesn't quite feel right).

 

Czech was in danger of being sent off for DOGSO - Denying an Obvious Goal Scoring Opportunity. A soon as the ball rolled to Bale and he scored, the goal scoring opportunity was not denied because they scored. So no Red card can be given for DOGSO.

 

Next question...was the Czech challenge worth a Yellow card.  The referee will ask himself was the challenge Careless, Reckless or Violent.  Careless means its a foul, reckless means a yellow and violent is red.  The challenge was cqareless but not reckless or violent so hence no card.

 

Strange situation to be so close to a Red card and yet no cards applied.

 

He did deny a DOGSO, he stopped Adebayor from scoring, the ball rolling to Bale was advantage being played.

 

The issue is whether Cech should get a yellow or red card for the intial foul, for me as a goal was scored from the advantage, it should be Yellow.

 

The law is denying a team the opportunity, not the player though.

 

Would have been interesting if Bale had accidentally missed it!

One and the same, he brought the player who had the opportunity down, now is Bale classed as the same ?, not for me, this is where the rules are muddled, trust me as someone who has gone through it.

On whether Bale missed, my post a couple up for my view

 

The law is denying a team the opportunity, not the player though.

 

Would have been interesting if Bale had accidentally missed it!

 

What if Bale stops to claim for the Penalty....or if he decides to NOT score to take the Penalty/Red card??  Does that still mean that the opportunity was denied?

 

 

I'd argue that was him not using the advantage and wouldn't pull it back (remember he has five/six seconds according to the law), tough call though!

For sure....glad it wasn't me

 

http://img51.imageshack.us/img51/4490/58058533474607991386613.jpg

 

And that's pretty much Martin Atkinson's view from his position.  Looks much more like a goal from there than the replays showed.

The whole of that ball is not over line for me, you need to be completely in line to tell 100%, and as the ref wasn't he cant and shouldn't have given it.

On the TV earlier they should a computer graphic, rotate the camera around and it wasn't over the line by that, fwiw.

Clearer picture

How did they not think it was a smart idea to have a camera in-line with the goal? Don't they normally?

I agree that the ball is not completely over the line, but it's a heck of a lot closer than the initial comments that the ball hadn't even touched the line at all

How did they not think it was a smart idea to have a camera in-line with the goal? Don't they normally?

On the other side I think. And it's covered by all those Spurs bodies.

Fu** the Fu**ing Fu**ers, Boll** to the C**ts.

Incompetent .. or corrupt....I prefer the former.

Until the stakeholders ( aka supporters) get a say, then nowt will change. As Tele has the say, we're stuck with what we have.

 

Clearer picture

Defintely a lot closer than it looked at the times but 100% of the ball is not over the line for me, a camera in the goal would have sorted it out within seconds.

The fact we are still debating these things after what happened in the world cup put FIFA to shame, joke that technology is still not being used.

I agree that the ball is not completely over the line, but it's a heck of a lot closer than the initial comments that the ball hadn't even touched the line at all

That clearer picture of Fugazi's makes a massive point for Atkinson tbf. Is that the shadow underneath or his leg?

I agree that the ball is not completely over the line, but it's a heck of a lot closer than the initial comments that the ball hadn't even touched the line at all

Very much so, much much closer than i thought.

I agree that the ball is not completely over the line, but it's a heck of a lot closer than the initial comments that the ball hadn't even touched the line at all

In real time, it didn't look it.

It's very easy to sit and stare at a still image for 2 minutes but Martin Atkinson isn't referee.2 - He would have seen it in an instant and in that speed, it's clear it doesn't cross the line.

I agree that the ball is not completely over the line, but it's a heck of a lot closer than the initial comments that the ball hadn't even touched the line at all

 

In real time, it didn't look it.

 

It's very easy to sit and stare at a still image for 2 minutes but Martin Atkinson isn't referee.2 - He would have seen it in an instant and in that speed, it's clear it doesn't cross the line.

What?

I agree that the ball is not completely over the line, but it's a heck of a lot closer than the initial comments that the ball hadn't even touched the line at all

 

In real time, it didn't look it.

 

It's very easy to sit and stare at a still image for 2 minutes but Martin Atkinson isn't referee.2 - He would have seen it in an instant and in that speed, it's clear it doesn't cross the line.

 

What?

People seeing a still image and saying "Oh, it's alot closer than I thought" - that's with the benefit of replays.

Initial instincts were that it had nowhere near crossed the line, so how Atkinson could think it had is beyond me.

I agree that the ball is not completely over the line, but it's a heck of a lot closer than the initial comments that the ball hadn't even touched the line at all

 

In real time, it didn't look it.

 

It's very easy to sit and stare at a still image for 2 minutes but Martin Atkinson isn't referee.2 - He would have seen it in an instant and in that speed, it's clear it doesn't cross the line.

 

What?

 

People seeing a still image and saying "Oh, it's alot closer than I thought" - that's with the benefit of replays.

 

Initial instincts were that it had nowhere near crossed the line, so how Atkinson could think it had is beyond me.

Agreed.

The still image looks to be 90-95% over but not 100%. But you're saying that it "clearly" didn't cross the line which to me would be in the 10-20% range.

In the picture it looks like 10% more of the ball would make this a goal, but 10% further on a "clearly not" position isn't a goal.

It was a lot closer than it looked

The still image looks to be 90-95% over but not 100%. But you're saying that it "clearly" didn't cross the line which to me would be in the 10-20% range.

 

In the picture it looks like 10% more of the ball would make this a goal, but 10% further on a "clearly not" position isn't a goal.

 

It was a lot closer than it looked

which is exactly my point

In this instance the referee was right (although it doesn't quite feel right).

 

Czech was in danger of being sent off for DOGSO - Denying an Obvious Goal Scoring Opportunity. A soon as the ball rolled to Bale and he scored, the goal scoring opportunity was not denied because they scored. So no Red card can be given for DOGSO.

 

Next question...was the Czech challenge worth a Yellow card.  The referee will ask himself was the challenge Careless, Reckless or Violent.  Careless means its a foul, reckless means a yellow and violent is red.  The challenge was careless but not reckless or violent so hence no card.

 

Strange situation to be so close to a Red card and yet no cards applied.

 

He did deny a DOGSO, he stopped Adebayor from scoring, the ball rolling to Bale was advantage being played.

 

The issue is whether Cech should get a yellow or red card for the intial foul, for me as a goal was scored from the advantage, it should be Yellow.

 

The law is denying a team the opportunity, not the player though.

 

Would have been interesting if Bale had accidentally missed it!

It brings in the argument as to whether a straight red should be given straight away when a penalty is. There have been rumours for a while about a possible change so that when a penalty is given and it is a sending off offence, the outcome of the penalty decides whether a yellow or red card (downgraded to a yellow if it is scored) is given. If this was the case, it would have been a yellow for Cech and 2-1.

Apart from being wrote down somewhere, personally I don't see how Cech's challenge today wasn't given at least a yellow card. If that challenge was made outside the area and advantage was given, it would have been at least a yellow when the ball went out of play. How come outfield players get carded but the keepers can't? Say Adebayor stayed down injured, would it have changed the decision?

On a different note, Ashley Young. Now I'm not his biggest fan but I could say the same about numerous other players and my point would still be valid. In the case of a bad challenge and the player making the most of it, much like Young's ability to win a penalty both last week and today, why can't the referee take whatever action is needed for the bad challenge then book the receiving player for diving, or simulation as they want us to use? In my eyes, this is like the referee saying 'Yes it is a foul but are trying to cheat me. Have the freekick but don't be a dick'. There is clever play to win freekicks, Jonas is brilliant for this, but obvious conning of the referee should be penalised, even if/when a foul has been made. Young, amongst others, is a player who does this time after time and it really gets on my tits.

In that last picture posted it certainly seems completely over to me. If you were to be in line with the post don't think any of the ball would overlap with the line.

In that last picture posted it certainly seems completely over to me. If you were to be in line with the post don't think any of the ball would overlap with the line.

Totally agree. During the game the replays seemed to show the ball being nowhere near the line, however looking at the clear picture above I think its 100% over. From being an awful decision from the referee, to, in reality, a very good decision in my opinion.