D
Deleted member 16999
Guest
I genuinely believe you have never actually seen the Son/Gomes incident.
VAR - Thoughts
- Thread starter Swango1980
- Start date
D
Deleted member 16999
Guest
But you’re biased being a Spurs fan.Yeah but he definitely didn't use excessive force. If he wanted to trip him over he used exactly the right amount of force. Any less and it wouldn't have worked.
Getting deja vu now, we definitely had this part of the conversation before.
Orikoru
Tour Winner
You're the one who brought it up when it had nothing to do with last night's VAR incidents!But you’re biased being a Spurs fan.
D
Deleted member 16999
Guest
Simply reminding people of one of, if not the biggest VAR injustice this season.You're the one who brought it up when it had nothing to do with last night's VAR incidents!
Orikoru
Tour Winner
The injustice being that Son was erroneously shown the red which probably cost us all 3 points, of course.Simply reminding people of one of, if not the biggest VAR injustice this season.
D
Deleted member 16999
Guest
That’s the blinkered view we like to see.
Swango1980
Well-known member
I have seen it. He pushed him from behind. At no point did I ever consider it violent or did I consider Son wished to injure Gomes. It was unnecessary, but in no way done to endanger player. Therefore, it was worth a yellow. On the day, the decision by the referee was wrong, and it appears he did it based on the nature of the injury. The VAR didn't have the confidence to overturn him on the spot. However, after necessary reflection by the panel afterwards, they decided to overturn the red card. I agree with that decision.I genuinely believe you have never actually seen the Son/Gomes incident.
Hopefully that summarises it. Perhaps you saw something different?
D
Deleted member 15344
Guest
he didn’t push him - he deliberately tripped him up from behind - it was a cynical foul which was a yellow but was unfortunate in the way Gomes landed
D
Deleted member 16999
Guest
Obviously there are different versions of the tackle as you’ve seen something different to me and Orikoru.
Plus on the day VAR gave the Red.
Swango1980
Well-known member
Yes, correction, Son did go to ground. I suppose my main point was there was no intent to injure, and it was an unfortunate injury.
Swango1980
Well-known member
I'm not sure if VAR did give the red card? The ref gave the yellow initially. But, he then went over to see Gomes, and then appeared to change his decision to Red. I do not remember VAR reviewing the decision to tell him it was a red card. In fact, I seem to remember VAR were only reviewing it AFTER the ref gave the red card, because I remember thinking "if they overturn this, I don't think Son will be in any fit state to play on given he was pretty much a broken man". Having just googles and read multiple stories on the incident, it does appear to confirm that it was Martin Atkinson, the on field ref who changed the card to red himself, and VAR did not overturn it. So, the ref made the call it seems, not VAR.Obviously there are different versions of the tackle as you’ve seen something different to me and Orikoru.
Plus on the day VAR gave the Red.
Mind you, I believe VAR was having a nightmare generally in that game, I think it was the one with Deli Ali's "no handball" incident.
Last edited:
MegaSteve
Tour Winner
If the intent is to trip/bring down the opponent any subsequent injury ain't "unfortunate". ..
Swango1980
Well-known member
Well, as I said, brandish a dozen red cards a game then. Especially for Man City.
chrisd
Major Champion
I don't think most footballers intend to harm opponents when they foul them, yes there are some nutters, but fouling an opponent is part and parcel of the game and always has been.
Swango1980
Well-known member
This conversation is a beautiful example on the dangers of using VAR for subjective decisions, even for those that appear to be blindingly obvious. I'd have thought most people would agree that Son had no intent to cause serious injury to Gomes and yellow card was correct. But, Atkinson got it wrong, and VAR couldn't 100% say he got it wrong, so didn't overturn. Only the panel afterwards decided it was the wrong decision. But, there are a few on here that, in their mind (and they seem to lack complete common sense) still think it should have been a red, yet clearly don't back up their argument by then going on to say ANY foul where there is no intent to win the ball should be a red, because there was a miniscule chance the opponent could have fallen and had a serious injury. If they don't agree with that, then their point must be caveated by "only if the opponent is unlucky enough to get a serious injury", and define what type of injuries would and would not warrant a red card.
So, if some fans cannot see this, it is dangerous to get VAR to try and decide it unless it is the most obvious mistake one could ever think off. Because, fans will still disagree. At least when the ref makes it on the spot, we can disagree but even if we don't admit it, he can always defend himself that he has seen the incident once and his viewing angle may have been poor. Whereas, with VAR, that is no excuse and so if it makes a decision fans disagree with, discontent will last for so much longer.
I do agree though, if we are to use VAR for red card incidents, the ref on the pitch should look at the screen and take ownership of it.
So, if some fans cannot see this, it is dangerous to get VAR to try and decide it unless it is the most obvious mistake one could ever think off. Because, fans will still disagree. At least when the ref makes it on the spot, we can disagree but even if we don't admit it, he can always defend himself that he has seen the incident once and his viewing angle may have been poor. Whereas, with VAR, that is no excuse and so if it makes a decision fans disagree with, discontent will last for so much longer.
I do agree though, if we are to use VAR for red card incidents, the ref on the pitch should look at the screen and take ownership of it.
MegaSteve
Tour Winner
Fairly certain I saw Martial deliver an elbow yesterday... Should the subsequent injury be considered "unfortunate" ?
chrisd
Major Champion
Not if it was deliberately done
Swango1980
Well-known member
Did he elbow him intentionally? If yes, it was a deliberate act and should have been a red.
Did he elbow him accidentally? Ifyes, the injury was unfortunate.
Easy question to answer in all fairness
D
Deleted member 16999
Guest
You’re a nightmare! Son’s was a deliberate act to foul Gomes, absolutely no intention to play the ball, reckless and premeditated.
Why should he be excused of the result of his actions, even your post above has sympathy for Son while not showing any empathy for Gomes!
As Orikoru showed, the Laws of the Game don’t show the word intent which you keep using in Son’s defence.
You also claim VAR couldn’t 100% say the Ref got it wrong either at the time.
For the final time, I fully agree Son did not set out to break/dislocate Gomes’s ankle, but he also made no attempt to play the ball his only purpose was to retalliate on Gomes.
Did Son use less or more force on Gomes than Maguire used on Bstshuyai
Not every foul is a Red Card, but if (IMO) you chase a player with the purpose of taking them out in a reckless and dangerous manner they should be Red Carded.
Swango1980
Well-known member
I have massive empathy for Gomes, but that is irrelevant. A red card should not be based on empathy?You’re a nightmare! Son’s was a deliberate act to foul Gomes, absolutely no intention to play the ball, reckless and premeditated.
Why should he be excused of the result of his actions, even your post above has sympathy for Son while not showing any empathy for Gomes!
As Orikoru showed, the Laws of the Game don’t show the word intent which you keep using in Son’s defence.
You also claim VAR couldn’t 100% say the Ref got it wrong either at the time.
For the final time, I fully agree Son did not set out to break/dislocate Gomes’s ankle, but he also made no attempt to play the ball his only purpose was to retalliate on Gomes.
Did Son use less or more force on Gomes than Maguire used on Bstshuyai
Not every foul is a Red Card, but if (IMO) you chase a player with the purpose of taking them out in a reckless and dangerous manner they should be Red Carded.
As I have said time and time again, there are dozens of deliberate fouls a match. some petulant. Some tactical. See how the game goes if you give a red card out every time.
You are only talking about the Son incident because of what happened to Gomes. Let's go back, review every single game this season, and pick out every challenge similar to Son's or worse, and then see how many red cards we dish out.
