perthsaint1977 Posted February 27 Share Posted February 27 I wonder if he landed on his big toe instead of above the ankle, whether that would result in a different decision.... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sergie's no1 fan Posted February 27 Share Posted February 27 32 minutes ago, perthsaint1977 said: I wonder if he landed on his big toe instead of above the ankle, whether that would result in a different decision.... Of course it would have been a different decision. His ankle/leg wouldn't have bent for a start. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Widge Posted February 27 Share Posted February 27 Christ this is getting all a bit repetative and the respective supports are never going to agree on it - Was it intentional or Reckless - No Was it a natural movement and a normal place to land - Yes Did it catch Flynn high on the ankle - Yes Was it unlucky - Yes Was it a stick on red card with VAR - Absolutely it was, whether it should be is another debate Either way, no point in appealing, it won't go anywhere and 99/100 the referee gives the red card when he sees the slowmo that VAR provides, therefore I'm sure if the roles were reversed there would probably be the same arguements. I can get over the fact Phillips got sent off, the only thing to blame here is the pitch, as it caused the poor first touch in the first place and accidently led to him landing on Flynn's ankle in a manner that meant it was a red card. Maybe after this first year of VAR there will be a review of the many inconsitencies and issues with it, but whlist it's here we know what to expect, no point in arguing about it now. 8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djchapsticks Posted February 27 Share Posted February 27 (edited) 54 minutes ago, Widge said: Christ this is getting all a bit repetative and the respective supports are never going to agree on it - Was it intentional or Reckless - No Was it a natural movement and a normal place to land - Yes Did it catch Flynn high on the ankle - Yes Was it unlucky - Yes Was it a stick on red card with VAR - Absolutely it was, whether it should be is another debate Pretty much everything I said during the match and at half time with the benefit of the replay. Not dirty or intentional but almost certainly had to be a red. We got caught for something similar a few weeks ago against Hearts where Marcus Fraser vaulted his own player, Olusanya and in coming down, landed glancingly on a Hearts player's leg and several Saints fans were saying it wasn't a red as he didn't know he was there. Doesn't matter, it had to be 100% given as a red just as this did. For the record, I do think some interpretation and consideration of the ebb and flow of the match has to be taken into these decisions and this should be the case in future but unfortunately, whether all refs play it straight by the letter of the law or interpret on a case-by-case basis, there will always be inconsistency and people asking 'but what about that time when...' and justifiably so. VAR being present simply doesn't matter. It works and it's proven to work. The technology isn't the issue...the technology works. You could put the complete works of Charles Dickens in front of a fucking baboon and ask them to read it, they aren't going to tell you a compelling, captivating story, they'll just make a load of daft noises and smear it in their own jobby, making it look bad. Those interpreting the technology are horrendously incompetent and simply will not or cannot apply common sense. It doesn't matter if VAR works, while those running it are so hopeless and feckless, it will be made to look bad by human idiocy. Edited February 27 by djchapsticks 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pozbaird Posted February 27 Share Posted February 27 I may be missing something bleedin’ obvious, but I saw an incident this weekend on TV whereby a player tried an overhead kick, never knew a defender was coming in to try to head the ball clear, and got a boot in the puss’ for his trouble. No intent whatsoever, no red card, but still, accidental or not, he booted an opponent in the face. No-one from the defending team surrounded the opposing player or the ref as everyone knew it was accidental. Intent seemed to matter there. We all seem to agree that the St Johnstone player never tried to ‘do’ Flynn, but got a red. Surely then the overhead kick boy should have received a red? If I’m missing something in regard to intent or accident and how it affects the dishing out of reds in this VAR age, then I’ll be more than happy to be put straight. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billyg Posted February 28 Share Posted February 28 20 hours ago, Widge said: Christ this is getting all a bit repetative and the respective supports are never going to agree on it - Was it intentional or Reckless - No Fakes aren't appealing the decision because it will be seen as "reckless" . Red every day of the week ! 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tree house tam Posted February 28 Share Posted February 28 Fakes is horrendous patter lads but you know this. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buddie Holly Posted February 28 Share Posted February 28 20 minutes ago, tree house tam said: Fakes is horrendous patter lads but you know this. fake off 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pozbaird Posted February 28 Share Posted February 28 4 minutes ago, Buddie Holly said: fake off 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.