I think you're being harsh. The ref took your exact view, hence the yellow card instead of the red. He judged the full situation nit just he freeze frame of studs on shin. It was the commentators (mostly Gnev) and the pundits who over reacted and took it out of context.
It was a yellow card and correctly so.
The one Nani got sent off vs Real Madrid game was harsh.
Said it at the time and stand by it - slow motion is the problem here.
No one watches that in real time and sees anything other than Luke Shaw kicking the ball.
Slow it down and suddenly it looks like he's intentionally leaving his foot in on the challenge, dangerously.
i felt sorry for harry, best offensive header he has made in 18 months at the club, a very good goal curiously denied him.
Maguire decision was a fckin joke.
I don't think the physics defence particularly helps Shaw. Speaking in the abstract (and not about Shaw's challenge in particular) if the movement required to win the ball means that potentially dangerous contact with the player's body is inevitable, then it's still a dangerous challenge. If you can't get the ball without putting your studs into the leg that's just behind ball, then a legal tackle probably isn't possible. I don't see a major difference between that and hitting the player first and ball second. Obviously, there are a lot of variables, especially whether the other player's movement makes the contact foreseeable.
I'd have been disappointed if it hadn't been given if it were the other way round.
On the other hand, Maguire's goal should have stood. Zero chance that a penalty would have been awarded if a defender had risen like that to make a defensive header.
Maguire’s should have been a goal; that was very soft indeed and he just wanted it more. I actually don’t think the Shaw one was a bad decision and, the way the game is these days, he could have seen red. He seemed to misjudge the ball as it went past him and had to overreach for the tackle, which I think was about 60/40 in the Burnley guy’s favour, hence Shaw not getting a great contact on the ball. And because he was stretching, his studs were showing when he inevitably made contact with the player. It wasn’t a very strong challenge though and yellow was about right for me.
Wins the ball and momentum takes him through to the opposition player...
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=k07srJRaGL0
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 49 seconds ago
I don't think the physics defence particularly helps Shaw. Speaking in the abstract (and not about Shaw's challenge in particular) if the movement required to win the ball means that potentially dangerous contact with the player's body is inevitable, then it's still a dangerous challenge. If you can't get the ball without putting your studs into the leg that's just behind ball, then a legal tackle probably isn't possible. I don't see a major difference between that and hitting the player first and ball second. Obviously, there are a lot of variables, especially whether the other player's movement makes the contact foreseeable.
I'd have been disappointed if it hadn't been given if it were the other way round.
On the other hand, Maguire's goal should have stood. Zero chance that a penalty would have been awarded if a defender had risen like that to make a defensive header.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Exactly. Shaw really shouldn’t have made the tackle. He’d ceded control of the ball and just had to stand his ground. I don’t think it looks great at full-speed, to be honest.
comment by Edinspur (U1109)
posted 28 seconds ago
Wins the ball and momentum takes him through to the opposition player...
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=k07srJRaGL0
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But Shawcross doesn’t win the ball
The rules are the issue. By he letter of the law Shaw was correctly punished. I have an issue with the rules more so in this situation. Probably didn't word that very well blaming the ref.
Injuries will happen in football through 50 50 challenges. Winning the ball first is no longer enough. Just don't think the rules fit the nature of the sport I have grown up with.
comment by Clockwork Red (U4892)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Edinspur (U1109)
posted 28 seconds ago
Wins the ball and momentum takes him through to the opposition player...
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=k07srJRaGL0
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But Shawcross doesn’t win the ball
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Foot rolls over it causing the injury. Unless that’s the Eduardo one - can’t remember which as I can’t bear to look at either again
I think Gary Neville wound me up more than that ref on that one... Neville just kept saying over and over again that Shaw didn't get the ball, where it was perfectly clear he got a touch.
Not overly fussed about the yellow card itself. Some get given for that, some don't, some even get a red.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
The Shaw one was definitely a foul and think they got it spot on in the end, even if it did take way longer than it needed to.
The Maguire one was weird because Kevin Friend was our ref against West Brom, and West Brom's goal was exactly the same situation yet he gave that one.
As I said on a couple of threads last night the major issue with the Shaw one (yellow was correct IMO) is that, by the laws of VAR, due to the fact it is not part of a play that leads to a goal or a penalty, the referee does not have the authority to bring it back to that foul for a yellow. He either has to award Shaw a red, or if he deems it isn’t a red card challenge, then he has to leave it and deal with the other incident. Basically the ref/VAR had to send Shaw off or probably send Brady off but he bottled it and decided to make up rules.
Wins the ball and momentum takes him through to the opposition player...
===============
Funny that there was a similar incident against Spurs, by Liverpool's Robertson and the explanation given by Liverpool fans was that his momentum meant he collided with the player
Clearly, it isn't the momentum. It's called leaving your foot in there
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n8J77Vayf7I
SE85 would you argue that if you get the ball first and it's physically inevitable that you make contact with the player afterwards it should never be a foul? Do you draw the line anywhere? Is it okay to break someone's leg because it was only caused by the unavoidable momentum after winning the ball?
It was ludicrous, when something takes as long as 6 minutes it is therefore not clear and obvious.
However, the challenge was a foul by Shaw which warranted a caution. It could have been worse. The challenge was badly timed, there was no malicious intent.
My main issue, irrespective of the right call by the officials, is the length of time taken. VAR is a great tool but lack of clear guidance to officials has given them freedom to be too forensic taking too much time. It's taking the joy out of the beautiful game.
They could really learn from cricket and rugby who have the tech down to a tee.
comment by morespurs (U15748)
posted 4 minutes ago
Wins the ball and momentum takes him through to the opposition player...
===============
Funny that there was a similar incident against Spurs, by Liverpool's Robertson and the explanation given by Liverpool fans was that his momentum meant he collided with the player
Clearly, it isn't the momentum. It's called leaving your foot in there
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n8J77Vayf7I
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Neither were red cards.
It only looks like he's leaving his foot in because it's in slow motion.
What's he meant to do, move his foot in the opposite direction in a split second of kicking the ball? Get real.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 56 seconds ago
comment by morespurs (U15748)
posted 4 minutes ago
Wins the ball and momentum takes him through to the opposition player...
===============
Funny that there was a similar incident against Spurs, by Liverpool's Robertson and the explanation given by Liverpool fans was that his momentum meant he collided with the player
Clearly, it isn't the momentum. It's called leaving your foot in there
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n8J77Vayf7I
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Neither were red cards.
It only looks like he's leaving his foot in because it's in slow motion.
What's he meant to do, move his foot in the opposite direction in a split second of kicking the ball? Get real.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It is a definitely a yellow card incident, if then turns to red card because of 2 yellows - yes but I didn't say it is a red card.
I said it is funny how the same incident almost, and yet if Robertson's one got him a yellow, it should therefore be a yellow for Shaw. Nothing to see really.
comment by Arteta Has Saved Christmas (U3245)
posted 1 minute ago
Winston probably thinks Roy Keane's foul on Haland was just an honest coming together
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So you mock me for my view, despite the fact that the VAR official also came to the same conclusion?
Interesting position and makes you look a bit stupid imo.
comment by morespurs (U15748)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 56 seconds ago
comment by morespurs (U15748)
posted 4 minutes ago
Wins the ball and momentum takes him through to the opposition player...
===============
Funny that there was a similar incident against Spurs, by Liverpool's Robertson and the explanation given by Liverpool fans was that his momentum meant he collided with the player
Clearly, it isn't the momentum. It's called leaving your foot in there
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n8J77Vayf7I
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Neither were red cards.
It only looks like he's leaving his foot in because it's in slow motion.
What's he meant to do, move his foot in the opposite direction in a split second of kicking the ball? Get real.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It is a definitely a yellow card incident, if then turns to red card because of 2 yellows - yes but I didn't say it is a red card.
I said it is funny how the same incident almost, and yet if Robertson's one got him a yellow, it should therefore be a yellow for Shaw. Nothing to see really.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fair enough, but I'm mainly challenging the idea that it's intentional and the result of 'leaving your foot in'.
No way is that what happens.
Sign in if you want to comment
The ref and that Luke Shaw challenge....
Page 1 of 4
posted on 13/1/21
I think you're being harsh. The ref took your exact view, hence the yellow card instead of the red. He judged the full situation nit just he freeze frame of studs on shin. It was the commentators (mostly Gnev) and the pundits who over reacted and took it out of context.
posted on 13/1/21
It was a yellow card and correctly so.
The one Nani got sent off vs Real Madrid game was harsh.
posted on 13/1/21
Said it at the time and stand by it - slow motion is the problem here.
No one watches that in real time and sees anything other than Luke Shaw kicking the ball.
Slow it down and suddenly it looks like he's intentionally leaving his foot in on the challenge, dangerously.
posted on 13/1/21
i felt sorry for harry, best offensive header he has made in 18 months at the club, a very good goal curiously denied him.
posted on 13/1/21
Maguire decision was a fckin joke.
posted on 13/1/21
I don't think the physics defence particularly helps Shaw. Speaking in the abstract (and not about Shaw's challenge in particular) if the movement required to win the ball means that potentially dangerous contact with the player's body is inevitable, then it's still a dangerous challenge. If you can't get the ball without putting your studs into the leg that's just behind ball, then a legal tackle probably isn't possible. I don't see a major difference between that and hitting the player first and ball second. Obviously, there are a lot of variables, especially whether the other player's movement makes the contact foreseeable.
I'd have been disappointed if it hadn't been given if it were the other way round.
On the other hand, Maguire's goal should have stood. Zero chance that a penalty would have been awarded if a defender had risen like that to make a defensive header.
posted on 13/1/21
Maguire’s should have been a goal; that was very soft indeed and he just wanted it more. I actually don’t think the Shaw one was a bad decision and, the way the game is these days, he could have seen red. He seemed to misjudge the ball as it went past him and had to overreach for the tackle, which I think was about 60/40 in the Burnley guy’s favour, hence Shaw not getting a great contact on the ball. And because he was stretching, his studs were showing when he inevitably made contact with the player. It wasn’t a very strong challenge though and yellow was about right for me.
posted on 13/1/21
posted on 13/1/21
Wins the ball and momentum takes him through to the opposition player...
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=k07srJRaGL0
posted on 13/1/21
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 49 seconds ago
I don't think the physics defence particularly helps Shaw. Speaking in the abstract (and not about Shaw's challenge in particular) if the movement required to win the ball means that potentially dangerous contact with the player's body is inevitable, then it's still a dangerous challenge. If you can't get the ball without putting your studs into the leg that's just behind ball, then a legal tackle probably isn't possible. I don't see a major difference between that and hitting the player first and ball second. Obviously, there are a lot of variables, especially whether the other player's movement makes the contact foreseeable.
I'd have been disappointed if it hadn't been given if it were the other way round.
On the other hand, Maguire's goal should have stood. Zero chance that a penalty would have been awarded if a defender had risen like that to make a defensive header.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Exactly. Shaw really shouldn’t have made the tackle. He’d ceded control of the ball and just had to stand his ground. I don’t think it looks great at full-speed, to be honest.
posted on 13/1/21
comment by Edinspur (U1109)
posted 28 seconds ago
Wins the ball and momentum takes him through to the opposition player...
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=k07srJRaGL0
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But Shawcross doesn’t win the ball
posted on 13/1/21
The rules are the issue. By he letter of the law Shaw was correctly punished. I have an issue with the rules more so in this situation. Probably didn't word that very well blaming the ref.
Injuries will happen in football through 50 50 challenges. Winning the ball first is no longer enough. Just don't think the rules fit the nature of the sport I have grown up with.
posted on 13/1/21
comment by Clockwork Red (U4892)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Edinspur (U1109)
posted 28 seconds ago
Wins the ball and momentum takes him through to the opposition player...
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=k07srJRaGL0
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But Shawcross doesn’t win the ball
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Foot rolls over it causing the injury. Unless that’s the Eduardo one - can’t remember which as I can’t bear to look at either again
posted on 13/1/21
I think Gary Neville wound me up more than that ref on that one... Neville just kept saying over and over again that Shaw didn't get the ball, where it was perfectly clear he got a touch.
Not overly fussed about the yellow card itself. Some get given for that, some don't, some even get a red.
posted on 13/1/21
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 13/1/21
The Shaw one was definitely a foul and think they got it spot on in the end, even if it did take way longer than it needed to.
The Maguire one was weird because Kevin Friend was our ref against West Brom, and West Brom's goal was exactly the same situation yet he gave that one.
posted on 13/1/21
As I said on a couple of threads last night the major issue with the Shaw one (yellow was correct IMO) is that, by the laws of VAR, due to the fact it is not part of a play that leads to a goal or a penalty, the referee does not have the authority to bring it back to that foul for a yellow. He either has to award Shaw a red, or if he deems it isn’t a red card challenge, then he has to leave it and deal with the other incident. Basically the ref/VAR had to send Shaw off or probably send Brady off but he bottled it and decided to make up rules.
posted on 13/1/21
Wins the ball and momentum takes him through to the opposition player...
===============
Funny that there was a similar incident against Spurs, by Liverpool's Robertson and the explanation given by Liverpool fans was that his momentum meant he collided with the player
Clearly, it isn't the momentum. It's called leaving your foot in there
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n8J77Vayf7I
posted on 13/1/21
SE85 would you argue that if you get the ball first and it's physically inevitable that you make contact with the player afterwards it should never be a foul? Do you draw the line anywhere? Is it okay to break someone's leg because it was only caused by the unavoidable momentum after winning the ball?
posted on 13/1/21
It was ludicrous, when something takes as long as 6 minutes it is therefore not clear and obvious.
However, the challenge was a foul by Shaw which warranted a caution. It could have been worse. The challenge was badly timed, there was no malicious intent.
My main issue, irrespective of the right call by the officials, is the length of time taken. VAR is a great tool but lack of clear guidance to officials has given them freedom to be too forensic taking too much time. It's taking the joy out of the beautiful game.
They could really learn from cricket and rugby who have the tech down to a tee.
posted on 13/1/21
comment by morespurs (U15748)
posted 4 minutes ago
Wins the ball and momentum takes him through to the opposition player...
===============
Funny that there was a similar incident against Spurs, by Liverpool's Robertson and the explanation given by Liverpool fans was that his momentum meant he collided with the player
Clearly, it isn't the momentum. It's called leaving your foot in there
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n8J77Vayf7I
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Neither were red cards.
It only looks like he's leaving his foot in because it's in slow motion.
What's he meant to do, move his foot in the opposite direction in a split second of kicking the ball? Get real.
posted on 13/1/21
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 13/1/21
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 56 seconds ago
comment by morespurs (U15748)
posted 4 minutes ago
Wins the ball and momentum takes him through to the opposition player...
===============
Funny that there was a similar incident against Spurs, by Liverpool's Robertson and the explanation given by Liverpool fans was that his momentum meant he collided with the player
Clearly, it isn't the momentum. It's called leaving your foot in there
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n8J77Vayf7I
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Neither were red cards.
It only looks like he's leaving his foot in because it's in slow motion.
What's he meant to do, move his foot in the opposite direction in a split second of kicking the ball? Get real.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It is a definitely a yellow card incident, if then turns to red card because of 2 yellows - yes but I didn't say it is a red card.
I said it is funny how the same incident almost, and yet if Robertson's one got him a yellow, it should therefore be a yellow for Shaw. Nothing to see really.
posted on 13/1/21
comment by Arteta Has Saved Christmas (U3245)
posted 1 minute ago
Winston probably thinks Roy Keane's foul on Haland was just an honest coming together
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So you mock me for my view, despite the fact that the VAR official also came to the same conclusion?
Interesting position and makes you look a bit stupid imo.
posted on 13/1/21
comment by morespurs (U15748)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 56 seconds ago
comment by morespurs (U15748)
posted 4 minutes ago
Wins the ball and momentum takes him through to the opposition player...
===============
Funny that there was a similar incident against Spurs, by Liverpool's Robertson and the explanation given by Liverpool fans was that his momentum meant he collided with the player
Clearly, it isn't the momentum. It's called leaving your foot in there
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n8J77Vayf7I
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Neither were red cards.
It only looks like he's leaving his foot in because it's in slow motion.
What's he meant to do, move his foot in the opposite direction in a split second of kicking the ball? Get real.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It is a definitely a yellow card incident, if then turns to red card because of 2 yellows - yes but I didn't say it is a red card.
I said it is funny how the same incident almost, and yet if Robertson's one got him a yellow, it should therefore be a yellow for Shaw. Nothing to see really.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fair enough, but I'm mainly challenging the idea that it's intentional and the result of 'leaving your foot in'.
No way is that what happens.
Page 1 of 4