http://www.ananova.com/sport/story/sm_435901.html?menu=sport.latestheadlines

-- Anonymous, October 29, 2001

Answers

Would he have been relegated if the push had been on a player other than Beckham?

-- Anonymous, October 29, 2001

yes, the guy who didn't send Le Saux off (Durkin ?) was reffing a 3rd division game on Saturday

-- Anonymous, October 29, 2001

Oh ;))

-- Anonymous, October 29, 2001

Then I wonder if the ref at Derby will get relegated for not sending dessailly or rubber belly off....

-- Anonymous, October 29, 2001

I'm just not sure this action will have the desired effect.

Durkin is possibly our best Referee: he did book Le Saux, and after watching video replays was man enough to admit the tackle was more dangerous than he initially felt, and that Le Saux deserved to be sent off. Did this really deserve disciplinary action? I'm not convinced.

I actually thought Gallagher had an excellent game in the ManU v Leeds game. In the incident in question, Keane definitely "raised his hands"; however, he pushed, and did not "strike", Beckham - who imo exaggerated the contact by throwing himself to the ground. I felt both of these facts influenced Gallagher's decision. I was surprised Keane wasn't sent off, but it didn't seem entirely clear cut to me.

The argument being put forward is that this was the same offence for which Paul Ince got sent off v the mackems. However, imo again it was not - Ince definitely swung at and struck Discopants.

Both of the refereeing displays in question were imo some of better overall displays I have seen this season, and disciplining the Refs for such relatively minor misjudgements will not, I fear, do anything to improve overall standards.

-- Anonymous, October 29, 2001

Bit of a tricky one - I saw the game and thought that one the whole the ref did extremely well in a difficult fixture. Certainly Keane shoved Beckham and a red card was justified looking at the incident in isolation. But Beckham's lunge was pretty nasty, was unecessary, and was unquestionably strong provocation for the incident. In the context of the game, a yellow for both players wasn't such a terrible decision as it allowed the game to flow and didn't excessively punish one of the teams when players from both teams were to blame. The problem, of course, is that it smacks of inconsistency when we see other incidents which, taken out of context, look exactly the same. Bottom line I guess is that I'd rather see a ref who shows some common sense than one who plays to the letter of the law every time, but we seem to be moving further away from that.

-- Anonymous, October 29, 2001

Maybe the problem on Saturday was that refs "know" they are not supposed to send 'Keane' off at Old Trafford and the ref just forgot the details in the heat of the moment

-- Anonymous, October 29, 2001

Imagine his punishment if he gave a decision against Poppins. Doesnt bare thinking about.

-- Anonymous, October 29, 2001

Good - bloody hate Gallagher ever since he reffed in a Sunday League game I was in 10 years ago - right up his own @rse after doing the Charity Shield the weekend before. That and failing to spot the moving ball for Chelsea's first in the semi final a couple of years back. Not to mention his weekly smug column in the Banbury Guardian, the fact he's a ManUre fan AND drinks in my dads local.

-- Anonymous, October 29, 2001

.... well in that case the bugger should be hanged, Scratchy! ;o{)

-- Anonymous, October 29, 2001

Superkev, what would you have done had the referee given ComparativelygoodbutnotEnglandclassKev his just deserts for twatting Lee Hendrie?

-- Anonymous, October 29, 2001

Clarky

he had a SHIT game. He hardly ever played advantage and disallowed a goal for us because he blew for a shite free-kick instead which came to nothing.

How can you say Beckham made a meal of it..look closer? Beckahm was moving away from the guy...not even looking at him. The PUSH in the face was hard enough to send him down. Hard enough to send anyone down.

I'm tellin' ya...had that been one of your player shoved in the face and dropped you would be screaming for the death penalty.

BTW...these refs are twats. They need to get their act TOGETHER. If Ince can get sent of last week for what he did then Keane should have walked too...and bollox the the crap about it ruining a good game. It's the rules. Rules is rules :-)

-- Anonymous, October 30, 2001

even the one that says matches last for 90 minutes ?

-- Anonymous, October 30, 2001

Smart arse. Yes..even THAT one.

-- Anonymous, October 30, 2001

spot on LR

it really pisses me off when people applaud the officials for "letting the game flow" (i.e. ignoring GBH) and then in the next breath criticise the poor sods for blowing up (hmmmm... image of Mr. Winter with dynamite up arse crosses brain...) for a "minor" offence. Rules are rules and the officials should implement them. I'd also like to see players criticised for "disrupting the flow of the game" as they are the ones breaking the bleeding rules!

-- Anonymous, October 30, 2001

We called for professional refs and what do we get?...we get exactly what we've always had except this time when they make a feck-up they get relegated...and rightly so.

Now...the push on Beckham in the heat of the moment was nowt but there's no consistency. Some players walk for much less than others. Fairness..where is it?

-- Anonymous, October 30, 2001

Dougal,or indeed if Alan nothadadecentgamesince1996 Shearer kicked Neil Lennon in the face.

-- Anonymous, October 30, 2001

With referees you can have consistency or you can have common sense - you can't have both. If you want consistency there will be far MORE sendings off - players will walk much more for two yellow cards whereas refs often let 'em off the second one at the moment. If you want common sense then you must allow refs to have some degree of discretion in their interpretation of the laws.

If you want consitency, a player whose team are winning 10-0 will be sent off for a second offence of kicking the ball away. Is that common sense?

It's up to you - which one do you want?

-- Anonymous, October 30, 2001

I think the Refs and the FA need to carefully reassess what should constitute a sending off offence. The problem with sending a player off is that it almost inevitably ruins the game for the spectators - and that imo should be an important consideration.

I really feel we need to reserve the red card primarily for violent conduct - the extreme, dangerous, career-threatening tackle - of the kind perpetrated by Steven Gerrard on George Boateng earlier this season.

I'm not sure what category it would fall into, but that disgusting "tackle" on Rob Lee by OGS a couple of season to prevent him scoring when clean through, would also imo constitute a sending off offence. This was a premeditated, potentially dangerous, foul clearly intended to prevent a goal - so could qualify on two counts. However, I don't like the present ruling regarding "the denial of a clear goal-scoring opportunity" being an automatic sending off offence. There are too many marginal decisions in this category - eg Schwarzer's against the Toon recently - and to my mind it must be clear and very obvious. This introduces an unavoidable element of discretion for the Referee, that I don't think can be avoided.

Using a more pragmatic approach, I don't think for instance that Robbie Keane's push on Becks should warrant a sending off, whereas a right hook to the chin or a head-butt would.

This approach could be usefully supported by introducing an interim punishment between a booking and a sending off - the ubiquitious "sin bin".

In addition, consideration could be given to giving the Referee discretion to award a penalty for a particularly violent foul, or act of gamsmanship, that occurred outside the PA - for instance, even sending off OGS for "that" foul on Rob Lee was an inadequate punishment to the team that was denied a very clear goal- scoring opportunity, and indeed three points. The award of a free- kick 10 yds outside the PA, 5 minutes from time, was scant punishment to Manure on that occasion.

-- Anonymous, October 30, 2001

No raising of hands would be pretty easy to manage, and understand I would have thought. Ravanelli/Desailly was very funny, but if they'd known they'd be off that would stop them arguing the toss over who started it.

Shearer showed against Keane that it is possible to walk away from trouble.

Violent play like Gerrard, Le Saux, and Keane against Poyet that time in the Charity Shield is so violent and so over the top in all ways that it too should be an instant off.

The goal scoring opportunity scenario is more difficult as it must be open to interpretation. The Boro match showed that with the two pens. Similarly it seems daft to punish hand ball on the line more severly than Given fouling a player. I don't know the answer :0)

The most annoying situation to me is a team playing rough tactics (which may well be understandable) getting away with sharing the fouls around and then one of the other side getting booked for kicking the ball away or some other petty completely non-dangerous act.

-- Anonymous, October 30, 2001

Loadsa points can be discussed on these decisions. Although maybe not sending off offences should the double yellow count as a red? Or should it just count as another yellow til 5 is reached?

I partially agree with LR, the push was not a sending off type "hit". If Keane was taller he probably could have pushed Bex in the chest and not the face. However if the push was a SO offence so was Bexs tackle

-- Anonymous, October 30, 2001

What about penalty goals? It works in Rugby - if a player is deemed to be in a goalscoring position (like Lee at OT etc) and a fouled is committed then the person who did the foul should be booked and a goal given to the other team.

Of course that would create more discussion on refereeing inconsistency though.

-- Anonymous, October 30, 2001

Quite an opportune moment. I discussed this tonight with Jonno A Friend over a couple of beers. It goes without saying, we have differing opinions. As far as I'm concerned, I want to prevent the sending off in the first instance.

Today (IMHO) the punishment for a SO is indirectly proportional to the amount of time left on the clock. Would OGS have "tackled" Rob Lee in the same manner if the game was only 10 mins old? Like **** he would. (Please don't get me wrong LR, not a specific ManUre reference but one that most on here will relate to). With only a few mins to go the punishment on ManUre was a few minutes with 10 men - all of who could the place themselves between the ball and the goal when the FK was taken. So what? ManUre have such a strong squad (apparently) that they could draft in Cole, Yorke, Sheringham or AN Other for the next game with no adverse affect on their season as long as Rob Lee didn't score. Ignore predjudices. What would you have done? Exactly. And OGS did what was "required" of him. Imagine the consequences if he hadn't. Hell hath no fury like a Taggart stuffed. Personally, I have no beef with OGS over that incident. I would have expected (tho not liked) it had the boot been on the other foot - so to speak.

We can't have it both ways. Jonno A Friend would have had a re-creation of the one-on-one. Fair dos, but how do you decide how to "re-create" the one-on-one?

On the other hand, [pretend_on] what if the rules said that any player sent off would incur a 90 minute penalty for his team? In other words, OGS would be off for 2 mins in the game against NUFC and ManUre would have to field 10 players in their next game {more_pretend_on} against Arsenal {more_pretend_off}? Do you suppose OGS would have made that "tackle"? LFHW. OK, so it wouldn't have helped NUFC if ManUre faced Arsenal for 88 mins (less Taggart time!) and it would have benefitted Arsenal (or whoever) [pretend_off].

I know it's not perfect, but on the basis I want to see 11 players on each side for the entire 90 mins (unless they'll give me a refund) I think that over time, we would see fewer players sent off for "professional fouls" (as opposed to clumsy tackles, the like of which we witnessed by Schwarzer at The Smogside).

Just to put my friend's view forward (please contradict me if I'm wrong), the punishment would depend on the nature of the foul. Rob Lee would be allowed to re-create the one-on-one. A clumsy "hand-ball" would incur a free kick inside the area. But where do you draw the line?

Football is a simple game (tho not as simple as golf). Eleven players on each side, attempting to put the ball into the goal of their opponents more times than their opponents do to them. Awarding a penalty for a clumsy attempt to get the ball by a goalie and also sending him off is a double-whammy and invariably changes the direction of the game. But will it stop goalies trying to get the ball? I honestly believe there was no malice in Schwarzer's attempt to get the ball (in the same way there was no malice by Shay). A penalty and a sending off will make no difference to a keeper under those circumstances. The team may or may not lose 3 points. Hacking down a player in a one-on-one may very well prevent a defeat, depending on when it occurs. Having greater consequences for the team will make the players think twice (is that possible??) before committing the "tackle".

Yes, I know it's not perfect and I know it doesn't compensate the victim. But I can guarantee it will cause fewer "professional fouls". (Can I climb down from this soap-box? I'm feeling dizzy).

-- Anonymous, October 30, 2001

Interesting ideas - but what is wrong with the concept of the 'discretionary penalty' for serious/violent fouls committed outside the PA. This is a similar concept to what they do in rugby.

I guess the real downside is the discretionary element, which would inevitably raise the whole issue of refereeing consistency again. However, I actually feel the real issue here is less one of consistency, and more one of refereeing standards per se.

-- Anonymous, October 30, 2001

I too fear the discretionary penalty could again cause controversey. When one person has to make such important decisions, we're often going to get inconsistencies. To be honest, I don't think there is a single answer, tho I do believe "video replays" to the 4th orificial could bring more consistency. That said, it still amazes me how many borderline decisions they actually do get right at the speed the game is played at. But it only goes to highlight the absolute blunders (like Ravioli's goal on Sunday) which are made at times.

But back to the sending off point. I agree that a "grading" of punishment might help. I'm in favour of the "sin bin", tho I'm not sure how effectrive it would be. Many a team down to 10 men simply shut up shop, making the game less of a spectacle for Joe Public :-(

-- Anonymous, October 30, 2001

Okay not enough complications in this.

In a sad statto sort of way I'm comfortable with luck evening itself out over a season of 38 league games. Having a great ref one game and a tosser the next should even itself out over time, or should for all teams. The suggestion of sending off minutes being carried over to the next game would even this out even more I think.

BUT what about Cup matches. These are absolutely one offs and the victim of an injustice, like the OGS one, has no further chance of evening out their luck. It may punish the perpetrators, but it will give a huge lift to the next round opponents of the bad guys, which is not fair in a Cup situation.

The other thing to consider is team fouls. I have never understood how this works in basketball but I can make it into a nice theory for football. If say a team in red and white stripes gets mre than 10 fouls against it in a half then they lose a player for the rest of that half. This would have reduced the carnage when they played us last season and may even in the long run make them into a better side ?!

-- Anonymous, October 31, 2001

For discretionary penalties the club with the most money will get the most benefit.

-- Anonymous, October 31, 2001

... that's a very cynical view Gus. Do you believe our Ref's are bent?

I don't think they are very good - including by comprison with the standard we routinely see in European and International games - but I certainly don't believe they are crooked.

BTW, talking about consistency, there are glaring inconsistencies between the interpretation of key rules between the PL Refs and their European counterparts. IMO this is so bad now as to be entirely ludicrous.

-- Anonymous, October 31, 2001

like rugby refs interpration being so different from southern to northern hemisphere

-- Anonymous, October 31, 2001

Well here's my twopennorth. IMHO Keane should have been sent off, as his offence was violent conduct and while there are refs who let players get away with violent conduct, players will continue to do it.

I have always been a big fan of the rugby law which says that any dissent is punished by the penalty being advanced ten yards forward. This has now been brought into football and has cut down the incidents of dissent. You may say that dissent still happens but this is due to the refs not enforcing the laws as strictly as they should.

If referees punished every incident of violent conduct as a red card offence then players would not do it. If you think that rising to your feet and pushing a player in the face is not violent conduct then do not send him off. IMHO any violent act towards amnother player including pushing, Kicking or elbowing should be punishable by a red card if intent can be proved.

Robbie Keane lept to his feet and pushed an opposition player with intent. He should have been sent off end of story. If i make a mistake at work and am asked to carry out lesser duties for a while, i take my punishment as a professional as Gallagher has done.

-- Anonymous, October 31, 2001

... probably so, Macbeth. However, I feel there is less of an excuse within European footy, and it must be very difficult for the players.
They could be sent off in PL game on a Saturday for precisely the same tackle that barely warrants a free-kick in a CL game the following Wednesday. IMO, this has become a ludicrous situation.

-- Anonymous, October 31, 2001

As always someone concentrates on the reaction, not the crime. bake has a valid point to the letter of the law, but that tackle that he reacted to gets no mention from you!

clarky, no suggestion of that, yet! However when the ref at OT awards a Discretionary Penalty against the home side what are the odds of a massive law suit against the ref, the fa, the refs association, the next door neighbours cat etc?

Then the refs would be too afraid to award DPs and we would be back at square 1.

-- Anonymous, October 31, 2001

Another point on consistency. This season the refs have been told to be hard on shirt pulling when tackling.

Why is this not policed in the box? Every corner and every free kick going into the box defenders are pulling shirts and wrapping their arms around strikers etc? If they were serious there would be half a dozen penalties and then it would stop!

-- Anonymous, October 31, 2001

Last night in the Celtic game there was a wonderful bit of refereeing. Juve were defending a corner and Balde, Sutton and Mjallby, the hooped brick outhouses, were all in the box waiting for corner to come in. Juve defenders having already conceded to two headers were wetting themselves. The ref stops the corner from being taken to tell Sutton (who worked it all night) and the Juve defender to keep their arms to themselves and to stop jostling. Sutton does the 'not me boss' look.

The corner is swung in and Balde attacks it but doesn't quite get passed his defender. Ref whistles for a penalty. The first replay highlights Balde and despite the commentators best efforts it is never a pen. In the background though the Juve defender has his arms around Sutton, just blatantly blocking any movement at all. The ref is staring at them and immediately blows correctly, and books the defender. The defender as is the norm these days wasn't even watching the corner being taken but is totally focussed on stopping the Sutton run.

Oh and by the way what a wonderful game of football. Juve were missing 8 from the first leg but the spectacle was perfect. Agathe again showing what a wingback can be, Sutton battling superbly, Petta brilliant on the wing, Moravcik sublime in midfield, the centre halves being awesomely big. Trezeguet came on at half time for Juve and was fantastic. Wonderful evening.

-- Anonymous, November 01, 2001

I don't seriously think Celtic would've been in the game had Juve NEEDED to win it....Don't get caught up with all that great result bollox....it was a nothing game....

-- Anonymous, November 01, 2001

Am I the only one who thinks that OGS did us the favour of not having to watch Lee cock up the one on one? Realistically we had more chance of scoring from the freekick than Lee racing 40 yards and slotting it past the keeper.

Lets not mess with rules, they're imperfect but it all adds to the spice. All of the above 'solutions' would create as many problems as they solve as far as I can see.

-- Anonymous, November 01, 2001

Gus, I didn't mention Beckham's tackle because it was just that an attempt to win the ball. He was overly agressive but was making a genuine attempt to play the ball.If the ref felt that Beckham was lashing out and Kicking Keane then he too should have been sent off. I did say that any violent conduct should mean a sending off including Kicking

-- Anonymous, November 01, 2001

Bake, I only happened to see the incident on Tuesday night when I saw it on videoed news from the previous night. Beckham's tackle connects with Keane's hip.

Celtic wouldn't have got close to Juve if they'd wanted to win, it doesn't stop it being wonderful entertainment, in much the way we used to be :0) BUT Juve only won in Italy by some dodgy reffing, so maybe Juve suit Celtic's style better than Porto and Rosenberg did. Celtic got as many points as Arsenal did in their group.

-- Anonymous, November 01, 2001

bake, sorry about the delays, I am a hit and run exponent, but most of it has to do with the time difference between us.

No intent to abuse you, it is just that on almost every occassion the retaliator has been sent off. In all the cases it has been justified, however in doing so the original tackle or whatever has been overlooked in the ensuing melee.

Sorry, but I have to agree with macbeth although in a more generous mood, I thought the tackle was more mid thigh than hip!

I will be watching the Celtic game in about an hour 2230 here about 1430 UK time.

-- Anonymous, November 01, 2001

Was just winding you up Mac....hoping for a bite ;))

-- Anonymous, November 01, 2001

Gav, glad to see you are still allowed to post!!!

-- Anonymous, November 01, 2001

She works in a different office Gus so I can still get away with it through the day....

-- Anonymous, November 01, 2001

Don't worry gus I didn't think you were abusive we'll leave that to Roy Keane.

The tackle was a bad one there is no doubt but I think the reactions deserve all they can get. If you are daft enough to allow a player to intimidate you to the point where you get sent off for smacking the bloke then you have ruined the game for the fans, ruined your team's chances and will probably get a flea in your ear from your manager.

There are plenty of examples of football players simply walking away from a fight. Shearer against MAN U where he wound Keane up so much that the idiot got himself sent off. THe perfect example is American football where they hit each other with helmets and push and shove each other all day and there are a miniscule amount of fights. THis is because you can be banned for life from the game for any cheap shots as they call them. Contrast that with ICe hockey where the aim of the game is to wind up the oppositions best player and get him in the sin bin and win the game.

If the penalty is harsh enough players will stop doing it.

-- Anonymous, November 02, 2001

That's it Bake, old chap! The stronger the better. Nowt like a bit of corporal punishment. Indeed, make it capital!! Firing squad at dawn if any of the over-paid t0$$er$ get sent off. But with wor shooting accuracy, they#d bliddy well miss :-(

-- Anonymous, November 02, 2001

The main issue here is what constitutes "violent conduct". The present approach is both inconsistent and ill-concived imo, and to a large degree predictaed on the direction to Referees regarding red- carding players who "raise their hands". As has become entirely apparent, this is open to confusion and interpretation as sensible Refs baulk at completely ruining yet another game by sending off someone who 'raises their hands' but is not in their opinion guilty of 'violent conduct'.

My own feeling is that we need to assemble a group of strong Referees, and then trust them to decide what constitutes violent conduct. As full-time pros now they should be able to spend enough time reviewing videos, and discussing key incidents and decisions, to ensure a good degree of consistency. Most certainly this is a better way of improving consistency than the FA issuing a new list of 'edicts' every season, which little-by-little is turning football into a non-contact sport.

-- Anonymous, November 02, 2001

But it is a non contact sport clarky!?

-- Anonymous, November 02, 2001