King's penalty, Mill's red card in slow motion

[Fox92]

So there would be at least 4 decisions where we would have asked for help from the technological assistance?

What time do you want to go home?

Exactly.

[hackneyfox]

Well they seem quite prepared to allow, and be party to free kicks taking an age to set up, whatever happened to quick free kicks I'm sure an extra minute or so for 4 crucial match changing decisions is worth while and it could be limited two 2 appeals for either side.

I was thinking back to the Rugger WC final the other year, it took about 5 minutes to make a decision.

[davieG]

I was thinking back to the Rugger WC final the other year, it took about 5 minutes to make a decision.

Some of their tries are impossible to tell even with video evidence, I think it would be a rarity for anything as complicated to occur in football.

[Fox92]

I don't want technology to be brought into the game. The referee is human so let him make human decisions. And where do you draw the line if it is brought in? Say, theres a penalty decision, the referee has to stop the game to look at the evidence and then restart the game again, and the same can be said about offsides and red cards etc, we will be watching a 100+ minute game. Technology will ruin football in my opinion.

I agree with hackneyfox. It could take ages to make a decision, fans will never get home.

[Ashley]

I said this in the Matt Mills thread.

Yes, I admit his tackle is worthy of a red card however. When tackles normally go in like that, refs would normally blow their whistle lots, no? Normally a red card would be produced straight away. Did either of these happen on Sunday? No. The ref gave the red card after the Birmingham players surrounded the ref and appealed.

Seeing the Video in slow motion, there is no intent from Matt Mills on causing injury, all the time he is looking to play the ball, which he does. Its the follow through which gets him the red card.

[Houdini Logic]

For the millionth time the need for technological assistance screams out. Referees just can't be trusted. That said it should not deflect one iota from why we lost and lost deservedly. Cos the failings on that score were far worse.

And how is this going to work, being that a few days, several angles and a slow-mo later only 54% of people think it wasn't a penalty and the rest think it was or are unsure. It will just mean that instead of blaming the ref the fans will instead blame the official who makes the call on the video evidence.

Law of averages, it'll level itself out - we don't need technology, we need to shut up and move on

[anotherharboroughfox]

I said this in the Matt Mills thread.

Yes, I admit his tackle is worthy of a red card however. When tackles normally go in like that, refs would normally blow their whistle lots, no? Normally a red card would be produced straight away. Did either of these happen on Sunday? No. The ref gave the red card after the Birmingham players surrounded the ref and appealed.

Seeing the Video in slow motion, there is no intent from Matt Mills on causing injury, all the time he is looking to play the ball, which he does. Its the follow through which gets him the red card.

I thought this was very strange also, the only reason I can think of was the referee was thinking about it?

[dannythefox]

Mills defo red card you cant do that he's a foot off the floor going in with two feet.

Kingys even on the slow video your cant tell who touches it first.

[Ashley]

Mills defo red card you cant do that he's a foot off the floor going in with two feet.

Kingys even on the slow video your cant tell who touches it first.

Considering bojoujeaur(sp?) Is running towards goal and the ball changes direction. King gets the first touch.

[Dylan]

Penalty- he nicked the ball FIRST meaning it was a good tackle. I don't agree with people saying but then there was contact after so its a fair decision. If you get the ball first before contacting with the man, its a perfect tackle.

Sending off- think he got this one correct, although shows his inconsisteny (explained below)

Beausejour- his tackle in the first half on Peltier (i think it was), was terrible, and could've easily got a straight red for that, but only got a yellow. Disappointed at the time, but could understand- it wasn't a bang-on 100% straight red. But then he cynically takes down our player after he took him on, right on the edge of the penalty area- undeniably 'commits a foul for the tactical purpose of interfering with or breaking up a promising attack'- surely? So why was he not given a second yellow?

And finally, King's penalty appeal. Can understand if it wasn't given in normal circumstances. But after giving that very soft penalty for them earlier, this had to be given: was more of a penalty than their shout (even though it's very soft).

Overall- referee was very inconsistent.

[Callabinho]

No way it was a penalty, apparently it can be classes as coming in from behind, but that should be irrelevant watching that video in slow motion King wins the ball no ifs no buts.

[nothin2seehere]

So there would be at least 4 decisions where we would have asked for help from the technological assistance?

What time do you want to go home?

And how long did it take for the peno to actually get taken because of all the on-pitch squabbling about was it/ wasn't it?

[yorksfox]

Ref got it all right - only just on the penalty, though. That's one goal in the last 4 away games - we aren't going anywhere fast under Sven. Hopefully our home form may eventually lead us to the Play-offs. I was disappointed with Mills who really can only hoof the ball and should be far more threatening from corners. In terms of flair we're some way behind West Ham and Southampton but at least relegation should not be on the cards. The home game against Watford could be pivotal as the Derby performance has been very much a one - off so far for this season.

[ScouseFox]

That angle, in that slow motion, neither of which the referee had, it's not a penalty. The other angle it looks like it is.

Red card is a red card a million times in a row. Bloody lunatic's tackle.

[StanSP]

Penalty- he nicked the ball FIRST meaning it was a good tackle. I don't agree with people saying but then there was contact after so its a fair decision. If you get the ball first before contacting with the man, its a perfect tackle.

Sending off- think he got this one correct, although shows his inconsisteny (explained below)

Beausejour- his tackle in the first half on Peltier (i think it was), was terrible, and could've easily got a straight red for that, but only got a yellow. Disappointed at the time, but could understand- it wasn't a bang-on 100% straight red. But then he cynically takes down our player after he took him on, right on the edge of the penalty area- undeniably 'commits a foul for the tactical purpose of interfering with or breaking up a promising attack'- surely? So why was he not given a second yellow?

And finally, King's penalty appeal. Can understand if it wasn't given in normal circumstances. But after giving that very soft penalty for them earlier, this had to be given: was more of a penalty than their shout (even though it's very soft).

Overall- referee was very inconsistent.

This isn't true. And it's falseness is proved with Mills' tackle. He got the ball first before the man. But because it was 2-footed and in the air, it was a red.

[davieG]

This isn't true. And it's falseness is proved with Mills' tackle. He got the ball first before the man. But because it was 2-footed and in the air, it was a red.

It's true for a legitimate tackle, Mill's tackle was illegal whether he got the ball or not. The only reasons he could give the King Penalty would be if he didn't get the ball first or if it was judged a tackle from behind, neither being the case in this instance.

[DB11]

Watched the game with a referee on sunday.

His opinion was straight red for Mills, in-direct free kick for obstruction on King.

King brought the player down IMO. Penalty.

Then your referee friend is wrong. IDFK for impeding the progression of an opponent can only be given if contact is not made. If contact is made it is no longer a technical offence, but becomes a penal offence. There was definitely contact between the players so it could not have been an IDFK; it was either a penalty or nothing.

[DB11]

Penalty- he nicked the ball FIRST meaning it was a good tackle. I don't agree with people saying but then there was contact after so its a fair decision. If you get the ball first before contacting with the man, its a perfect tackle.

How naive and incredibly wrong from you.

[whitlock]

Ref bottled the Brum red card tho. Thats what is pissing most the fans off and using Mills and King as an example, i'd be raged if it was the other way around and a penalty and red card wasn't given.

I'm sure i read that Mills was coming up to 5 yellow cards and a one match ban? If so does that now mean his yellow cards have been wiped off?

[NewburyFox]

People are calling for technology over the King tackle that gave away the penalty, but here we are two days later still undecided over whether it's a penalty or not, even after looking at all the different camera angles. What does that tell you?

[sdb]

It was a definite pen. The slow mo doesn't show it properly because it stutters and is blurry. I said Mills' was a yellow straight off.

[Kitchandro]

You can argue that Beausejour made a meal of the tackle maybe, but you cannot argue that King touched the ball or didn't stand on his foot. It is as clear as day if you are watching close enough.

If King got the ball don't you think he would have protested? Think about it.

[lcfcliam]

Mills was sent off because he did something very stupid. It should be a red card whether its Premier league or sunday laegue you cannot do that, if he has fully caught him then were talking a serious broken leg here.

The penalty was soft but IMO from what i can see it looks like King stands on his foot before hitting the ball but from our end of the ground i said penalty straight away.

Beasejour no doubt should not of been on that field, that is where all my frustration was aimed. I reckon the first challenge on Peltier alone was worthy of a straight red or even the synical foul on Peltier should of got a yellow then who knows how the game would of ended. But at the end of the day we couldn't finish at all.

[MikeyT]

King = Not sure. Very tough to tell...though i'm leaning slightly more towards the peno as being correct. But only slightly.

Mills = Definitely sending off. In this day and age if you go in like that with both feet off the ground and studs showing then expect a card of some sort.

[Haydos]

Considering bojoujeaur(sp?) Is running towards goal and the ball changes direction. King gets the first touch.

I have NO idea why people say this....Is the attacking player incapable of changing the direction of the ball? I was unaware that in any situation they only ever kicked the ball in one direction.