Bednarek's red card - Official: Rescinded

[benjii]

A decision so bad, it deserves its own thread.  Now, I've checked the laws and if it was a foul then it should have been a red, which seems perverse but true.

The red card

The law says:

"Where a player commits an offence against an opponent within their own penalty area which denies an opponent an obvious goal-scoring opportunity and the referee awards a penalty kick, the offending player is cautioned if the offence was an attempt to play the ball; in all other circumstances (e.g. holding, pulling, pushing, no possibility to play the ball etc.) the offending player must be sent off."

So, if you think someone is trying not to make a challenge but does commit a foul, then a red card is correct. 

This is clearly an absurdity because a hack at the ball would result in a yellow.  This law is terribly drafted by the inepts in charge of the game.

The foul

The obvious way to avoid such an absurd outcome is not to award a foul when a defender is doing what they can to avoid contact and a striker is falling over in the hope of contact which has not yet occurred.  This is clearly what happened in the incident so it's quite baffling that the officials stuck with the penalty call.  

There are two broad categories of foul. There is the careless / reckless / excessive force group of offences. Evidently that didn't apply. 

The other grounds for a direct free kick are:

A direct free kick is awarded if a player commits any of the following offences:
 

• a handball offence (except for the goalkeeper within their penalty area)
• holds an opponent
• impedes an opponent with contact
• bites or spits at someone
• throws an object at the ball, opponent or match official, or makes contact with the ball with a held object

The bolded one is the only one that could possibly apply.  It is quite clear that Martial was not impeded by Bednarek making contact with him.

Conclusion

Due to a badly drafted law, interpreted by spaccy goons who were no-doubt picked last in Games at school every week, the red card was technically correct if it was a foul.  But it clearly wasn't a foul.

The VAR review

When Dean went to look at the monitor he wasn't shown proper replays of the incident.  He didn't get a single view from the camera on the goal-line which clearly showed Martial diving in anticipation of a challenge which never came. An absolute clusterfuck of an incident.

[S-Clarke]

It wasn't even a penalty. Let alone a foul. Let alone a red fucking card!

You can quite clearly see, on the number of replays I saw, that Bednarek didn't do anything to cause Martial to collapse like that. Nothing.

You could argue maybe slight accidental touch, but he was pulling away from Martial to avoid that. At absolute worse that's a 'double jeopardy' situation, whereby Jan gets a yellow and they get a pen.

I just cannot make any sense of the red card. The review of it was a cluster fuck. He was desperate to give them a penalty, even a commentary feed mentioned that he looked happy to be giving it. They gave him the chance to look at the screen but he's never wrong is he, they didn't even bother showing it in full motion. Shambles, needs investigating.

If that isn't rescinded then I've lost all hope in football and as far as I'm concerned the game is dead.

[aintforever]

4 minutes ago, benjii said:

 

The VAR review

When Dean went to look at the monitor he wasn't shown proper replays of the incident.  He didn't get a single view from the camera on the goal-line which clearly showed Martial diving in anticipation of a challenge which never came. An absolute clusterfuck of an incident.

That's the bit that really pissed me off, he seemed to stand there for a minute staring at a freeze frame which would tell him fuck all. 

 

[westmidlandsaint]

Dermot Gallagher on Sky Sports News Ref Watch has said it wasnt a penalty in his opinion Martial initiated contact by dragging his leg into Bednarek. Bet the FA don't overturn it tho.

[davefizzy14]

I seriously hope we are appealing this, absoulte joke of a decision.

[aintforever]

I doubt they will overturn it, VAR means they don't have the 'didn't see it' excuse anymore. Overturning it will basically mean they are admitting their officials are incompetent.

[Sheaf Saint]

4 minutes ago, aintforever said:

I doubt they will overturn it, VAR means they don't have the 'didn't see it' excuse anymore. Overturning it will basically mean they are admitting their officials are incompetent.

There has to be some consequence of Dean not actually looking at the replay though. There has to be.

[Turkish]

Surely they’ll overturn it? The contact was minimal if any. martial was already going down anyway and Bednarek was trying to pull out. It was a ludicrous decision. I’m yet to see anyone who agrees with it. 

[Turkish]

41 minutes ago, aintforever said:

That's the bit that really pissed me off, he seemed to stand there for a minute staring at a freeze frame which would tell him fuck all. 

 

Is this true? I’ve seen a few people say that but has it been confirmed that he was just looking at a freeze frame?

[tajjuk]

8 minutes ago, aintforever said:

I doubt they will overturn it, VAR means they don't have the 'didn't see it' excuse anymore. Overturning it will basically mean they are admitting their officials are incompetent.

Yeh basically this.

It's why VAR is failing, because none of these refs want to correct the other refs, because then next week the roles are reversed.

VAR needs to be taken out of the hands of refs, need a panel of ex-pros or something that vote on it and that decision is final. 

[Whitey Grandad]

36 minutes ago, Sheaf Saint said:

There has to be some consequence of Dean not actually looking at the replay though. There has to be.

He looked at the screen but wasn't shown any action. You can see him talking to someone on his microphone. but nothing changed on the screen. He gives a puzzled look to his left and says something, probably to the fourth official. I think thay intended to show him more but the technology mseed up.

32 minutes ago, Turkish said:

Is this true? I’ve seen a few people say that but has it been confirmed that he was just looking at a freeze frame?

The broadcast cameras covered his view all the time that he was stood there.

[Whitey Grandad]

34 minutes ago, tajjuk said:

Yeh basically this.

It's why VAR is failing, because none of these refs want to correct the other refs, because then next week the roles are reversed.

VAR needs to be taken out of the hands of refs, need a panel of ex-pros or something that vote on it and that decision is final. 

It has to be someone qualified in the Laws of the Game. Once you start putting it to the vote you're going to get a phone in competition or worse.

[Turkish]

26 minutes ago, Whitey Grandad said:

He looked at the screen but wasn't shown any action. You can see him talking to someone on his microphone. but nothing changed on the screen. He gives a puzzled look to his left and says something, probably to the fourth official. I think thay intended to show him more but the technology mseed up.

The broadcast cameras covered his view all the time that he was stood there.

Fair enough, i didn't notice that, was probably too busy swearing at the telly.

[Whitey Grandad]

Just now, Turkish said:

Fair enough, i didn't notice that, was probably too busy swearing at the telly.

Understandable. You might need to clean your screen now.

[Dusic]

If they overturn it then its essentially admitting that VAR was wrong.

Which is why they won't overturn it.

[S-Clarke]

2 minutes ago, Dusic said:

If they overturn it then its essentially admitting that VAR was wrong.

Which is why they won't overturn it.

And that will be why football is truly dead. They are condemning us to ANOTHER defeat based on shit referring decisions if they don't overturn it.

[LordHester]

1 minute ago, S-Clarke said:

And that will be why football is truly dead. They are condemning us to ANOTHER defeat based on shit referring decisions if they don't overturn it.

I hope you're not being entirely serious. It was a terrible decision, but it was hardly instrumental in the defeat.

[Turkish]

2 minutes ago, LordHester said:

I hope you're not being entirely serious. It was a terrible decision, but it was hardly instrumental in the defeat.

It'll be instrumental in our defeat on saturday as we only have one centre half if he's banned.

[stknowle]

Wrong thread

 

 

 

Edited 3 February, 2021 by stknowle

[davefizzy14]

Adam Blackmore says we are going to appeal it and rightly so.

[S-Clarke]

3 minutes ago, davefizzy14 said:

Adam Blackmore says we are going to appeal it and rightly so.

Absolutely right. I'd be staggered if we didn't.

'Pundit' Referees don't believe it was a red card, Martial doesn't believe it was a foul, Ole doesn't believe it was a red card. Literally no one, other than Mike fucking Dean believe it to be a red card.

As others have alluded to, overturning this will mean making one of the 'STAR' referees and their VAR approach all wrong. Can they do it....?

[Whitey Grandad]

21 minutes ago, Turkish said:

Fair enough, i didn't notice that, was probably too busy swearing at the telly.

I undeleted my recording and watched the monitor incident again. Dean spends 56 seconds at the monitor. The first 18 seconds are spent showing him the incident in slow motion from the camera in the normal central stand position. They show this same clip three times. The remaining 36 seconds he is staring at a still frame long shot taken from high up on the left of the stand. At one point he looks to his left and shakes his head with a puzzled expression.

As he walks away he has a few words into his microphone and here we need a lip reader. I don’t think he learnt anything from the monitor. To be fair to him he looks concerned as he walks back to issue the red card. I think he has been let down by the VAR team.

[Whitey Grandad]

12 minutes ago, LordHester said:

I hope you're not being entirely serious. It was a terrible decision, but it was hardly instrumental in the defeat.

It was 6-0 at the time on 85 minutes.

[S-Clarke]

2 minutes ago, Whitey Grandad said:

It was 6-0 at the time on 85 minutes.

And 4-0 when we had a perfectly good goal chalked off.

It ended in that hugely embarrassing score line because of the referee, no more than that.

[Lord Duckhunter]

Somebody (can’t remember who) said Dean was only looking at screen to determine whether it was a red card or not. Therefore he was looking at frozen screen to see who was around/where keeper was etc. They claimed that VAR decided that awarding a pen wasn’t “a clear and obvious error”, so he wasn’t watching footage over & over to decide if it was a pen as that had already been decided,  just whether it was red or yellow. 

[Teddeer]

Might be wrong but from what I saw Dean waited for VAR and they confirmed it was a penalty.

[Whitey Grandad]

4 minutes ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

Somebody (can’t remember who) said Dean was only looking at screen to determine whether it was a red card or not. Therefore he was looking at frozen screen to see who was around/where keeper was etc. They claimed that VAR decided that awarding a pen wasn’t “a clear and obvious error”, so he wasn’t watching footage over & over to decide if it was a pen as that had already been decided,  just whether it was red or yellow. 

The commentator said something about that but Martial was right in the middle of the goal area and it was an obvious goal scoring opportunity.

2 minutes ago, Teddeer said:

Might be wrong but from what I saw Dean waited for VAR and they confirmed it was a penalty.

All very strange. Why suggest that he went to the monitor?

[Lord Duckhunter]

1 minute ago, Whitey Grandad said:

The commentator said something about that but Martial was right in the middle of the goal area and it was an obvious goal scoring opportunity.

 

DGSO is only a red if no attempt is made to play the ball, maybe he was asked to check that. Not saying I agree with the decision, but only checking whether it’s red or yellow makes sense of the still frame. Unless the technology failed, it’s the only explanation. 

[Lord Duckhunter]

Dean also made the TV sign before showing the red. I’m pretty sure the TV sign isn’t made if the refs original decision stands. Maybe wrong, but if not, this backs up the theory that the monitor   was used for red card decision only. 

Edited 3 February, 2021 by Lord Duckhunter

[saintwbu]

Fulham had a red card reviewed and given by VAR against Newcastle, only for it to be overturned after the game. It’d be truly quite astonishing if within one season we saw two red cards given in real time by a referee, reviewed by VAR, and upheld by the referee on second viewing, only for it to be overturned. What an absolutely horrifying reflection of the officiating standards in the Premier League.

[Minsk]

So, if the only reason he was given a red is because no attempt to win the ball was made the obvious answer in the future is just to go right the player. Take him out completely. That way it can only be a yellow. How fecking stupid is that!!

[Dusic]

I guess the appeal will rest on whether or not Bednarek is deemed to have made a foul as appears from the laws that if he did then a red card is justified.

Of course, it wasn't a foul, but this is the key point.

I see Arsenal are also appealing Luiz's red. I think this will remain a red as even though it was not intentional he did bring a player down when he was through on goal.

From the FA's perspective its probably less hassle to just reject both appeals rather than have to explain why one is different to the other.

[Sheaf Saint]

The more I look at this, the more angry it makes me that Dean didn't even review whether or not there was even a foul on the pitchside monitor.

You can clearly see Martial already on his way down having not made any contact with Bednarek.

They have to rescind that red card. They just have to. If they don't, it will just send a clear signal that they are corrupt as hell and don't care who knows it.

[Sheaf Saint]

And we all know full well if that exact same incident had happened at the other end, he would have just waved play on.

Not a chance in hell he would give the away team a penalty at OT for that.

[benali-shorts]

16 minutes ago, Dusic said:

I guess the appeal will rest on whether or not Bednarek is deemed to have made a foul as appears from the laws that if he did then a red card is justified.

Of course, it wasn't a foul, but this is the key point.

I see Arsenal are also appealing Luiz's red. I think this will remain a red as even though it was not intentional he did bring a player down when he was through on goal.

From the FA's perspective its probably less hassle to just reject both appeals rather than have to explain why one is different to the other.

The issue for PL being that if they deem Bednarek not to have made a foul, it also would mean Martial dived / cheated (there having been no contact), a complication which won't help our cause. Do they then have to cite Martial? I suspect they'll back Dean's interpretation, because....well, it's just easier that way. 

[Whitey Grandad]

1 hour ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

DGSO is only a red if no attempt is made to play the ball, maybe he was asked to check that. Not saying I agree with the decision, but only checking whether it’s red or yellow makes sense of the still frame. Unless the technology failed, it’s the only explanation. 

True, but that only applies only if a penalty is awarded since a goal scoring opportunity still exists.

1 hour ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

Dean also made the TV sign before showing the red. I’m pretty sure the TV sign isn’t made if the refs original decision stands. Maybe wrong, but if not, this backs up the theory that the monitor   was used for red card decision only. 

Making the TV sign is supposed to mean that a decision has been changed as a result of the review.

[Whitey Grandad]

4 minutes ago, benali-shorts said:

The issue for PL being that if they deem Bednarek not to have made a foul, it also would mean Martial dived / cheated (there having been no contact), a complication which won't help our cause. Do they then have to cite Martial? I suspect they'll back Dean's interpretation, because....well, it's just easier that way. 

Yellow cards cannot be reviewed after the match. There is ‘bringing the game into disrepute’ but that is separate and more serious.

[RedWillie]

On BBC site now. We are appealing it and also asked that Mason and Dean don't officiate anymore of our matches.

Southampton request Mike Dean and Lee Mason do not officiate games - https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/55922560

[eurosaint]

They won't overturn it, they'll bottle it once again and move on to the next fiasco 😦, Dean will not be admonished in any way as that would be a loss of face for the lot of them ! 

Maybe one of you smart techies could put together a montage of the dodgy decisions over the last four days so that we can circulate online and try and build a bit of momentum for change ????

 

[tajjuk]

2 hours ago, Sheaf Saint said:

And we all know full well if that exact same incident had happened at the other end, he would have just waved play on.

Not a chance in hell he would give the away team a penalty at OT for that.

Well the other stupid thing is we damn know full if he hadn't given it, VAR wouldn't have over ruled him that way either. 

VAR isn't correcting bad decisions, its reinforcing them, it just leans towards whatever the ref decided. 

In Cricket if it's clearly been caught or a very clear LBW that the Umpire has missed, then DRS they literally say 'you have to overturn your decision there', not 'hey fancy having a look at it, see if you feel like admitting you made a mistake? No, ok then no bother'. 

[DT]

2 hours ago, RedWillie said:

On BBC site now. We are appealing it and also asked that Mason and Dean don't officiate anymore of our matches.

Southampton request Mike Dean and Lee Mason do not officiate games - https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/55922560

Can we request that Dean and Mason leave the country?

[Whitey Grandad]

20 minutes ago, DT said:

Can we request that Dean and Mason leave the country?

Well, they’re both cu...s

[Wurzel]

4 hours ago, saintwbu said:

Fulham had a red card reviewed and given by VAR against Newcastle, only for it to be overturned after the game. It’d be truly quite astonishing if within one season we saw two red cards given in real time by a referee, reviewed by VAR, and upheld by the referee on second viewing, only for it to be overturned. What an absolutely horrifying reflection of the officiating standards in the Premier League.

Even more embarrassing overturning 2 from the same evening. Arsenal have appealed theirs too. 

VAR has been controversial since it was introduced but I can't ever remember quite so much outright condemnation from such a variety of sources as last night. Hopefully the PL will finally get the message that fans are turning their backs on the game as it is currently being played (fixed).

[egg]

4 hours ago, Dusic said:

I guess the appeal will rest on whether or not Bednarek is deemed to have made a foul as appears from the laws that if he did then a red card is justified.

Of course, it wasn't a foul, but this is the key point.

I see Arsenal are also appealing Luiz's red. I think this will remain a red as even though it was not intentional he did bring a player down when he was through on goal.

From the FA's perspective its probably less hassle to just reject both appeals rather than have to explain why one is different to the other.

My guess is that Luiz red will be rescinded and Bednarek's won't be. The explanation will be the distance between the defender and attacker. All bollox of course, neither was a foul. 

[Dusic]

Hearing that the FA have brought in Mike Dean and Leonard Mason to oversee this week's disciplinary appeals process.

Edited 4 February, 2021 by Dusic

[warsash saint]

How long does it usually take the FA to pull their finger out their arse & make a decision?

[Whitey Grandad]

1 hour ago, Dusic said:

Hearing that the FA have brought in Mike Dean and Leonard Mason to oversee this week's disciplinary appeals process.

And have their knuckles rapped.

[VectisSaint]

Red card overturned. Thank goodness there are still some sensible people at the FA/PL

[S-Clarke]

The Red Card has been overturned.

Common sense prevails. It's a shame it didn't on the night.

[Badger]

So can they expunge the penalty and last couple of goals as well then ?

And bring back transportation so Mike Dean only officiates an Aussie Rules match in future ?