Hoover Attack wrote: ↑Wed Feb 26, 2025 3:55 pm
Any player who lunges at an opponent in challenging for the ball from the front, from the side or from behind using one or both legs, with excessive force or endangers the safety of an opponent is guilty of serious foul play.[/b]
I'm sure we've been over this previously for another incident? It all comes down to whether Currie used 'Excessive Force' or not (he didn't) or if he endangered the safety of an opponent (he didn't).
You could make a case that the tackle meets this criteria.
1. It was a lunge
2. Lunging at somebody with both feet off the ground can endanger the safety of an opponent as you’re not in complete control when you leave the floor
For complete clarity, I’m not saying I think the ref got it bang on but I’m disputing the implication that his decision was completely unfounded.
But is someone in control just because they don't leave the floor? Momentum can still mean you're not in control.
No. But I don’t see that as being relevant to the both feet off the ground interpretation. Both of these can be true:
1. Both feet off the ground is always deemed as not being in control and endangering an opponent
2. There are occasions where a player makes a challenge with one foot on the ground which is deemed to be not in their control and endangering an opponent.
Additionally, the fact that there is an entire thread on this challenge with a variety of opinions suggests that the ref did indeed have an argument for sending him off.
If you want a genuinely bizarre decision think back to that time James Dayton got sent off whilst being structured off with his ankle snapped in half.
Re: Currie Red
Posted: Wed Feb 26, 2025 5:32 pm
by CharlieO
dayton threw his boot at the ref.
Re: Currie Red
Posted: Wed Feb 26, 2025 5:59 pm
by Hoover Attack
The reason he ‘lunged’ was because that south London dwarf was pulling him back. Was a free kick to us.
Re: Currie Red
Posted: Wed Feb 26, 2025 6:38 pm
by The Reverend
Hoover Attack wrote: ↑Wed Feb 26, 2025 5:59 pm
The reason he ‘lunged’ was because that south London dwarf was pulling him back. Was a free kick to us.
This presupposes two things which I don’t think are necessarily true:
1. A player being infringed by an opponent cancels out an offence subsequently made by the player being infringed in the first place
2. A player cannot be sent off if the offence they commit is the result of an infringement being made upon them in the first place.
For example, it’s entirely possible for a free kick to be awarded for an offence on a player and the player who won the free kick to also be sent off for an act they committed directly after or as a result of that infringement. One doesn’t cancel out the other.
Each offence (the pull on currie and Curries lunge) are judged independently. You can make a case that the ref got both calls wrong.
Hoover Attack wrote: ↑Wed Feb 26, 2025 5:59 pm
The reason he ‘lunged’ was because that south London dwarf was pulling him back. Was a free kick to us.
This presupposes two things which I don’t think are necessarily true:
1. A player being infringed by an opponent cancels out an offence subsequently made by the player being infringed in the first place
2. A player cannot be sent off if the offence they commit is the result of an infringement being made upon them in the first place.
For example, it’s entirely possible for a free kick to be awarded for an offence on a player and the player who won the free kick to also be sent off for an act they committed directly after or as a result of that infringement. One doesn’t cancel out the other.
Each offence (the pull on currie and Curries lunge) are judged independently. You can make a case that the ref got both calls wrong.
When one action is a direct result of the other - which it was in this case - then yes, it does ‘cancel’ it out.
Regardless, I don’t think it is a lunge and of excessive force anyway.
I forgive him, it’s not his fault. He’s never had to referee a game in that sort of environment before so you can understand him caving in like he did.
It’s the organisers fault for giving him a top of L1 game in front of 25/30k fans when he’s not up to it.
Refs should have a maximum attendance award, depending on their experience. Saying they can referee games up to a certain division is meaningless.
Not all L1 games are the same. 1,500 people watching Cambridge v Burton in L1 does not require the same level of official as 30,000 watching Birmingham v Bradford, for example.
Hoover Attack wrote: ↑Thu Feb 27, 2025 9:56 am
Refs should have a maximum attendance award, depending on their experience. Saying they can referee games up to a certain division is meaningless.
Not all L1 games are the same. 1,500 people watching Cambridge v Burton in L1 does not require the same level of official as 30,000 watching Birmingham v Bradford, for example.
This is a great shout. We had a similar issue back in the conference days. Officiating a match against two former league sides in front of 6,000 people is completely different to doing it in front of 600 people for a couple of semi-pro sides.
I really loathed the appalling standard of officiating down in the abyss.
This guy is so up himself . Some of his quotes about us and the red card and how they dominated
f*cking hell. That's an awful take.
He makes 3 points, he has seen them given in the Premier league, VAR would have picked up on it, and the Brum player was lucky not to get injured. Neither of the first two are relevant only what would happen in commensurate circumstances in other L1 games, and he wasn't lucky not to get injured, he didn't get injured because it was not a reckless or dangerous interception. As said, the only reason the ball ran away from Currie and he had to make an interception rather than have the ball under control was because he was tugged back. He didnt go in studs up, he actuall flicks the ball with his toes. Usually the home ex players who co-commentate on lower league games are wall-eyed biased, but the ex blue on sky+ was adamant on first sight and after replays that it wasn't reckless nor was he off the ground as suggested and was an error by the officials. He was also clear that orient had dominated the game to then and birmingham were struggling to play their normal game.
The same ref has already had a red card rescinded so hasn't developed a learning faculty, particularly as the assistant right in front of the incident gave a throw; they normally flag like demented puppies if they can signal a foul and get involved in the game.
Hoover Attack wrote: ↑Thu Feb 27, 2025 9:56 am
Refs should have a maximum attendance award, depending on their experience. Saying they can referee games up to a certain division is meaningless.
Not all L1 games are the same. 1,500 people watching Cambridge v Burton in L1 does not require the same level of official as 30,000 watching Birmingham v Bradford, for example.
This is a great shout. We had a similar issue back in the conference days. Officiating a match against two former league sides in front of 6,000 people is completely different to doing it in front of 600 people for a couple of semi-pro sides.
I really loathed the appalling standard of officiating down in the abyss.
Surprisingly , officiating in League One isn't that much better
Re: Currie Red
Posted: Thu Feb 27, 2025 5:30 pm
by Celtient
I think people see what they want to see. I mean, that commentator describing it as "a lunging, high challenge" WTF?
Re: Currie Red
Posted: Thu Feb 27, 2025 5:32 pm
by RedDwarf 1881
Hoover Attack wrote: ↑Thu Feb 27, 2025 9:58 am
Have we appealed yet?
This is also what I'd like to know . The silence on this issue suggests we're not going to.
Re: Currie Red
Posted: Thu Feb 27, 2025 5:55 pm
by Hoover Attack
I’ve just remembered towards the end of the first half, he awarded us a drop ball mid way between the penalty area and halfway line, dropped it for Keeley then proceeded to run across Keeley so he couldn’t clear it long, almost allowing May to snatch it off him.
