| Just watched the highlights 12:03 - Dec 3 with 1306 views | TNBlue |
How Matisuwa didn't get sent off for DOGSO I don't know
Very bad decision from the ref but lucky for us! |  | | |  |
| Just watched the highlights on 12:13 - Dec 3 with 1164 views | SitfcB |
Because Leif Davis was covering. |  |
| |
| Just watched the highlights on 12:14 - Dec 3 with 1155 views | Blueschev |
I didn't think he touched him to be honest. Though as the ref gave it I'm not sure how it wasn't a red. |  | | |
| Just watched the highlights on 12:20 - Dec 3 with 1129 views | bluester |
I saw a ref on Reddit explain that it wasn't a clear goalscoring opportunity and that the rule isn't related to the last man. [Post edited 3 Dec 12:21]
| | | |
| Just watched the highlights on 12:22 - Dec 3 with 1106 views | TNBlue |
| Just watched the highlights on 12:13 - Dec 3 by SitfcB |
Because Leif Davis was covering. |
I wouldn't call that covering. Leif was well behind and wouldn't have caught up i dont think. If the attacker hadn't been tripped he was through on goal with Walton well out of his area. | | | |
| Just watched the highlights on 12:24 - Dec 3 with 1080 views | BrayBlue |
I didn’t think it was even a foul - just a tangle of legs between two players running after the ball. Plus, as others have pointed out, Davis was back on the cover anyway - so never a red card.
Cheers,
JK | | | |
| Just watched the highlights on 12:34 - Dec 3 with 1027 views | Basuco |
| Just watched the highlights on 12:20 - Dec 3 by bluester |
I saw a ref on Reddit explain that it wasn't a clear goalscoring opportunity and that the rule isn't related to the last man. [Post edited 3 Dec 12:21]
|
looking at replays, it is quite obvious that the Blackburn player went past Matusiwa easily with pace, then instead of continuing towards goal slowed down to initiate the contact himself, Azor was caught out by the sudden slowing down.
Last man has never been in the rules, just constantly used by pundits who obviously do not know the rules, Leif was also quickly catching him up and would have been able to take over defending, the Blackburn player probably saw him as well and why he decided to take a dive rather than go for goal himself. |  | | |
| Just watched the highlights on 12:39 - Dec 3 with 983 views | mk_blue |
Yeah I thought that initially but then you see Davis covering and fair to say it wasn't a clear opportunity. Also it's becoming so common now for players to cut in front, or stop suddenly to draw the foul (see kerkez in just about every match), referees must have to account for that to some degree. Not like he intentionally held him back. | | | |
| Just watched the highlights on 12:40 - Dec 3 with 960 views | SitfcB |
| Just watched the highlights on 12:24 - Dec 3 by BrayBlue |
I didn’t think it was even a foul - just a tangle of legs between two players running after the ball. Plus, as others have pointed out, Davis was back on the cover anyway - so never a red card.
Cheers,
JK |
This. Matusiwa didn’t intentionally trip him, he was watching the ball and it was just a clash of legs. | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Just watched the highlights on 13:14 - Dec 3 with 837 views | Ftnfwest |
the davis covering argument seals it for me but only because the ball is bouncing high in the air, not on ground, he would have had plenty of time to get across. The blackburn player hadn't touched the ball at the point of the 'foul'. |  | | |
| Just watched the highlights on 13:15 - Dec 3 with 819 views | Plums |
| Just watched the highlights on 12:24 - Dec 3 by BrayBlue |
I didn’t think it was even a foul - just a tangle of legs between two players running after the ball. Plus, as others have pointed out, Davis was back on the cover anyway - so never a red card.
Cheers,
JK |
That was my view and that of the referee I was watching with.
But we are both slightly biased... [Post edited 3 Dec 13:16]
|  |
| |
| Just watched the highlights on 13:59 - Dec 3 with 699 views | RegencyBlue |
| Just watched the highlights on 12:24 - Dec 3 by BrayBlue |
I didn’t think it was even a foul - just a tangle of legs between two players running after the ball. Plus, as others have pointed out, Davis was back on the cover anyway - so never a red card.
Cheers,
JK |
Watching it in real time I thought Matusiwa was a lucky boy to stay on the pitch but having seen it again it does just look like a tangle of legs and Davis was covering. |  | | |
| Just watched the highlights on 14:06 - Dec 3 with 650 views | TNBlue |
| Just watched the highlights on 12:40 - Dec 3 by SitfcB |
This. Matusiwa didn’t intentionally trip him, he was watching the ball and it was just a clash of legs. |
Well the ref obviously saw it as a foul as he carded him. However, I guess he didn't see it as a DOGSO offence | | | |
| Just watched the highlights on 14:08 - Dec 3 with 628 views | Ftnfwest |
| Just watched the highlights on 12:22 - Dec 3 by TNBlue |
I wouldn't call that covering. Leif was well behind and wouldn't have caught up i dont think. If the attacker hadn't been tripped he was through on goal with Walton well out of his area. |
he never had possession of the ball though, it was bouncing and well above head height which would have given Leif plenty of time, plus 45 yards out | | | |
| Just watched the highlights on 14:12 - Dec 3 with 592 views | Smoresy |
| Just watched the highlights on 13:14 - Dec 3 by Ftnfwest |
the davis covering argument seals it for me but only because the ball is bouncing high in the air, not on ground, he would have had plenty of time to get across. The blackburn player hadn't touched the ball at the point of the 'foul'. |
Totally, ref needs to decide if reasonable to expect their attacker would control the ball and make it to Walton unopposed. Given direction and height of ball, proximity of Leif, I'm very comfortable ref made the right call. Was worried at the time mind, given the background to last night's game. | | | |
| Just watched the highlights on 14:14 - Dec 3 with 579 views | Swansea_Blue |
| Just watched the highlights on 12:22 - Dec 3 by TNBlue |
I wouldn't call that covering. Leif was well behind and wouldn't have caught up i dont think. If the attacker hadn't been tripped he was through on goal with Walton well out of his area. |
Matusiwa was obviously the last man. Leif [may] have got back as we know he’s quick and seemed to be making up ground, so I can only assume the ref thought he could have. I think we got away with one; could very easily have been given. Unless the ref could see there was no contact, which isn’t clear on the replays. |  |
| |
| Just watched the highlights on 15:02 - Dec 3 with 491 views | jaykay |
matisuwa never tackled him or stuck a leg out. the blackburn player knew he wouldn't go on to score as the ball was bouncing about , decided to slow down and try to win
a sending off |  |
| forensic experts say footers and spruces fingerprints were not found at the scene after the weekends rows |
| |
| Just watched the highlights on 15:08 - Dec 3 with 460 views | mellowblue |
| Just watched the highlights on 14:14 - Dec 3 by Swansea_Blue |
Matusiwa was obviously the last man. Leif [may] have got back as we know he’s quick and seemed to be making up ground, so I can only assume the ref thought he could have. I think we got away with one; could very easily have been given. Unless the ref could see there was no contact, which isn’t clear on the replays. |
To be last man, he has to be in a clear goal scoring opportunity and I don't think he had this, not having any control of the ball and not heading directly to goal either. I think the ref got it right, especially as it is just a tangle of legs. By the time the striker would have got to the ball and had control leif would have been on him. I thought the ref gave them far too many decisions, but he got this one right. Of course if it was the other way round and Clarke is being fouled by a defender, it is a straight red, every day of the year..... | | | |
| Just watched the highlights on 15:28 - Dec 3 with 397 views | usm |
Yep I agree.
We definitely got away with one at Blackburn - two in fact, including the first game.
Only thing is he was a long way form goal and Davis was coming across so perhaps it wasnt an 'obvious' goalscoring opportunity. But they are given more often than not. |  |
| |
| Just watched the highlights on 15:46 - Dec 3 with 354 views | RIPbobby |
Too many grey areas for me to say it is a certain red card. Lots of kick outs to give a yellow. I don't think the camera angles I've seen so far point to a foul at all. |  | | |
| Just watched the highlights on 16:01 - Dec 3 with 316 views | Cheltenham_Blue |
Because it was never a red, barely a yellow. Attacker felt the contact and went down as though shot. |  |
| |
| Just watched the highlights on 16:16 - Dec 3 with 293 views | ITFCson |
1. No where near the goal
2. Attacker going away from goal.
3. Covering defender
And even then I am not sure it was even a foul, barely any contact if any at all.
Yes we played bad and lucky to get a draw but that was not even close to a red card | | | |
| Just watched the highlights on 16:26 - Dec 3 with 256 views | Swansea_Blue |
| Just watched the highlights on 15:08 - Dec 3 by mellowblue |
To be last man, he has to be in a clear goal scoring opportunity and I don't think he had this, not having any control of the ball and not heading directly to goal either. I think the ref got it right, especially as it is just a tangle of legs. By the time the striker would have got to the ball and had control leif would have been on him. I thought the ref gave them far too many decisions, but he got this one right. Of course if it was the other way round and Clarke is being fouled by a defender, it is a straight red, every day of the year..... |
He’s a way out, so yes that could well have had a bearing on the ref’s decision. | |
| |
| Just watched the highlights on 16:34 - Dec 3 with 248 views | Nthsuffolkblue |
I think most of the comments made cover my view of it.
As soon as the ref gave the foul I expected the red card and was surprised it was yellow. However, I think the ref was unconvinced it was a foul so went with the yellow card on the basis that the attacker was heading away from goal and Davis was getting back to cover.
I thought the ref was poor all night and annoyed both sets of fans. |  |
| |
| Just watched the highlights on 16:44 - Dec 3 with 222 views | TNBlue |
Who downvoted this? What's his problem! | | | |
| Just watched the highlights on 16:52 - Dec 3 with 198 views | Nthsuffolkblue |
| Just watched the highlights on 16:44 - Dec 3 by TNBlue |
Who downvoted this? What's his problem! |
Click on the number and it tells you ... DaveU. Never get upset about a DaveU downvote. They will never explain why if you ask them either.
However, I would say it is possible someone could downvote in the belief that it wasn't a red card or because they recognise the rule is no longer whatever DOGSO stands for (Denial Of a Clear Goal Scoring Opportunity?) [Post edited 3 Dec 17:02]
| |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
