• Littlegreenman42@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    11 months ago

    Somehow the Kai Havertz is a unanimous sending off by the panel, but the Bruno Guimares elbow/forearm to the back of the head is not deemed a red card by 2 people. Make it make sense

    • Interesting-Archer-6@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      11 months ago

      Yeah if Kai should’ve been sent off but Bruno’s is questionable, I’m very much questioning the “independence” of this panel.

    • its2304pmnow@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      11 months ago

      I’m more shocked that many people like you that don’t think it’s an absolute red card tackle.

      Just a few centimeters difference between a certain leg breaker.

      • Littlegreenman42@alien.topB
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        11 months ago

        Havertz is at least trying to block a clearance down the line, there is absolutely nothing about the Bruno incident that belongs in a football match

      • Gadzookie2@alien.topB
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        11 months ago

        I don’t think it was a few centimeters though, he catches him with his trailing leg. He is like a foot away from any spikes on leg contact.

    • simbols@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      11 months ago

      completely undermines any credibility this “independent” panel might have had.

    • farqueue2@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      11 months ago

      I read it as they were split 3-2 on whether VAR should have intervened. It’s not clear what the split was on the actual incident itself

      • IsleofManc@alien.topB
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        11 months ago

        Surely a vote for VAR not to intervene is the same as a vote saying it isn’t a red card

    • HighburyOnStrand@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      11 months ago

      PGMOL needs to be ripped to the studs and rebuilt. It is beyond repair or renovation at this point. It is a tear down.

    • forestation@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      11 months ago

      No. The article suggests everyone on the panel personally thought that the elbow was a red card offense. But only 3 out of 5 thought it was a clear and obvious error to not give a red. Meaning that 2 out of 5 believed there was a gray area where some refs could plausibly judge the offense to only be a yellow.

    • Same_Grouness@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      11 months ago

      The panel think that the team with the most money is right.

      Get used to it.

      Man City only not seeing sanctions because the UAE government would be raging about it is just another example.

    • DrCocktapus@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      11 months ago

      It’s not meant to make sense, it’s meant to distract from what was a very blatant case of match fixing.

    • BIG_FICK_ENERGY@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      11 months ago

      A lot of people have decided that Arteta’s comments were out of line, and are twisting their brains into pretzels to make his complaints look unhinged. I’m so over the entire thing honestly, the bootlicking of referees is astonishing.

    • Lewk_io@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      11 months ago

      No question about Willock hitting Gabriel in the face after he lost the ball as well