• Participation within this 'World Football' is only available to members who have had 5+ posts approved elsewhere.

Was Madleys Colocconi decision right?

Was red card justified?

  • Yes, he blocked last man in clear scoring chance

    Votes: 20 48.8%

  • No, too harsh decision not in line with his earlier rulings

    Votes: 21 51.2%
  • Total voters
    41
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.


RFUS said:
It's correct by the rulebook, but I think the rule needs to change. Conceding a pen and losing a man for one offence is too harsh and has ruined many games over the years.
Click to expand...

Mate thats illogical...what if they wouldnt score?refs can give penos and not give cards. Certain level of fouls mean cards.
 
TheFinnFan said:
Mate thats illogical...what if they wouldnt score?refs can give penos and not give cards. Certain level of fouls mean cards.
Click to expand...

If they miss a pen then they miss a pen. A "clear goalscoring opportunity" does not mean "a certain goal". A penalty is a clear goalscoring opportunity and seems a fine enough replacement for 99% of these offences.

The only exception is for example, cases like when Neville handballed it on the line against Lucas years ago. That was a certain goal, and so if they'd have missed the pen they'd have been livid. But generally most of these offences aren't like that.
 
Definitely a foul, took the man out, no attempt to play the ball.

Was it a Red Card? well, the striker possibly wasn't in control of the ball, but he was cynically wiped out.

Just one look at Colocconi and you can see he's a Bellend of the highest order. Best off the pitch for aesthetic reasons is nothing else.
 

Thinking about it more maybe it would be better to replace all last man/clear denial of a goalscoring opportunity offences with a spot kick, even if it was outside the area. And a maximum of a yellow card, no red.

If it was a clear chance to score, then give them that clear chance to score back (the pen). If the player was also on a yellow, then a second yellow means a red, that's fine. Much like making any other foul.

Just a thought. Probably loads of holes in this idea, like.
 
I think the foul was correct but the red wasn't.

Colocini clearly moved into Fletchers path and used his body/elbow to push Fletcher over to stop him getting the ball. Clear foul.

But i don't think the red was correct because it he didn't deny an "obvious goalscoring chance" because it's questionable that Fletcher would have got to the ball first, thus getting a shot at goal from about 6 yards out.

He might have done, he might not. Understandable the ref thinking he would in real time but i think he should have erred on the side of caution and not shown a red. But thats after wtaching replays, if he thought that Fletcher would have got to the ball first then the red is the correct decision.
 
RFUS said:
Thinking about it more maybe it would be better to replace all last man/clear denial of a goalscoring opportunity offences with a spot kick, even if it was outside the area. And a maximum of a yellow card, no red.

If it was a clear chance to score, then give them that clear chance to score back (the pen). If the player was also on a yellow, then a second yellow means a red, that's fine. Much like making any other foul.

Just a thought. Probably loads of holes in this idea, like.
Click to expand...

Furthermore, a decision is expected to be taken by the IFAB on the so-called ‘triple punishment’ (Law 12 – Fouls and Misconduct, Sending-off offences) with a proposal from UEFA to be reviewed, as well as the use of electronic performance and tracking systems.
Click to expand...

http://www.thefa.com/news/2015/feb/greg-dyke-and-david-gill-attend-ifab
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join Grand Old Team to get involved in the Everton discussion. Signing up is quick, easy, and completely free.

Register

Shop

Back
Top