CGO rule

[Olgrligm]

I've seen threads discussing the offsides and the refereeing in general on Saturday, but I haven't seen anything about what seemed to be the two clear-cut red cards. On the first occasion, one of our players (Ince?) was brought down on the halfway line, with three Stoke players in the clear with no other defenders around. Fair enough, it was a long way from the goal, but I would have said that the fact that we'd completely overloaded them would compensate for that. The second one was much closer to the goal, but I suppose there was another defender who might just have got back. Even so, most weeks you would expect at least one of them to result in a red. Am I just going mad?

Then again, anything's possible after Mignolet was only booked for legging up Diouf.

[bayernoatcake]

I’d be fuming if one of ours are sent off for either tbh.

The first is too far back for the ref to give a red. You’re probably right and we should score from what the situation but it was just too far out imo. Yellow seemed right.

The second one was closer but again I never thought it’d be a red.

[RF10]

Feb 11, 2020 22:05:56 GMT bayernoatcake said:

I’d be fuming if one of ours are sent off for either tbh.

The first is too far back for the ref to give a red. You’re probably right and we should score from what the situation but it was just too far out imo. Yellow seemed right.

The second one was closer but again I never thought it’d be a red.

Second was a close call but I think he was saved as there were two Charlton defenders back.

[lordb]

There is no last man rule
The rule relates to denying a clear goal scoring opportunity
The second one definitely a yellow as there were covering defenders

The first on was a long way out but we would have been clear in goal with teammates to pass to
Red card for me

[scfc75]

Whilst it was annoying to not see a red for either, I wasn’t surprised. There was reason in both cases for it to be a yellow, as Bayern suggests.

[rickyfullerbeer]

Feb 11, 2020 22:13:37 GMT lordb said:

There is no last man rule
The rule relates to denying a clear goal scoring opportunity

It really fucks me off how BT Sport state 'last man' on their vidi-printer as a reason for a sending off. Absolutely tinpot.

[mattador78]

First one McLean was running away from goal towards the touch line imho if he was running the other way direct to goal it was a red all day

[albundy]

Feb 11, 2020 21:53:09 GMT Olgrligm said:

I've seen threads discussing the offsides and the refereeing in general on Saturday, but I haven't seen anything about what seemed to be the two clear-cut red cards. On the first occasion, one of our players (Ince?) was brought down on the halfway line, with three Stoke players in the clear with no other defenders around. Fair enough, it was a long way from the goal, but I would have said that the fact that we'd completely overloaded them would compensate for that. The second one was much closer to the goal, but I suppose there was another defender who might just have got back. Even so, most weeks you would expect at least one of them to result in a red. Am I just going mad?

Then again, anything's possible after Mignolet was only booked for legging up Diouf.

He wasn't the last man on the 2nd

[Deleted]

It has to be a clear goal scoring opportunity and neither were.

Both cynical but exactly the right challenges.

I hope we'd do the same in similar circumstances.

[Rt Hon Reverend Luvpump]

I always base my judgement on experience of watching refereeing decisions that go against us not the rules of the game! So for me deffo red cards.
By the way are they still giving penalties for shirt pulling in the box haven’t seen many given lately🤓

[rawli]

Feb 11, 2020 22:17:23 GMT rickyfullerbeer said:

Feb 11, 2020 22:13:37 GMT lordb said:

There is no last man rule
The rule relates to denying a clear goal scoring opportunity

It really fucks me off how BT Sport state 'last man' on their vidi-printer as a reason for a sending off. Absolutely tinpot.

It's up there with not putting the ball in the middle of the quadrant for me.

[PotterLog]

Feb 11, 2020 22:13:37 GMT lordb said:

There is no last man rule
The rule relates to denying a clear goal scoring opportunity
The second one definitely a yellow as there were covering defenders

The first on was a long way out but we would have been clear in goal with teammates to pass to
Red card for me

They’re never going to adjudge it a *clear* GSO if you’re more than one or two touches from goal, there’s still far too much to do.

[lordb]

Feb 11, 2020 23:07:35 GMT PotterLog said:

Feb 11, 2020 22:13:37 GMT lordb said:

There is no last man rule
The rule relates to denying a clear goal scoring opportunity
The second one definitely a yellow as there were covering defenders

The first on was a long way out but we would have been clear in goal with teammates to pass to
Red card for me

They’re never going to adjudge it a *clear* GSO if you’re more than one or two touches from goal, there’s still far too much to do.

does it depend on the player?
If Campbell had been in that position I'd expect him to go on and score
much less so for the other players but if the foul hadn't occurred and we didn't score then I think there would have been, quite rightly, a right whinge from our supporters for failing to take advantage

tricky as we are expecting ref to judge what is a clear goal scoring opportunity which is entirely subjective as proven by difference on opinion on this thread.

[Veritas]

Feb 12, 2020 8:49:46 GMT lordb said:

Feb 11, 2020 23:07:35 GMT PotterLog said:

They’re never going to adjudge it a *clear* GSO if you’re more than one or two touches from goal, there’s still far too much to do.

does it depend on the player?
If Campbell had been in that position I'd expect him to go on and score
much less so for the other players but if the foul hadn't occurred and we didn't score then I think there would have been, quite rightly, a right whinge from our supporters for failing to take advantage

tricky as we are expecting ref to judge what is a clear goal scoring opportunity which is entirely subjective as proven by difference on opinion on this thread.

No, nothing to do with who the player is it is all down to the situation with very little chance of a red card much outside the penalty box.

[leicspotter]

Feb 11, 2020 22:48:42 GMT mattador78 said:

First one McLean was running away from goal towards the touch line imho if he was running the other way direct to goal it was a red all day

That's what the ref seemed to be indicating at the time...players can change direction...

[greyman]

Neither were a straight red, but then their number 2 later in the game hauls back a player who'd beaten him without getting a second yellow. Given the cynicism of the first foul, that should have been his day over.

[reddipotter]

I accept the explanations people have given as to why they weren't red card offences, but that means that the rules allowed Charlton to benefit from two blatant pieces of cheating. In both cases the chances favoured a goal being scored.

[Clem Fandango]

I’m sure tug on Thompson late on was red at the time. He looked to be pretty much in the clear to me.

[lordb]

Feb 12, 2020 10:27:24 GMT Clem Fandango said:

I’m sure tug on Thompson late on was red at the time. He looked to be pretty much in the clear to me.

There were two other Charlton defenders coming across.

It is tricky

[greyman]

Feb 12, 2020 10:45:06 GMT lordb said:

Feb 12, 2020 10:27:24 GMT Clem Fandango said:

I’m sure tug on Thompson late on was red at the time. He looked to be pretty much in the clear to me.

There were two other Charlton defenders coming across.

It is tricky

What's really needed is for the ref to tell the player that he's doing them a favour with a yellow but that anything else and they're gone. Like I said above, their number 2 should have gone later in the game on that basis.

[Veritas]

Feb 12, 2020 10:22:38 GMT reddipotter said:

I accept the explanations people have given as to why they weren't red card offences, but that means that the rules allowed Charlton to benefit from two blatant pieces of cheating. In both cases the chances favoured a goal being scored.

Yes as is it in many cases of foul play, really unless you adopt the Rugby Union concept of a penalty try nothing guarantees that foul play wont't favour the offender.

[PotterLog]

Feb 12, 2020 8:49:46 GMT lordb said:

Feb 11, 2020 23:07:35 GMT PotterLog said:

They’re never going to adjudge it a *clear* GSO if you’re more than one or two touches from goal, there’s still far too much to do.

does it depend on the player?
If Campbell had been in that position I'd expect him to go on and score
much less so for the other players but if the foul hadn't occurred and we didn't score then I think there would have been, quite rightly, a right whinge from our supporters for failing to take advantage

tricky as we are expecting ref to judge what is a clear goal scoring opportunity which is entirely subjective as proven by difference on opinion on this thread.

There’ll be extensive guidelines on it I’m sure but broadly I think you’re thinking of it too much from a supporter’s point of view. What we see as a great chance for our team to score is not the same as an “obvious” (as it’s actually worded) goal-scoring opportunity in the rules.

As an example, say we break and we’re clean through with three advancing attackers versus one isolated defender, with the ball just past the halfway line in the “inside right channel” (tm Nige). We would all see that as a golden opportunity and be expecting us to score, but in reality there’s still a long way to go to the goal, a player might miscontrol, a poor pass might be played or whatever. So as infuriating as it might be, if that defender cynically takes out the winger on the ball in that moment, he’s still not denying an obvious GSO because there’s still a large part of the attacking move to be played and plenty that could go wrong.

I think it only becomes an obvious GSO when, at the moment of the foul, the defender basically prevents a player from slotting the ball home, or being in the position to slot the ball home.

[mattador78]

Feb 12, 2020 9:23:44 GMT leicspotter said:

Feb 11, 2020 22:48:42 GMT mattador78 said:

First one McLean was running away from goal towards the touch line imho if he was running the other way direct to goal it was a red all day

That's what the ref seemed to be indicating at the time...players can change direction...

True but at that moment they will see it as he wasn’t heading for goal, it’s bullocks really as let’s be honest it was cynical and knew what they were doing on both occasions so they should have walked

[Veritas]

Feb 12, 2020 12:46:48 GMT mattador78 said:

Feb 12, 2020 9:23:44 GMT leicspotter said:

That's what the ref seemed to be indicating at the time...players can change direction...

True but at that moment they will see it as he wasn’t heading for goal, it’s bullocks really as let’s be honest it was cynical and knew what they were doing on both occasions so they should have walked

Yes they were both cynical and you may feel the rules should be changed to have such incidents result in red cards but under the current rules they were clearly yellow card offences so they should not have walked.

[reddipotter]

Feb 12, 2020 12:21:14 GMT PotterLog said:

Feb 12, 2020 8:49:46 GMT lordb said:

does it depend on the player?
If Campbell had been in that position I'd expect him to go on and score
much less so for the other players but if the foul hadn't occurred and we didn't score then I think there would have been, quite rightly, a right whinge from our supporters for failing to take advantage

tricky as we are expecting ref to judge what is a clear goal scoring opportunity which is entirely subjective as proven by difference on opinion on this thread.

There’ll be extensive guidelines on it I’m sure but broadly I think you’re thinking of it too much from a supporter’s point of view. What we see as a great chance for our team to score is not the same as an “obvious” (as it’s actually worded) goal-scoring opportunity in the rules.

As an example, say we break and we’re clean through with three advancing attackers versus one isolated defender, with the ball just past the halfway line in the “inside right channel” (tm Nige). We would all see that as a golden opportunity and be expecting us to score, but in reality there’s still a long way to go to the goal, a player might miscontrol, a poor pass might be played or whatever. So as infuriating as it might be, if that defender cynically takes out the winger on the ball in that moment, he’s still not denying an obvious GSO because there’s still a large part of the attacking move to be played and plenty that could go wrong.

I think it only becomes an obvious GSO when, at the moment of the foul, the defender basically prevents a player from slotting the ball home, or being in the position to slot the ball home.

I wouldn't dispute any of that explanation, but in both cases on Saturday the defenders obviously thought that a goal was very likely and were prepared to take a free kick and a yellow card, and possibly even a red, in order to stop the attacker. Not that I have a good idea about how the rules could be changed.

[Veritas]

Feb 12, 2020 14:09:09 GMT reddipotter said:

Feb 12, 2020 12:21:14 GMT PotterLog said:

There’ll be extensive guidelines on it I’m sure but broadly I think you’re thinking of it too much from a supporter’s point of view. What we see as a great chance for our team to score is not the same as an “obvious” (as it’s actually worded) goal-scoring opportunity in the rules.

As an example, say we break and we’re clean through with three advancing attackers versus one isolated defender, with the ball just past the halfway line in the “inside right channel” (tm Nige). We would all see that as a golden opportunity and be expecting us to score, but in reality there’s still a long way to go to the goal, a player might miscontrol, a poor pass might be played or whatever. So as infuriating as it might be, if that defender cynically takes out the winger on the ball in that moment, he’s still not denying an obvious GSO because there’s still a large part of the attacking move to be played and plenty that could go wrong.

I think it only becomes an obvious GSO when, at the moment of the foul, the defender basically prevents a player from slotting the ball home, or being in the position to slot the ball home.

I wouldn't dispute any of that explanation, but in both cases on Saturday the defenders obviously thought that a goal was very likely and were prepared to take a free kick and a yellow card, and possibly even a red, in order to stop the attacker. Not that I have a good idea about how the rules could be changed.

The rule could easily be changed from preventing clear goal scoring opportunity to the much misquoted last defender.

[PotterLog]

Feb 12, 2020 14:12:42 GMT Veritas said:

Feb 12, 2020 14:09:09 GMT reddipotter said:

I wouldn't dispute any of that explanation, but in both cases on Saturday the defenders obviously thought that a goal was very likely and were prepared to take a free kick and a yellow card, and possibly even a red, in order to stop the attacker. Not that I have a good idea about how the rules could be changed.

The rule could easily be changed from preventing clear goal scoring opportunity to the much misquoted last defender.

Defenders don't form a convenient line from first to "last" though do they. What happens if the foul is committed in between two defenders? Or a forward is prevented from taking a clear shot on goal despite there being other defenders in the penalty area? The idea of the "last man" serves some purpose as a working definition in some scenarios but there's a reason the rule is not worded like that.

[Vermelho20312505]

Whenever there is discussion around which direction a player was going it drives me insane. These are professional footballers who amazingly can kick the ball in various different directions very easily.

The Charlton player who took McClean down clearly recognised that it was a serious situation hence the challenge. These kind of fouls should be cut out and refs can do it by punishing appropriately. Should have been a red.

[lifelong]

Personally wish we did it a bit more, particularly thinking of the Derby game where we let their midfield break away, twice.

[PotterLog]

Feb 12, 2020 15:06:07 GMT Vermelho20312505 said:

Whenever there is discussion around which direction a player was going it drives me insane. These are professional footballers who amazingly can kick the ball in various different directions very easily.

The Charlton player who took McClean down clearly recognised that it was a serious situation hence the challenge. These kind of fouls should be cut out and refs can do it by punishing appropriately. Should have been a red.

But that’s not what the rule is. The ref did punish appropriately. What you’re advocating is a change in the rule.