Aston Villa vs Brighton post-match thread

[LukeJames]

The Dermot Gallagher ref watch thing on SSN is a cringe fest. If the penalty stood then he would've still said it was the correct decision. Pointless feature but with 24/7 coverage they need to put something on.

[john e]

In what world do people think that is not a penalty? I respect one's right to an opinion, but Trez cuts the ball back and the defender gets a touch but then proceeds to hack Trez's shins. Let's allow that the player "defended the ball" (which is dubious), he then impedes Trez's ability to continue to play and chase down the ball by taking him down in the box. By any reasonable standard, that is a penalty. Again, I respect a person's right to view it as a fair play, but it surprises me greatly that anyone does!

So by definition you think every tackle with contact is a foul?  Every sliding tackle is a foul etc?

no not every foul
Just the ones where the contact is a direct kick to the opponents legs

[paul_e]

In what world do people think that is not a penalty? I respect one's right to an opinion, but Trez cuts the ball back and the defender gets a touch but then proceeds to hack Trez's shins. Let's allow that the player "defended the ball" (which is dubious), he then impedes Trez's ability to continue to play and chase down the ball by taking him down in the box. By any reasonable standard, that is a penalty. Again, I respect a person's right to view it as a fair play, but it surprises me greatly that anyone does!

So by definition you think every tackle with contact is a foul?  Every sliding tackle is a foul etc?

No, literally no one this thread has come close to suggesting that. What many people have said is that March didn't 'win' the ball. If there's no contact Trez retains possession and probably gets a shot away because the contact from March is nowhere near enough to take the ball away from him. If you make a tackle and don't clearly win the ball before making contact with the attacker then then I don't see how that's a legal challenge in line with the laws of the game. I've watched it 7-8 times since 'live' and nothing has changed my opinion that anywhere else on the pitch it's a guaranteed free kick no review required. All they've done, in my opinion, is set precedents that contact with the ball negates the possibility of a foul unless it's also a booking and that the bar for foul play is higher inside the box than outside.

I don't think either of those is a good thing for the game.

[robbo1874]

It is the MON dilemma, do you weaken the team by playing the second string or risk burn out and injuries by sticking with the best X1.

i Spose if we’d won we wouldn’t be talking about this. They could’ve probably rested all the international players and still put out a strong side. I do go along with the keep the settled side theory, but sometimes I think maybe you do need to rest a few players in a situation like where they’ve just played international games and we’ve decent players in the squad who haven’t.

[chrisw1]

I don't see how you can watch this 7 or 8 times and not see how the defenders touch significantly takes the ball away from Trez.  It may not be clean but it deflects the ball substatially.  In that action he then clips Trez - if he hadn't got the ball it would of course have been a pen.  It's a tackle.  It may not be an aesthetically pleasing one but it still nips the ball away from Trez.  Personally I don't want to see a game where slight contact after a tackle is deemed a foul.

https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11095/12140105/ref-watch-dermot-gallagher-on-conor-gallagher-bruno-fernandes-incident-not-a-penalty

[Abbeyfealeavfc]

That link has certainly convinced me....not.
Sh-t decisions made by refs or var or both and then endorsed by the likes of gallagher will only serve to ensure that refs or var or both remain sh-t.

[Drummond]

The grass was too long for our game. The ball was moving around more slowly than normal.

[The Edge]

The grass was too long for our game. The ball was moving around more slowly than normal.

All joking aside. I did comment while watching the game that the pitch didn't look it's usual immaculate best on Saturday. Just an observation.

[Lastfootstamper]

I don't see how you can watch this 7 or 8 times and not see how the defenders touch significantly takes the ball away from Trez.  It may not be clean but it deflects the ball substatially.  In that action he then clips Trez - if he hadn't got the ball it would of course have been a pen.  It's a tackle.  It may not be an aesthetically pleasing one but it still nips the ball away from Trez.  Personally I don't want to see a game where slight contact after a tackle is deemed a foul.

https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11095/12140105/ref-watch-dermot-gallagher-on-conor-gallagher-bruno-fernandes-incident-not-a-penalty

Trez could have stayed on his feet if he wanted

It's looking like we'll never agree on our definitions of 'substantially', 'significantly' or '90 degrees', but I can't escape the feeling that your biggest beef with this is that you think Trez wasn't robust enough.

[ChicagoLion]

I think the number of Villa fans on here that did not think it was a pen is a clue as to why it was not given.
Its not as clear cut as the Fernandez foul on Konsa for example that did arrive at a penalty decision (incredbly) and every one of us agreed it was an abomination of a decision..
And this was more of a penalty because the contact was instigated by March.

[The Edge]

I don't see how you can watch this 7 or 8 times and not see how the defenders touch significantly takes the ball away from Trez.  It may not be clean but it deflects the ball substatially.  In that action he then clips Trez - if he hadn't got the ball it would of course have been a pen.  It's a tackle.  It may not be an aesthetically pleasing one but it still nips the ball away from Trez.  Personally I don't want to see a game where slight contact after a tackle is deemed a foul.

https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11095/12140105/ref-watch-dermot-gallagher-on-conor-gallagher-bruno-fernandes-incident-not-a-penalty

You used the words "clips Trez" and "slight contact" Neither of these are close to what actually happened. I think a true description is "gets the faintest of touches with the outside of his boot. He then clatters Trez's shin". I think that's a more accurate description of what actually happened. I usually rate Michael Oliver but he would have gone up in most people's estimation if he had looked at the monitor in normal speed and said "I'm happy with my original decision" Now he just looks weak and indecisive.

[Lastfootstamper]

The grass was too long for our game. The ball was moving around more slowly than normal.

All joking aside. I did comment while watching the game that the pitch didn't look it's usual immaculate best on Saturday. Just an observation.

Watching that ball travel along the edge of the box towards March almost looks like it was filmed in reverse with how it starts off rolling true before beginning to skip higher and higher, eventually sitting up perfectly for the foot he normally only uses for standing.

[Drummond]

The grass was too long for our game. The ball was moving around more slowly than normal.

All joking aside. I did comment while watching the game that the pitch didn't look it's usual immaculate best on Saturday. Just an observation.

I was being serious!... Well just a little bit. I'm not blaming it as its the same for both sides but I did think it looked slow.

[chrisw1]

I don't see how you can watch this 7 or 8 times and not see how the defenders touch significantly takes the ball away from Trez.  It may not be clean but it deflects the ball substatially.  In that action he then clips Trez - if he hadn't got the ball it would of course have been a pen.  It's a tackle.  It may not be an aesthetically pleasing one but it still nips the ball away from Trez.  Personally I don't want to see a game where slight contact after a tackle is deemed a foul.

https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11095/12140105/ref-watch-dermot-gallagher-on-conor-gallagher-bruno-fernandes-incident-not-a-penalty

Trez could have stayed on his feet if he wanted

It's looking like we'll never agree on our definitions of 'substantially', 'significantly' or '90 degrees', but I can't escape the feeling that your biggest beef with this is that you think Trez wasn't robust enough.

That's not true I think he did the right thing and it's just unfortunate the defender got the ball first.  My biggest beef is we didn't get the penalty and I was furious the ref changed his mind.  It's just that on re-watching it I can clearly see the touch on the ball that I didn't see properly at the time and if it was us defending I would have said that touch was enough for it not to be a pen.

[paul_e]

I don't think anyone is going to change their minds on this, it all comes down to how you define 'gets the ball' and 'careless'.

For me, gets the ball means the attacker player loses possession even if there is no contact between the players. In this situation I believe that if March catches the bal las he did but doesn't kick Trez as well then Trez stays in possession and probably gets a shot away.

Careless just means contact that was unnecessary but isn't dangerous and is very often fairly minor contact so even if you think it was just a light tap across the shin (I don't, Smith said he heard the contact from the dugout) that doesn't mean the challenge wasn't careless.

If the defender wins the ball and the tackle isn't considered reckless or excessive then there's a fair argument that it's not a foul but for me he didn't do that. Other people will see contact with the ball and think that's enough, which is up to them, but I think there are more examples where contact with the ball like this is deemed irrelevant than where it's enough to not be a free kick.