News:

Use a VPN to stream games Safely and Securely 🔒
A Virtual Private Network can also allow you to
watch games Not being broadcast in the UK For
more Information and how to Sign Up go to
https://go.nordvpn.net/SH4FE

Main Menu


Never a Red Card

Started by Ordar, August 12, 2017, 05:22:56 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Andy S

I cannot see what there is to appeal about by the rules of the game in that situation you are taking a walk. You don't need an early bath as you haven't had time to raise a sweat. Very silly and probably cost us two points

Baszab

I think I dislike Reading under Stam with his bully tactics more than CFC Brentford and QPR put together

westcliff white

Quote from: Andy S on August 12, 2017, 08:58:52 PM
I cannot see what there is to appeal about by the rules of the game in that situation you are taking a walk. You don't need an early bath as you haven't had time to raise a sweat. Very silly and probably cost us two points
I don't think the appeal will win personally, but I do not think it was a red card, there was a covering defender, but hey ho we got a point which is more than I thought we would get after 60 seconds
Every day is a Fulham day


jarv

I have not seen it yet. Harsh it may be but if it meets the definition then an extra game ban will be added.

ps...I hate Reading too. Soooo pleased they lost to Huddersfield. I was in a pub in Winchester, most supporting Reading. Thoroughly enjoyed seeing those bully boy cheats losing.

Robbie

I was sitting right in front of the incident. Sadly I think it was 70% a red card. What you can't see on the highlights due to the camera angle is that Kalas definitely puts an arm out and catches the Reading attacker. The initial reaction around me was disbelief that he did something so stupid.

Today was a top performance (COYWs) but I think Kalas should not have put his arm out... he was duped.

Sorry.

One Martin Thomas

Quote from: PokerMatt on August 12, 2017, 08:12:39 PM
Honestly? It's not as harsh as I had expected it to be.

I mean, the player is through on goal with a clear shot if he's not fouled. The early in the game sense might have come into play, but I doubt that'll be overturned.

I don't think they'll overturn that. Really not convinced it's worth appeal.


Finnegans Wake

Forgive me if I'm wrong (which I maybe, I've only viewed the highlights on my phone) but doesn't the other Reading player immediately pounce onto the loose ball in the box?

The red card is given for "denying a clear goal scoring opportunity". If the ref plays advantage Reading still get their shot on goal away in exactly the same place as they would of anyway so therefore the goal scoring opportunity wasn't denied.


andyk

Quote from: Finnegans Wake on August 12, 2017, 10:26:11 PM
Forgive me if I'm wrong (which I maybe, I've only viewed the highlights on my phone) but doesn't the other Reading player immediately pounce onto the loose ball in the box?

The red card is given for "denying a clear goal scoring opportunity". If the ref plays advantage Reading still get their shot on goal away in exactly the same place as they would of anyway so therefore the goal scoring opportunity wasn't denied.



I think you may have just proven the case for the prosecution. If the other Reading player stays on his feet, then they have 2 players clean through, against an out of position Ream. They would almost certainly have scored.

Anyway, great result in the end.

Finnegans Wake

Quote from: andyk on August 12, 2017, 10:37:20 PM
Quote from: Finnegans Wake on August 12, 2017, 10:26:11 PM
Forgive me if I'm wrong (which I maybe, I've only viewed the highlights on my phone) but doesn't the other Reading player immediately pounce onto the loose ball in the box?

The red card is given for "denying a clear goal scoring opportunity". If the ref plays advantage Reading still get their shot on goal away in exactly the same place as they would of anyway so therefore the goal scoring opportunity wasn't denied.



I think you may have just proven the case for the prosecution. If the other Reading player stays on his feet, then they have 2 players clean through, against an out of position Ream. They would almost certainly have scored.

Anyway, great result in the end.

But the rules don't take the quality of the chance into account (I think). A goal scoring opportunity still remains.

I suppose it could be argued that the act of denying a goal scoring opportunity is a red card irrelevant of what happens after but then they changed to rules last season or the season before. Now if you are the last man in the penalty area, you bring someone down and a penalty is given then you don't receive a red card on the basis that the goal scoring opportunity still remains.


AlexW132

nice of Modou Barrow to celebrate Kalas' red card, classless fool

The Rock

I just watched this 20 times.

Free kick to Reading, that's it.

It's fixed - we need to grease the refs like the other teams I reckon. No I am not joking.

The Rock

Still can't believe it after 10 more times of watching it.  :wow:

I wonder what will happen to the ref? Fast pay makes fast friends?


Arthur

Quote from: Statto on August 12, 2017, 11:52:01 PM


An interesting picture.

To me, it confirms that the Reading player could have taken the ball at least a further 7-or-8 yards directly towards the goal without Ream being able to get across to challenge him. In which case, I fail to see how Kalas's foul has not denied a goalscoring opportunity. (Playing an advantage would not have given the other Reading player the same chance: he was moving in the direction of the penalty spot and not towards the ball.)

The Rock

Quote from: Arthur on August 13, 2017, 01:52:11 AM
Quote from: Statto on August 12, 2017, 11:52:01 PM


An interesting picture.

To me, it confirms that the Reading player could have taken the ball at least a further 7-or-8 yards directly towards the goal without Ream being able to get across to challenge him. In which case, I fail to see how Kalas's foul has not denied a goalscoring opportunity. (Playing an advantage would not have given the other Reading player the same chance: he was moving in the direction of the penalty spot and not towards the ball.)

So you are saying that another player could have intervened? Sounds like any other free kick outside the box then, not a clear one on one with the goalie. Last time I checked just about every foul right outside of the box was to prevent a clear goal scoring opportunity.

therealjaybee

Definitely a  063.gif

Can understand how it was given as a  096.gig

Have to admit though, I think in the early stages of a game refs are usually FAR more lenient which is why this was surprise.

One thing to also bear in mind is that they've reinstated the law where giving away a penalty is most likely a red card now whereas last year it would only be a yellow unless it was a dangerous tackle. That could have been playing on the refs mind a bit?


Denver Fulham

It was pretty clearly a red card/DOGSO infraction. It sucks, but it's the same call in the 1st minute as the 89th. We got a good point.

AnEssexFan

From where we were sitting it looked a red to me. The ref had a poor game but at the time I felt I couldn't complain about the red card. Not seen a replay yet.
@leightonrw07

One Martin Thomas

Quote from: Arthur on August 13, 2017, 01:52:11 AM
Quote from: Statto on August 12, 2017, 11:52:01 PM


An interesting picture.

To me, it confirms that the Reading player could have taken the ball at least a further 7-or-8 yards directly towards the goal without Ream being able to get across to challenge him. In which case, I fail to see how Kalas's foul has not denied a goalscoring opportunity. (Playing an advantage would not have given the other Reading player the same chance: he was moving in the direction of the penalty spot and not towards the ball.)

Need a wider shot of this foto. Another Fulham player is closer to the goal than the one you see here.


westcliff white

Quote from: Robbie on August 12, 2017, 09:26:29 PM
I was sitting right in front of the incident. Sadly I think it was 70% a red card. What you can't see on the highlights due to the camera angle is that Kalas definitely puts an arm out and catches the Reading attacker. The initial reaction around me was disbelief that he did something so stupid.

Today was a top performance (COYWs) but I think Kalas should not have put his arm out... he was duped.

Sorry.
Watching the rep,as it is quite clear what he did for me, I just think there is doubt as ream was closer to the goal and coming across. Having said that I do not think we would win any appeal as it has to be Chrystal clear to win those and thus isn't.

Don't think an additional game will be  added unless they believe we are trying to delay when the suspension starts, if they think we are then they will class it as frivolous and add an extra game to the 3 he will surely get
Every day is a Fulham day

Delboy

To me, bad judgement by Kalas, should have let the player go, Button may have saved it, at worse we are a goal down with 89 minutes to recover, with 11 men.
Not seen the AK trip on TV yet late on in the game, their player didn't even get spoken to. He was on a yellow, surely it deserved a caution even if it wasn't meant as he implied.