League Cup League Cup 2024/25 (Semi Finals) - On BeIN Sports

[Frank Bunn]

Am I right to say that in the situation where a second yellow should be given that the instruction to refs is that advantage shouldn't be played?

It depends on if the ref thinks there's a clear opportunity to score a goal. If so, he allows play to go on then comes back and sends the player off. If not, he stops play and sends the player off immediately. Either way I think the ref got it wrong.

Here's the law.

Advantage should not be applied in situations involving serious foul play, violent conduct or a second cautionable offence unless there is a clear opportunity to score a goal. The referee must send off the player when the ball is next out of play but if the player plays the ball or challenges/interferes with an opponent, the referee will stop play, send off the player and restart with an indirect free kick, unless the player committed a more serious offence.​

 

[Mr Meow]

You wind yourself up!

It's so weird for the football part of this forum to have some of the more precious souls. Getting upset on the behalf of others, no less.

Anyway, I assume that poster is usually a bit more chilled out.

Spurs played well (hope this doesn't offend).

 

[SM]

It's so weird for the football part of this forum to have some of the more precious souls. Getting upset on the behalf of others, no less.

Anyway, I assume that poster is usually a bit more chilled out.

You're still carrying on about something from early this morning.

Move on, discuss the game. Breathe. Let it go.

My god.

 

[Mr Meow]

You're still carrying on about something from early this morning.

Move on, discuss the game. Breathe. Let it go.

My god.

Maybe follow your own advice. You're getting angry now for being mocked about your sensitivity. It's not the end of the world.

 

[SM]

Maybe follow your own advice. You're getting angry now for being mocked about your sensitivity. It's not the end of the world.

I'm not angry in the slightest. Again, move on.

I left it alone all afternoon and you're still going on and taking sniping shots at me so I've interjected. Enough.

 

[Mr Meow]

I'm not angry in the slightest. Again, move on.

I left it alone all day and you're still going on and taking sniping shots at me so I've interjected. Enough.

Easy big fella, the only person I appear to have upset today is you.

I was just getting an idea if this is your usual routine, or whether you're simply having a bad day. Why else bother with your "hurr durr you seem to upset every supporter base" spiel?

If you're not usually like this, I apologise for getting you at a bad time.

 

[SM]

It depends on if the ref thinks there's a clear opportunity to score a goal. If so, he allows play to go on then comes back and sends the player off. If not, he stops play and sends the player off immediately. Either way I think the ref got it wrong.

Here's the law.

Advantage should not be applied in situations involving serious foul play, violent conduct or a second cautionable offence unless there is a clear opportunity to score a goal. The referee must send off the player when the ball is next out of play but if the player plays the ball or challenges/interferes with an opponent, the referee will stop play, send off the player and restart with an indirect free kick, unless the player committed a more serious offence.​

The law you've quoted is missing an important element, an offence can occur that isn't worth a yellow card, and in that situation an advantage can be played.

 

[chef]

Time to quit the personal niggles, let's get back to discussing the game hey.

 

[Jars458]

The law you've quoted is missing an important element, an offence can occur that isn't worth a yellow card, and in that situation an advantage can be played.

Indeed, and last night should not have been one of those times.

 

[Jars458]

That isn't his argument FFS.
That's your incorrect interpretation and comprehension.

His argument is that complaints about no second yellow could be easily made in the other direction about the first yellow.

Do you think the ref had the first one in mind when he didn't give the second one? Really it just means there were two mistakes. They are bloody incompetent.

 

[SM]

Do you think the ref had the first one in mind when he didn't give the second one? Really it just means there were two mistakes. They are bloody incompetent.

I doubt it, but my initial point which Zidane misrepresented was that people are sitting here endlessly debating whether he should have had a second yellow but no one is acknowledging he shouldn't have had a first. The ref made two decisions, you can argue they were both wrong, but then if they were both right he'd still only be on one yellow so it seems a bit of a redundant discourse.

 

[Frank Bunn]

Do you think the ref had the first one in mind when he didn't give the second one? Really it just means there were two mistakes. They are bloody incompetent.

The first yellow card by Bergvall is irrelevant.

It was a clear second yellow card offence. Didn't get anything of the ball to try to stop a Liverpool counter attack.

The law states that advantage should not be applied in situations involving a second cautionable offence unless there is a clear opportunity to score a goal. That wasn't the case. The ref should have stopped play and sent Bergvall off the field.

 

[SM]

The first yellow card by Bergvall is irrelevant.

It was a clear second yellow card offence. Didn't get anything of the ball to try to stop a Liverpool counter attack.

The law states that advantage should not be applied in situations involving a second cautionable offence unless there is a clear opportunity to score a goal. That wasn't the case. The ref should have stopped play and sent Bergvall off the field.

It's relevant in post game discussion just as much as the non-second yellow it.

 

[Jars458]

I doubt it, but my initial point which Zidane misrepresented was that people are sitting here endlessly debating whether he should have had a second yellow but no one is acknowledging he shouldn't have had a first. The ref made two decisions, you can argue they were both wrong, but then if they were both right he'd still only be on one yellow so it seems a bit of a redundant discourse.

I totally get your point. Didn't see the first yellow so not sure if that call was as bad as the clearly wrong second call.

 

[Bradesmaen]

So... How about them second legs.

 

[hawkman]

So... How about them second legs.

Liverpool lucky VVD is playing after putting his studs down Solanke's calf. Diaz also lucky not to see 2 yellows for 2 blatant dives. Other than that nothing else controversial should carry over to the 2nd leg.
Will be nice to get some players back for it though

 

[SM]

I totally get your point. Didn't see the first yellow so not sure if that call was as bad as the clearly wrong second call.

There was either no or extremely negligible contact which the Liverpool player made the most of, and not the sort of thing that the ref seeing the incident properly would give a yellow for. I just figure with the innocuousness of the first yellow people might not be so quick to anger about the lack of a second, as I said in my first post way back this morning, it's a bit of swings and roundabouts. A bit unlucky with the first and a bit lucky with the second.

 

[Cruyff14]

Liverpool lucky VVD is playing after putting his studs down Solanke's calf. Diaz also lucky not to see 2 yellows for 2 blatant dives. Other than that nothing else controversial should carry over to the 2nd leg.
Will be nice to get some players back for it though

Funnily enough Zidane neglected to mention either of these incidents.

 

[hawkman]

Funnily enough Zidane neglected to mention either of these incidents.

The Diaz one I am just having fun with given that one was Bergvall's yellow but I thought VVD was lucky. I mean not even a yellow for the studs on the back of the calf and then they are complaining for Bergvall not getting a yellow for a genuine attempt at the ball

 

[Bradesmaen]

The Diaz one I am just having fun with given that one was Bergvall's yellow but I thought VVD was lucky. I mean not even a yellow for the studs on the back of the calf and then they are complaining for Bergvall not getting a yellow for a genuine attempt at the ball

Didn't you know? VVD never does anything wrong, he is in fact perfect in all facets.

 

[Frank Bunn]

Yeah seemed a medical episode of some type

This doctor thinks Bentancur simply smashed his head on the ground and knocked himself out. Also says if medical staff are present then players shouldn't move their teammate as it risks compounding possible spinal injuries.