Refwatch: Burnley FA Cup 4th round

[Ian Royal]

I was furious at the time, in fact for most of the game
Such an irrittating little man stopping and starting for no reason and not spotting obvious fouls and inventing others

But have seen our penalty shouts again on TV and I think he got them both right

as tenuous as the first shout was.......the burnley player deliberately had his arms wrapped around Raz's midriff....a foul...in the box= penalty

McDuffs was without a doubt a foul...a foul in the box = penalty

I don't care what Sir Steve said on Tv

Ref was blindsided to the hug and it was very soft. Rasiak did himself no favours by going down the way he did. But then it does seem that Refs are incapable of giving a penalty unless the player goes down.

If teh holding had been much more obvious and Rasiak hadn't have gone down, but been clearly impeded, I doubt he'd have got anything either.

[readingbedding]

Referee had an erratic performance.
He won't recieve a great mark through the match assessment.

[sandman]

It's the consistency that's the problem not just with D'Urso but all refs.The Mills booking was a case in point it was a deserved yellow card sure, but, the foul on Bertrand about 5 minutes earlier was also a yellow yet the Burnley player only got a talking to.

As for the McAnuff decision if that was anywhere else on the pitch it would have been a free kick. Gudjonsson was clumsy rather than malicious with the challenge but it was a foul and should have resulted in a penalty.

[Ian Royal]

It's the consistency that's the problem not just with D'Urso but all refs.The Mills booking was a case in point it was a deserved yellow card sure, but, the foul on Bertrand about 5 minutes earlier was also a yellow yet the Burnley player only got a talking to.

As for the McAnuff decision if that was anywhere else on the pitch it would have been a free kick. Gudjonsson was clumsy rather than malicious with the challenge but it was a foul and should have resulted in a penalty.

Think the Bertrand one was their first serious foul wasn't it? I thought he did well with that. He gave both teams a solid talking to for their first poor offence rather than going straight for the cards. Then got them out when the next offence from each came in. Again, consistently.

[bcubed]

It's the consistency that's the problem not just with D'Urso but all refs.The Mills booking was a case in point it was a deserved yellow card sure, but, the foul on Bertrand about 5 minutes earlier was also a yellow yet the Burnley player only got a talking to.

As for the McAnuff decision if that was anywhere else on the pitch it would have been a free kick. Gudjonsson was clumsy rather than malicious with the challenge but it was a foul and should have resulted in a penalty.

Don't think so - I did at the time, but in replay just looks a clumsy coming together and Jobi went over very easily
Hate to give Durso any credit but i think he got this right

[Ian Royal]

you've got to be the only person to think that.

[handbags_harris]

Did Gudjohnsen trip McAnuff resulting in McAnuff being impeded? Yes. It doesn't matter if there is intent or not, that is a foul and referees should give a decision in McAnuff's favour. Pedancy dictates that if the referee deems it an unintentional trip then an indirect free kick should be awarded.

As much as McAnufff engineered the position to get the trip, Gudjohnsen also had the opportunity to see what was happening and back off, avoiding contact. Defenders are as responsible for their actions as attackers are for theirs.

I short, a horrendous decision by one of the worst referees I have had the dubious priveledge of seeing take charge of a match. Funny how these big decisions regularly centre around this man isn't it?

[bcubed]

you've got to be the only person to think that.

apart from SSC?

[Ian Royal]

you've got to be the only person to think that.

apart from SSC?

Congratulations. Two of you.

[bcubed]

you've got to be the only person to think that.

apart from SSC?

Congratulations. Two of you.

Just correcting your inaccuracy

[Mr Angry]

The Rasiak dive was embarassing to be honest; i'm glad none of our other players went running after the ref demanding the pen for that!

As for the Jobi incident, from way up in the Upper West it seemed pretty clear to me; viewing replays, IMHO, only confirms that it was a foul, and whilst I'm not an advocate of player protests having an influence, it was noticeable how so many of the Reading players were incensed by the lack of a decision by D'oh-So.

Being generous to him, I've seen those both given and not given, but you have to ask yourself, had that been at Old Trafford and Rooney had gone down like that, what would the decision have been?

[Dave the rave]

Anus D'royd

[handbags_harris]

The Rasiak dive was embarassing to be honest; i'm glad none of our other players went running after the ref demanding the pen for that!

Did the arms around Rasiak's waist not have any bearing on your embarrassment? Unfortunately there is only one way a referee is going to make his mind up and that is by the player enforcing the referee to make a decision by going down. Referees never give penalties to teams who's players stay on their feet yet are clearly impeded (Fuller yesterday a case in point). Rasiak's attempt at winning the penalty wasn't great, and it's not something I like to see, but it's the only justification I can find for it - to force the referee to make a decision. I also always find it amusing that people always look at the infringed player first instead of looking to see what has made him go to ground. More often than not there is a deliberate infringement before the player's actions. Surely that should take precedence?

[Ian Royal]

The Rasiak dive was embarassing to be honest; i'm glad none of our other players went running after the ref demanding the pen for that!

Did the arms around Rasiak's waist not have any bearing on your embarrassment? Unfortunately there is only one way a referee is going to make his mind up and that is by the player enforcing the referee to make a decision by going down. Referees never give penalties to teams who's players stay on their feet yet are clearly impeded (Fuller yesterday a case in point). Rasiak's attempt at winning the penalty wasn't great, and it's not something I like to see, but it's the only justification I can find for it - to force the referee to make a decision. I also always find it amusing that people always look at the infringed player first instead of looking to see what has made him go to ground. More often than not there is a deliberate infringement before the player's actions. Surely that should take precedence?

Agree with that, although I think it would be a very very soft penalty to be given. Rasiak should have been stronger.

The best way to cut diving is a two pronged approach, give fks and penalties without players having to fall over & take retrospective action by video panel for diving.

A ref can't do it, because it simply isn't possible to be certain in the majority of cases, with one full speed view, to tell if a players has deliberately simulated contact and dived.