• forestation@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Looks like the article has been corrected. It now says “but on a split 3-2 decision for the VAR to get involved.” That suggests they all personally thought it was a red, but only 2 out 5 thought a yellow was a clear and obvious error

    • Harvey-Specter@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      That suggests they all personally thought it was a red, but only 2 out 5 thought a yellow was a clear and obvious error

      He didn’t get a yellow for the elbow, he got a yellow in the 88th minute for shoving Vieira in the face.

      So actually 2 of the 5 thought giving him nothing for purposely elbowing an opponent in the back of the head was not a clear and obvious error.

      • forestation@alien.topB
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I forgot Guinarares didn’t get a yellow, but that doesn’t change the main point.

        The fact that no yellow was given was (probably) because the on field ref didn’t see it. However VAR can’t intervene to give a yellow. So the question is whether it was a clear and obvious error to not give a red. And 2 out of 5 thought no.

        Anyway, I’ve had enough of this discussion. Everything has been laid out, if you don’t accept it, then you don’t.

    • playathree@alien.top
      cake
      B
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      He didn’t even give a foul let alone a yellow. If that’s not clear and obvious I don’t know what is. They need to let the VAR just talk to the ref more like in Rugby