Match officials…

I'm not a fan of sharing Twitter links but its the only way i can see to easily share the video here. For me he does nothing wrong. He was attempting to pass the ball and the bolton lad threw a leg at it. Studs not raised and didn't dive in. In fairness to the ref I think the fact that his standing leg slipped made it look more like he dived in but I dont think he did.

https://x.com/The_Mannster/status/1956736684097417499

 

Vimal cannot have complaints at either booking. The first he retaliated and the second his studs were showing.

 

That's the link I have just found and was about to post - you beat me to it. End of the day, he got his shin and this view shows it clearly.

Even Hourihane says he agrees with the sending off and says he is more frustrated with the fact that he got needlessly involved for the first booking. Which is good because that's how I see it. Hopefully he will be having words with VY and he'll learn from it because he needs to cut that out. It was a pointless first booking.

 

I've only seen the angle from the gantry cam, and from that it looks like he was making a fair 50/50 challenge. It may have looked more cynical closer up, but that's 2 soft reds IMO, and only 3 games in...

Edit, I've just seen the Twitter video just now. It still looks like he's just tried passing it.

 

Watch the view in the twitter link that @RamTam has posted. It's much clearer that he got him.

 

Nope. I'm afraid we're going to have to agree to disagree here. From that angle he's tried passing it and the other player's come off worse from the challenge. IMO no intent, no yellow.

 

There doesn't need to be intent. He got his shin / ankle.

If that had been his only booking, i highly doubt that there would be such a hoo-har about whether it was a booking - it would be accepted that it was. I am really struggling here to see how on earth it is so contentious. In this day and age, that is a booking all day long. It just happened to be his second one.

 

Never a foul

 

Bolton played the "game" well, then. We're going to have to learn the dark arts to stop getting caught in these naivety traps and "giving the refs decisions to make".
Ie:
● no 50/50 challenges
● no getting manhandled and pinned to the ground
● superman reflexes to stop getting the ball volleyed at our hand from 2 yards away.

Else this is going to be a fun, yellow and red coloured season!

Btw, this is the 2nd time Vimal has been attacked in 3 games. Versus Plymouth he got punched in the face with nothing done about it, after Shep's being the subject of Weridu's wrestling talents - from which we're facing a disciplinary charge; And Bolton, getting shoved in the chest. I think I'd be fed up of it too.

 

Absolutely

 

So who is kicking who?

 

So yoganathan gets the ball, their player doesnt

 

That's what the still shows is it? Yoganathan getting the ball?

Anyway, where in the laws of the game is there any mention that getting the ball means it's not a foul?

https://www.thefa.com/football-rule.../football-11-11/law-12---fouls-and-misconduct

 

Edit: wait. Is that the ball on the left nowhere near the two players? So they both dove in to absolutely nothing then?

 

I think it’s pretty obvious he wins the ball but follows through . Does he slip? Perhaps, but it matters not. His foot is high and I don’t think we have a good argument, it’s a red card.

I do think there’s an argument that their man could have been sent off in the first incident for 1. The first challenge combined with 2. the aftermath .

I think he used excessive force in the first challenge.

bottom line is that Vimal is young and was naive. He needs to wise up. He has a good teacher in Hourihane.

Perhaps a learning experience for Hourihane too in that he should have brought him off at half time.

 

100%

 

2nd was a dive

 

Absolutely. Agree with all points.

Not sure if you meant it this way but you make a good point when you say its a red card - some refs would have shown a straight red for it. Then we could have this discussion about whether it was harsh. But we are not even talking about that, it was given as a (second) yellow. Looking at the footage, I just can't see how anyone could quibble that it wasn't a yellow card offence. For me, it was one of the most clear cut yellow cards you'll see all season.

"But he got the ball" - doesn't matter, he followed through and got the man.

"There was no intent" - irrelevant.

It might be sh.t, we might moan that the game is too soft these days. All of that might be valid. But the fact is that in the modern game, that is a card all day long.