Yeah, I guess you’re right so I think that will be the call.He did get a touch FWIW
Yeah, I guess you’re right so I think that will be the call.He did get a touch FWIW
Well, shit. Now he’s probably getting a start next week.I’m loving Tuchel giving Gallagher all the reasons to push for a loan to Palace.
Now I'm a Spurs fan; and I don't have a problem with TT doing the sideline strut after the Chelsea goal after tempers had already flared--but you can't do that and get mad when Conte...gives you an aggressive handshake.Tuchel is such a clown to me
Funny .. the announcer claimed it was TT that gave the super aggressive hand shake which set Conte off.Now I'm a Spurs fan; and I don't have a problem with TT doing the sideline strut after the Chelsea goal after tempers had already flared--but you can't do that and get mad when Conte...gives you an aggressive handshake.
Completely agree .. when I saw it in the first replay it looked an obvious red. There didn’t seem to ne anything else reviewable. Gee, if only we could hear the VAR deliberations. “Serves him right damn hippy”Tuchel and Conte both acted like clowns.
I don't really understand how VAR can't give Romero a red on the hair pull. What exactly would they have to see for that to be deemed violent conduct? A face stomp afterwards?
Referee: Anthony Taylor (pictured). Assistants: Gary Beswick, Adam Nunn. Fourth official: Peter Bankes. VAR: Mike Dean. Assistant VAR: Mark Scholes.
Anthony Taylor clearly jealous of Cucurella’s majestic mop.Completely agree .. when I saw it in the first replay it looked an obvious red. There didn’t seem to ne anything else reviewable. Gee, if only we could hear the VAR deliberations. “Serves him right damn hippy”
They can count on viewer #51 if they cover his trial and conviction next season.Are there more than 50 people who watch “Chrisley Knows Best”? How is that even a thing?
I don't know enough to know, but there were 3 incidents.He’s obviously not going about it the right way, but it’s not hard to figure out why Tuchel has lost his mind. Taylor and Dean have a lot to answer for (except they won’t).
Tuchel will be rightfully disciplined, but there will be no explanation or sanction for a horrific display from the match officials. New year, new head, same results.
It matters, but it's not 100%. But either way, after that happened and before the goal, Chelsea got possession of the ball and turned it over.The one I am most unsure of the the tackle before the goal. It looked on replay that the defender got a toe on the ball. How much does that matter?
That worked!The hair pull is another matter. That has to be a straight red and I don't think there is any argument for it not being considered violent conduct. My guess is that the VAR bottled it for dumb reasons - "there''s only a minute left in the game, I'll just let it slide rather than giving a red that might generate controversy" kind of thing.
Tottenham Cristian Romero will not face retrospective action for pulling the hair of Chelsea's Marc Cucurella on Super Sunday - as pulling a player's hair is not considered an offence in football's rules.
So, because the action was reviewed in-game by VAR and because hair pulling isn't a red, VAR could not ask the ref to review.And because VAR took a look at the decision, Romero will not face any further punishment for violent conduct. Retrospective action can only be given when both the match and video officials fail to spot an incident on the pitch in real time and do not mention it in their post-match report.
Had referee Taylor spotted the incident in real time, then the correct course of action would have been a free-kick to Chelsea, leaving Spurs unable to score from that specific attack.
Unlike rugby, football laws do not specifically mention hair-pulling. The officials must decide whether the extent of the hair pulling is forceful enough to be considered violent conduct, if it is not then it would probably be considered unsporting behaviour and result in a yellow card.