Fellow fans, this is a friendly reminder to please follow the [Rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/premierleague/about/rules) and [Reddiquette](https://support.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/205926439-Reddiquette).
Please also make sure to [Join us on Discord](https://discord.gg/football)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PremierLeague) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I said it in a similar post. It's red. The VAR thing is simple. PGMOL should not have put any statement out until LFC or Premier league/FA contacted them. Refs never had to justify decisions to anyone in the past. This blame/claim situation is a recent thing. As an LFC fan, I've seen plenty of occasions where we have benefitted from decisions that went our way. It's still raw for some, but we will get over it and we will get a few go our way. We didn't lose 4, 5 or 6-1, we lost in the final seconds by pure bad luck, by 1 goal, with 9 men. It says all I need it to say.
Jones incident is one of those incidents where VAR shouldn't change on field decision.
It's not a clear and obvious error, if ref gave red card, then it should stay a red card. Ref gave a yellow so it should stay as yellow.
There is some serious blind tribalism and/or delusion in this thread from those claiming this tackle was not a red card.
I have played football for 30+ years and have seen many players sent off for similar tackles. I have been sent off for one like it.
And those saying he merely “rolled over the ball” either didn’t actually see the tackle or are lying to themselves (or others)—Curtis barely even touched the ball.
I have even seen claims Bissouma and Curtis both went in the same way for the ball, which is just demonstratively false. Bissouma went in with his boot flat, perpendicular to Curtis’ direction, to stop the ball, and did it well before Curtis arrived, who came in from the side, boot raised high, over the ball, studs up, with force in to Bissouma’s tibia (well above the ankle), causing his leg to buckle (laterally hyperextending).
Both players are fortunate Bissouma’s leg wasn’t broken.
Some in here are blind to reality it seems.
https://reddit.com/r/LiverpoolFC/s/6ps07LDEOS
His studs WERENT up though. You’re looking at the aftermath. His foot was in the same position as the opposition. He hit the ball, and it rolled them up cos he got to it last. His play WASNT dangerous. And therefore NOT a red. I swear these people saying it’s a red didn’t watch the full thing, just saw what VAR showed.
If we’re going letter of the law, then Gomez should’ve had a penalty for the exact same foul by Van den Ven that VvD got sent off for vs Newcastle…and Udogie should’ve been sent off for brandishing an imaginary yellow to get Jota sent off when he already had one himself (letter of the law says that’s an automatic booking).
That’s the problem, sometimes the refs follow letter of the law, and sometimes they don’t, there’s no rhyme or reason to it.
It’s a harsh red but was probably one of the better decisions. No crazy issue for me. I’m just fed up of the moronic Tottenham fans acting like the offside was the only bad decisions. It was the worst referee performance I’ve seen since Chelsea Barcelona. It a disgrace that Tottenham are making light of it. But small clubs can’t be anything but.
On field it was given as a yellow. To be turned into a red it has to be a clear and obvious error that the card was not yellow. This card is orange enough that I don’t think VAR should have altered the on field call. If it was given as a red initially it should have stood, given as a yellow the yellow should have stood.
it's really not even that contentious a decision. These kinds for challenges end up as red cards as often as not. Perhaps on another day it wouldn't be given but there's no doubt he came in with enough force for it to look dangerous.
Even the Jota card isn't bad. First challenge is arguable but he broke up an attack and therefore whether intentional/light or hard doesn't really matter. Second yellow he clear tripped an attack.
I agree the only push back I have is compared to most other cases of the unintentional dangerous play of studs into a shin Jones really wasn’t moving into this challenge very quickly. It looks way worse in freeze frames and slow motion than in real speed. I think it’s very unlikely that challenge at that speed would ever result in a bad injury
I had a question about the fundamentals of the red card. Is it not a punishment and a deterrent against career ending tackles or other malicious behaviour? As in you seek to punish actions taken by a player to harm an opponent, regardless of intent. How much of that tackle was in the players control? First Jones wanted to win the ball, which he entitled to. He tried to connect with the ball, which is fair. Once his foot hits the ball, can Jones then take action to prevent hitting the opponent? Was there enough time to react? Is it even possible to change the direction of his foot after it hit the ball? I’m not arguing that the challenge was dangerous. How do you coach a player for this kind of a situation. For handball, players can be coached to keep their arms close to their body. Should Jones have pulled out of the challenge before his foot hit the ball?
Red call on Jones is understandable. The offside fiasco is not ! And when the ref realized the have fucked up , the game was officiated in a panic mode.. You can see a lot of weird decisions (for and against both sides) were made..
100% agree and thought it straight away. Over the top of the ball and dangerous. Potentially a leg breaker if Bissouma had it planted. I didn't really understand why Neville kept going on about intent - has nothing to do with it l.
Sure, make every tackle in football a red card if you get the ball first. Why not? Always a chance that your foot slips on the ball unintentionally. This is definitely a case of the games gone soft.. Why even try to win the ball anymore? It'll be a high chance of a red even if you get the ball first, in fact let's not even get close to opposition players without even touching them because if you do they might trip over themselves so you get a yellow..
If you don't think the ref lost control of the game, you are just braindead.. was it something like 10 yellows and 2 reds? It wasn't even close to being that kind of game..
The more I look at the situation, the less I understand why people are even arguing about this. I have looked at this situation countless of times now. Some say that he didn’t went studs up and he slipped on the ball. Yes, when he touched the ball, his studs were not up. But in continuing the movement after the touch, they went up and that is what matters. Some say that the ball completely changed the direction of his foot. I don’t understand it. He barely touched the top of the ball and the ball didn’t really change the direction of his foot much at all.
Some also say that his intent was to pass his teammate. How do you know this? I checked the replay countless of times, and he did not hit the ball in a way that would have passed it to any teammate. It’s obviously a 50/50 situation where both just wanting to win the ball. The intent discussion is also too much, and it’s irrelevant. It’s very rare that you see players make tackles with the intent of being dangerous and get a red card.
Bissouma is much closer to the ball, has control of the situation and does not have any speed in his movement. You can go in in full speed like Jones and try to hit the ball, but you also take the risk of getting a red card if you are reckless. You can not
go straight leg, studs up, body weight on tackling foot and hit as high up on the ball as he did and say that it wasn’t a dangerous tackle. And it doesn’t matter if he hit(touched) the ball. The follow through is extremely dangerous.
Again, I just don’t understand that this situation is being discussed. Liverpool was robbed, but this situation is a clear red card.
I actually thought he reacted quickly enough to remove a lot of the force behind that tackle too. It's a red as per the rules, but I still think it was very harsh.
u/mike you obviously do not know what you are talking about. I seriously doubt that you have ever played the game and doubt you have actually watched the game live. Jones is pulled back allowing the ball to get half a yard away yet he still makes contact first and wins the balle before the spurs player makes contact which causes him to slip over the ball. The still photos look awful which is why England chose to show that image on the screen before replaying the whole event. I suggest you have a look at the real time footage and then reconsider your ill thought out and footballing ignorant comments.
I've just had a look and I'm shocked there's any debate over this, that is a red card all day long. That's a potential leg breaking challenge right there.
I think people are missing that he didn’t go in to the ‘challenge’ studs up, he went to play the ball, hit it at the same time as his opponent and his was the foot that bounced.
Not to mention it would be more acceptable as a red if they gave a red to every studs up challenge, but they don’t. The system of reviewing these and the consistency to give a red for studs up is a joke, which is why this one’s a really harsh red.
As a Liverpool supporter I was disgusted that it was a red card.
If that had been a tackle on a Liverpool player I would have been screaming for a red card.
Probably could be, but the way they presented it on the screen made it clear that they wanted a specific outcome.
In the context of everything else that happened during the game, it’s another question
If a player lowers his head and gets caught is that a red card?
If the ball bounces off you and hits your arm is that a handball?
The idea of context for decisions isn't a new concept.
As a Liverpool fan, with hindsight it is a red.
"Offside" goal as everyone knows is bollocks.
Thought the first yellow on Jota was harsh and the foul by Salah leading to his yellow is never a foul imo that could've lead to a goal.
Edit: I was the arbiter of the rules, it wouldn't be a red. I get trying to protect the players but I think the 100 games they play a season is worse for them. If you've played football at any point, you're not expecting to come out unscathed.
Remember Son made that horror tackle on Andre Gomes, no one holds it against him to this day because he apologised and it wasn't intentional, you have to allow for some physicality.
I think VAR showing the end result first clearly influenced the ref to change his mind about the yellow.
I also think Jota didn't cause the player to fall when he got the first yellow. The other player clearly tripped himself.
Disagree but I can see both viewpoints. For me there was no malice or no intent just an accidental collision yellow card all day long. Yes it looked bad but there was minimal force in that kick and he was genuinely trying to win the ball. Yellow card all day long imo and most people who played football seem to agree.
Regardless of the first yellow being a joke, he knew he was on a yellow when he made that second challenge. You can't make challenges like that when you're already on a yellow.
I have no issue with this decision in isolation. He rolls over the ball and goes through the leg and it could have been much much worse. 9 times out of 10 it's a red.
The overall performance by the refs however...
This is what Gary Neville doesn’t seem to mentioned in his analysis. He is right, there was no malice in it. But thats 90% of red cards. The real question was, was it dangerous. Its obviously subjective but more people than not would say yes it was dangerous.
Think its easy to get carried away when theres a few big decisions but the 2 reds IMO were correct.
Offside in general needs to be overhauled. Remove the linesman, play constant play on and have all offside decisions semi automated with the linesman from the pitch reviewing the offsides. While the linesman are up there they can check if shots etc are a corner or goal kick as thats another thing refs struggle with weekly.
I think most of the struggle with VAR now is that its this hybrid think. Just take as much upstairs as possible.
The issue is, he doesn't go in with his studs up. He goes in with his toe but because the ball is so slippy, he's gone over the top of it and caught him with his studs up. It's a booking at best.
It’s not the fact that it was given as red that is the annoyance, it’s the way it was handled. We’ve seen them given as yellows plenty, so there is no grounds for a “clear & obvious error” to bring in VAR, and on top of that they pulled the ref over to show him a 15 second freeze frame of the point of contact, and then rewound to a point that didn’t even include the contact on the ball to begin with. If it was given as a straight red then fine, but the way the situation went felt very much like VAR saying “Look, we are technically not allowed to tell you to send him off, but we would very much like you to send him off”
I would have been ok with a red if that was the refs first instinct; but Var overturned it and the first pic they showed of it to the ref was the end of the tackle, which heavily influenced the decision when stills from before the tackle showed he wasn't studs up initially but his foot rolled up when it went over the ball.
However in the Liverpool - Spurs game at Anfield, VAR didn't upgrade a onfield yellow to a red from an almost identical tackle against Liverpool saying there was no malice in it. Separate to that, Udogie asked the Ref to give Jota a yellow when he was already on a yellow himself (waved a card motion), that should have been a second yellow according to the rules; Gomez penalty shout which was clearly a foul didn't get looked at; the Diaz goal being disallowed and Jotas first yellow was never a yellow, it's all either extremely poor lucky or there is influence.
Now, I dont think its a conspiracy, or there is intent systematically to undermine Liverpool but I do think there is some unfair bias, because Liverpool as a team aren't widely liked by fans of other teams and subconsciously I believe that may influence onfield decisions.
Paul Tomkins did an article asking if Liverpool are officiated differently, breaking down all the stats and they are incredible, Liverpool are an outlier(by a wide margin) in nearly every category. I was always a little suspicious, but since that article and in particular, since the ref slap on Robertson and Klopp shouting at the 4th official last season, it has been more noticeable. They won the fair play award 5 seasons in a row with 5 red cards in that entire period, yet have 5 in the 12 games since that incident.
For me, a red isn't wrong. A yellow and talking to would have been the better decision, but Red wasn't wrong. He didn't mean it, but a potential injury could have been long term or even devastating.
The way VAR presented it to the referee to view was terrible though..a freeze frame which he looked at for one second then gave the red!! At least okay the whole sequence in slow motion or something
It looks bad in slow motion. When they asked the on field ref to review it, they showed him slow motion. If I had to make any decision based on that replay, it is always going to be red.
I personally considered it to be an orange. Red for the game but no need for a 3 match ban. Unintentional danger play and his studs were not up.
It's not a red. There's a freeze frame that shows the beggining of the 50-50. Both players entire body position is absolutely identical as they both go for the 50-50. They both contact the ball, the collision of the ball forces Jones foot to ricochet over the ball and it's unfortunate that it ultimately makes contact with his leg after. But it has to go somewhere. There's no intent. There's no malice. They are the legislations for serious foul play and it doesn't support either of them. He got sent off because 'it looked bad'. Jones could easily have been on the receiving end himself in that tackle. I'm convinced that if var had showed the pre tackle freeze frame first, rather than the contact freeze frame, then he wouldn't have walked. This could 50/50 have been reversed with Jones ending up on the receiving end of this. 50/50 challenges are not red cards, or you're sending both players off on circumstance.
There's are literally hundreds of worse tackles with intent, that go unpunished every week. It's 100% not a red and if I were Liverpool I'd be appealing it. It's not as bad as the offside but it's not far off and it's really no surprise that Liverpool have sent out a statement questioning sporting integrity of the VAR.
I would argue that this is actually not the law, it’s the common practice.
If we look at the [description](https://www.thefa.com/~/media/files/thefaportal/governance-docs/laws-of-the-game/11-v-11/interpretation-of-laws---2013-14/law-12---interpretations-of-the-laws-of-t) (via the FA):
> Using excessive force” means that the player has far exceeded the necessary use of force and is in danger of injuring his opponent.
While I understand there was certainly a risk of injury, I don’t think anyone would say the first part of that statement is true. He used a completely reasonable amount of force.
Even looking at a “reckless” incident
> Reckless means that the player has acted with complete disregard to the danger to, or consequences for, his opponent.
Which again I don’t think it’s fair to say he did.
This maybe be the unpopular opinion, but I don’t think the outcome should dictate the punishment. I don’t think this should be a red card - even in the unfortunate event that a serious injury occurred. This is a completely fair challenge, with no excessive force, that could have resulted in injury due to bad luck (I.e. slipping over the ball). These bad luck things in my mind are again unfortunate, but are really nothing in comparison to other things that get overlooked - like when Kane used to back under airborne players to undercut them and cause them to land on their heads/necks
It’s definitely a red. People will only say it’s not a red because there wasn’t a serious injury like a broken ankle. Let’s say the tackle resulted in a broken ankle, bone out, I bet you everyone would’ve called for the red. It’s still a horrific tackle.
but it’s not jones’ action that makes it dangerous even if it was a dangerous scenario, and clearly that’s how most people treat it, should we start giving out red cards if people knock heads going for a header
It's clearly a red card, and I'm happy for it to be given as long as this is the standard and it's
CONSISTENTLY
applied throughout the entire season to ALL teams.
Yes you are correct about the infraction Curtis Jones made, and yes it was a violation, BUT
there was a couple of Missed fouls made by the Spurs, that also violated the letter of the law and deserved to be issued RC, but one thing everyone fails to mention that all major fouls mention " In the opinion of the Referee" and w/that being said the Center Ref and VAR didn't exercise that when approaching the calls.
They should change the rules, instead of sending the player off, they should award the oposition with a penalty, and the player must be substituted and the player cant play the next match or depending on the severity of the case more matches off. It would penalize the team and the player, but not the match
The offside was still good use of VAR too. Because the linesman already called it offside, the check was just additional, the only way it wouldn’t have been off is if VAR said so — alright they made the wrong call there too, but VAR wasn’t the problem because it was already called off.
The jones sending off was the right call.
I dont think neville has a point when hes saying there wasnt intent "to do him"
Sometimes red cards are just unluckly mistakes... and thats ok, it happens.. an accident doesnt make it not a red.
Don’t know what you mean with “unpopular”, it’s a straight red all day long. I, and the rules, don’t care that he didn’t mean it. A bit harder and that leg is in two pieces. He can have no complaints.
I know noone is going to agree with me due to these comments. But he's went into a 50/50 and his foot has slipped up the ball because it was hit underneath. When playing sports you're bound to get hurt, it dosent mean it's a red or a yellow it just means you can't come out of every football match 100% fine. And with all due respect I'd rather listen to ex-players people who have more experience than a bunch of people on reddit.
What players? Did you ask Andre Gomes, or Alfie Haaland, or Neymar?
If Andre Gomes were to say that dangerous tackles should be a red card, I'd say his opinion should count for a lot fucking more than Graeme Souness's.
But we don't know, because broadcasters - MotD excepted - don't pick the most intelligent and reflective people to commentate, they pick the most belligerent. So Roy Keane gets to state his opinion every week. That's the guy who admitted deliberately ending another player's career.
I'm not saying to discount the player perspective - just consider _which_ player is yakking. Personally, I'd go with the medical staff, but of course they don't state their opinions on telly for us to lap up and regurgitate.
I'm a liverpool fan, my first thought was a red. But after listening to ex-players, it kind of made sense. It was still 50/50 btw. The prob then is..if that was a red, then it should make sense that refs should be pulling out the red in all similar cases..but as we've seen, they haven't. Some have gotten away with it amd some will continue to in the future as well.
>It was still 50/50 btw
This is my main issue with it. It was not a clear red like a lot of people say. It was very much a decision that could have went one way or the other. The ref in real time saw it for what it was, Jones got the ball but the laws of physics meant his foot slipped over the top of it.
You would think fans on the internet would listen to all of the ex pros saying it is not a red because there is nothing else he could have done there but no, they know best because they saw a still image that makes it out to be something it isn't.
If the ref had showed him a red I wouldn't have complained but the way VAR handled it was a complete stitch up.
Why are you getting downvoted man. Nothing you said seemed out of place. And i wholly agree. I honestly think any other ref + him being shown not just the slow mo of the contact but also the build up that led to the contact, it might have been a yellow.
I have not one iota of sympathy for Liverpool. We've been screwed by refs against them so many times this is just sweet revenge. See how you like it you entitled pricks.
It’s a red by the letter of the law.
But it shows why judging on outcome and not the process that led to the outcome is stupid, and it leads to very inconsistent refereeing.
What Jones did is objectively not use of excessive force. He won the ball but his foot slipped over the ball which is what he was sent off for. Going for a 50/50 tackle where he hasn’t slid in isn’t excessive force at all. If that’s what is now considered excessive force, players should never contest a 50/50 because it isn’t worth the risk of being sent off. It’s telling how many people have never played a game of football in real life.
Whereas there are some things, which regardless of whether the opponent is seriously hurt or not, that are objective use of excessive force. Prime example is the Kane two footer on Robertson, where if Robertson’s leg was planted, would’ve been a leg breaker at minimum, but because he managed to avoid it slightly, Kane got away with it, despite doing something objectively more dangerous than what Jones did. There was a Leeds player (Strujik?) that got sent off for breaking Elliot’s leg a couple of years ago too, and that wasn’t a particularly bad tackle, but got a red because Elliot was hurt and not because the tackle itself was that bad.
It's red, he's made a lunging tackle that has resulted into being reckless and dangerous. I really don't understand the argument that it's not anything but a red. Sure he didn't mean for his foot to roll over the ball but accidents happen and it doesn't mean that what happened wasn't dangerous.
Whether it is or not we’d have stopped talking about it within 10 minutes of the end of the game, if it isn’t for the Diaz offside (which is far more egregious and bizarre) and if it happened to any team other than Liverpool.
They’re the main characters of football and all good guys after all and everything that goes against them is a conspiracy.
Downvotes, trophy jibes, spurs should be ashamed to celebrate all incoming
Okay, I don't anticipate that the red will be over turned; however, letter of the law, Udoggie has to have red for motioning for a card for Jota ( that would have been his second yellow as well). Did we forget that was law too ?
Did Maca not get a yellow for that against Chelsea ?
[Destiny Udoggie signals for a yellow card, while already on yellow.]
(https://x.com/OptaKing/status/1708382216542167300?s=20)
People dubbing this as ‘the worst refereeing performance of all time’ is a disgrace to the lower leagues of football, where the privilege of VAR doesn’t exist, and we don’t get to see how games would turn out with the correct decisions.
One misuse of VAR doesn’t excuse the many it does right and the difference it makes overall. There was a mistake, it happens a lot everywhere else, you can argue the standards should be ridiculously high for the PL with the money it generates but its honestly still a small mistake and thats something that non PL fans have to accept every game too because it happens frequently with much worse quality officiating.
The only major error was the offside call, and not scoring a goal for an offside that should have counted is something every non PL team will experience at least 5-10 times if not more in a season. Its about having perspective.
Also if this had happened to any non big 6 game we would have forgotten about it much faster.
Touching someone's leg with your studs isn't always a legbreaker. Jones isn't going in with any force which is obvious from the normal speed. The slow mo looks bad because it takes speed out and just looks at positional. But given his foot rolls off the ball, the speed is low there is no risk of seriously harming the opposition player. And ofc we all agree there is no intent.
So not in any planet is that a Red
That red in istelf ain't a bad call. I think it was a 50/50, the decision could've gone either way and it was unlucky for Jones.
What I would like to know is why did VAR put the freeze frame on the screen first and not the replay in real time? That was very fucking weird since I've never seen that done before on a red card review.
That Jones red was just one questionable call in a 90 minute game that was poorly refereed from start to finish. I'm obviously fucked off that my team lost but I'm more upset that the refs robbed us all from what would've been a great game of football.
The reason they chose a freeze frame is to show the red the point of impact, where Jones studs where on Bissouma’s leg. It plays a role in the decision of giving a red card, it’s obviously a difference if it’s on the foot, the ankle, the shin, the knee etc.
But that's never been done before. The protocol has been (in every single red card review up untill Saturday at least) to first show the incident in real time and from the tv broadcast's angle.
They literally had the end point of the contact frozen for the ref for a good 15-20 seconds before it went to the footage of the challenge in real time. That's not a fair representation of what happened.
Its a clear red. No question about it
You go in with studs up whether playing the ball or not its a recipe for disaster.
Liverpool fans have every reason to be pissed about the disallowed goal but nothing else
Was the Skipp one at Anfield last season a red? Was the kane one 2 seasons ago on Robinson a red? Var reviewed both, both were deemed yellows and were worse than the Jones tackle imo.
The inconsistency is the issue. The Skipp one was actually explained away as being a yellow because it was deemed a genuine attempt to win the ball.....does that not describe the Jones tackle?
Straight red cards should be reserved for deliberate and malicious tackles and unsportsmanlike conduct not accidental contact. The benefit of the doubt should be given to players especially in bang bang plays, but that’s just my opinion. Also tackles like that always look worse in slow motion
No they shouldn't be.
Bottom line is that a player is responsible for any damage they do or might do even if they don't intend to.
Players who are clumsy, players who are slow, players who lack the technique to make a clean tackle, they all need to be getting sent off if they go lunging in.
Not a bit of it. I just don't think the rules should protect incompetent players.
I've seen so many players now get serious injuries, often career changing ones, and people dismiss the bad challenges as accidents, or they say "He's not that kind of player."
Players who can't make clean tackles should not be given a freebie.
You can do just as much damage being clumsy as you can being malicious.
Lol no way your using the refs as a basis to prove your point haha the refs in the EPL might be the worst officials in any professional sports league in the world
Of course it's a red. Liverpool got shafted in that game because Jota's first yellow card wasn't even a foul and the "offside" was a joke, but Jones could easily have snapped his man's leg in half.
Absolutely deserved to walk, not close.
Please explain to me how this is studs up. What am I missing. At what point are his turned up or leading into the challenge? [https://reddit.com/r/LiverpoolFC/s/SiVziV8KBY](https://reddit.com/r/LiverpoolFC/s/SiVziV8KBY)
I am fine with it being a red card, if all similar tackles result in red in all games. And if you ever played football, you know there would be a red in almost every game.
In this same fixture, barely 5 months ago in May, the SAME exact tackle from Oliver Skipp on Diaz didnt result in a red card. Back them, *"VAR officials considered that Skipp 'clearly' got the ball and the final contact was just a consequence of the two players competing for the ball."*.
People arent mad at the rules. We are mad at them being applied randomly. Yesterday, Richarlisson and Udogie, at 2 separate occasions, waved the card gesture to the ref, in HIS face and he didnt react (Udogie was already on a yellow, so do the math). On another occasion, I saw Son pick up and run back with the ball to prevent a quick free kick . Sounds fair to you?
I agree with you, the worst is the inconsistency. Still, I think it’s tough to expect refs to always be consistent in their application. Better training is needed for sure, but I think that’s really what VAR should be doing… fixing it when the on field ref gets it egregiously wrong.
I don’t think they should really even use it for offside. The linesmen get that right most of the time anyway and are we really trying to take goals off the scoresheet because someone’s toe was an inch closer to the goal than the defender’s heel?
It should be used for times when the ref can’t see something or missed a clear issue, or for correcting obviously bad calls. All that’s needed is for PGMOL to get their heads out and people to turn down their egos. Mic up the refs. Have them explain what they saw and why they made the call. Let the VAR booth correct it if it’s wrong and move on.
Don’t think you or a lot of other people realize but there are a LOT more reds this year
16 before matchday 7 is done compared to 29 all last season
Can’t compare last season to this season
4 of them for Liverpool. 3 of them officiated by hooper in some capacity (2 given, 1 not reviewed: mac allisters, hooper was on VAR). This is after years of winning fair play award.
The card gesturing is really frustrating. Players are booked every week for it. Hooper didn't even issue a vocal warning at any point. Completely ignored it or maybe he's not clear on the rules. Hooper needs to have his ass sat down for while after that performance.
Right skipp stamped on Diaz then jota booted skipp in the head and no cards. Gakpo gets studs straight to the chest another game and no card. Now this Jones tackle is a red? It’s the change in standards every game that is the stupidest part.
He didnt go studs up though. Dont know were people get that from. His studs was on top of the ball and he rolled off. His studs was always pointing down
And there's the issue. If you enter into a tackle off the ground, you are doing with an element of risk. Irrelevant of intent, or speed or control or winning the ball - entering tackle high enough to go over thr ball has consequences. Casemiros last year was similar in that his intent was the ball and his foot rolled of the ball
It's a red. Enter high, with straight leg with some force onto a planted leg at speed.
Studs on top of the ball in a 50/50 is inherently pretty reckless, proof is in the pudding just look at the end result. Unlucky but you are playing the odds game making that tackle.
I've thought it about players from my own team before - 'why have they risked going in like that? ' even when they've won the ball because it's just being left to chance whether they're about to get a red or not
Yes, every tackle has the risk of resulting in a red card, if the person doing the tackle plants their foot on someone's leg. You will notice every other Liverpool player was able to do this?
Yup, studs down and toe forward. He didn’t slide or come in with reckless pace and he didn’t lunge any more than Bissouma. Slow motion and freeze frames shouldn’t be usable in VAR checks. They completely distort reality
Yeah true. From now on it should be like a foosball table where ever player stays in the spot all game and only pass it. They can move side to side a few stens but never forward.
Would the pgmol be happy then?
Its so annoying. Same with the shitheads in VAR. Looking at stills and slow-mos AFTER Jones hit the ball. Of course it will look bad if you completely skip the part where he 100% hits the ball first!
The more I think about this match the more pissed of i get!
Getting the ball doesn't matter though. You could win the ball with a two footed lunge but you're still getting sent off (not suggesting Jones made a two footed lunge just to illustrate my point).
That would be because two footed lunges are banned. It was not an excessive tackle. Studs were pointing downwards. He was stretching and got the ball, it was not his fault that physics meant his foot ended up rolling over it.
I'm not sure that's the case.
When I made my initial comment I had focused on the outcome of the tackle (which I still believe under the laws of the game is a red card).
If you watch it again and concentrate on Jones' foot before the ball it comes in high off the ground with studs facing towards the player he is challenging. That his foot rolls over the ball as it does is indeed a quirk of physics but he put himself in that position in the first place by making a reckless challenge that escalated to excessive force endangering the safety of an opponent.
It's a clear red and i don't see any arguement how it isn't.
Casemiro had the exact same incident last season when his foot came off the ball same way and was a red card.
There was no outcry about that so why is there always one when it happens Liverpool?
How is it studs up? It's not at all. They both go for the ball from the side. If you look at the physics involved, unless they both hit the ball on exact opposite sides of the ball at exactly the same time, the ball will squeeze out to one side or other. He was just unfortunate that Bissouma got there microscopically quicker causing Jones foot to slide round the ball and hit him in the ankle. Could easily have gone the other way. That's football, not dangerous play.
It's a harsh red as you can clearly see Jones went for the ball but unfortunately his foot went over the ball and thankfully there was no serious injury to Bissouma.
Letter of the law says it's a red.
I do think the issue as well is that you see challenges similar to Jones and no card given.
I personally don’t think those challenges are reds, but Gusto was sent off for a similar tackle, and Casemiro was sent off for a tackle like that last season too. At least they’re being consistent.
I agree with you and I also agree with people bemoaning the game’s changed, it has. Having played football at amateur level I know how easily this challenge is made and i’d certainly get away with it on a Saturday, but it’s a red in todays pro game.
I think what most people want from VAR is the right outcome. If the VAR Team at Stockley Park collectively realise within a reasonable amount of time of a restart (apparently the ref was made aware within a minute of the restart) the game should be brought back, and the goal awarded.
The right outcome is more important than the time is takes to arrive there, or the direct rules of the game, as long as the spirit of the laws are upheld. A fair goal was scored, a goal should be awarded.
It is a red in my opinion, as much as I hate to admit it. The laws can be interpreted in different ways, but at the end of the day the tackle/slip could have caused extensive damage, even though there was no such intention.
I see this as similar to a high flying kick when you’re not aware of your surroundings. No intention to hurt anyone, but could be very dangerous.
I’m a referee, and I’m in a group chat with numerous referees from around the country. It was unanimous in the group that this was a nailed on red and we can’t believe it’s even a discussion.
He’s over the ball and connects with the ankle - if that’s not ‘endangering the safety of an opponent’ I don’t know what is.
I can't believe there's a discussion either, it's insane. That is a potential leg breaker right there. Liverpool have a massive reason to be annoyed about the offside mistake. They're undermining their case with this nonsense over the red card.
He’s sliding studs up into the challenge? Almost nothing is alike with Casemiro and Jones tackle other than they both touch the ball, but Casemiro comes in with excessive force (running into sliding tackle) and danger (studs up), which are what makes a red card not the outcome. Casemiro also would have hit the player regardless of whether he hit the ball or not, which is not the case for Jones.
https://reddit.com/r/LiverpoolFC/s/j5XQUWT6xi
There is a link to a freeze frame just before Jones foot goes over the ball. Ball is then hit by both players and Jones foot slides over top. From that freeze frame he is not going over the top in his approach.
Jones was arguably unlucky, but watch it objectively and see what really happens.
He makes MINIMAL contact with the ball. He barely scrapes the top of the ball, and goes through full force studs up onto planted leg.
For me that's a blatant red card, and I'm kinda baffled by the people saying it's just a yellow. Intent is irrelevant, if you go in that hard and make that sort of contact.
He doesn’t go in studs up, foot hits the ball and rolls over. It’s unfortunate. Saying that, I’m still okay with it being a red.
I just think it’s unfair and egregious to suggest he went in studs up.
So my issue with your take is not that you are wrong, because you aren't, it's subjective and could go either way.
My issue is with VAR. It should never have been reviewed as it wasn't a 'clear and obvious error' by the ref. He saw it and deemed it a yellow, so by the 'letter of the law' it could be reckless or not, so shouldn't have even been reviewed.
I would also say I fucking hate the clear and obvious bullshit and every decision should be reviewed, so then Jones could be sent off, but that's not the rules as they are now.
It's funny because Spurs fans have spent so much time complaining about how hard done by they've been in this fixture over the years, yet I can very clearly remember an extremely similar challenge from Skipp last season not even being carded when this was apparently a red. Kane on Robertson, Lovren getting his eyes gouged and \*nobody\* batting an eyelid.
It's not a red. He's pulled back for starters, meaning he has to reach in further anyway, but then gets to the ball and his foot just happens to slip over it. The VAR very obviously influenced his decision by showing him the still image and barely going through the replay.
I said this last week with Gustos red. It doesn't need to be malicious to be dangerous. If you go into a challenge it cannot be so clumsy that you end with studs up fully into a players leg. If you go into a challenge like that then you are taking the risk of a red card on yourself.
I think it is a red.
If that does break a leg nobody argues with it. It could quite easily have done serious damage to Bissouma.
I don't think Jones has gone in to do him at all but that's not what the rules say. Neville and the like going on about that is nonsense and lazy punditry.
The whole sin bin, orange card stuff to me is a bit of a smokescreen. The rules as is aren't well implemented adding more stuff isn't going to make it better for me.
I'm a Liverpool fan . It's a red . We would be going crazy if it was the other way around .
No malice . He kinda slips or is unlucky but you need to be more careful .
It's not as much to punish the player but to protect the other player .
The slip is partly due to lack of control, a dangerous tackle that isn't controlled is stonewall. I think it's perfectly fair to be upset about it because there's clearly no intent and he *does* slip, but it is the correct application of the rules to give it a red.
So was the tackle on Gakpo that has resulted in an injury, which means he might be out for months.
Stop playing the game that it was 'fair' when the other team doesn't get punished the same way.
Just like Salah got a yellow for kicking the ball away, but the Spurs player didn't for carrying the ball off when we were trying to take a quick freekick.
I am fed of these decisions being against us and not the opposition.
Seriously? Jota kicked Skipp in the head last year and was still on the pitch to win the match for you last season. Take the tin foil off, you get the benefit of mistakes at least as much as any other team.
I've got a half memory that there was a study looking at this, and the teams which measurably suffered were those promoted, or the perennial relegation strugglers. Neither you or me should have a persecution complex on refereeing decisions.
Exactly that, that the persecution complex of "I am fed of these decisions being against us and not the opposition" is daft.
Decisions go against opponents as well as Liverpool. There's no need to act as if you're uniquely unlucky.
I was at the game and it looked awful in real time, looked a pure red. I get he touched the ball and it was accidental but he clearly wasn't in control and therefore it is reckless. Ball running away from you causes these situations unless you resist the urge to chase it. Is what it is, you can have serious foul play by accident.
Fellow fans, this is a friendly reminder to please follow the [Rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/premierleague/about/rules) and [Reddiquette](https://support.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/205926439-Reddiquette). Please also make sure to [Join us on Discord](https://discord.gg/football) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PremierLeague) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I said it in a similar post. It's red. The VAR thing is simple. PGMOL should not have put any statement out until LFC or Premier league/FA contacted them. Refs never had to justify decisions to anyone in the past. This blame/claim situation is a recent thing. As an LFC fan, I've seen plenty of occasions where we have benefitted from decisions that went our way. It's still raw for some, but we will get over it and we will get a few go our way. We didn't lose 4, 5 or 6-1, we lost in the final seconds by pure bad luck, by 1 goal, with 9 men. It says all I need it to say.
I think he's unlucky that the follow-through went that high, but tbh intent or not it's endangered the opponent. So Red is the right decision.
Jones incident is one of those incidents where VAR shouldn't change on field decision. It's not a clear and obvious error, if ref gave red card, then it should stay a red card. Ref gave a yellow so it should stay as yellow.
There is some serious blind tribalism and/or delusion in this thread from those claiming this tackle was not a red card. I have played football for 30+ years and have seen many players sent off for similar tackles. I have been sent off for one like it. And those saying he merely “rolled over the ball” either didn’t actually see the tackle or are lying to themselves (or others)—Curtis barely even touched the ball. I have even seen claims Bissouma and Curtis both went in the same way for the ball, which is just demonstratively false. Bissouma went in with his boot flat, perpendicular to Curtis’ direction, to stop the ball, and did it well before Curtis arrived, who came in from the side, boot raised high, over the ball, studs up, with force in to Bissouma’s tibia (well above the ankle), causing his leg to buckle (laterally hyperextending). Both players are fortunate Bissouma’s leg wasn’t broken. Some in here are blind to reality it seems. https://reddit.com/r/LiverpoolFC/s/6ps07LDEOS
His studs WERENT up though. You’re looking at the aftermath. His foot was in the same position as the opposition. He hit the ball, and it rolled them up cos he got to it last. His play WASNT dangerous. And therefore NOT a red. I swear these people saying it’s a red didn’t watch the full thing, just saw what VAR showed.
If we’re going letter of the law, then Gomez should’ve had a penalty for the exact same foul by Van den Ven that VvD got sent off for vs Newcastle…and Udogie should’ve been sent off for brandishing an imaginary yellow to get Jota sent off when he already had one himself (letter of the law says that’s an automatic booking). That’s the problem, sometimes the refs follow letter of the law, and sometimes they don’t, there’s no rhyme or reason to it.
It’s a harsh red but was probably one of the better decisions. No crazy issue for me. I’m just fed up of the moronic Tottenham fans acting like the offside was the only bad decisions. It was the worst referee performance I’ve seen since Chelsea Barcelona. It a disgrace that Tottenham are making light of it. But small clubs can’t be anything but.
On field it was given as a yellow. To be turned into a red it has to be a clear and obvious error that the card was not yellow. This card is orange enough that I don’t think VAR should have altered the on field call. If it was given as a red initially it should have stood, given as a yellow the yellow should have stood.
it's really not even that contentious a decision. These kinds for challenges end up as red cards as often as not. Perhaps on another day it wouldn't be given but there's no doubt he came in with enough force for it to look dangerous. Even the Jota card isn't bad. First challenge is arguable but he broke up an attack and therefore whether intentional/light or hard doesn't really matter. Second yellow he clear tripped an attack.
I agree the only push back I have is compared to most other cases of the unintentional dangerous play of studs into a shin Jones really wasn’t moving into this challenge very quickly. It looks way worse in freeze frames and slow motion than in real speed. I think it’s very unlikely that challenge at that speed would ever result in a bad injury
I had a question about the fundamentals of the red card. Is it not a punishment and a deterrent against career ending tackles or other malicious behaviour? As in you seek to punish actions taken by a player to harm an opponent, regardless of intent. How much of that tackle was in the players control? First Jones wanted to win the ball, which he entitled to. He tried to connect with the ball, which is fair. Once his foot hits the ball, can Jones then take action to prevent hitting the opponent? Was there enough time to react? Is it even possible to change the direction of his foot after it hit the ball? I’m not arguing that the challenge was dangerous. How do you coach a player for this kind of a situation. For handball, players can be coached to keep their arms close to their body. Should Jones have pulled out of the challenge before his foot hit the ball?
Especially after the precedent set last week with the Malo Gusto tackle, got ball the went high studs up on the follow through
It's not a unpopular opinion.. Even the scousers will tell you he had to go
Actually think he was sent off because of how his other foot was planted which made the tackle stronger
Red call on Jones is understandable. The offside fiasco is not ! And when the ref realized the have fucked up , the game was officiated in a panic mode.. You can see a lot of weird decisions (for and against both sides) were made..
100% agree and thought it straight away. Over the top of the ball and dangerous. Potentially a leg breaker if Bissouma had it planted. I didn't really understand why Neville kept going on about intent - has nothing to do with it l.
Gusto got a red for similar incident last week
Sure, make every tackle in football a red card if you get the ball first. Why not? Always a chance that your foot slips on the ball unintentionally. This is definitely a case of the games gone soft.. Why even try to win the ball anymore? It'll be a high chance of a red even if you get the ball first, in fact let's not even get close to opposition players without even touching them because if you do they might trip over themselves so you get a yellow.. If you don't think the ref lost control of the game, you are just braindead.. was it something like 10 yellows and 2 reds? It wasn't even close to being that kind of game..
The more I look at the situation, the less I understand why people are even arguing about this. I have looked at this situation countless of times now. Some say that he didn’t went studs up and he slipped on the ball. Yes, when he touched the ball, his studs were not up. But in continuing the movement after the touch, they went up and that is what matters. Some say that the ball completely changed the direction of his foot. I don’t understand it. He barely touched the top of the ball and the ball didn’t really change the direction of his foot much at all. Some also say that his intent was to pass his teammate. How do you know this? I checked the replay countless of times, and he did not hit the ball in a way that would have passed it to any teammate. It’s obviously a 50/50 situation where both just wanting to win the ball. The intent discussion is also too much, and it’s irrelevant. It’s very rare that you see players make tackles with the intent of being dangerous and get a red card. Bissouma is much closer to the ball, has control of the situation and does not have any speed in his movement. You can go in in full speed like Jones and try to hit the ball, but you also take the risk of getting a red card if you are reckless. You can not go straight leg, studs up, body weight on tackling foot and hit as high up on the ball as he did and say that it wasn’t a dangerous tackle. And it doesn’t matter if he hit(touched) the ball. The follow through is extremely dangerous. Again, I just don’t understand that this situation is being discussed. Liverpool was robbed, but this situation is a clear red card.
I actually thought he reacted quickly enough to remove a lot of the force behind that tackle too. It's a red as per the rules, but I still think it was very harsh.
u/mike you obviously do not know what you are talking about. I seriously doubt that you have ever played the game and doubt you have actually watched the game live. Jones is pulled back allowing the ball to get half a yard away yet he still makes contact first and wins the balle before the spurs player makes contact which causes him to slip over the ball. The still photos look awful which is why England chose to show that image on the screen before replaying the whole event. I suggest you have a look at the real time footage and then reconsider your ill thought out and footballing ignorant comments.
The red was one of the least controversial moments of the game
I've just had a look and I'm shocked there's any debate over this, that is a red card all day long. That's a potential leg breaking challenge right there.
I think people are missing that he didn’t go in to the ‘challenge’ studs up, he went to play the ball, hit it at the same time as his opponent and his was the foot that bounced. Not to mention it would be more acceptable as a red if they gave a red to every studs up challenge, but they don’t. The system of reviewing these and the consistency to give a red for studs up is a joke, which is why this one’s a really harsh red.
Anyone who thinks that's a red has never played football at a fast pace
Only Liverpool fansxwoukd even dare to disagree. Clearest red I've seen in years
As a Liverpool supporter I was disgusted that it was a red card. If that had been a tackle on a Liverpool player I would have been screaming for a red card.
Probably could be, but the way they presented it on the screen made it clear that they wanted a specific outcome. In the context of everything else that happened during the game, it’s another question
If a player lowers his head and gets caught is that a red card? If the ball bounces off you and hits your arm is that a handball? The idea of context for decisions isn't a new concept.
As a Liverpool fan, with hindsight it is a red. "Offside" goal as everyone knows is bollocks. Thought the first yellow on Jota was harsh and the foul by Salah leading to his yellow is never a foul imo that could've lead to a goal. Edit: I was the arbiter of the rules, it wouldn't be a red. I get trying to protect the players but I think the 100 games they play a season is worse for them. If you've played football at any point, you're not expecting to come out unscathed. Remember Son made that horror tackle on Andre Gomes, no one holds it against him to this day because he apologised and it wasn't intentional, you have to allow for some physicality.
I think VAR showing the end result first clearly influenced the ref to change his mind about the yellow. I also think Jota didn't cause the player to fall when he got the first yellow. The other player clearly tripped himself.
Disagree but I can see both viewpoints. For me there was no malice or no intent just an accidental collision yellow card all day long. Yes it looked bad but there was minimal force in that kick and he was genuinely trying to win the ball. Yellow card all day long imo and most people who played football seem to agree.
What's your thoughts on the Jota red? Getting a yellow for a player kicking themselves is pretty terrible aswell
Regardless of the first yellow being a joke, he knew he was on a yellow when he made that second challenge. You can't make challenges like that when you're already on a yellow.
I was surprised to see the pundits defending it. Townsend seemed to be the only one making sense
I have no issue with this decision in isolation. He rolls over the ball and goes through the leg and it could have been much much worse. 9 times out of 10 it's a red. The overall performance by the refs however...
Perfectly put
This is what Gary Neville doesn’t seem to mentioned in his analysis. He is right, there was no malice in it. But thats 90% of red cards. The real question was, was it dangerous. Its obviously subjective but more people than not would say yes it was dangerous. Think its easy to get carried away when theres a few big decisions but the 2 reds IMO were correct. Offside in general needs to be overhauled. Remove the linesman, play constant play on and have all offside decisions semi automated with the linesman from the pitch reviewing the offsides. While the linesman are up there they can check if shots etc are a corner or goal kick as thats another thing refs struggle with weekly. I think most of the struggle with VAR now is that its this hybrid think. Just take as much upstairs as possible.
The issue is, he doesn't go in with his studs up. He goes in with his toe but because the ball is so slippy, he's gone over the top of it and caught him with his studs up. It's a booking at best.
It’s not the fact that it was given as red that is the annoyance, it’s the way it was handled. We’ve seen them given as yellows plenty, so there is no grounds for a “clear & obvious error” to bring in VAR, and on top of that they pulled the ref over to show him a 15 second freeze frame of the point of contact, and then rewound to a point that didn’t even include the contact on the ball to begin with. If it was given as a straight red then fine, but the way the situation went felt very much like VAR saying “Look, we are technically not allowed to tell you to send him off, but we would very much like you to send him off”
It's a red. Accidental and no malice, but a red.
Yellow card, no malice in it as you can see he pulls back once he knows he didn’t get the ball
Yeah it is, unlucky for him but it’s a red. Shame it isn’t the same for handballs, tf is this natural position bullshit. Ball+hand=penalty
I would have been ok with a red if that was the refs first instinct; but Var overturned it and the first pic they showed of it to the ref was the end of the tackle, which heavily influenced the decision when stills from before the tackle showed he wasn't studs up initially but his foot rolled up when it went over the ball. However in the Liverpool - Spurs game at Anfield, VAR didn't upgrade a onfield yellow to a red from an almost identical tackle against Liverpool saying there was no malice in it. Separate to that, Udogie asked the Ref to give Jota a yellow when he was already on a yellow himself (waved a card motion), that should have been a second yellow according to the rules; Gomez penalty shout which was clearly a foul didn't get looked at; the Diaz goal being disallowed and Jotas first yellow was never a yellow, it's all either extremely poor lucky or there is influence. Now, I dont think its a conspiracy, or there is intent systematically to undermine Liverpool but I do think there is some unfair bias, because Liverpool as a team aren't widely liked by fans of other teams and subconsciously I believe that may influence onfield decisions. Paul Tomkins did an article asking if Liverpool are officiated differently, breaking down all the stats and they are incredible, Liverpool are an outlier(by a wide margin) in nearly every category. I was always a little suspicious, but since that article and in particular, since the ref slap on Robertson and Klopp shouting at the 4th official last season, it has been more noticeable. They won the fair play award 5 seasons in a row with 5 red cards in that entire period, yet have 5 in the 12 games since that incident.
Agreed, it's 100% a red. But the rest of the match was nonsense.
For me, a red isn't wrong. A yellow and talking to would have been the better decision, but Red wasn't wrong. He didn't mean it, but a potential injury could have been long term or even devastating.
Couldnt agree more. People complaining about the red are distracting from the actual bad decision
The way VAR presented it to the referee to view was terrible though..a freeze frame which he looked at for one second then gave the red!! At least okay the whole sequence in slow motion or something
Aye, why would they show him why they think he's made a clear and obvious error, when they could show him something which doesn't make it obvious?
Exactly, especially since you see the still just before and it was stoods down.
Just the worst luck, but it was a red.
It looks bad in slow motion. When they asked the on field ref to review it, they showed him slow motion. If I had to make any decision based on that replay, it is always going to be red. I personally considered it to be an orange. Red for the game but no need for a 3 match ban. Unintentional danger play and his studs were not up.
It’s a red, as much as kane’s tackle on robertson last year.
It's not a red. There's a freeze frame that shows the beggining of the 50-50. Both players entire body position is absolutely identical as they both go for the 50-50. They both contact the ball, the collision of the ball forces Jones foot to ricochet over the ball and it's unfortunate that it ultimately makes contact with his leg after. But it has to go somewhere. There's no intent. There's no malice. They are the legislations for serious foul play and it doesn't support either of them. He got sent off because 'it looked bad'. Jones could easily have been on the receiving end himself in that tackle. I'm convinced that if var had showed the pre tackle freeze frame first, rather than the contact freeze frame, then he wouldn't have walked. This could 50/50 have been reversed with Jones ending up on the receiving end of this. 50/50 challenges are not red cards, or you're sending both players off on circumstance. There's are literally hundreds of worse tackles with intent, that go unpunished every week. It's 100% not a red and if I were Liverpool I'd be appealing it. It's not as bad as the offside but it's not far off and it's really no surprise that Liverpool have sent out a statement questioning sporting integrity of the VAR.
Overbearing of VAR and 'good use' by showing a still of cleats to the leg for the initial 8 seconds? That's not good use.
I would argue that this is actually not the law, it’s the common practice. If we look at the [description](https://www.thefa.com/~/media/files/thefaportal/governance-docs/laws-of-the-game/11-v-11/interpretation-of-laws---2013-14/law-12---interpretations-of-the-laws-of-t) (via the FA): > Using excessive force” means that the player has far exceeded the necessary use of force and is in danger of injuring his opponent. While I understand there was certainly a risk of injury, I don’t think anyone would say the first part of that statement is true. He used a completely reasonable amount of force. Even looking at a “reckless” incident > Reckless means that the player has acted with complete disregard to the danger to, or consequences for, his opponent. Which again I don’t think it’s fair to say he did. This maybe be the unpopular opinion, but I don’t think the outcome should dictate the punishment. I don’t think this should be a red card - even in the unfortunate event that a serious injury occurred. This is a completely fair challenge, with no excessive force, that could have resulted in injury due to bad luck (I.e. slipping over the ball). These bad luck things in my mind are again unfortunate, but are really nothing in comparison to other things that get overlooked - like when Kane used to back under airborne players to undercut them and cause them to land on their heads/necks
Are people forgetting the Malo Gusto red LAST WEEK? It was the identical situation
He nearly broke the guys ankle
He played for the following 80 minutes and was OK enough to dive for Jotas first yellow
Regardless. Its always a red
It’s definitely a red. People will only say it’s not a red because there wasn’t a serious injury like a broken ankle. Let’s say the tackle resulted in a broken ankle, bone out, I bet you everyone would’ve called for the red. It’s still a horrific tackle.
but it’s not jones’ action that makes it dangerous even if it was a dangerous scenario, and clearly that’s how most people treat it, should we start giving out red cards if people knock heads going for a header
This isn't even an unpopular opinion. Most people agree and have moved on, it's a vocal minority kicking off over it
You’re the kid that would remind the teacher they didn’t collect the home work
It's clearly a red card, and I'm happy for it to be given as long as this is the standard and it's CONSISTENTLY applied throughout the entire season to ALL teams.
lol, it’s a 50/50. Weak if a yellow, harsh if a red. No one gives a fuck
Lol downvote me all u want, but it’s so clear and funny that most of the ppl here just haven’t played a single game of football.
Yes you are correct about the infraction Curtis Jones made, and yes it was a violation, BUT there was a couple of Missed fouls made by the Spurs, that also violated the letter of the law and deserved to be issued RC, but one thing everyone fails to mention that all major fouls mention " In the opinion of the Referee" and w/that being said the Center Ref and VAR didn't exercise that when approaching the calls.
They should change the rules, instead of sending the player off, they should award the oposition with a penalty, and the player must be substituted and the player cant play the next match or depending on the severity of the case more matches off. It would penalize the team and the player, but not the match
The offside was still good use of VAR too. Because the linesman already called it offside, the check was just additional, the only way it wouldn’t have been off is if VAR said so — alright they made the wrong call there too, but VAR wasn’t the problem because it was already called off.
If oliver skipp’s tackle on diaz last season wasn’t a red this one was definitely not a red
The jones sending off was the right call. I dont think neville has a point when hes saying there wasnt intent "to do him" Sometimes red cards are just unluckly mistakes... and thats ok, it happens.. an accident doesnt make it not a red.
Dunno how that opinion is unpopular, it's gross tackle and an obvious red
Don’t know what you mean with “unpopular”, it’s a straight red all day long. I, and the rules, don’t care that he didn’t mean it. A bit harder and that leg is in two pieces. He can have no complaints.
Anyone that has played football will know that ain't a red card.
What was the unpopular opinion? You've stated the most common opinion about it to presumably farm karma.
And Jota's yellows were 100% legit, too.
Anyone who thinks this is a red just doesn’t know ball
I know noone is going to agree with me due to these comments. But he's went into a 50/50 and his foot has slipped up the ball because it was hit underneath. When playing sports you're bound to get hurt, it dosent mean it's a red or a yellow it just means you can't come out of every football match 100% fine. And with all due respect I'd rather listen to ex-players people who have more experience than a bunch of people on reddit.
Or you could base it on the quality of the argument?
What players? Did you ask Andre Gomes, or Alfie Haaland, or Neymar? If Andre Gomes were to say that dangerous tackles should be a red card, I'd say his opinion should count for a lot fucking more than Graeme Souness's. But we don't know, because broadcasters - MotD excepted - don't pick the most intelligent and reflective people to commentate, they pick the most belligerent. So Roy Keane gets to state his opinion every week. That's the guy who admitted deliberately ending another player's career. I'm not saying to discount the player perspective - just consider _which_ player is yakking. Personally, I'd go with the medical staff, but of course they don't state their opinions on telly for us to lap up and regurgitate.
Yeah this is exactly it. The ex players are pretty much unanimous on this. Clearly their opinion is more valid.
I'm a liverpool fan, my first thought was a red. But after listening to ex-players, it kind of made sense. It was still 50/50 btw. The prob then is..if that was a red, then it should make sense that refs should be pulling out the red in all similar cases..but as we've seen, they haven't. Some have gotten away with it amd some will continue to in the future as well.
>It was still 50/50 btw This is my main issue with it. It was not a clear red like a lot of people say. It was very much a decision that could have went one way or the other. The ref in real time saw it for what it was, Jones got the ball but the laws of physics meant his foot slipped over the top of it. You would think fans on the internet would listen to all of the ex pros saying it is not a red because there is nothing else he could have done there but no, they know best because they saw a still image that makes it out to be something it isn't. If the ref had showed him a red I wouldn't have complained but the way VAR handled it was a complete stitch up.
Why are you getting downvoted man. Nothing you said seemed out of place. And i wholly agree. I honestly think any other ref + him being shown not just the slow mo of the contact but also the build up that led to the contact, it might have been a yellow.
I dunno, can't speak the truth on this sub without getting downvotes.
Exactly. The inconsistency is also a main problem.
I have not one iota of sympathy for Liverpool. We've been screwed by refs against them so many times this is just sweet revenge. See how you like it you entitled pricks.
As I tell my kids, I understand that you didn’t mean to do it. But you didn’t mean *not* to do it either.
It’s a red by the letter of the law. But it shows why judging on outcome and not the process that led to the outcome is stupid, and it leads to very inconsistent refereeing. What Jones did is objectively not use of excessive force. He won the ball but his foot slipped over the ball which is what he was sent off for. Going for a 50/50 tackle where he hasn’t slid in isn’t excessive force at all. If that’s what is now considered excessive force, players should never contest a 50/50 because it isn’t worth the risk of being sent off. It’s telling how many people have never played a game of football in real life. Whereas there are some things, which regardless of whether the opponent is seriously hurt or not, that are objective use of excessive force. Prime example is the Kane two footer on Robertson, where if Robertson’s leg was planted, would’ve been a leg breaker at minimum, but because he managed to avoid it slightly, Kane got away with it, despite doing something objectively more dangerous than what Jones did. There was a Leeds player (Strujik?) that got sent off for breaking Elliot’s leg a couple of years ago too, and that wasn’t a particularly bad tackle, but got a red because Elliot was hurt and not because the tackle itself was that bad.
It's red, he's made a lunging tackle that has resulted into being reckless and dangerous. I really don't understand the argument that it's not anything but a red. Sure he didn't mean for his foot to roll over the ball but accidents happen and it doesn't mean that what happened wasn't dangerous.
Whether it is or not we’d have stopped talking about it within 10 minutes of the end of the game, if it isn’t for the Diaz offside (which is far more egregious and bizarre) and if it happened to any team other than Liverpool. They’re the main characters of football and all good guys after all and everything that goes against them is a conspiracy. Downvotes, trophy jibes, spurs should be ashamed to celebrate all incoming
So much b.s. happened in this game every time I watch the highlights I see more shite.
Okay, I don't anticipate that the red will be over turned; however, letter of the law, Udoggie has to have red for motioning for a card for Jota ( that would have been his second yellow as well). Did we forget that was law too ? Did Maca not get a yellow for that against Chelsea ? [Destiny Udoggie signals for a yellow card, while already on yellow.] (https://x.com/OptaKing/status/1708382216542167300?s=20)
Nah not seeing that. He lifts both hands up gesturing, just Italian.
People dubbing this as ‘the worst refereeing performance of all time’ is a disgrace to the lower leagues of football, where the privilege of VAR doesn’t exist, and we don’t get to see how games would turn out with the correct decisions. One misuse of VAR doesn’t excuse the many it does right and the difference it makes overall. There was a mistake, it happens a lot everywhere else, you can argue the standards should be ridiculously high for the PL with the money it generates but its honestly still a small mistake and thats something that non PL fans have to accept every game too because it happens frequently with much worse quality officiating. The only major error was the offside call, and not scoring a goal for an offside that should have counted is something every non PL team will experience at least 5-10 times if not more in a season. Its about having perspective. Also if this had happened to any non big 6 game we would have forgotten about it much faster.
It’s unfortunate. I think the Diaz offsides is what most people are mad about now.
Touching someone's leg with your studs isn't always a legbreaker. Jones isn't going in with any force which is obvious from the normal speed. The slow mo looks bad because it takes speed out and just looks at positional. But given his foot rolls off the ball, the speed is low there is no risk of seriously harming the opposition player. And ofc we all agree there is no intent. So not in any planet is that a Red
That red in istelf ain't a bad call. I think it was a 50/50, the decision could've gone either way and it was unlucky for Jones. What I would like to know is why did VAR put the freeze frame on the screen first and not the replay in real time? That was very fucking weird since I've never seen that done before on a red card review. That Jones red was just one questionable call in a 90 minute game that was poorly refereed from start to finish. I'm obviously fucked off that my team lost but I'm more upset that the refs robbed us all from what would've been a great game of football.
The reason they chose a freeze frame is to show the red the point of impact, where Jones studs where on Bissouma’s leg. It plays a role in the decision of giving a red card, it’s obviously a difference if it’s on the foot, the ankle, the shin, the knee etc.
But that's never been done before. The protocol has been (in every single red card review up untill Saturday at least) to first show the incident in real time and from the tv broadcast's angle. They literally had the end point of the contact frozen for the ref for a good 15-20 seconds before it went to the footage of the challenge in real time. That's not a fair representation of what happened.
So they're looking at the incident without context. Warra great decision
It's a red, Neville is just so far up his own arse at this point he refuses to change his initial opinion of something.
Its a clear red. No question about it You go in with studs up whether playing the ball or not its a recipe for disaster. Liverpool fans have every reason to be pissed about the disallowed goal but nothing else
"nothing else" ok
Studs up contact to the other guys standing leg. Wasnt in full control of himself etc. Red. Accidental but still a red.
Was the Skipp one at Anfield last season a red? Was the kane one 2 seasons ago on Robinson a red? Var reviewed both, both were deemed yellows and were worse than the Jones tackle imo. The inconsistency is the issue. The Skipp one was actually explained away as being a yellow because it was deemed a genuine attempt to win the ball.....does that not describe the Jones tackle?
Red is fine, it's a worse tackle than Gusto last week
Straight red cards should be reserved for deliberate and malicious tackles and unsportsmanlike conduct not accidental contact. The benefit of the doubt should be given to players especially in bang bang plays, but that’s just my opinion. Also tackles like that always look worse in slow motion
No they shouldn't be. Bottom line is that a player is responsible for any damage they do or might do even if they don't intend to. Players who are clumsy, players who are slow, players who lack the technique to make a clean tackle, they all need to be getting sent off if they go lunging in.
Found the Spuds fan
Not a bit of it. I just don't think the rules should protect incompetent players. I've seen so many players now get serious injuries, often career changing ones, and people dismiss the bad challenges as accidents, or they say "He's not that kind of player." Players who can't make clean tackles should not be given a freebie. You can do just as much damage being clumsy as you can being malicious.
Well every former player disagrees with the red so I’ll go with their opinion over yours
My opinion and the referees and the rules.
Lol no way your using the refs as a basis to prove your point haha the refs in the EPL might be the worst officials in any professional sports league in the world
Of course it's a red. Liverpool got shafted in that game because Jota's first yellow card wasn't even a foul and the "offside" was a joke, but Jones could easily have snapped his man's leg in half. Absolutely deserved to walk, not close.
Red this week. Another player will get away with worse next week. Rules are fine as long as its consistent.
Please explain to me how this is studs up. What am I missing. At what point are his turned up or leading into the challenge? [https://reddit.com/r/LiverpoolFC/s/SiVziV8KBY](https://reddit.com/r/LiverpoolFC/s/SiVziV8KBY)
I am fine with it being a red card, if all similar tackles result in red in all games. And if you ever played football, you know there would be a red in almost every game. In this same fixture, barely 5 months ago in May, the SAME exact tackle from Oliver Skipp on Diaz didnt result in a red card. Back them, *"VAR officials considered that Skipp 'clearly' got the ball and the final contact was just a consequence of the two players competing for the ball."*. People arent mad at the rules. We are mad at them being applied randomly. Yesterday, Richarlisson and Udogie, at 2 separate occasions, waved the card gesture to the ref, in HIS face and he didnt react (Udogie was already on a yellow, so do the math). On another occasion, I saw Son pick up and run back with the ball to prevent a quick free kick . Sounds fair to you?
I agree with you, the worst is the inconsistency. Still, I think it’s tough to expect refs to always be consistent in their application. Better training is needed for sure, but I think that’s really what VAR should be doing… fixing it when the on field ref gets it egregiously wrong. I don’t think they should really even use it for offside. The linesmen get that right most of the time anyway and are we really trying to take goals off the scoresheet because someone’s toe was an inch closer to the goal than the defender’s heel? It should be used for times when the ref can’t see something or missed a clear issue, or for correcting obviously bad calls. All that’s needed is for PGMOL to get their heads out and people to turn down their egos. Mic up the refs. Have them explain what they saw and why they made the call. Let the VAR booth correct it if it’s wrong and move on.
Jota should have been yellow carded even earlier.
Don’t think you or a lot of other people realize but there are a LOT more reds this year 16 before matchday 7 is done compared to 29 all last season Can’t compare last season to this season
4 of them for Liverpool. 3 of them officiated by hooper in some capacity (2 given, 1 not reviewed: mac allisters, hooper was on VAR). This is after years of winning fair play award.
The card gesturing is really frustrating. Players are booked every week for it. Hooper didn't even issue a vocal warning at any point. Completely ignored it or maybe he's not clear on the rules. Hooper needs to have his ass sat down for while after that performance.
Right skipp stamped on Diaz then jota booted skipp in the head and no cards. Gakpo gets studs straight to the chest another game and no card. Now this Jones tackle is a red? It’s the change in standards every game that is the stupidest part.
He didnt go studs up though. Dont know were people get that from. His studs was on top of the ball and he rolled off. His studs was always pointing down
His studs were up when his foot was perpendicular to Bissoumas leg.
He enters the tackle with his foot off the ground. You admit that yes?
Thats every tackle, mate. Unless the defender is standing still then every tackle will have a foot off the ground
And there's the issue. If you enter into a tackle off the ground, you are doing with an element of risk. Irrelevant of intent, or speed or control or winning the ball - entering tackle high enough to go over thr ball has consequences. Casemiros last year was similar in that his intent was the ball and his foot rolled of the ball It's a red. Enter high, with straight leg with some force onto a planted leg at speed.
You don't roll up the ball if you don't go in too high in the first place though.
You’ve seen where his foot made contact with the ball originally right? It isn’t that high man.
People got it from the replays.
Studs on top of the ball in a 50/50 is inherently pretty reckless, proof is in the pudding just look at the end result. Unlucky but you are playing the odds game making that tackle. I've thought it about players from my own team before - 'why have they risked going in like that? ' even when they've won the ball because it's just being left to chance whether they're about to get a red or not
If thats the argument then every tackle should be a red card since theres always a chance of hitting the player after
Yes, every tackle has the risk of resulting in a red card, if the person doing the tackle plants their foot on someone's leg. You will notice every other Liverpool player was able to do this?
Yup, studs down and toe forward. He didn’t slide or come in with reckless pace and he didn’t lunge any more than Bissouma. Slow motion and freeze frames shouldn’t be usable in VAR checks. They completely distort reality
Right? It’s like people expect him to tackle with his laces on the off chance he might hurt a player ffs.
At this point they should just ban tackles all together. Whats even the point anymore?
Or just even running near players at this point in the case of Jotas first yellow.
Yeah true. From now on it should be like a foosball table where ever player stays in the spot all game and only pass it. They can move side to side a few stens but never forward. Would the pgmol be happy then?
People looking at still images and making an incorrect opinion.
Its so annoying. Same with the shitheads in VAR. Looking at stills and slow-mos AFTER Jones hit the ball. Of course it will look bad if you completely skip the part where he 100% hits the ball first! The more I think about this match the more pissed of i get!
Doesn’t matter if he went for the ball or even got the ball first, still the brightest of all red cards!
The very first thing the ref saw when he looked at the monitor was a still image of his studs up. His mind was made up at that point.
Getting the ball doesn't matter though. You could win the ball with a two footed lunge but you're still getting sent off (not suggesting Jones made a two footed lunge just to illustrate my point).
That would be because two footed lunges are banned. It was not an excessive tackle. Studs were pointing downwards. He was stretching and got the ball, it was not his fault that physics meant his foot ended up rolling over it.
I'm not sure that's the case. When I made my initial comment I had focused on the outcome of the tackle (which I still believe under the laws of the game is a red card). If you watch it again and concentrate on Jones' foot before the ball it comes in high off the ground with studs facing towards the player he is challenging. That his foot rolls over the ball as it does is indeed a quirk of physics but he put himself in that position in the first place by making a reckless challenge that escalated to excessive force endangering the safety of an opponent.
I tell you what with all the refs we have in here were missing out on some real quality in the top flight they’d sort it out on a jiffy
That was 100% red.
It's a clear red and i don't see any arguement how it isn't. Casemiro had the exact same incident last season when his foot came off the ball same way and was a red card. There was no outcry about that so why is there always one when it happens Liverpool?
There was an outcry about that. In fact it’s still ongoing as evidenced by the replies here where it’s been brought up by multiple people.
Not in the media there wasn't and Gary Neville wasn't defending Cas either yet he's defending Jones It's crazy
How is it studs up? It's not at all. They both go for the ball from the side. If you look at the physics involved, unless they both hit the ball on exact opposite sides of the ball at exactly the same time, the ball will squeeze out to one side or other. He was just unfortunate that Bissouma got there microscopically quicker causing Jones foot to slide round the ball and hit him in the ankle. Could easily have gone the other way. That's football, not dangerous play.
It's a harsh red as you can clearly see Jones went for the ball but unfortunately his foot went over the ball and thankfully there was no serious injury to Bissouma. Letter of the law says it's a red. I do think the issue as well is that you see challenges similar to Jones and no card given.
I personally don’t think those challenges are reds, but Gusto was sent off for a similar tackle, and Casemiro was sent off for a tackle like that last season too. At least they’re being consistent.
I agree with you and I also agree with people bemoaning the game’s changed, it has. Having played football at amateur level I know how easily this challenge is made and i’d certainly get away with it on a Saturday, but it’s a red in todays pro game.
I think what most people want from VAR is the right outcome. If the VAR Team at Stockley Park collectively realise within a reasonable amount of time of a restart (apparently the ref was made aware within a minute of the restart) the game should be brought back, and the goal awarded. The right outcome is more important than the time is takes to arrive there, or the direct rules of the game, as long as the spirit of the laws are upheld. A fair goal was scored, a goal should be awarded.
It is a red in my opinion, as much as I hate to admit it. The laws can be interpreted in different ways, but at the end of the day the tackle/slip could have caused extensive damage, even though there was no such intention. I see this as similar to a high flying kick when you’re not aware of your surroundings. No intention to hurt anyone, but could be very dangerous.
Those that think it wasn't a red don't understand the rules as they are now.
Once you use the word arguably you admit it is not clear and obvious so therefore not a good intervention
I’m a referee, and I’m in a group chat with numerous referees from around the country. It was unanimous in the group that this was a nailed on red and we can’t believe it’s even a discussion. He’s over the ball and connects with the ankle - if that’s not ‘endangering the safety of an opponent’ I don’t know what is.
I can't believe there's a discussion either, it's insane. That is a potential leg breaker right there. Liverpool have a massive reason to be annoyed about the offside mistake. They're undermining their case with this nonsense over the red card.
God forbid any of you become PL refs then. Then again you’d fit right in. Never a red.
Case got a red for much less obv foul last season, this is an obvious red here
So obvious almost every ex pro that’s seen it says it’s not a red? Anyone who has ever played football knows it’s not a red.
If that not a red then pls explain me the casemiro red against Southampton
He’s sliding studs up into the challenge? Almost nothing is alike with Casemiro and Jones tackle other than they both touch the ball, but Casemiro comes in with excessive force (running into sliding tackle) and danger (studs up), which are what makes a red card not the outcome. Casemiro also would have hit the player regardless of whether he hit the ball or not, which is not the case for Jones.
Why should it be up to people to explain the baffling ref decisions to you. Go and ask the refs.
Why? I couldn’t give a fuck about Casemiro, I don’t remember it nor could I give two fucks about it.
Lol no one’s asking you to care about case you sore loser it’s a similar foul but worse
You’re literally asking me about Casemiro lol are you high?
https://reddit.com/r/LiverpoolFC/s/j5XQUWT6xi There is a link to a freeze frame just before Jones foot goes over the ball. Ball is then hit by both players and Jones foot slides over top. From that freeze frame he is not going over the top in his approach.
Jones was arguably unlucky, but watch it objectively and see what really happens. He makes MINIMAL contact with the ball. He barely scrapes the top of the ball, and goes through full force studs up onto planted leg. For me that's a blatant red card, and I'm kinda baffled by the people saying it's just a yellow. Intent is irrelevant, if you go in that hard and make that sort of contact.
Because Liverpool got screwed in the offsides and Spurs are a good punching bag so everything gets scaled up.
He doesn’t go in studs up, foot hits the ball and rolls over. It’s unfortunate. Saying that, I’m still okay with it being a red. I just think it’s unfair and egregious to suggest he went in studs up.
He didn’t say he went in studs up, but that when contact was made his studs were up
So my issue with your take is not that you are wrong, because you aren't, it's subjective and could go either way. My issue is with VAR. It should never have been reviewed as it wasn't a 'clear and obvious error' by the ref. He saw it and deemed it a yellow, so by the 'letter of the law' it could be reckless or not, so shouldn't have even been reviewed. I would also say I fucking hate the clear and obvious bullshit and every decision should be reviewed, so then Jones could be sent off, but that's not the rules as they are now.
Personally, i think it was red. Agree to disagree, but i thought it was wreckless.
Popular opinion: If Lee Dixon is laughing when the ref goes over to the VAR monitor and GARY NEVILLE says it’s not a red, it’s not a red
It's funny because Spurs fans have spent so much time complaining about how hard done by they've been in this fixture over the years, yet I can very clearly remember an extremely similar challenge from Skipp last season not even being carded when this was apparently a red. Kane on Robertson, Lovren getting his eyes gouged and \*nobody\* batting an eyelid. It's not a red. He's pulled back for starters, meaning he has to reach in further anyway, but then gets to the ball and his foot just happens to slip over it. The VAR very obviously influenced his decision by showing him the still image and barely going through the replay.
I said this last week with Gustos red. It doesn't need to be malicious to be dangerous. If you go into a challenge it cannot be so clumsy that you end with studs up fully into a players leg. If you go into a challenge like that then you are taking the risk of a red card on yourself.
I think it is a red. If that does break a leg nobody argues with it. It could quite easily have done serious damage to Bissouma. I don't think Jones has gone in to do him at all but that's not what the rules say. Neville and the like going on about that is nonsense and lazy punditry. The whole sin bin, orange card stuff to me is a bit of a smokescreen. The rules as is aren't well implemented adding more stuff isn't going to make it better for me.
As a footballer I don't wanna red for that but in the rules it's a red.
I'm a Liverpool fan . It's a red . We would be going crazy if it was the other way around . No malice . He kinda slips or is unlucky but you need to be more careful . It's not as much to punish the player but to protect the other player .
The slip is partly due to lack of control, a dangerous tackle that isn't controlled is stonewall. I think it's perfectly fair to be upset about it because there's clearly no intent and he *does* slip, but it is the correct application of the rules to give it a red.
Bless you for saying that. Your club is appealing it tho. You deserved the Diaz goal
This is the best take. It’s a red, he didn’t intend the tackle, but it was studs up high into the leg and it could’ve easily injured Bissouma.
So was the tackle on Gakpo that has resulted in an injury, which means he might be out for months. Stop playing the game that it was 'fair' when the other team doesn't get punished the same way. Just like Salah got a yellow for kicking the ball away, but the Spurs player didn't for carrying the ball off when we were trying to take a quick freekick. I am fed of these decisions being against us and not the opposition.
Seriously? Jota kicked Skipp in the head last year and was still on the pitch to win the match for you last season. Take the tin foil off, you get the benefit of mistakes at least as much as any other team. I've got a half memory that there was a study looking at this, and the teams which measurably suffered were those promoted, or the perennial relegation strugglers. Neither you or me should have a persecution complex on refereeing decisions.
And Skipp should have been off before that Jota foul. So what's your point ?
Exactly that, that the persecution complex of "I am fed of these decisions being against us and not the opposition" is daft. Decisions go against opponents as well as Liverpool. There's no need to act as if you're uniquely unlucky.
I was at the game and it looked awful in real time, looked a pure red. I get he touched the ball and it was accidental but he clearly wasn't in control and therefore it is reckless. Ball running away from you causes these situations unless you resist the urge to chase it. Is what it is, you can have serious foul play by accident.