Rob-BEE
Buzzing
It’s Only Violent Conduct When It’s Brentford
You kind of prove my point about confirmation bias. And yes, I cited the Gabriel example in my first post on this thread.
It’s Only Violent Conduct When It’s Brentford (5 Viewers)
- Thread starter Untouchable
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 59
- Views 2K
Rob-BEE
Buzzing
It’s Only Violent Conduct When It’s Brentford
I must have missed Arsenal winning the European Cup.
But seriously, ive no idea what this table proves or is supposed to prove tbh!
It’s Only Violent Conduct When It’s Brentford
That refs make more "errors" against the larger clubs. That's as clear as day!
OP
OP
Untouchable
Professional Marinakis hater
- Joined
- 5 May 2014
- Messages
- 32,845
- Reaction score
- 93,299
It’s Only Violent Conduct When It’s Brentford
The KMI panel decided that Palmer should have been sent off by the referee but only by a margin of 3:2. The reasoning is below:
“The on-field no red card decision was deemed incorrect, 3:2. The majority felt that Palmer's action on Fernandes was clear contact to the head as well as unnecessary, dangerous and made with excessive force. Two panellists supported the on-field call as they viewed the action as aggressive with no excessive force. All panellists supported the VAR's decision to not intervene and support the referee's call given that a yellow card was awarded on-field.”
For reference this is the Palmer incident:
View: https://x.com/1manny_fs/status/2114057615391011026?a=ryGFM9eTK2_OG2bvjxs&s=46
So 2 of the KMI panel think this was not violent conduct. And all 5 thought the threshold for VAR intervention was not met.
In comparison all 5 of the panel concluded that the referee was wrong not to send Yarmo off and by 5:0 that VAR was right to intervene. In other words Yarmo used excessive force or brutality against Jacquet.
“The on-field no red card decision was deemed incorrect, 3:2. The majority felt that Palmer's action on Fernandes was clear contact to the head as well as unnecessary, dangerous and made with excessive force. Two panellists supported the on-field call as they viewed the action as aggressive with no excessive force. All panellists supported the VAR's decision to not intervene and support the referee's call given that a yellow card was awarded on-field.”
For reference this is the Palmer incident:
View: https://x.com/1manny_fs/status/2114057615391011026?a=ryGFM9eTK2_OG2bvjxs&s=46
So 2 of the KMI panel think this was not violent conduct. And all 5 thought the threshold for VAR intervention was not met.
In comparison all 5 of the panel concluded that the referee was wrong not to send Yarmo off and by 5:0 that VAR was right to intervene. In other words Yarmo used excessive force or brutality against Jacquet.
Last edited by a moderator:
Kingston Bee
Well-known member
It’s Only Violent Conduct When It’s Brentford
Fully agree, consistency goes out the window when a top 6 team is involved. Have not read anywhere the logic behind not booking/sending off Madueke for the headbutt against Liverpool, almost like it never happened. But we all know why.
Last edited:
It’s Only Violent Conduct When It’s Brentford
It was at the very least a yellow, which would have been his 2nd of the game. So off anyway
It’s Only Violent Conduct When It’s Brentford
Got more of a Stones vibe to me
View: https://youtube.com/shorts/Rn3fjg78gws?is=EQrP3CQ4109XHIzV
When does this panel share their thoughts on Madueke as, while the Palmer aggression to the opponents head was far more forceful, this was the most comparable incident to Yarmo's with a different word soup by the officials? I'm obviously not holding my breath but I wonder if the club is waiting for that if they haven't already made contact with Pro Ref.
westendbee
Active member
- Joined
- 12 Dec 2012
- Messages
- 3,055
- Reaction score
- 3,408
It’s Only Violent Conduct When It’s Brentford
I don’t have a problem with the Madueke incident. Because it’s Arsenal and they get away with things, it has at least highlighted how the innocent-looking and “much-wronged” Iraola has encouraged his players to wind up the opposition at set pieces with the aim of provoking an incident. So maybe the cheating scousers won’t get away with this any more, much like Sunderland haven’t been awarded a “Sunderland penalty” (where their attacker instigates contact, disorientates the defender who is then punished for “not looking at the ball”) since they had one awarded against Arsenal, shortly after they got lucky against us.
Carri Bee Un
The Most Esteemed and Very Reverend
It’s Only Violent Conduct When It’s Brentford
Weirdly though I've been singing it all day.
It’s Only Violent Conduct When It’s Brentford
From Iraola's press conference today:
Liverpool’s Andoni Iraola was asked about referees and some of the decisions that may have gone against his players of late.
“I think we are quite an honest group. Sometimes too honest,” said the Spaniard.
“The referee said last week, our behaviour has been very good.
“You cannot fake things. When we complain it has to be genuine.”
Liverpool’s Andoni Iraola was asked about referees and some of the decisions that may have gone against his players of late.
“I think we are quite an honest group. Sometimes too honest,” said the Spaniard.
“The referee said last week, our behaviour has been very good.
“You cannot fake things. When we complain it has to be genuine.”