not an equal level of punishment though so its a silly rule.

The ref can't play advantage on a red card offence. He pauses blowing his whistle as Jimenez had an immediate chance of scoring a goal. If he scores Robertson doesn't get a red.
=====
Is this in the rules?

comment by Inbefore (U20589)
posted 8 minutes ago
Either play an advantage or send them off instantly basically not both which is essentially what they did.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No they didn't. You can't play advantage on a red. You can allow yourself some time to make the decision and if a goal is scored 'immediately' you don't give the red. This was the guidance given to referees, which for me is good guidance as it punishes the offending team but keeps all players on the pitch.

comment by Mamba - I filter right back (U1282)
posted less than a minute ago
The ref can't play advantage on a red card offence. He pauses blowing his whistle as Jimenez had an immediate chance of scoring a goal. If he scores Robertson doesn't get a red.
=====
Is this in the rules?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No, it was guidance given to referees when they brought in no advantage on red card offences.

comment by TheresOnlyOne7-0Reds (U1721)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by Mamba - I filter right back (U1282)
posted less than a minute ago
The ref can't play advantage on a red card offence. He pauses blowing his whistle as Jimenez had an immediate chance of scoring a goal. If he scores Robertson doesn't get a red.
=====
Is this in the rules?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No, it was guidance given to referees when they brought in no advantage on red card offences.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Any links? Sounds a ridiculous advice to me tbh. Disband the PGMOL.

Woah. It's actually in the rules.

"Advantage should not be applied in situations involving serious foul play, violent conduct or a second cautionable offence unless there is a clear opportunity to score a goal. The referee must send off the player when the ball is next out of play but if the player plays the ball or challenges/interferes with an opponent, the referee will stop play, send off the player and restart with an indirect free kick, unless the player committed a more serious offence."

comment by Mamba - I filter right back (U1282)
posted 19 minutes ago
comment by TheresOnlyOne7-0Reds (U1721)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by Mamba - I filter right back (U1282)
posted less than a minute ago
The ref can't play advantage on a red card offence. He pauses blowing his whistle as Jimenez had an immediate chance of scoring a goal. If he scores Robertson doesn't get a red.
=====
Is this in the rules?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No, it was guidance given to referees when they brought in no advantage on red card offences.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Any links? Sounds a ridiculous advice to me tbh. Disband the PGMOL.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think it's good guidance. If a goal is scored no red, if not red.

It would be if a goal carried the same weight as an early red card or a late red card.

comment by Inbefore (U20589)
posted about a minute ago
It would be if a goal carried the same weight as an early red card or a late red card.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I disagree.

So Nunez one vs Villa, if we draw that game 1-1 we've been facked over pretty much as a early red card in most cases is more advantageous than a single goal.

Its also unfair on future opposition since he doesnt miss a game he should have.

comment by Inbefore (U20589)
posted 13 seconds ago
So Nunez one vs Villa, if we draw that game 1-1 we've been facked over pretty much as a early red card in most cases is more advantageous than a single goal.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We haven't as every team plays to the current rules. If we drew 1-1 we can't claim to be fuсked over as they didn't change the laws mid-game. Every club is briefed on the rules and guidance before the season starts. This is why Slot had no issue with the red.

People are focusing on the wrong part of the law when trying to argue against the red as they're focusing on the factual part. It's the subjective part they should focus on, ie. was Wilson getting control of the ball?

Its the law i have issue with and giving my reasons.

Or the guidance*

Didnt mean specifically us, anyone who could have played 10 men for 70+ minutes but instead get a single goal and drop points vs 11 men. And any team who could be playing a team missing a suspended player but isnt.

Theyre not equal punishments so just be done with the immediate goalscoring opportunity, if its red blow and produce the red.

Idk why they went out of their way to add the unless an immediate goalscoring opportunity... Only case that will be of more benefit is late on in a game thats level, a late goals prob more valuable and a late rc.

than a late rc*

it just complicates things and makes its more unfair, as certain outcomes mean its better or worse and not just for the 2 teams playing. So just have the 1 ruling.

comment by Inbefore (U20589)
posted 2 minutes ago
Didnt mean specifically us, anyone who could have played 10 men for 70+ minutes but instead get a single goal and drop points vs 11 men. And any team who could be playing a team missing a suspended player but isnt.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They have changed the laws in nearly all areas to keep eleven on the pitch when a red may or may not be better than a goal. For example denying a goalscoring opportunity in the box is now a yellow and a penalty, unless the foul was not an attempt to play the ball.

This happened years ago, it's nothing new.personally I think it's better for the game. It's already so much easier to get sent off nowadays, although apparently not if you're a Fulham player at Anfield

comment by Inbefore (U20589)
posted 3 minutes ago
Idk why they went out of their way to add the unless an immediate goalscoring opportunity... Only case that will be of more benefit is late on in a game thats level, a late goals prob more valuable and a late rc.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I told you why. Generally in football a goal is the ultimate and wipes out everything else, unless it's violent conduct. Personally I prefer it that way but one thing is for sure, that won't be changing, it's generally accepted as being better for the game.

the pereira one numerous former refs were disgusted by that not being a rc, one said the dip on robbo one was a coming together though

the Diop* on Robbo

comment by TheresOnlyOne7-0Reds (U1721)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Inbefore (U20589)
posted 3 minutes ago
Idk why they went out of their way to add the unless an immediate goalscoring opportunity... Only case that will be of more benefit is late on in a game thats level, a late goals prob more valuable and a late rc.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I told you why. Generally in football a goal is the ultimate and wipes out everything else, unless it's violent conduct. Personally I prefer it that way but one thing is for sure, that won't be changing, it's generally accepted as being better for the game.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Lets face it, its not for the good of the game they do it. The incident with Robbo proved that, they had a glorious chance to make it 2-0 didnt take it, but happy to ruin the spectaclte as 11v11.

comment by Inbefore (U20589)
posted 3 minutes ago
it just complicates things and makes its more unfair, as certain outcomes mean its better or worse and not just for the 2 teams playing. So just have the 1 ruling.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not really sure what your angle is here. The outcome would have been the same on this occasion anyhow, with or without the time allowed to see if a goal was scored. A red card. On one hand you're arguing it shouldn't be a red as Jimenez was allowed to shoot before it was called back and on the other you're saying you want it to be a red card with no chance of scoring before calling it back to the DOGSO offence.