sounds like the other linesman on the Bob Lord side was the guy who gave the info to over rule !
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y3PVGifKUkA&t=6s

some nice words there from Warnock about Dyche too

sounds like the guy accepts his fate and thinks f@@k it let's go again Tuesday

sox8595 wrote:sounds like the guy accepts his fate and thinks f@@k it let's go again Tuesday

I fancy them to beat Brighton tbh

To be fair, I think Warnock is a very good manager.
Cardiff have done quite well this season and have been unlucky with some decisions lately, especially against Chelsea.
I wouldn’t be unhappy if they beat Brighton on Tuesday now we are safe.

I bet the lady interviewer was chuffed when he called her “Darling”. The prehistoric sexist B@stard!!!
“Should have got something out of the game” no Colin you should have been behind 4 0 at half time. Bye bye Cardiff. UTC

Good interview and very funny about Liverpool. Would be good to see them safe at the expense of Brighton and provided we stayed up it would be even better to see them beat Liverpool AND Man U

Soon summary he should have said “I can’t believe a linesman from 75 yards away had the temerity to see with his eyes, and allow the correct decision to be made”

Vegas Claret wrote:I fancy them to beat Brighton tbh

Look how Bummouth bounced back v Brighton yesterday ... I would love it if Cardiff stuck one on the Sanctimonious Brighton bunch on Tuesday, and dragged them right into an end of season scrap

Bosscat wrote:Look how Bummouth bounced back v Brighton yesterday ... I would love it if Cardiff stuck one on the Sanctimonious Brighton bunch on Tuesday, and dragged them right into an end of season scrap

Right up until the fisticuffs yesterday, I wanted Cardiff to stay up. I couldn't care less who goes down now.

Dodobdobodobo wrote:I bet the lady interviewer was chuffed when he called her “Darling”. The prehistoric sexist B@stard!!!
“Should have got something out of the game” no Colin you should have been behind 4 0 at half time. Bye bye Cardiff. UTC

But it's ok for Rylan and Alan Carr to call you darling, eh?
Get a life- it's nowt!

Bosscat wrote:Look how Bummouth bounced back v Brighton yesterday ... I would love it if Cardiff stuck one on the Sanctimonious Brighton bunch on Tuesday, and dragged them right into an end of season scrap

when you look at Brighton's fixtures then they will really struggle if they lose to Cardiff

Vegas Claret wrote:sounds like the other linesman on the Bob Lord side was the guy who gave the info to over rule !
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y3PVGifKUkA&t=6s

The linesman on the longside flagged for the pen....Mike Dean pointed to the spot (he had no choice)... But in going over to speak to him he was making it clear that he wasn't happy (he'd have been livid that the AR gave him the problem)... It was brave refereeing from Dean to cancel the penalty and restart with a drop ball. A weaker referee would have backed the lino and let him take the rap when TV proved him (the lino) wrong.

Was he right to point to the spot? Surely the correct course is to stop the game, speak to the Lino and then give the decision.

The line had given the decision. That's the point. That's what stopped the game. The rest is question and establishing the facts.

turfytopper wrote:The linesman on the longside flagged for the pen....Mike Dean pointed to the spot (he had no choice)... But in going over to speak to him he was making it clear that he wasn't happy (he'd have been livid that the AR gave him the problem)... It was brave refereeing from Dean to cancel the penalty and restart with a drop ball. A weaker referee would have backed the lino and let him take the rap when TV proved him (the lino) wrong.

did you even bother watching the interview ? Warnock clearly says different

I’m pretty sure you can lip read Mee asking Dean what was that for and Dean responding I don’t know. Like above, the AR left him in a position where he had to blow up and point to the spot.

seeing as people can't be arsed watching the ******* video - Warnock says Darren Cann gives the penalty (in front of Longside), Mike Dean says he doesn't see anything then the linesman on the near side(Bob Lord) who is 75 yards away says it comes off Mee's head - the decision was made by the linesman who was in front of the Bob Lord. The laziness of some people on here is astounding

Couldn't care less what Warnock said to be honest. It wasn't a penalty so Dean correctly decide not to award it.

taio wrote:Couldn't care less what Warnock said to be honest. It wasn't a penalty so Dean correctly decide not to award it.

I bet you're a laugh a minute in the pub.

FactualFrank wrote:I bet you're a laugh a minute in the pub.

Pathetic post.

When I go out next weekend I must refer to Warnock's interview. I'll have everyone in the pub in stitches.

taio wrote:Couldn't care less what Warnock said to be honest. It wasn't a penalty so Dean correctly decide not to award it.

your opinion is irrelevant as is mine, my post is merely pointing out what happened.

Vegas Claret wrote:..... the decision was made by the linesman who was in front of the Bob Lord.

No it wasn't. The decision was made by the referee after he heard out what both assistants had to say. And it was the right decision.

jtv wrote:No it wasn't. The decision was made by the referee after he heard out what both assistants had to say. And it was the right decision.

so without the correct information from the BL linesman the decision would have been wrong. Like I said, the decision was made because the lino gave the correct info, I can't word it another way and quite frankly I can't be arsed

Vegas Claret wrote:did you even bother watching the interview ? Warnock clearly says different

Are you being serious?

Vegas Claret wrote:so without the correct information from the BL linesman the decision would have been wrong. Like I said, the decision was made because the lino gave the correct info, I can't word it another way and quite frankly I can't be arsed

It was the linesman that f@cked up on the longside.
From that point Dean sorted it out.

I was sat behind the lino with a perfect view.

scouseclaret wrote:Was he right to point to the spot? Surely the correct course is to stop the game, speak to the Lino and then give the decision.

I'm pretty sure that the rules don't permit that.
I think he could have allowed play to continue, told the lino (through his earpiece) to keep the flag up and then once the ball was out of play go across and consult with him. If he agreed with the lino then he could have brought play back for the penalty. This would have avoided the rather unfortunate sequence of events that made it look as though Dean had changed his mind - whereas I don't think he did.

nil_desperandum wrote:I'm pretty sure that the rules don't permit that.
I think he could have allowed play to continue, told the lino (through his earpiece) to keep the flag up and then once the ball was out of play go across and consult with him. If he agreed with the lino then he could have brought play back for the penalty. This would have avoided the rather unfortunate sequence of events that made it look as though Dean had changed his mind - whereas I don't think he did.

The liner couldn’t stay rooted to the spot with his flag up when play is continuing as he would need to run the line. Dean did what he had to do, the liner dropped a massive clanger.

Rileybobs wrote:The liner couldn’t stay rooted to the spot with his flag up when play is continuing as he would need to run the line. Dean did what he had to do, the liner dropped a massive clanger.

I agree, but I didn't say he should remain rooted to the spot. We've seen it before where AR's keep up with play but wave frantically at the ref to try to get his attention.
(Rarely happens today because of the wireless communication).
I was only putting it forward as a possible alternative to awarding a penalty and then having to reverse. As you say it was an AR error, and left Dean in a difficult position.
Simply stopping play to consult - which was the suggestion I was responding to - wasn't one of his options.

mdd2 wrote:Good interview and very funny about Liverpool. Would be good to see them safe at the expense of Brighton and provided we stayed up it would be even better to see them beat Liverpool AND Man U

I wouldn't be wishing them too much good luck yet bud. They are 11 points (12 if you take account of goal difference I suppose) behind with 15 to play for and we have 4 games that, on paper, we won't get much if anything from. Allowing for us not getting anything (which I hope won't be the case) we need them to drop at least 4 points and those could or should be at United and Liverpool. Personally I don't care who goes down now as I don't particularly dislike either Cardiff or Brighton (don't really understand the hatred of Brighton on here, so they have a few idiot fans, doesn't every club)?

nil_desperandum wrote:I agree, but I didn't say he should remain rooted to the spot. We've seen it before where AR's keep up with play but wave frantically at the ref to try to get his attention.
(Rarely happens today because of the wireless communication).
I was only putting it forward as a possible alternative to awarding a penalty and then having to reverse. As you say it was an AR error, and left Dean in a difficult position.
Simply stopping play to consult - which was the suggestion I was responding to - wasn't one of his options.

.... and if Burnley went up the field and scored which would put the ball out of play would the ref go back to the AR and consult and give the penalty and rule out Burnley's goal?

... or worse still if a Burnley player was through on goal and brought down and denied an obvious goalscoring opportunity would the ref stop play consult the lino possibly award a penalty for cardiff, deny Burnley a free kick or penalty but send off the defender as he clearly committed the offence as the ball was still in play as a result of the ref not stopping play?

... or select any other of the many other scenarios that your view could create.

lovebeingaclaret wrote:.... and if Burnley went up the field and scored which would put the ball out of play would the ref go back to the AR and consult and give the penalty and rule out Burnley's goal?

... or worse still if a Burnley player was through on goal and brought down and denied an obvious goalscoring opportunity would the ref stop play consult the lino possibly award a penalty for cardiff, deny Burnley a free kick or penalty but send off the defender as he clearly committed the offence as the ball was still in play as a result of the ref not stopping play?

... or select any other of the many other scenarios that your view could create.

I can answer the second one - if there was no goalscoring opportunity because the play was going to be disallowed anyway, then there's no red card for the defender. Yellow for unsporting behaviour, in that case, just the same as if the forward was offside but play hadn't yet stopped. (The defender can still be red carded for violent conduct or other forms of serious foul play.)

Safe refereeing is a phrase used commonly and this is what we had here.

Dean had to stop play as the ball was in the penalty area, an AR was flagging outside of his credible area, players tend to stop when they see a flag go up.

Dean was convinced no pen hence stopped play. There was every likelihood that Cardiff could have stuck the ball in the back of the net as the Burnley defence will have stopped.

Much easier to over rule a penalty than a goal.

Brilliant piece of refereeing , not so good piece of Assisting.
I bet when the assessment comes through though Dean's teamwork mark will have been hit however his application of law will have gone up.
Given the weighting that the sections carry AOL x 2, Teamwork x 0.5 it is better to lose marks in teamwork.

lovebeingaclaret wrote:.... and if Burnley went up the field and scored which would put the ball out of play would the ref go back to the AR and consult and give the penalty and rule out Burnley's goal?

... or worse still if a Burnley player was through on goal and brought down and denied an obvious goalscoring opportunity would the ref stop play consult the lino possibly award a penalty for cardiff, deny Burnley a free kick or penalty but send off the defender as he clearly committed the offence as the ball was still in play as a result of the ref not stopping play?

... or select any other of the many other scenarios that your view could create.

You're quite right - welcome to the potential world of VAR.

After watching the SkySports highlights(https://www.skysports.com/football/burn ... iff/391088" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;) this morning I noticed the commentary refer to the AR flagging for the first suspected handball. I think this is the reason for the confusion as Dean had already seen and had not given the first suspected handball (correctly as it was ball to hand); but Dean was not sure about the second suspected handball so stopped play to consult with the AR as to which one he was flagging for.

After consultation with AR (longside) Dean decided that the first was not as it was ball to hand (as he had already decided during play) and that the AR (Longside) had flagged for that and not the second; which was still in question until he consulted with the other AR (Bob Lord) who said he had seen Ben Mee "face it" onto his arm.

With that info Dean correctly decided neither were handball at all and I must say, it was the right decision too.

He said they Burnley were very fortunate today on another day we would have won
He said at half time next to score will win it he was right we did.
on another day Westwood would have put his two chances away and Wood wouldn't have hit the post, he would have buried it result 4 nil at half time game over.
And whats all that about we playing teams at the right time does he not see our form since Christmas is top six performance.
He by all accounts thinks we are spawney and have rag it with what the obnoxious twerp said
He had good praise for the gaffer but who would not say how well hes done for us its black and white
Hes still a tosser is Warnock of the highest order

Initially I thought the AR gave the handball for the initial incident where the ball was blasted from virtually point blank range on to Mees hand. Sky Sports have subsequently backed up my initial take on the incident on Ref Watch (they didn't even deem the second incident where Mee miss heads the ball on to his own arm worthy of coverage or comment. Perhaps because the linesman had already motioned for the 1st incident)

The linesman didn't start flagging until the second "handball". Definite.

So having read all this and seeing it again (and again) on TV let me ask, does anyone these days know the rules on handball in the area? The Mee incident was clearly handball, Mee admitted as much, but it was also clearly accidental, he headed it (or faced it if you listen to Mee) and it hit his arm. Is there such a thing as accidental handball any more because this incident yet again brings up the controversy? If there is no accidental allowed any more what is to stop a player purposely kicking a ball onto a players hand? If there is clearly this was it. I don't know the answer and looking at this thread it seems many others are also in the dark. Surely there should be some clarification. If we get down to the interefering with play argument the answer to that must be if they aren't they should be. Penalties for handball must be the most contraversial area in the game at the moment.

I think in the end Dean got it spot on so why was there so much made of it in the media and by Warnock (although that is understandable). In my opinion there should have been no question of it being 'not a penalty'.

Handball has to be "deliberate" for it to be a foul, whether in the area or not.

From next season they're amending the law so that a goal can't be scored with the hand, deliberate or not. No change to how free kicks or penalties are awarded as far as I know.

Vegas Claret wrote:I fancy them to beat Brighton tbh

4.33 for Cardiff to win too - I'll be having a tenner on that