₦airaland Forum

Spy360:
Are you in essence blaming Martinelli's indiscipline for the refs rash decision? Because that's where I am coming from.

We can talk indiscipline, but what I am saying here is that the ref made the wrong call. That's it.

Besides, I like the agbero mentality. I like that we can use unconventional approaches just to get ahead. Remember we have been accused of being too soft and lacking cojones. But here we are showing we can be mad and ruthlessly dubious if need be. The referees will soon get used to us just as they have gotten used to other teams. Afterall, other teams do same or even worse and get away.

Teams go hard/physical with sense without putting their own team in dangerous situations because it becomes counterproductive. We were silly while employing the “Agbero” style and it nearly cost us the game.
We were already on 3 yellow cards by the 60th minute, that meant we were not utilizing the “agbero” style well and were pushing our luck.

Let me ask you 3 questions, I need yes or no answers only.

1. Is pushing Podence when he was attempting to start an attack with a throw a foul?

2. Is blocking a throw and time wasting a foul? Was it a deserving of a yellow card?

3. Is intentionally jabbing into an opponent from behind to stop play a yellow card?

For clarification

Both incidents are officiated as separate incidents, not lumped into one.

Playing an advantage is called to favor the attacking team, not the defending team.

Both incidents are yellow card worthy (Martinelli pushed another player to the ground, we have seen straight red cards for such incidents before, he intentionally tried to delay the game/ stop the flow of the game by blocking a throw and recklessly jabbed into another player from behind.

The referee will only stop plays including advantage plays when it is a straight Red card situation or health situation.

Despite being an Arsenal fan, it is okay to be objective sometimes and not allow emotions control your thoughts and narratives.

Roland17:
Teams go hard/physical with sense without putting their own team in dangerous situations because it becomes counterproductive. We were silly while employing the “Agbero” style and it nearly cost us the game.
We were already on 3 yellow cards by the 60th minute, that meant we were not utilizing the “agbero” style well and were pushing our luck.

Let me ask you 3 questions, I need yes or no answers only.

1. Is pushing Podence when he was attempting to start an attack with a throw a foul?

2. Is blocking a throw and time wasting a foul? Was it a deserving of a yellow card?

3. Is intentionally jabbing into an opponent from behind to stop play a yellow card?

Well, the agbero style did work a lot for Chelsea with Diego Costa, and United during the time of Ferdinand etc. We may not be getting it right now, but if that agbero mentality sits in, it will definitely favour us and I will be happy.

As for your questions, the answer to all is yes. But let me ask you mine, if all three happen in the same path of play, how many freekicks will be given?

Roland17:
For clarification

Both incidents are officiated as separate incidents, not lumped into one.

Playing an advantage is called to favor the attacking team, not the defending team.

Both incidents are yellow card worthy (Martinelli pushed another player to the ground, we have seen straight red cards for such incidents before, he intentionally tried to delay the game/ stop the flow of the game by blocking a throw and recklessly jabbed into another player from behind.

The referee will only stop plays including advantage plays when it is a straight Red card situation or health situation.

Despite being an Arsenal fan, it is okay to be objective sometimes and not allow emotions control your thoughts and narratives.

I have seen a player foul two opponents in a sequence, yet got one caution.

Spy360:
Well, the agbero style did work a lot for Chelsea with Diego Costa, and United during the time of Ferdinand etc. We may not be getting it right now, but if that agbero mentality sits in, it will definitely favour us and I will be happy.

As for your questions, the answer to all is yes. But let me ask you mine, if all three happen in the same path of play, how many freekicks will be given?

Now you have deviated and now bringing Chelsea and United. Well, let me indulge you. Despite employing the “Agbero” style, Chelsea did not amass 23 yellow cards and 4 red cards in the space of 2 months with 2 weeks international breaks inbetween the 2 months. I will go you one further with Burnley and Stoke City. Both teams are renowned to be physical sides but guess what? They finish their games with 11 men and have fewer cautions.

Employing a physical tactics, what you call “Agbero” doesn’t imply that you become reckless and throw caution to the wind and just cop yellow cards. At some point, those cards add up or you suffer a red card which makes games more complicated than it should have been.

To your question, you get 1 free kick, however, the free kick doesn’t absolve you from a caution (be it yellow, red or a talking to by the ref) which supports my point that an advantage is played to favor the attacking team, not the defending team. Referees have gone back full 60 seconds after the expiration of an advantage to card fouls, we see this all the time.

Spy360:
I have seen a player foul two opponents in a sequence, yet got one caution.

Of course, it is possible if the first foul or both were not deemed egregious or aggressive enough to warrant yellow cards.

Roland17:
Of course, it is possible if the first foul or both were not deemed egregious or aggressive enough to warrant yellow cards.

An example was city v wolves
Jimenez was booked for a foul, city tried to play fast free kick Jimenez got involved again and he got the marching order without warning

Roland17:
Now you have deviated and now bringing Chelsea and United. Well, let me indulge you. Despite employing the “Agbero” style, Chelsea did not amass 23 yellow cards and 4 red cards in the space of 2 months with 2 weeks international breaks inbetween the 2 months. I will go you one further with Burnley and Stoke City. Both teams are renowned to be physical sides but guess what? They finish their games with 11 men and have fewer cautions.

Employing a physical tactics, what you call “Agbero” doesn’t imply that you become reckless and throw caution to the wind and just cop yellow cards. At some point, those cards add up or you suffer a red card which makes games more complicated than it should have been.

To your question, you get 1 free kick, however, the free kick doesn’t absolve you from a caution (be it yellow, red or a talking to by the ref) which supports my point that an advantage is played to favor the attacking team, not the defending team. Referees have gone back full 60 seconds after the expiration of an advantage to card fouls, we see this all the time.

https://dailycannon.com/2022/02/martinelli-red-card/

1. Yellow is a caution, if you're not gonna caution then give a straight red. Issuing two cautions just to throw in a red is emotional and laughable.

2. An advantage is given if the ball is t out of play, if Martinelli pushed the player before the throwing, then the ball is out of play, there's no advantage to be given. Allowing the throw to stand means nullifying the presumed foul since the ball was initially out of play.

3. When you give an advantage, and another foul is committed in the same sequence or path of play, you award the caution to the more dangerous one. If the tackle was injurious, simply award a straight red to the second tackle. We have seen this happen several times.

This was poor bias officiating and Michael Oliver has made himself a laughable reference point. Unless the PL clamps down on this it will happen again as other refs will point to this incident. I believe Oliver will get a demotion next week.

50d33q:
An example was city v wolves
Jimenez was booked for a foul, city tried to play fast free kick Jimenez got involved again and he got the marching order without warning

Yes. That's because the caution was issued before the second offense.

Jiminez commits a foul.

Jiminez receives a yellow card.

Jiminez blocks the passage of the ensuing free kick.

Jiminez gets another yellow which automatically means a red.

London is Blue ... the world is blue .. make una know una mate

Spy360:
Yes. That's because the caution was issued before the second offense.

Jiminez commits a foul.

Jiminez receives a yellow card.

Jiminez blocks the passage of the ensuing free kick.

Jiminez gets another yellow which automatically means a red.

Yes
Martinelli pushed an opponent, ref played advantage (one yellow)
Martinelli nudged another opponent breaking an attack another yellow
2 avoidable situations but he presented himself to the ref on a platter

50d33q:
Yes
Martinelli pushed an opponent, ref played advantage (one yellow)
Martinelli nudged another opponent breaking an attack another yellow
2 avoidable situations but he presented himself to the ref on a platter

Sir,
U cannot give another yellow without a caution na,
Is that not clear enough.
In this case, it was in the same sequence of play,
See this is sending a very unsporting precedence,
It means a ref will just issue 2 yellow to one player at once because teams will now be pointing to this incident and demanding for it and will also use it to defend itself if it happens against them.
Pls read my earlier post in this thread to get the understanding of the matter.

Anyway it will happen this season again on another team.
This is the same thing with handball which they tried to make it " a foul even when it was unintentional."
The very first game mancity ,
This became a problem because so many unintentional handball in penalty area involving Debrune, Gabriel jesus and an opponent leading to a goal for mancity which var struck out because of ball to hand
That same season when they brought this policy, they still didn't give a foul for arsenal against an opponent in the 18box which ought to be a penalty (Bournemouth or Watford).
Now they have cancelled it bcoz its an unsporting policy.

Brother, u need to see it with football eyes not just an incident.
If u can remember, a keeper wanted to kick a ball he had caught, henry and also later etoo nipped the ball from the air and scored.
U think they had to cancel such goals after those incidences, because its totally unsporting.

Spy360:
https://dailycannon.com/2022/02/martinelli-red-card/

1. Yellow is a caution, if you're not gonna caution then give a straight red. Issuing two cautions just to throw in a red is emotional and laughable.

2. An advantage is given if the ball is t out of play, if Martinelli pushed the player before the throwing, then the ball is out of play, there's no advantage to be given. Allowing the throw to stand means nullifying the presumed foul since the ball was initially out of play.

3. When you give an advantage, and another foul is committed in the same sequence or path of play, you award the caution to the more dangerous one. If the tackle was injurious, simply award a straight red to the second tackle. We have seen this happen several times.

This was poor bias officiating and Michael Oliver has made himself a laughable reference point. Unless the PL clamps down on this it will happen again as other refs will point to this incident. I believe Oliver will get a demotion next week.

Alaye, go and watch replays again, the ball had already been thrown and was on the field before Martinelli made contact with Podence, that is why the advantage was played. It was not a dead ball or out of bound play. The ball had already been thrown before Martinelli made contact.

I thought you just admitted both plays were fouled and card worthy why are we dancing around again?

See context below

Spy360:
I have seen a player foul two opponents in a sequence, yet got one caution.

the same refree gave this player a yellow card for a worse challenge than martinelli

When we say there’s an agenda against Arsenal, people think we’re crazy. pic.twitter.com/gJ9zWxSo1z

— Ebuka (@EbukaMeanzGreat) February 12, 2022

Boys club.. I wan look for trouble... una get this type of cup ? No be tea cup o

kodded:
the same refree gave this player a yellow card for a worse challenge than martinelli

When we say there’s an agenda against Arsenal, people think we’re crazy. pic.twitter.com/gJ9zWxSo1z

— Ebuka (@EbukaMeanzGreat) February 12, 2022

If after watching this clip anybody still thinks Martinelli deserves the red card, then I don't know what to say again.

This is a perfect example of what happened.... Two fouls in the same sequence of play and only a yellow card was issued.

To a man who only has hammer in his possession, every problem he encounters will look like a nail to him. For those who would like to blame Arteta for everything, nothing u will tell them to make them see Michael Oliver nearly used his emotional officiating to ruin our game.

Any wonder why I said your school of thought is short sighted, reactionary and emotional? You are seriously using a Twitter video to make a case. Well, I will use the rules and laws that guide the officiating of the game.

A lack of knowledge of the rules does not absolve you from the crime or the penalty associated with the crime. I have never seen it happen before doesn’t mean the rule doesn’t exist. I am not cut for emotional tantrums filled with subjective interpretations of how incidents should be adjudicated or how the rules of the game should be applied.

According to 2021/2022 IFAB rules, Michael Oliver was 100% correct in issuing 2 cautions to Martinelli. Please see the screen shots and stop the tantrums. You are welcome to visit this website to learn more. We have a serious on field indiscipline issue, the sooner we accept it and try to resolve it, the better.

PLEASE AND PLEASE READ TO COMPREHEND.

Case closed!

https://downloads.theifab.com/downloads/laws-of-the-game-2021-22?l=en

Roland17:
Alaye, go and watch replays again, the ball had already been thrown and was on the field before Martinelli made contact with Podence, that is why the advantage was played. It was not a dead ball or out of bound play. The ball had already been thrown before Martinelli made contact.

I thought you just admitted both plays were fouled and card worthy why are we dancing around again?

I think you are alone on this issue in the top class football fans world.

The case is simple,

1. It's unconventional to issue a caution twice. I mean, a caution is caution. It's like a child brings his report card, you see an F in the card, then you said 'dont fail again if you do, I will flog you' then you flog the child. The child asks you why you should flog him after just given a warning, and you say, the warning was for the first subject you failed, the flogging was for the second one. Lol.
A caution is meant to deter the player from repeating any offense. It's senseless, I can't even imagine.

2. The throw was already a dead ball situation. If the ref felt, Martinelli obstructed play, then why give an advantage and allow the ball to flow? He should have stopped play, issue the yellow, and let the player repeat the throw. If you give an advantage, then there was no obstruction. This was a dead ball situation. Even if he gave an advantage, he should have cautioned one offense because the rule says a player must first be cautioned before sending off. He gave Martinelli no chance to be cautioned. I mean, this is too simple.

Spy360:
I think you are alone on this issue in the top class football fans world.

The case is simple,

1. It's unconventional to issue a caution twice. I mean, a caution is caution. It's like a child brings his report card, you see an F in the card, then you said 'dont fail again if you do, I will flog you' then you flog the child. The child asks you why you should flog him after just given a warning, and you say, the warning was for the first subject you failed, the flogging was for the second one. Lol.
A caution is meant to deter the player from repeating any offense. It's senseless, I can't even imagine.

2. The throw was already a dead ball situation. If the ref felt, Martinelli obstructed play, then why give an advantage and allow the ball to flow? He should have stopped play, issue the yellow, and let the player repeat the throw. If you give an advantage, then there was no obstruction. This was a dead ball situation. Even if he gave an advantage, he should have cautioned one offense because the rule says a player must first be cautioned before sending off. He gave Martinelli no chance to be cautioned. I mean, this is too simple.

Baba, he fit no gree ,
Leave the matter.
The most important thing is arsenal won.
While teams will now be counting for referee how many foul (worthy of a yellow)an opponent has committed.
And the ref will be feeling the heat.
So relax.
It will happen this season with another team and we shall see if 2 yellow card will be dished out
Did u see the outcry for arsenal asking to reschedule its game due to covid and injury but no noise was heard when we were just about to play wolves after being on a winning run and beating last opponent Norwich 5-0.
Martinelli will be available for wolves and he will be motivated.

By then we shall be counting the fouls for that ref on that day
Pls don't be surprised that they will want to card an arsenal player for showing the ref the yellow card offense he is ignoring to give a wolves player.
Na here we dey
Let it rest.
Dey say first to do no dey pain

Roland17:
Any wonder why I said your school of thought is short sighted, reactionary and emotional? You are seriously using a Twitter video to make a case. Well, I will use the rules and laws that guide the officiating of the game.

A lack of knowledge of the rules does not absolve you from the crime or the penalty associated with the crime. I have never seen it happen before doesn’t mean the rule doesn’t exist. I am not cut for emotional tantrums filled with subjective interpretations of how incidents should be adjudicated or how the rules of the game should be applied.

According to 2021/2022 IFAB rules, Michael Oliver was 100% correct in issuing 2 cautions to Martinelli. Please see the screen shots and stop the tantrums. You are welcome to visit this website to learn more. We have a serious on field indiscipline issue, the sooner we accept it and try to resolve it, the better.

PLEASE AND PLEASE READ TO COMPREHEND.

Case closed!

https://downloads.theifab.com/downloads/laws-of-the-game-2021-22?l=en

Nwanne, I have studied the rules like you said and found flaws in your judgement. First you omitted an important clause that led to the pic you posted, next you ignored the actual part that concerns giving advantages and cautions.

The first pic shows that after giving an advantage, the player is only cautioned for one offense even if his tackle was to hinder a goal scoring opportunity.

The second pic shows that the double caution is only meant for substitutes or substituted players and not on field players.

Lush100:
Baba, he fit no gree ,
Leave the matter.
The most important thing is arsenal won.
While teams will now be counting for referee how many foul (worthy of a yellow)an opponent has committed.
And the ref will be feeling the heat.
So relax.
It will happen this season with another team and we shall see if 2 yellow card will be dished out
Did u see the outcry for arsenal asking to reschedule its game due to covid and injury but no noise was heard when we were just about to play wolves after being on a winning run and beating last opponent Norwich 5-0.
Martinelli will be available for wolves and he will be motivated.

By then we shall be counting the fouls for that ref on that day
Pls don't be surprised that they will want to card an arsenal player for showing the ref the yellow card offense he is ignoring to give a wolves player.
Na here we dey
Let it rest.
Dey say first to do no dey pain

Thank God say we won, because I for almost go crazy.

Na here we dey. Hope other teams will not complain because na so e dey start.

Spy360:
I think you are alone on this issue in the top class football fans world.

The case is simple,

1. It's unconventional to issue a caution twice. I mean, a caution is caution. It's like a child brings his report card, you see an F in the card, then you said 'dont fail again if you do, I will flog you' then you flog the child. The child asks you why you should flog him after just given a warning, and you say, the warning was for the first subject you failed, the flogging was for the second one. Lol.
A caution is meant to deter the player from repeating any offense. It's senseless, I can't even imagine.

2. The throw was already a dead ball situation. If the ref felt, Martinelli obstructed play, then why give an advantage and allow the ball to flow? He should have stopped play, issue the yellow, and let the player repeat the throw. If you give an advantage, then there was no obstruction. This was a dead ball situation. Even if he gave an advantage, he should have cautioned one offense because the rule says a player must first be cautioned before sending off. He gave Martinelli no chance to be cautioned. I mean, this is too simple.

Nwanne, you are missing a very critical piece and that is the fact that the play you are calling dead was already active and in play which resulted in the advantage, that is the whole idea of the advantage. A dead ball would not need an advantage and this would be irrelevant. The ball had made it into the pitch before Martinelli made contact with Podence which means it is alive and makes a ton of difference.
The throw placed Wolves in a dangerous attacking position.
The first foul was not deemed egregious enough to stop the advantage which the rules explains. He did not think the foul was red card worthy, so of course he continues the play.

Spy360:
Nwanne, I have studied the rules like you said and found flaws in your judgement. First you omitted an important clause that led to the pic you posted, next you ignored the actual part that concerns giving advantages and cautions.

The first pic shows that after giving an advantage, the player is only cautioned for one offense even if his tackle was to hinder a goal scoring opportunity.

The second pic shows that the double caution is only meant for substitutes or substituted players and not on field players.

You have wrongly interpreted the advantage rule that you have highlighted. The laws clearly states there that "If the referee plays the advantage for an offence for which a caution/sending-off would have been issued had play been stopped, this caution/sending-off must be issued when the ball is next out of play."

The caution for the first incident must be issued when the ball is out of play, not when the play is active, especially not when a 2nd foul and separate foul is committed by the same player. An out of play is different from a dead ball situation, don't mis-construe both to mean the same. The ref did not have to blow to caution, he already knew he was going to caution Martinelli after the pushing incident and the ball was still in play, not dead or even out of play which is as a resulted in the advantage.

Stopping a throw to slow the game and shoving an opponent in itself was already a justifiable red card on Martinelli if Oliver wanted to be rash but he allowed play go on because if he stopped play, Arsenal would have benefited from stopping the quick throw which kills the entire idea of an advantage being played.

Spy360:
The second pic shows that the double caution is only meant for substitutes or substituted players and not on field players.

This is why I said read carefully because you are either being disingenuous or failing to understand how the rules were segmented. The second pic covers CAUTIONABLE OFFENSES, ALL CAUTIONABLE OFFENSES. The next section after CAUTIONABLE OFFENSE is CAUTION FOR UNSPORTING BEHAVIOR, which is clearly separated as it's own section.

The first bullet point under cautionable offenses addresses the cautioning of players, the 2nd bullet point addresses substitute or substituted players. The portion, I highlighted, summarized CAUTIONABLE OFFENSES, not necessarily the substitute.

Martinelli had already committed two cautionable offenses under the first bullet points, SEE BULLET POINTS 1 and 4, while Arsenal had persistently committed BULLET POINT 5. There is no rule that obligates the referee to warn a player of a booking before the booking is issued, especially when they play is still active, absolutely none! You are a professional player, you know these things, most especially when we time wasting from the 60th minute and had gotten 3 yellow cards.

For those who keep saying, "we have never seen it before" please go re-watch Napoli vs Barcelona (UCL), fast forward to the 88th minute and see the ref issue Vidal 2 yellow cards for 2 separate cautionable incidents.

Roland17:
Nwanne, you are missing a very critical piece and that is the fact that the play you are calling dead was already active and in play which resulted in the advantage, that is the whole idea of the advantage. A dead ball would not need an advantage and this would be irrelevant. The ball had made it into the pitch before Martinelli made contact with Podence which means it is alive and makes a ton of difference.
The throw placed Wolves in a dangerous attacking position.
The first foul was not deemed egregious enough to stop the advantage which the rules explains. He did not think the foul was red card worthy, so of course he continues the play.

Then that would be a foul throw check again. Did Martinelli's actions caused a foul throw? Then it should have been stopped and he penalised. If not there was no advantage. The ref goofed both ways. There's no excuse which ever angle you come in.

Roland17:
You have wrongly interpreted the advantage rule that you have highlighted. The laws clearly states there that "If the referee plays the advantage for an offence for which a caution/sending-off would have been issued had play been stopped, this caution/sending-off must be issued when the ball is next out of play."

The caution for the first incident must be issued when the ball is out of play, not when the play is active, especially not when a 2nd foul and separate foul is committed by the same player. An out of play is different from a dead ball situation, don't mis-construe both to mean the same. The ref did not have to blow to caution, he already knew he was going to caution Martinelli after the pushing incident and the ball was still in play, not dead or even out of play which is as a resulted in the advantage.

Stopping a throw to slow the game and shoving an opponent in itself was already a justifiable red card on Martinelli if Oliver wanted to be rash but he allowed play go on because if he stopped play, Arsenal would have benefited from stopping the quick throw which kills the entire idea of an advantage being played.

Wow! Are you for real?

Please get my point on the advantage rule. Martinelli's push on Podence was to stop a possible chance on goal which didn't work and the ref played the advantage, his second action was similar but he did hinder the move. He was to have been cautioned on the second since the first was just unsporting and not an attempt to injure the player.

At least you now agree that a caution cannot be given for the same event. You are only attempting to make both actions separate events which they are not.

Roland17:
This is why I said read carefully because you are either being disingenuous or failing to understand how the rules were segmented. The second pic covers CAUTIONABLE OFFENSES, ALL CAUTIONABLE OFFENSES. The next section after CAUTIONABLE OFFENSE is CAUTION FOR UNSPORTING BEHAVIOR, which is clearly separated as it's own section.

The first bullet point under cautionable offenses addresses the cautioning of players, the 2nd bullet point addresses substitute or substituted players. The portion, I highlighted, summarized CAUTIONABLE OFFENSES, not necessarily the substitute.

Martinelli had already committed two cautionable offenses under the first bullet points, SEE BULLET POINTS 1 and 4, while Arsenal had persistently committed BULLET POINT 5. There is no rule that obligates the referee to warn a player of a booking before the booking is issued, especially when they play is still active, absolutely none! You are a professional player, you know these things, most especially when we time wasting from the 60th minute and had gotten 3 yellow cards.

Nwanne the example given clearly describes who the rule was meant for. Let's not argue over typed material.

Spy360:
Then that would be a foul throw check again. Did Martinelli's actions caused a foul throw? Then it should have been stopped and he penalised. If not there was no advantage. The ref goofed both ways. There's no excuse which ever angle you come in.

You are shifting goal posts and turning amala at this point, now na foul throw! Podence had both feet planted on the ground, there was no foul throw.

Roland17:
For those who keep saying, "we have never seen it before" please go re-watch Napoli vs Barcelona (UCL), fast forward to the 88th minute and see the ref issue Vidal 2 yellow cards for 2 separate cautionable incidents.

Lol. You are being smart with us na.

Check again, the ref issued the first caution. Vidal then acted aggressively towards the ref that led to the second caution.

My question to you on this incident is had Vidal walked away after the first caution, would he have been issued the sending off?

Spy360:
Nwanne the example given clearly describes who the rule was meant for. Let's not argue over typed material.

On this one, you are absolutely wrong! The section was well segmented. Besides, have you looked at bullet points 1, 4 and 5?

I enjoy debates with you because we push each other respectfully.

You what? let’s die the issue. I personally hope the call is reversed because we are already thin to be now be missing players.

At the end of the day, I am glad the decision did not cost us all 3 points. I gratefully take the W.