Re: [情報] 月黑風高2023-24 Mac Allister

看板FAPL作者 (黃鳥56)時間2年前 (2023/08/23 12:24), 2年前編輯推噓14(1405)
留言19則, 12人參與, 2年前最新討論串1/1
紅軍阿根廷中場小麥(Alexis Mac Allister)因在上週六對櫻桃幫的比賽下半場侵犯B ramall而被祭出紅牌。 小麥原本將錯過對油卡斯爾、維拉和狼隊的比賽。但紅軍在週一對紅牌提出上訴並成功翻 盤,這位阿根廷中場球員現在可以出場參加這三場比賽。 英格蘭足球協會在一份聲明中表示:“一個獨立 independent Regulatory Commission 在提出誤判的申訴後,取消了小麥的紅牌與三場比賽禁賽處分。” The red card shown to Liverpool’s Alexis Mac Allister against Bournemouth las t Saturday has been rescinded, meaning he will no longer receive a three-match ban. The ?35m summer signing was sent off on his first league appearance at Anfield by the referee Thomas Bramall for a 58th-minute foul on Ryan Christie. Althou gh his boot was high when he made contact with the Bournemouth player, there a ppeared to be little force in the challenge and there was surprise that the VA R, Paul Tierney, did not ask Bramall to review the decision on the pitchside m onitor. Mac Allister was scheduled to miss games against Newcastle on Sunday and again st Aston Villa and Wolves in September. But Liverpool appealed against the red card on Monday and the Argentina midfielder is now available for all three ga mes. In a statement the Football Association said: “An independent Regulatory Comm ission has removed Alexis Mac Allister’s three-match suspension following a c laim of wrongful dismissal.” Jurgen Klopp had said of the on-field decision: “After the game I saw it back . I think if you have a list of points, what we need to give a red card, besid es contact there’s nothing else, no other boxes ticked. It’s a decision we a ll agree if he gives a yellow card VAR would not overturn it and if he gives a red card VAR will not overturn it because contact means it’s not a clear and obvious mistake.” Liverpool responded to the FA decision by saying: “A club appeal against the suspension has now been upheld by an independent regulatory commission, meanin g Mac Allister is eligible for selection when the Reds travel to Newcastle Uni ted on Sunday.” 來源: the guardian https://pse.is/57zldn -- ※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc), 來自: 118.171.214.178 (臺灣) ※ 文章網址: https://www.ptt.cc/bbs/FAPL/M.1692764665.A.794.html ※ 編輯: oriole5566 (118.171.214.178 臺灣), 08/23/2023 12:26:42

08/23 12:40, 2年前 , 1F
上訴原來是會成功的?!
08/23 12:40, 1F

08/23 12:49, 2年前 , 2F
新賽季裁判感覺很亢奮 各種奇妙執法
08/23 12:49, 2F

08/23 13:38, 2年前 , 3F
合理
08/23 13:38, 3F

08/23 14:47, 2年前 , 4F
裁判都嗑了什麼
08/23 14:47, 4F

08/23 15:40, 2年前 , 5F
樓下本人
08/23 15:40, 5F

08/23 16:34, 2年前 , 6F
這還好吧 取消禁賽是可以預見的
08/23 16:34, 6F

08/23 19:03, 2年前 , 7F
感謝英足協不殺之恩QQ (咦)
08/23 19:03, 7F

08/23 20:57, 2年前 , 8F
畢竟亮鞋釘踩腿,主裁這樣判也沒法說啥,由於不是明顯的
08/23 20:57, 8F

08/23 20:58, 2年前 , 9F
誤判,VAR也無法介入,但確實不必禁三場
08/23 20:58, 9F

08/24 06:42, 2年前 , 10F
XDD
08/24 06:42, 10F

08/24 08:00, 2年前 , 11F
啊不就還好贏了,如果輸櫻桃現在補償也不能改變結果
08/24 08:00, 11F

08/24 14:07, 2年前 , 12F
好奇VAR啟動的標準是什麼 應該不是明顯誤判才能介入吧
08/24 14:07, 12F

08/24 14:07, 2年前 , 13F
很多時候不確定的時候不就是VAR啟動的時機嗎
08/24 14:07, 13F

08/24 16:52, 2年前 , 14F
不,只要是直接紅牌(非兩黃),VAR就可以介入;所以比
08/24 16:52, 14F

08/24 16:52, 2年前 , 15F
賽當時VAR是同意這是紅牌。只是禁賽場次數有上訴成功
08/24 16:52, 15F

08/24 16:55, 2年前 , 16F
誤不誤判不是VAR的介入條件,而是看時機:1.進球時(有
08/24 16:55, 16F

08/24 16:55, 2年前 , 17F
無越位/手球/烏龍球)2.判罰12碼時 3.發生紅牌時。除此
08/24 16:55, 17F

08/24 16:55, 2年前 , 18F
之外VAR都是"不能"介入的
08/24 16:55, 18F

08/24 18:00, 2年前 , 19F
上訴成功不代表誤判,大家覺得這個犯規沒那麼嚴重
08/24 18:00, 19F
文章代碼(AID): #1avOdvUK (FAPL)
文章代碼(AID): #1avOdvUK (FAPL)