The Voice - Match preview #31: Newport County vs Bradford City Saturday 15th February 2025 3:00pm

Yeah I know. So what? He's got nobody to beat. He's through one on one. What's going to happen to prevent him having a one on one?

Not a single neutral observer is criticising that decision.

 

That’s fair, perhaps I’m too harsh.

 

He seemed to make his mind up so quickly, without considering distance from goal and covering defender. Basically he took the easiest decision. I don’t disagree it was a contentious one, but legitimately say if that went in our favour I’d have a puff of the cheeks and look in my face that we’ve been given a lucky call for that one.

As for the rest of his performance - simply shocking.

 

Distance (and position) is actually something in favour of the red here IMO. It’s well inside our half and in the middle third of the pitch, albeit a bit to the right.

Covering defender in the vicinity only matters if they could prevent the goalscoring opportunity. Not a chance Huntington gets across in time IMO, looking at that footage.

Striker could continue his run into the area and have a clear chance of scoring, or cut across Huntington and be more central 1 on 1 with Walker.

Personally think this is a red more often than not. The ref wasn’t good today, but I feel he got this one correct.

My only reservation is his positioning for making this decision - he seems quite some way behind play and may be having to look ‘through’ one of our players to see it (hard to tell from the TV angle).

 

The Arsenal red they successfully appealed was given for serious foul play (raked the ankle), not DOGSO.

 

And the red card they were given this season to Saliba Arsenal didn't even bother appealing and that one was further out than the one today.

 

Not bad at all Dave… just needs crossing ability?

 

Spot on on all counts.

 

Yep - the Saliba one was a more contentious than today’s. Was a much bigger distance to goal for a start.

 

Proves my point , they are inconsistent as a “ body”. Rules should not be capable of differing opinions surely? If they are they are mere “ guidelines” which don’t stack up in common law . I realise it’s pedantic but laws of the game should not be open to individual interpretation .
ie it’s a funny old game!

 

You just contradicted yourself … Read what you wrote. Add to that Huntingdon was in the frame to come across.

“ Nobody to beat, he’s through one on one “

 

That was only said later and that’s why Arsenal appealed. It wasn’t the reason he was originally sent off . Happy to be shown to be wrong though?

 

Completely wrong. The rules of football around everything except offside and goal line incidents will always be subjective. Why do you think pundits, ex pros, managers, journos argue about every single major call every single weekend.

 

That’s just what I said, open to different interpretations . They shouldn’t be , what’s wrong with that?

 

You know very well I'm talking about defenders. Are you trying to say that's its not a goalscoring opportunity because there's a keeper in the way? Come on man, I'm trying to have a sensible conversation here. Huntington would've maybe reached him by next week.

 

It's simply not possible unless you create a set of laws completely unsuitable to the game of football.

 

What's the Arsenal one got to do with the one today? I can't think of two more different incidents.

 

Huntington would have had to morph into Usain Bolt to get across. He was level and 10 yards lateral. He could have come across and watched him smack it in the goal from behind.

 

It partly explains all the controversy around some VAR decisions. Many are a matter of opinion too.

 

It's impossible to avoid subjective laws unless you want to destroy football. How do you make a foul factual without making the sport non-contact, same with handball you can't make that factual unless you make it handball every time the ball touches the hand.
How would you make it factual when stopping a promising attack (yellow card) becomes denial of obvious goalscoring opportunity (red card) which is what the debate is in this incident.