作者oriole5566 (黃鳥56)
看板FAPL
標題Re: [情報] 月黑風高2023-24 Mac Allister
時間Wed Aug 23 12:24:23 2023
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t Saturday has been rescinded, meaning he will no longer receive a three-match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://webptt.com/m.aspx?n=bbs/FAPL/M.1692764665.A.794.html
※ 編輯: oriole5566 (118.171.214.178 臺灣), 08/23/2023 12:26:42
1F：推 iamnotgm: 上訴原來是會成功的?! 08/23 12:40
2F：推 sammyymmas: 新賽季裁判感覺很亢奮 各種奇妙執法 08/23 12:49
3F：推 YCLEE1114: 合理 08/23 13:38
4F：推 leeleeg: 裁判都嗑了什麼 08/23 14:47
5F：推 c8227867: 樓下本人 08/23 15:40
6F：推 GSHARP: 這還好吧 取消禁賽是可以預見的 08/23 16:34
7F：推 MacAllister: 感謝英足協不殺之恩QQ （咦） 08/23 19:03
8F：推 ff760725: 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
9F：→ ff760725: 誤判，VAR也無法介入，但確實不必禁三場 08/23 20:58
10F：推 evol6381: XDD 08/24 06:42
11F：推 nuturewind: 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
12F：推 sam9595: 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
13F：→ sam9595: 很多時候不確定的時候不就是VAR啟動的時機嗎 08/24 14:07
14F：推 fukunmin: 不，只要是直接紅牌（非兩黃），VAR就可以介入；所以比 08/24 16:52
15F：→ fukunmin: 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
16F：推 fukunmin: 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
17F：→ fukunmin: 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
18F：→ fukunmin: 之外VAR都是"不能"介入的 08/24 16:55
19F：推 GSHARP: 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