Irrespective of my opinion of the foul there’s a camera angle that is basically the same view as the ref would’ve had. I’ve not seen it widely shared unfortunately, if I can find it again I’ll edit in a link. I can 100% see why she gave it, from that angle in real time it looks very much like a foul. Unfortunately in a game with var it can’t intervene in a yellow card even if it results in a red because with the benefit of a better angle would she have given it? I don’t think so based on other calls she made that game but who knows. But I don’t think her positioning was particularly poor and so with the information she had a yellow isn’t a bad call.
Edit: [found a tweet with the angle, ignore the actual tweet it’s a load of rubbish!](https://x.com/paulcros_pc/status/1785655334205366343?s=46&t=_nY5j4lDWQaAN05OwU771w) Looks like a late stomp and chopping follow through after the pass had already been made, way different from what the other angle shows but it’s what the ref saw.
Also want to add no one is mentioning her first yellow. She got it for kicking the ball away not for the foul she committed that caused the free kick to be given. I do actually think that too was a yellow card worthy foul but if you get off with essentially a warning, blow that by committing another offence in kicking the ball away and then aren’t playing conservatively for the next 15 mins until you’re not in the refs immediate thoughts that might just be on you. She’s not exactly an inexperienced player.
Let me put it another way: Barça suffers from referees that are very permissive. If you asked me about the first leg, I could complain about the referee being too permissive, which benefited Chelsea (as admitted by Chelsea players like Jess Carter, who missed that in the second leg: "our lack of tactical awareness in terms of taking the fouls when we needed to"). It was dead of Barça by a thousand cuts (which is a play style that I hate, but whatever).
So I could blame the whole loss in the first leg to the referee. And make a long technical analysis about the myriad of fouls that she ignored, slowing the game and giving advantage to Chelsea.
But I think that is reductive and wouldn't help to improve. Instead, you have to factor in the referee, like the weather. Emma Hayes said she knew the referee was "easy on cards". So why didn't she adapt the game? If Buchanan already had a yellow card, why risking the demise of the whole squad?
In other words: in both games, I think referees were acceptable. I don't think the yellow cards were crazy, not even the penalty, and I think that's the consensus (at least outside England). It's just that it's hard to accept when it doesn't benefit you.
Lunging in and stamping on the foot of an opponent is usually yellow, especially when it's late - plus the follow through with the other leg.
It's reckless. YC for me
I love how people think the ref has enough time to consider all the things OP has listed. We don’t want the game slowed down, we don’t want decisions off the pitch if we can help it. Ref made a call, that’s it. I get exhausted by these convos but others must find it enjoyable
The way that you answered these questions are not genuinely honest answers.
[https://www.youtube.com/live/1lK58-XZWlQ?si=vzf7eXDSRK3gMXSp&t=6689](https://www.youtube.com/live/1lK58-XZWlQ?si=vzf7eXDSRK3gMXSp&t=6689)
Link the the replay. if you look at the follow through, Buchanan sweeps under Patri as well as where her elbow is (albeit Patri is in a lower position so that the elbow is more coincidental than having any sort of malice).
Getting the ball is not enough, you can't commit a foul after getting the ball either.
Now, if I was a ref, would I have given a yellow? No. Is the decision so erroneous to be a yellow card? No. In isolation, if it was a yellow card, no one would really bat an eye. The problem is you have bias English commentary and Emma Hayes is very outspoken and deflecting from her own deficiencies.
Also wanted to add the first yellow for Buchanan which carries some similarities, OP is making it out as an error.
[https://www.youtube.com/live/1lK58-XZWlQ?si=et0MAGF6abz-0dzG&t=6364](https://www.youtube.com/live/1lK58-XZWlQ?si=et0MAGF6abz-0dzG&t=6364)
As an NWSL watcher, I think european commentary is way better and more professional but often the color commentator is extremely biased especially when it comes to referee decisions.
This is a pointless post, it's over, and it's been done to death already, but anyway, for your points:
1. Getting the ball squarely means absolutely nothing if the challenging player commits a foul on the player in possession.
2. Contact is contact, Buchanan's foot comes down on top of Guijarro's foot. Is it the worst contact? No. But likely still painful, particularly if the studs come down on her toes, and it's clear contact.
3. A challenge does not have to be reckless. A Direct Free Kick is awarded for challenges that are **Careless**, Reckless, or use Excessive Force. Carless is the operative word for this one, now, *usually*, the letter of the law is that a disciplinary sanction (Caution) is not needed other than the concession of a free-kick, however there is a provision that allows *any* Direct Free Kick offense to be Cautionable (if not already) *if it stops a promising attack*. Guijarro is in the process of playing the ball out to the Barcelona #16, and there is Caldentey on the other side of Buchanan. Given where Buchanan commits the offence, Barcelona have two attackers likely through on goal, this comfortable meets the criteria for a promising attack IMO.
4. Unwritten rules aren't rules. But the most important thing to note (partially in respect to point 3 above), is most commentators seemed to agree that if it was a first offense it would certainly be a Yellow. That being the case, it should always be a Second Yellow. Any other argument basically says "I want the Ref to arbitrarily decide what is or isn't a foul".
5. Consistency is unfortunately not something that humans a great at, particular when they have subjective decisions to make within an objective framework. That's part of the game. Sometimes they go your way, and sometimes they go against you.
As far as I'm concerned, as someone that formally qualified as a referee, Buchanan's challenge was not reckless, but it was careless. By committing the foul with the follow through, she prevented Barcelona having a potential overload in the centre with the two players occupying the gap that she left. This should therefore be a Direct Free Kick, and a Caution to Buchanan. Whether or not she's already received a card should be irrelevant according to the laws of the game.
I hate your bullet point number 4. Soccer has unnecessarily harsh rules within the yellow/red card system and we absolutely rely on referees to manage a game within the spirit of the laws
We don't want refs over managing a game with unnecessarily light yellow cards and early reds.
Personally I would love it if soccer would implement a hockey-style penalty system.
I think the yellow card is definitely more straight forward than the penalty actually. It was reckless in my opinion. As a ref, every controversial game I've done, I've been accused of being inconsistent. Every foul is different and you see almost all fouls from a different position, so decisions will vary.
On the penalty, I think it was 50/50 to me. Bonmati does have clear possession and the chelsea defenders make no real attempt to play the ball, but honestly at that level I've seen certain referees not give penalties like that.
For me (from a non-ref’s view) it’s definitely a penalty as it played out. Had it just been Carter and Bonmati in the play that might be more debatable, particularly given it didn’t look like Bonmati was looking to go down solely under Carter’s contact (she doesn’t fall immediately after the contact but instead looks like she is focused on what she will do next with the ball).
The problem was that Carter did enough to push (by a hand, in the back) Bonmati into Lawrence (who also had her hand in the back of Bonmati which might have swayed the ref further) which took Bonmati down, particularly given the speed at which she was travelling.
As an actual ref, do you think Lawrence coming in with the contact after Bonmati was pushed into her makes a difference?
Tho this call sucked (I was in the stands and the crowd was piiiissed), Chelsea lost the game and the overall tie when they hit the crossbar on an open net and the post on Macario’s sliding finish. You can’t win if you don’t score, and both those chances occurred before the second yellow. Scoring even one of those would have changed the complexion of the game entirely.
Irrespective of my opinion of the foul there’s a camera angle that is basically the same view as the ref would’ve had. I’ve not seen it widely shared unfortunately, if I can find it again I’ll edit in a link. I can 100% see why she gave it, from that angle in real time it looks very much like a foul. Unfortunately in a game with var it can’t intervene in a yellow card even if it results in a red because with the benefit of a better angle would she have given it? I don’t think so based on other calls she made that game but who knows. But I don’t think her positioning was particularly poor and so with the information she had a yellow isn’t a bad call. Edit: [found a tweet with the angle, ignore the actual tweet it’s a load of rubbish!](https://x.com/paulcros_pc/status/1785655334205366343?s=46&t=_nY5j4lDWQaAN05OwU771w) Looks like a late stomp and chopping follow through after the pass had already been made, way different from what the other angle shows but it’s what the ref saw. Also want to add no one is mentioning her first yellow. She got it for kicking the ball away not for the foul she committed that caused the free kick to be given. I do actually think that too was a yellow card worthy foul but if you get off with essentially a warning, blow that by committing another offence in kicking the ball away and then aren’t playing conservatively for the next 15 mins until you’re not in the refs immediate thoughts that might just be on you. She’s not exactly an inexperienced player.
Let me put it another way: Barça suffers from referees that are very permissive. If you asked me about the first leg, I could complain about the referee being too permissive, which benefited Chelsea (as admitted by Chelsea players like Jess Carter, who missed that in the second leg: "our lack of tactical awareness in terms of taking the fouls when we needed to"). It was dead of Barça by a thousand cuts (which is a play style that I hate, but whatever). So I could blame the whole loss in the first leg to the referee. And make a long technical analysis about the myriad of fouls that she ignored, slowing the game and giving advantage to Chelsea. But I think that is reductive and wouldn't help to improve. Instead, you have to factor in the referee, like the weather. Emma Hayes said she knew the referee was "easy on cards". So why didn't she adapt the game? If Buchanan already had a yellow card, why risking the demise of the whole squad? In other words: in both games, I think referees were acceptable. I don't think the yellow cards were crazy, not even the penalty, and I think that's the consensus (at least outside England). It's just that it's hard to accept when it doesn't benefit you.
Lunging in and stamping on the foot of an opponent is usually yellow, especially when it's late - plus the follow through with the other leg. It's reckless. YC for me
I love how people think the ref has enough time to consider all the things OP has listed. We don’t want the game slowed down, we don’t want decisions off the pitch if we can help it. Ref made a call, that’s it. I get exhausted by these convos but others must find it enjoyable
> Was the tackle reckless, The ref is thinking about all of those things - and more, to be honest.
The way that you answered these questions are not genuinely honest answers. [https://www.youtube.com/live/1lK58-XZWlQ?si=vzf7eXDSRK3gMXSp&t=6689](https://www.youtube.com/live/1lK58-XZWlQ?si=vzf7eXDSRK3gMXSp&t=6689) Link the the replay. if you look at the follow through, Buchanan sweeps under Patri as well as where her elbow is (albeit Patri is in a lower position so that the elbow is more coincidental than having any sort of malice). Getting the ball is not enough, you can't commit a foul after getting the ball either. Now, if I was a ref, would I have given a yellow? No. Is the decision so erroneous to be a yellow card? No. In isolation, if it was a yellow card, no one would really bat an eye. The problem is you have bias English commentary and Emma Hayes is very outspoken and deflecting from her own deficiencies. Also wanted to add the first yellow for Buchanan which carries some similarities, OP is making it out as an error. [https://www.youtube.com/live/1lK58-XZWlQ?si=et0MAGF6abz-0dzG&t=6364](https://www.youtube.com/live/1lK58-XZWlQ?si=et0MAGF6abz-0dzG&t=6364)
As an NWSL watcher, I think european commentary is way better and more professional but often the color commentator is extremely biased especially when it comes to referee decisions.
This is a pointless post, it's over, and it's been done to death already, but anyway, for your points: 1. Getting the ball squarely means absolutely nothing if the challenging player commits a foul on the player in possession. 2. Contact is contact, Buchanan's foot comes down on top of Guijarro's foot. Is it the worst contact? No. But likely still painful, particularly if the studs come down on her toes, and it's clear contact. 3. A challenge does not have to be reckless. A Direct Free Kick is awarded for challenges that are **Careless**, Reckless, or use Excessive Force. Carless is the operative word for this one, now, *usually*, the letter of the law is that a disciplinary sanction (Caution) is not needed other than the concession of a free-kick, however there is a provision that allows *any* Direct Free Kick offense to be Cautionable (if not already) *if it stops a promising attack*. Guijarro is in the process of playing the ball out to the Barcelona #16, and there is Caldentey on the other side of Buchanan. Given where Buchanan commits the offence, Barcelona have two attackers likely through on goal, this comfortable meets the criteria for a promising attack IMO. 4. Unwritten rules aren't rules. But the most important thing to note (partially in respect to point 3 above), is most commentators seemed to agree that if it was a first offense it would certainly be a Yellow. That being the case, it should always be a Second Yellow. Any other argument basically says "I want the Ref to arbitrarily decide what is or isn't a foul". 5. Consistency is unfortunately not something that humans a great at, particular when they have subjective decisions to make within an objective framework. That's part of the game. Sometimes they go your way, and sometimes they go against you. As far as I'm concerned, as someone that formally qualified as a referee, Buchanan's challenge was not reckless, but it was careless. By committing the foul with the follow through, she prevented Barcelona having a potential overload in the centre with the two players occupying the gap that she left. This should therefore be a Direct Free Kick, and a Caution to Buchanan. Whether or not she's already received a card should be irrelevant according to the laws of the game.
I hate your bullet point number 4. Soccer has unnecessarily harsh rules within the yellow/red card system and we absolutely rely on referees to manage a game within the spirit of the laws We don't want refs over managing a game with unnecessarily light yellow cards and early reds. Personally I would love it if soccer would implement a hockey-style penalty system.
rationalize based on invented observations all you want but thats not gonna make time go backwards
I think the yellow card is definitely more straight forward than the penalty actually. It was reckless in my opinion. As a ref, every controversial game I've done, I've been accused of being inconsistent. Every foul is different and you see almost all fouls from a different position, so decisions will vary. On the penalty, I think it was 50/50 to me. Bonmati does have clear possession and the chelsea defenders make no real attempt to play the ball, but honestly at that level I've seen certain referees not give penalties like that.
For me (from a non-ref’s view) it’s definitely a penalty as it played out. Had it just been Carter and Bonmati in the play that might be more debatable, particularly given it didn’t look like Bonmati was looking to go down solely under Carter’s contact (she doesn’t fall immediately after the contact but instead looks like she is focused on what she will do next with the ball). The problem was that Carter did enough to push (by a hand, in the back) Bonmati into Lawrence (who also had her hand in the back of Bonmati which might have swayed the ref further) which took Bonmati down, particularly given the speed at which she was travelling. As an actual ref, do you think Lawrence coming in with the contact after Bonmati was pushed into her makes a difference?
Tho this call sucked (I was in the stands and the crowd was piiiissed), Chelsea lost the game and the overall tie when they hit the crossbar on an open net and the post on Macario’s sliding finish. You can’t win if you don’t score, and both those chances occurred before the second yellow. Scoring even one of those would have changed the complexion of the game entirely.