Reading FC

Reading FC defender Matt Mills saw red on his return to Doncaster Rovers
advertisement

Mills feels ref was looking for the big decision at Doncaster

By Jonny Fordham
February 08, 2010

Matt Mills feels referee Keith Stroud was looking to make a big decision on the defender’s return to the Keepmoat Stadium that ended in him seeing red.

Shane Long’s 40th-minute header and Brian Howard’s 76th-minute strike earned Royals back-to-back league wins for the first time this campaign before Mills was given his marching orders.

The 23-year-old centre-back was unlucky to be sent-off in the 82nd-minute after what looked like an accidental handball in the box, conceding a penalty in the process which Billy Sharp tucked away past Adam Federici for a Rovers consolation.

Mills said: “The ref was talking to me throughout the game and must have known I had moved from Doncaster to Reading and it was an opportunity to make a decision.

“The crowd were straight on it because of my past with Doncaster and I feel like he’s reacted, but he might have made the right decision.”

Brian McDermott won’t be appealing Mills’ punishment at the risk of losing him for longer than the automatic one game suspension he will serve.

Georgia captain and centre-back Zurab Khizanishvili will replace Mills for tomorrow night’s six-pointer with Plymouth Argyle at Madejski Stadium (8pm kick-off).

Mills has been one of Reading’s best performers since cementing his place in the side after his £2million summer move, making a total of 10 Championship starts and scoring two goals.

But he remained upbeat despite missing out for the first time in 2010 after a seven-game run in the first-team.

“The game isn’t about me or my performance,” added the Swindon-born defender.

“It’s all about Reading and picking up the three points. When you’re in the relegation zone three points is massive.

“I’ve felt good since I’ve been back in the team and I’ve done a lot of work with the phyisos and hopefully there’s more to come now until the end of the season.”

Gylfi Sigurdsson is still a minor doubt as he hopes to recover from a minor foot injury and Marek Matejovsky will also be monitored after missing training on Friday.

| Submit Comments | View Comments (13)

« Previous Story | Next Story »

Most recent user comments 13 of 13

Show 15 | 25 | 50 per page

Robsy .agree, thought the foull on feds was a straight red card, also didnt like the smirky smile on refs face as he pulled out the card ,looks like he was wanting to give one all night . Still cant work out the six mins extra time .Still was a good and welcomed win.

grumpywilliam, reading
9/02/2010 at 15:52

Chinese Steve and others, unless I was seeing things, I think you are missing something. The red card offence should be for denying a clear goal-scoring opportunity. The way I saw it, the shot first hit Mills in the chest, which took virtually all of the power out of it and deflected the ball away from goal and towards his arm. Then, as Mills tried to pull his arm away, it knocked the ball back towards goal, although not with enough power to carry it into the net. Therefore, whilst Mills was 'guilty' of denying a clear goal-scoring opportunity he did so in a perfectly lawful way i.e. with his chest!

Also, the way I saw it, the ref didn't award the penalty and probably didn't/couldn't see the offence. Whilst his assistant saw what he thought was a handball, I don't think his positioning would have easily allowed him to determine whether it had denied a clear goal-scoring opportunity.

HARB
9/02/2010 at 12:40

By the way it wasn't only Robsy who thought Sharp's challenge was a bad one. The current laws say that it is a red card offence to make a challenge which endangers the safety of an opponent and I cannot see how Sharp or the referee could argue otherwise. It wasn't as if he was making a reasonable challenge to get the ball.

As for the Mills sending off, technically the referee was wrong again because the law relating to that sort of incident does still say the handball has to be deliberate but when the referee or the assistant referee consider a player's arm stops the ball going into the net referees usually show the red card whether deliberate or not even though the player is very unlucky. I think most Reading fans would have expected a penalty and a red card if the incident had been at the other end.

JBJ
9/02/2010 at 12:05

boys just to settle your argument - if you directly stop a goal being scored delibrately or not its still a red card,just the mere fact his arms are spread deems it delibrate in the authorities eyes.

in the same way as leading with an elbow when jumping for a header, is deemed delibrate whether intensional contact is made or not.

ajr111, swindon
8/02/2010 at 21:50

Was just talking to Millsy in Asda, was at the same till at him. Quite a nice bloke really.

He was gutted about it because he just wants to play football! he told me he was trying to make himself big and shouldn't of got the red.

Keirantheroyal, Reading
8/02/2010 at 18:52

Was just talking to him in Asda!! he said it was unbelievable and was only trying to make himself big but thankfully it's only a 1 match ban.

Keirantheroyal, Reading
8/02/2010 at 18:50

Oh i know it wasn't deliberate but i think the red card was given purely for the fact his arm stopped the ball going into the net - had it been to the side then a penalty would have been given but not the card.

Chinese Steve
8/02/2010 at 17:09

@ Chinese Steve

A good point - but it still has to be deliberate and I don't think it was - also as you say if the ref/lino didn't know whether it would have gone in/hit post then they should really have given it.

I understand it was he lino who flagged the handball so we can only surmise that the ref deemed it a deliberate handball in which case the decision was correct -- IMO it was not deliberate so thus not a red card.

Seems its only me who thought Sharps challenge on Feds was a bad one ?

Robsy , Reading
8/02/2010 at 16:28

@ Robsy

Have a look at the incident again - if the ball didn't strike Mills arms then it would have gone in or at least hit the post but the ref/lino wouldn't have known that. Fed was nowhere near the ball had Mills not been in the way. So it was stopping a goal being scored which is an automatic red card.

Chinese Steve
8/02/2010 at 16:19

he was excellent all game and you can really see why now fit he was worth 2 million IMO sending off was harsh as was the penalty as he headed the ball down and it hit is arm

ivar also looks so much better along side him, also thought one of the unsung heroes was andy griffin, he was excellent as well.

Good to see brian howard put in a superb performance, i'm a big fan of his and hope gets a run in the team now

On a worrying note Jobi looks like he is starting to go off the boil a bit after a brilliant start to his RFC career, hope his heart is still in after Mr rogers left

FRED BAINES
8/02/2010 at 15:48

@ Chinese Steve

If anything the ball hitting Mills' arm directed the ball goalwards leaving Feds to make a save which he wouldn't have had to make!

I've seen those given in the past so penalty maybe but red-card was exceptionally harsh as it wasn't deliberate.

But I guess its academic really - still think Sharp was lucky not to go for challenge on Feds!

c'mon urzzzzzzzzzzz

Robsy , Reading
8/02/2010 at 15:36

Jonny - the referee was Anthony Taylor who was a late replacement for Keith Stroud. Despite Matt's comments it appeared on the TV that it was the Assistant Referee who gave the penalty and although I am not a lip reader I thought he mouthed the words 'red card' into his link to the referee.

JBJ
8/02/2010 at 15:09

But it was the lino that gave the penalty, not the ref. The ref had no choice but to show him the red card as it stopped a goal being scored.......................or am i missing something!?