VAR

[olaftab]

I am only concerned about the interpretation of the rules and consistency of decisions from officials and deployed technology.
Recognition from media or joe public will always be subjective.

[aj2k77]

It's a waste of breath. The thing is shit and isn't applied correct half the time or has a useless , muppet of a ref delaying the game to make a toss up decision anyway. They've ran with it and it will continue to blight the weekends for years to come because fundamentally it's shit and just adds another layer of aggrevation to the game. It is now proven to not get the decisions correct, so what is the point of it?

[Ian.]

Just watched it for first time. Didn't look a pen to me.

Same here. If that had been against us and a penalty had been given this place would be up in arms.

I can’t see how in any universe whether for or against us, that isn’t a pen. He kicks the player’s shin, which is a foul. A foul in the box is a penalty.

For all the part time refs on here saying

Just watched it for first time. Didn't look a pen to me.

Same here. If that had been against us and a penalty had been given this place would be up in arms.

I can’t see how in any universe whether for or against us, that isn’t a pen. He kicks the player’s shin, which is a foul. A foul in the box is a penalty.

For all the part time refs on here saying that whether he got the ball or not is irrelevant, a professional referee, in full view of the world, clearly said the reason for overturning the penalty award was that the defender got the ball.

Sure, refs make the odd mistake, but he's got a better grasp of the rules than any of us, and the fact the defender got the ball was the deciding factor.

If that had been one of our defenders there's no way anyone on here would've said it was a penalty.

So you have never disagreed with a referee because you are not one they know more than you?

[LukeJames]

Yeah thats some odd logic there.

[Des Little]

My problem is the transparency of these decisions. Only once they’re miked up, and we can hear the reasons will we begin to buy it, otherwise the conspiracy theories will continue to circulate.

[LukeJames]

Im sitting here pissed off that they denied Albion a penalty, this is reason enough to fuck VAR off!

[Ad@m]

I'm not going to quote that word salad Ian, but this isn't about a difference of opinion. This is a professional referee who clearly changed his mind on a penalty because the defender got the ball.

That's not a matter of opinion, it's fact, and I'm pretty sure the ref hasn't got the rule wrong or he won't be reffing again this season.

[frank black]

Watching at home is frustrating enough, but it’s sheer misery when actually attending the game (oh those days).

[Lastfootstamper]

Last year in similar circumstances VAR award Spurs a pen at Villa Park. Engels got his foot to the ball but in doing so brought down Moura.

How many people responded "well done VAR - getting the big decisions right"?!

Not in those exact words, but...

Never a pen

CHEatingheating

It was a clear penalty. He never got the ball.

That's how I saw it to be honest.

The question is whether he brought down the attacker, not whether he got the ball. Which I think he probably did.

Plenty of other questionable decisions though.

Aurier told after two cautionable fouls to cut it out, another one straight after which didn't even get a talking to let alone a card. 

A clear corner off the defenders heel - not even a difficult one as the ball changed direction, given as a goalkick.

An utterly shit referring display.

Yes we've had a few go against us.  Aurier should be on a yellow and we were denied the clearest corner you'll ever see but I think the pen was fair enough.  Truth be told we should have been 2-0 up and cruising.

FUCK VAR

Clear and obvious error my arse.
Soft pen, minor contact.
Farce

the word that says it all there is 'contact'

Was a penalty in all fairness. Could see it coming.... we were on top and much better team for most of that half, but need to be more ruthless.

[paul_e]

I'm not going to quote that word salad Ian, but this isn't about a difference of opinion. This is a professional referee who clearly changed his mind on a penalty because the defender got the ball.

That's not a matter of opinion, it's fact, and I'm pretty sure the ref hasn't got the rule wrong or he won't be reffing again this season.

and another professional referee on BT sports said it was pen. Last season a professional ref on the pitch gave fernandes a penalty and another upheld it. Refs get things wrong and a number of laws are subjective enough to allow for that. That said there is nothing in the laws that says kickng someone in the shin is ok if the ball brushes your heel on the way through.

[Ian.]

I'm not going to quote that word salad Ian, but this isn't about a difference of opinion. This is a professional referee who clearly changed his mind on a penalty because the defender got the ball.

That's not a matter of opinion, it's fact, and I'm pretty sure the ref hasn't got the rule wrong or he won't be reffing again this season.

So hold on you are saying the ref is right and I’m wrong because he’s a ref and I’m not?

[London Villan]

He didn’t get the ball... it touched him, hardly Bobby Moore in the 1970 World Cup.

[Nev]

It was obvious that trying to turn subjective decisions into objective decisions by adding a layer of judgement wouldn't work.

And it doesn't.

[paul_e]

It was obvious that trying to turn subjective decisions into objective decisions by adding a layer of judgement wouldn't work.

And it doesn't.

You need both, the wording for fouls from tackles can very easily give both objective and subjective guidance.

If the ball is deliberately played by the defender and on their follow-through they make contact that isn't deemed reckless or excessive then it's a legal challenge. If there is no deliberate contact with the ball then any contact deemed careless or worse with the attacking player in the follow through is a free kick.

That fixes 2 problems, the wording of the first bit means nasty shit like Mee on Wesley or Pickford on Van Dyck should be called up as red cards whicgh surely everyone would agree with. The 2nd bit removes the silly grey area where an attackers clips the ball past his man before getting clattered but the ball brushes the defender on the way past (obviously like today, but also something that happens fairly regularly (and is often given as a free kick already), again I don't see any controversy with adding that little bit of clarity, "he got the ball ref" is a sentiment that really needs to go out of the game.

[Risso]

I'm not going to quote that word salad Ian, but this isn't about a difference of opinion. This is a professional referee who clearly changed his mind on a penalty because the defender got the ball.

That's not a matter of opinion, it's fact, and I'm pretty sure the ref hasn't got the rule wrong or he won't be reffing again this season.

and another professional referee on BT sports said it was pen. Last season a professional ref on the pitch gave fernandes a penalty and another upheld it. Refs get things wrong and a number of laws are subjective enough to allow for that. That said there is nothing in the laws that says kickng someone in the shin is ok if the ball brushes your heel on the way through.

Yep.  To say "he's a professional ref so he's right and you're wrong' is facile beyond belief.  You're exactly right to bring up the Fernandes example last season.  The ref gave it, VAR didn't overrule it, but after the game when it had been reviewed, PGMOL gave a statement that evening saying the ref had made a mistake.  I said it wasn't a penalty, my Villa supporting mate I was watching with said it wasn't a penalty, my two Man U supporting mates watching it said it wasn't a penalty, and from memory the commentator said it wasn't a penalty. 

The professional ref during the game thought it was of course, which is ultimately all that really matters, but it goes to prove, not that any proof is needed, that they're a long way from being infallible.