Fulham v Aston Villa Post Match Thread

[Monty]

Yeah the conspiratorial wailing is embarrassing. It was a decision some agree with and some don't.

[Percy McCarthy]

Presumably he took it into consideration and decided that it was still enough for him to change his mind and award the penalty.

As per aftab's point above re: the Palace game, it's not like he's not comfortable sticking with his original decision after watching it again if he thinks he got it right first time.

If you're not going to take proximity into consideration as per the rules when it's a foot away, when are you? Especially as he'd waved away the penalty shouts in the first place. As ever, VAR in those situations is supposed to be for clear and obvious errors. Wasn't it going to be "referee's call" more often this season, ie not sending them to the screen?

If his arms were in that position and he was 6 foot from the player/ball, and the ref missed it, then fair enough, clear reason for VAR to get involved. In this instance though, the common sense and indeed correct decision from VAR should have been: it's hit his hand, but from a foot away, so the proximity rule comes into play, and we'll stick with the on-field ref's decision not to award a penalty. There was certainly enough leeway in the rules not to be sending him to the screen.

Correct.

Bollocks. Man City score as I type.

[Percy McCarthy]

Yeah the conspiratorial wailing is embarrassing. It was a decision some agree with and some don't.

I agree with the second part of your sentence, but z Risso is right in that VAR shouldn’t have sent the ref to the screen.

[eamonn]

Is Sadiq Khan a cottager?

[Percy McCarthy]

Is Sadiq Khan a cottager?

He’s a happily married man isn’t he?

[The Edge]

Presumably he took it into consideration and decided that it was still enough for him to change his mind and award the penalty.

As per aftab's point above re: the Palace game, it's not like he's not comfortable sticking with his original decision after watching it again if he thinks he got it right first time.

If you're not going to take proximity into consideration as per the rules when it's a foot away, when are you? Especially as he'd waved away the penalty shouts in the first place. As ever, VAR in those situations is supposed to be for clear and obvious errors. Wasn't it going to be "referee's call" more often this season, ie not sending them to the screen?

If his arms were in that position and he was 6 foot from the player/ball, and the ref missed it, then fair enough, clear reason for VAR to get involved. In this instance though, the common sense and indeed correct decision from VAR should have been: it's hit his hand, but from a foot away, so the proximity rule comes into play, and we'll stick with the on-field ref's decision not to award a penalty. There was certainly enough leeway in the rules not to be sending him to the screen.

Correct.

Bollocks. Man City score as I type.

They haven't kicked off yet?

[Monty]

Yeah the conspiratorial wailing is embarrassing. It was a decision some agree with and some don't.

I agree with the second part of your sentence, but z Risso is right in that VAR shouldn’t have sent the ref to the screen.

I agree as well! But I don't think it's corruption that they did. We are talking about Fulham here...

[cdbearsfan]

I think it's a penalty under the current rules, but the current rules are still bollocks. As I understand it, if the ball had ricocheted onto his hand from two yards, it wouldn't have been given. But because it hit him directly from two yards, it was. That seems mad to me as you don't have any more time to get out of the way, do you?

I'd much rather they just went back to the old rules, where it has to be deliberate. If you're running, jumping, turning or unlinking yourself from a defensive wall, you're going to have your arms outstretched. It's a ridiculous rule that defenders are expected to act like they're engaging in a Michael Flatley production.

[kippaxvilla2]

What’s this Onana celebration?

[ez]

It was a pen. It was not "point blank header". It was not seen by Darren England on field, he waved away appeals.
Darren England is the only ref as far as I know who has stood by his on-field decision despite VAR  telling him to change. (Pen for us v Palace last season)

Just listened to that Claret & Blue podcast, some moron called Matt Lynch said it was always going to be a pen as the ref was looking to give them something all game. Obviously didn’t notice that he waved it away.

Yes. I doubt the referee saw anything on the screen that he didn't see initially. He changed his decision purely because he had been sent to the screen.

[dave shelley]

For me inconsistency was encapsulated in the the Southampton game, one penalty awarded for shirt pulling and another, more obvious imo refused.  Awful refereeing.

[Risso]

I think it's a penalty under the current rules, but the current rules are still bollocks. As I understand it, if the ball had ricocheted onto his hand from two yards, it wouldn't have been given. But because it hit him directly from two yards, it was. That seems mad to me as you don't have any more time to get out of the way, do you?

I'd much rather they just went back to the old rules, where it has to be deliberate. If you're running, jumping, turning or unlinking yourself from a defensive wall, you're going to have your arms outstretched. It's a ridiculous rule that defenders are expected to act like they're engaging in a Michael Flatley production.

I haven't seen anything about ricochets to be honest. The two main rules after it's been shown to hit the arm are "arms making body unnaturally bigger" which I suppose you could argue they were, but then also proximity to the incident, and it was close as it was possible to get. So you could argue for the penalty either way to be honest, but then seeing as the ref didn't award a penalty in the first place, I think it was suitably ambiguous that they should have left it at that.

When Cash was adjudged to have fouled the West Ham player in the first game, despite having won the ball fairly, it was said that we were going to have a lot more of "referee's call" ie VAR wouldn't intervene if it wasn't clear and obvious. It's this lack of consistency that drives fans mad.

[Risso]

What’s this Onana celebration?

This:

[kippaxvilla2]

Bloody hell what’s the problem with that?!

[Risso]

No idea tbh.