VAR and Refs | General Discussion

VAR said no conclusive evidence on when the ball made contact supposedly, so I guess that's fine!
They told BBC commentators that they couldn’t draw the lines as there were too many players in the way.

That’s now the second offside call given against us where it’s been confirmed that the lines simply haven’t been drawn.
 
Our goal against Brighton should have stood.

We have been shite but in half our PL games, the refs have been a joke and you barely hear a thing about it. Meanwhile, the scousers get one unlucky break and they're ready to sue.

We had the Brighton goal, the Spurs penalty, the Arsenal goal and then the City penalty.

All of these decisions were key and we could easily have another 3-6 points more and be level with the Arse. Absolutely criminal from the refs.

And funnily enough, it's Newcastle and City who always seem to get the benefit of the doubt.
 
They told BBC commentators that they couldn’t draw the lines as there were too many players in the way.

That’s now the second offside call given against us where it’s been confirmed that the lines simply haven’t been drawn.

But but it all evens out in the end, is what we are told
 
I think he was just about in line with the ball when the Newcastle player heads it but the ball hits the Arsenal defender and actually hits the Newcastle player before it rolls to Gordon. At the point when it hits the Newcastle player, I think Gordon was ahead of the ball but I don't think VAR even checked it.

Neville said they couldn't determine the point at which Joelinton made contact with the ball so they couldn't adjudicate on the offside one way or the other.
 
Just amazes me TV companies regularly boast about endless camera angles in games they cover. Yet they can't find one to define whether a goal goes out on the touchline clearly?

If you can put them on goallines then they should have some hovering over the corner flags that give clear images on when balls go in/out.

Was same in World cup with the goal Japan scored v Germany which looked clearly out.
 
Gabriel was looking for a foul. Not giving him one was definitely not a “clear and obvious error” that’s for sure.
If you push an opponent in the back with both hand when he’s defending on the goal line, it’s a foul. Whether Gabriel was “looking for it” is irrelevant.
 
Yep. That’s the only possible explanation, well done mate.
You don't seem interested in elaborating on how it's clear and obvious that the ball is over the line so I can only assume you're just having a general moan because your team just had the clear and obvious bar work against you.
 
If you push an opponent in the back with both hand when he’s defending on the goal line, it’s a foul. Whether Gabriel was “looking for it” is irrelevant.
If you look at the incident Gabriel isn't pushed over. He leans forward by himself to try to head the ball behind him. The arms are in the back but they're not the reason he ends up in that position.
 
You don't seem interested in elaborating on how it's clear and obvious that the ball is over the line so I can only assume you're just having a general moan because your team just had the clear and obvious bar work against you.
You’re free to assume what you like.
 
Looking for a foul has never been a reason not to give a foul

It looked like Gabriel felt the hands on this back and threw his legs back into Joelinton. As the goal had been given there wasn't enough in it to over-rule the onfield decision.

To be honest, I'm happy enough they decided they didn't have enough evidence to rule the goal out. It'd be preferable if they admitted this and let other marginal goals stand. It seems like some of them guess and rule out goals unnecessarily.
 
It looked like Gabriel felt the hands on this back and threw his legs back into Joelinton. As the goal had been given there wasn't enough in it to over-rule the onfield decision.

To be honest, I'm happy enough they decided they didn't have enough evidence to rule the goal out. It'd be preferable if they admitted this and let other marginal goals stand. It seems like some of them guess and rule out goals unnecessarily.
It doesn't seem like it , that's exactly what they do
 
Hard to see how they deem insufficient evidence that the ball was out, but had a different ruling for Hojlund's goal vs Palace.

The two look pretty much identical, no?
 
Wrong and wrong. The ball should be obviously out to be called out. Whole of the ball over whole of the line.

I’d love to see a Hawkeye view of it because I’d bet it would show the whole ball wasn’t over the line.