Well, it was obvious error. I was able to see it from my home.
VAR, Refs and Linesmen | General Discussion
- Thread starter Samid
- Start date
I mean why shouldn't it be used for this? It was am absolute blatant foul through the back of him, then arsenal pass the ball and score. Surely this is a perfect use of VAR to prevent dodgy goals like that one?
Exactly . Very few are making the argument that it’s not a foul but rather about whether VAR should intervene or not. Not sure how Tierney is supposed to look at the evidence and just ignore it
Still seem pointless and a waste of time that the on pitch ref needs to go and watch a replay. The equally qualified ref in the VAR booth should just tell him what happened and what the correct decision is. The rules don't change depending on who the ref is.
It would take a ton of heat off the on pitch ref as well.
It would take a ton of heat off the on pitch ref as well.
It's hilarious that there are people claiming the Odegaard incident wasn't a foul, it was an utterly blatant foul in today's game, and because it was let run, they scored a goal completely against the run of play that changed the dynamic of the game. If it had been correctly called in the first place, we could have easily scored soon after, as we were all over Arsenal at the time.
Of course I will see matters Chelsea through Blue tinted glasses just as most on here will see Utd matters through a Red tinted lense.
There is absolutely no doubt that for the disallowed Arsenal goal there was physical contact and yes there was justification in it being chalked off. The trouble is that this season there is this much heralded change that the refs have raised the bar in terms of when they will call a foul. I won’t say it was a soft foul but based on how I feel refs should operate then yes it was a foul.
The Brighton disallowed goal was correctly disallowed the Brighton player was offside the technology struggled to get the lines drawn due to where the players were but once that was established the only question then , which was quickly answered, was did the offside player impact on that phase of play.
Now to the Newcastle one. There was a push on Willock was that a penalty? Probably not so that incident as mad as it is has to be ignored and you are then in isolation just looking at Willock coming together with the Palace keeper. As we all think football should be then it’s a terrible decision but putting together the incidents, VAR , and of course the initiative to let minor infringements go was it technically wrong to rule it out ?
So on to the Chelsea one.
Law 12 in Football is clear . If you kick or attempt to kick a player it’s a foul. No mention of was it deliberate was it intentional that’s the law as written. You rarely see an incident ignored where a players foot makes contact with another player and it not result in a free kick
IFAB have afforded extra levels of protection to goal keepers. We can argue all day do they get too much protection, I personally think the do but I don’t write the guidelines
Mendy should have dealt with the terrible back pass but he didn’t and there is no doubt that he didn’t have the ball under his control nor come to that did Bowen.
There is no doubt that Bowens trailing foot was dragging, we see time after time when this sort of situation happens claims for a penalty are turned down just about everyone will use the phrase “ He initiated the contact”
I was amused that Moyes suggested that Mendy wasn’t injured because he probably wasn’t but the reality is that just about every player that goes down injured is putting it on.
Should the goal have been allowed ? Well you know where I will hang my hat but I personally can see why both Newcastles and WHU goals were called off and I find it interesting that the PGMOL despite what Sky and other media outlets are saying haven’t actually said the VAR interventions were incorrect all they have said is they acknowledge them
Last edited:
Agree with this, the performative nonsense needs to end.
Are you trying to suggest the Chelsea decision was correct?
Just FYI PGMOL, the governing body of professional referees, disagree with you and the incident is being reviewed with the Premier League.
Out of interest, has this happened before? Nothing will happen, but it still feels significant
I’m not sure to be honest. It’s a positive sign though I think?
With the referee coming out and admitting he got the Cucerella foul wrong the other week and now this perhaps we are starting to see more accountability?
Sooner they mic them up and allow us to hear audio during the decision making process and at Stockley Park the better.
I am saying that technically I can see why it was chalked off just as I can see why Arsenals goal was
The PGMOL have not yet said it was incorrect all they have said is that they have agreed to the Premier League request to review the two incidents and they will be included in the on going review.
If they have said more please post the link
Paul Durkin once said sorry following a Utd game and of course Dean did a week or so ago but at this time there hasn’t been an acknowledgment , despite what some think, that the two incidents were wrong all that has been said is they will be included in the on going review and any lessons learnt will be used to improve
https://www.skysports.com/amp/footb...-controversial-calls-at-chelsea-and-newcastle
They have acknowledged they are mistakes by agreeing to the Premier Leagues request to hold a review to understand how they were made. How often do you see that happen.
Essentially the Premier League itself thinks they were wrong and now PGMOL have accepted they need to review what happened.
You are quoting Skys take on what PGMOL have said. No where in PGMOLS statement do they say that the two decisions were wrong
Maybe this is a PGMOL account in disguise.
Joke. Clubs need to be compensated.
It’s ridiculous but anyone with a working set of eyes could see the Chelsea decision was wrong.
The problem is the lack of accountability, really. What consequence is there for anyone for the standard of refereeing and VAR use being and staying so low? What mechanisms or plans are even in place to try and force the standard to improve? I'm not sure I've ever heard of anyone actually being under real pressure for allowing the poor standard of officiating to continue. And then there's some of the stupid laws and interpretations officials are expected to follow. Again, where are the consequences for it being such a mess?
As is giving them VAR is like giving a faster car to a terrible Formula 1 driver. In theory you're helping their chances but it's not really doing them much good if they still can't go five minutes without smashing into the barriers.
As is giving them VAR is like giving a faster car to a terrible Formula 1 driver. In theory you're helping their chances but it's not really doing them much good if they still can't go five minutes without smashing into the barriers.
How would you compensate a club that got shafted ? Points ? Money ?
Me personally? Yes, absolutely! That’s part of the game. Players make mistakes, as do referees.
Personal preferences aside, offside is one of those exceptions I alluded to. There’s nothing subjective about an offside call. You’re either on or off.
So offside is one aspect of the game, just like goal line tech, where you can actually utilise technology to ensure a correct call. And, by extension, making the game fairer and more consistent.
I don’t like the current implementation, however, where it’s been lumped in with VAR in general. I believe we should work towards a more seamless integration that doesn’t interrupt the flow of the game, in the mould of goal line tech.
this is the problem. Instead of the people making poor decisions being reprimanded or something happening, the managers and players moaning and in uproar about the shitty decisions get sent off or fined. It’s not fair.
Not sure but the whole point of VAR was to help and make sure that points weren’t dropped because of poor decisions and in turn money wasn’t lost from dropping points. As it stands teams are losing points and money from decisions which are then admitted to be wrong in newspaper columns by the referees making them or the official footballing bodies. How is that fair? Teams don’t want an apology, they want the points, the money and the system to fecking work in the first place.
PGMOL initiated a review of VAR several weeks ago. The review will now include the two incidents. It is not a review bought about by the two games in question.
People called out for VAR thinking it would make matters better the problem now is that yes it has when it comes to offside the problem you now have is you have two qualified individuals who look at the incidents and there is your problem one sees it in real time and the other with the aid of technology
Agreed but compensating would be a PR and legal nightmare. That is probably the last thing you want for your product, headlines about apologies and hush money.
I don't know what the arrival of Webb will do but not sure one man (wether he's the right one or not) can clean up such rooted and rotten incompetence.
I hate the argument that it is what the big heads want, controversy to have a permanent debate and eyes glued to the PL. It does not need that, it's already the best league in the world and is now even bigger with the end of the Messi/Ronaldo era. PSG is not nearly enough to boost the cachet of the french ligue 1 to even dream of being a challenger.
What the PL did took decades to achieve, it will probably be decades before La Liga gets back on its feet and Serie A would need massive continued investment.
The referee pool will not change overnight, clubs should rally and demand refs to be mic'd up. If not live at least releasing the unedited audio "privately" for the clubs. And i would gladly trade a 3 minutes segment of Stormzy for a 3 minutes mandatory interview of the ref after the game. Pay them a bonus for the audacity of demanding accountability if needed.
There's a pattern of VAR decisions that are out of sync with the expectations of players, ex-pros and fans. We saw that with the early trigger-happy interpretation of the new handball rule. The West Ham goal was a good example of how slowing down, freeze-framing and re-running footage created a 'foul' that would normally never get the time of day. We don't really want Paul Merson and Danny Mills calling the shots, but I don't think it's healthy for decision-making when a group of referees are slow-motion analysing in pursuit of an offence.
Mixed bag in there.
1m - Clear foul. Martinez gets really tight and swings his left leg out that catches forces Jesus to hurdle.
8m - Clear foul. McTominay's push is blatant
16m - Soft. Varane has a swipe and doesn't get the ball, but he doesn't really get the man either.
37m - Foul. Varane has his arms wrapped around him for too long
45m - Soft. Saka loses the ball, but the LB going to ground gives the referee a decision to make.
There's a referee assessment in place to measure their performance which, like any role, influences how they progress in their careers. It seems to be more of a communications issue where fans are in the dark about what goes on in the background.
Mixed bag in there.
1m - Clear foul. Martinez gets really tight and swings his left leg out that catches forces Jesus to hurdle.
8m - Clear foul. McTominay's push is blatant
16m - Soft. Varane has a swipe and doesn't get the ball, but he doesn't really get the man either.
37m - Foul. Varane has his arms wrapped around him for too long
45m - Soft. Saka loses the ball, but the LB going to ground gives the referee a decision to make.
For those "sceptic of the decision" Just look one last time and end this stupid discussion. You have to be completely blind to ignore this.
To be fair, I wasn't saying any of those weren't fouls necessarily - just that not one of them was any less soft than the Odegaard on Eriksen foul and never got mentioned in all the fuss about the disallowed goal.
Odegaard barges through the back of him, pulls at his his shoulder to get him off balance and knees him in the thigh while getting nowhere near the ball. If the McTominay push is blatant (it is), then a push, pull and knee is surely even more so?
I also think the Varane foul on 37m is 6 of one, half a dozen of the other. They both have hands on each other and Jesus was pulling that charging into a defender and then diving on the floor shite all afternoon.
Agree with all the other though.
Worth remembering that this wasn't even deemed a foul. Don't hear too many Arsenal fans bringing that up in all their Old Trafford conspiracy nonsense.
That only happened because Dean is a retired ref who only operates VAR now. He's also a paid columnist now. No chance he'd have said a word about the Cucurella incident if he was still an active on the pitch ref.
This. I can't believe players and pundits still saying it was a soft foul and the goal should stand, it's still a foul. He pushes him over and makes no attempt for the ball... it's not Rugby/UFC. And then since they win it back in transition they go on to score completely against the run of play. It's one of the most blatant fouls you'll see and perfect use of VAR to overturn it. Shouldn't of even needed VAR to be honest.
When attackers do the exact same thing to defenders shielding the ball, every pundit in the land calls them stupid, yet somehow Odegaard did nothing wrong. It's complete crap.
It's bizarre... do only "hard" fouls matter now? do you have to boot someone up in the air for it to be clear and obvious?!
a foul is a foul - if it's a clear foul then it's clear and obvious, doesn't matter how "soft" or "hard" it is.
It's not even a soft foul anyway... it's just a foul. That happens all the time and gets punished as a foul every time.
Exactly. It's a simple thing to understand. Odegaard doesn't play the ball number one, number two he pushes Eriksen and number three he knees him in the leg. Obvious foul.
Anybody thinking that was not a foul on Eriksen seriously just need to give their heads a wobble.
What was the difference between Odegaard doing what he did, and Mctominay a little earlier on the byline?
If you run into somebody from behind, forcibly push with your hands/body and knock an opponent over WITHOUT touching the ball, it's a CLEAR foul.
The ref clearly thought Odegaard won the ball on the live viewing, he got it wrong. Perfect use of VAR.
What was the difference between Odegaard doing what he did, and Mctominay a little earlier on the byline?
If you run into somebody from behind, forcibly push with your hands/body and knock an opponent over WITHOUT touching the ball, it's a CLEAR foul.
The ref clearly thought Odegaard won the ball on the live viewing, he got it wrong. Perfect use of VAR.
Are you Thomas Tuchel?
He’s the only other person on the planet who seems to think the referees made the right decision so I’m wondering if you’re one of the same
Completely agreed. VAR shouldn’t have all these rules about how it can’t be used or play stopped if x, y or z happens. It shouldn’t take a qualified professional more than 10 secs to look at even the most complex of cases - if there’s a foul VAR, not the ref, decides to stop play and tells the ref what to do. Replays are given to the crowd and punishment is given.
They’ve deliberately convoluted a good technology in my opinion. Next up they just need to replace linesmen with technology, so many wrong calls for offsides and even throw ins corners.
This literally happened this weekend. Michael Oliver gave a penalty to Forest for a Bournemouth handball, got told to check it by VAR and stuck with his original decision…
That Eriksen one is definitely a foul. Haven't actually seen the full event, was the foul immediately before the build up started for the goal?
Just seen Ref Watch on Sky sports they are saying the one on Fernandes isn't a red. Have to strongly disagree with them. That type of tackle is so dangerous. Reminds me of the one on Dani Alves that Pepe got sent off , there was contact , it was minimal, but that was only because Alves had stopped his follow through after his clearance. Both are lunges where you know you aren't get the ball and you want leave something on the player.
Just seen Ref Watch on Sky sports they are saying the one on Fernandes isn't a red. Have to strongly disagree with them. That type of tackle is so dangerous. Reminds me of the one on Dani Alves that Pepe got sent off , there was contact , it was minimal, but that was only because Alves had stopped his follow through after his clearance. Both are lunges where you know you aren't get the ball and you want leave something on the player.
Last edited:
There is a shitload of money in football. Make refereeing a highly lucrative profession and then hold them accountable.
That's how you attract and maintain the best. You want to own a massive house and drive a Ferrari for reffing? Fine, but you're going to have to come out after a game and explain your decisions.
Refs and officials are going to get rated after games and ranked according to their points scored. High scoring refs get the higher profile and more lucrative games while lower scoring refs get relegated to lower levels and earn less.
All this "it's an unattractive profession and we need to protect the refs feelings" nonsense is resulting in mediocre to abject levels of people applying to be refs. If you could earn a couple of mill a year doing it, wait and see what calibre of people you'll get applying and succeeding.
That's how you attract and maintain the best. You want to own a massive house and drive a Ferrari for reffing? Fine, but you're going to have to come out after a game and explain your decisions.
Refs and officials are going to get rated after games and ranked according to their points scored. High scoring refs get the higher profile and more lucrative games while lower scoring refs get relegated to lower levels and earn less.
All this "it's an unattractive profession and we need to protect the refs feelings" nonsense is resulting in mediocre to abject levels of people applying to be refs. If you could earn a couple of mill a year doing it, wait and see what calibre of people you'll get applying and succeeding.