VAR, Refs and Linesmen | General Discussion

[RobinLFC]

I always felt that the reason why fans of other teams posted here was because they had a little more intelligence and wanted to escape the myopic tendencies of RAWK, blue moon, etc.

You have to be slightly more objective here. Do you honestly think that if United had benefitted from a similar situation in a derby, that you guys would be on here saying, 'fair play, we didn't defend the resultingly corner well enough. Well done, Mancs. Deserved.'

Most people on here (myself included) felt Liverpool were very hard done by against Spurs. Despite the rivalry, there were barely any United fans not supporting Liverpool's case. This decision, against Forest, has evened that out, because it was a simple mistake by Paul Tierney. Even Mike Dean admits he was totally wrong.

It's a huge stroke of luck, so be grateful for that instead of performing these embarrassing mental gymnastics on a United forum.

I don’t feel Forrest are hard done by. They got screwed over in the end by their own naivety not to just boot it away but dribbling it out of their own penalty area, so hard to feel sorry for them.

One of their players went berserk at the culprit right after the goal, and rightfully so.

It’s inconsequential to me. And re: your Utd comment, I’d shrug and move on just like I did after the Spurs game. We lost that game fair and square imo and Klopp’s comments afterwards or mentions of a replay were pathetic (which is also what I said at the time, so not changing directions here).

 

[Mshafeek]

He didn’t touch Konate. Show a scrap of evidence that he did. The video above shows him colliding with Kelleher

Whether there is any touch isn't clear from available videos. Even if he didn't touch konate it is enough of a dangerous play to warrant a free kick. His boot was dangerously high and close enough to be considered dangerous play and if it was given it wouldn't have been disputed.

 

[Jev]

How is it mad reasoning?

Of course an incorrect decision that plays a part in a goal being scored or a player being sent off, especially if that then changes the result, is more of a talking point than something with little to no impact on the final score. No one gives a shit if the ref misses a second yellow for a player on a team that lost 5-0, but missing one for a player on a team that later scored the winner is obviously a talking point.

It literally is a fact. You didn't have the ball and were defending. The ref stopped play, gave you the ball and you scored before losing it for any meaningful period of time.

That is the sequence of events, and that is why the decision to give you the ball resulted in a goal.

The problem with that logic is that if you apply it consistently, you’d get into some extreme examples. Say City wrongly get a throw-in deep in their own half. They then go on to have one of their sustained five minute presses where the opponents don’t really have control over the ball, and then City score. You’d then had to say the wrong throw-in call resulted in the goal. Which to me would be bizarre.

 

[Alex99]

The problem with that logic is that if you apply it consistently, you’d get into some extreme examples. Say City wrongly get a throw-in deep in their own half. They then go on to have one of their sustained five minute presses where the opponents don’t really have control over the ball, and then City score. You’d then had to say the wrong throw-in call resulted in the goal. Which to me would be bizarre.

Again, a throw in can often be difficult to judge correctly in real-time.

There was nothing to judge here.

Forest had possession on the edge of Liverpool's box when he stopped play. He restarted the game by giving Liverpool uncontested posession. They went up the other end, didn't lose the ball in any meaningful way, and scored less than two minutes after the restart.

Regardless, if City were incorrectly awarded a throw-in and that handover of posession ended in a goal, it would be absolutely correct to say that the decision to award them a throw-in resulted in a goal. However, the only way it'd be remotely as controversial is if the referee gave them a throw-in that was blatantly not theirs, e.g. a City player, completely unopposed, kicking it out of play.

A key part of this controversy is how obvious the decision was.

It'd even have been less controversial if Forest had managed to string even one or two proper passes together after the restart. The fact is though, that they were under the cosh pretty much immediately, and the brief glimpses of the ball any of their players saw were while being pressured/challenged by Liverpool players in close proximity, and near or in their own box.

 

[90 + 5min]

You know the world is mad when it falls to Garth Crooks to speak sense.

"As for the controversy surrounding referee Paul Tierney and where the game should have restarted. The referee made a mistake, however once the ball was back in play it was incumbent on Forest to defend their goal regardless of the referee's decision. They had numerous opportunities to clear the danger and failed.

As for former official and now Nottingham Forest analyst Mark Clattenburg, asking to see the referee after the game was an interesting request. What was he intending to do - compare career mistakes?"

That was ridiculous comment. Lets say you get penalty against you in every game which is scored. Penalties that were wrongly given. Should you blame goalkeeper for not saving them and just ignore the fact that they were wrongful given? Did your club forget or ignore referees and VAR mistake against Tottenham? No, they went all in talking about integrity with official statements. What have happened since then (And before that game)? You can ask every fan that is not Liveprool fan.

He literally got kicked in his face.

Moments before that Endo was holding and draging down Nottingham Forrest player which should have been penalty. Why do we ignore that?

 

[RobinLFC]

Again, a throw in can often be difficult to judge correctly in real-time.

There was nothing to judge here.

A wrong decision is a wrong decision though, no matter how obvious it is. You're avoiding to answer his question, which would be: no, the goal was not a direct consequence of the wrongfully allowed throw-in.

Applied to the Liverpool game, the direct consequence of the goal would be Forrest conceding possession on the edge of their penalty area.

 

[Alex99]

A wrong decision is a wrong decision though, no matter how obvious it is. You're avoiding to answer his question, which would be: no, the goal was not a direct consequence of the wrongfully allowed throw-in.

Applied to the Liverpool game, the direct consequence of the goal would be Forrest conceding possession on the edge of their penalty area.

I literally just said that his hypothetical City example would still be an example of a wrong decision resulting in a goal, even if that hypothetical wrong decision was less obvious.

Do you literally only see what you want to see?

 

[Withnail]

Could you get a smaller replay and a more pixellated photo, please? I feel it would really help your argument if we absolutely can't see the incident at all.

 

[NICanRed]

The problem wasn’t giving Liverpool the ball. It was not giving it to Forest!
An interesting conundrum - if the uncontested drop-ball was incorrectly given to the attacking team in the penalty area and they scored would people still say “well, they should have saved it.”
Interesting to hear Dean say that Tierney would need to rectify the situation. I hope he mis-spoke. That would imply that Tierney would either give Forest a benefit or punish Liverpool at a future opportunity!

 

[Jeppers7]

Nobody can claim with a straight face that it wasn’t a huge error by the referee. What rules was he following when he took the pressure off Liverpool and changed the direction of the game, ultimately the outcome of the game, by putting the pressure on Forrest? Did he just feel like it?

 

[TheReligion]

Stop embarrassing yourselves.

 

[TheReligion]

Nobody can claim with a straight face that it wasn’t a huge error by the referee. What rules was he following when he took the pressure off Liverpool and changed the direction of the game, ultimately the outcome of the game, by putting the pressure on Forrest? Did he just feel like it?

Yes but but Konate was kicked in the face and Liverpool didn’t get a throw in… or something.

Its all in the narrative… or something.

 

[LochGormanAbú]

Because the handing over of posession directly led to the period of pressure that Liverpool scored the winning goal in.

If Forest hold out for a draw, it's a different result and the decision had a far smaller impact on the game, so obviously no one would bat an eye.

The decision resulted in a goal. It's that simple.

And isn't an incorrect throw in or wrongly awarded free kick or corner kick that can all and do lead to goals just the same? but we never have a huge thing about them, every game some of these decisions are wrong and will have led to goals

 

[Alex99]

And isn't an incorrect throw in or wrongly awarded free kick or corner kick that can all and do lead to goals just the same? but we never have a huge thing about them, every game some of these decisions are wrong and will have led to goals

Feck me I've gone over that about three times. Read the other posts.

 

[Buchan]

It’s probably been already said, but the most egregious element of the Scouse fix at the weekend was how Tierney made sure they didn’t lose the match, never mind giving them a leg-up towards winning it.

Forest pushing hard for the win in injury-time, camped outside the Liverpool penalty area in a very promising position with their most dangerous player in possession, and he simply wipes it clean. How unfortunate do you have to be for that opportunity to be taken from you on the whim of a weak referee?

It was an incredible piece of officiating and, surprise surprise, the Scousers were the beneficiaries.

 

[LochGormanAbú]

It’s probably been already said, but the most egregious element of the Scouse fix at the weekend was how Tierney made sure they didn’t lose the match, never mind giving them a leg-up towards winning it.

Forest pushing hard for the win in injury-time, camped outside the Liverpool penalty area in a very promising position with their most dangerous player in possession, and he simply wipes it clean. How unfortunate do you have to be for that opportunity to be taken from you on the whim of a weak referee?

It was an incredible piece of officiating and, surprise surprise, the Scousers were the beneficiaries.

Blooming heck, every fanbase is the same, convinced there are agendas, there really isn't, it's not that deep. Liverpool have had loads of questionable decisions go for and against them this season, couple of obvious ones both ways. Still on any stats thing, Liverpool have been done out of most VAR decisions wrongly, whatever, it's not a conspiracy. I remember first game of the season, Onana almost decapitated a Wolves player in the last act of the game, would have resulted in a pen and a probable equalizer, am sure there was not the same outrage on here for that as this Liverpool one that resulted in a Liverpool kick out. Seriously, every fan base the same, and rightly so, every team can point to the bad ones, no one points to the favourable ones, give up the ridiculous conspiracy nonsense and look at your own clubs failings, celebrate their successes, whatever club that is.

 

[Jeppers7]

And isn't an incorrect throw in or wrongly awarded free kick or corner kick that can all and do lead to goals just the same? but we never have a huge thing about them, every game some of these decisions are wrong and will have led to goals

No because an incorrect throw in is typically given because it looked like it touched a certain player last. It’s not a ref either ignoring the rules or not understanding them. In that case the ref had no grounds whatsoever to give Liverpool the ball, unless in fact he thought CHO played for Liverpool.

That being said it’s annoying when a throw goes the wrong way. Funnily enough you seem to do ok out of those decisions too

 

[Jeppers7]

Blooming heck, every fanbase is the same, convinced there are agendas, there really isn't, it's not that deep. Liverpool have had loads of questionable decisions go for and against them this season, couple of obvious ones both ways. Still on any stats thing, Liverpool have been done out of most VAR decisions wrongly, whatever, it's not a conspiracy. I remember first game of the season, Onana almost decapitated a Wolves player in the last act of the game, would have resulted in a pen and a probable equalizer, am sure there was not the same outrage on here for that as this Liverpool one that resulted in a Liverpool kick out. Seriously, every fan base the same, and rightly so, every team can point to the bad ones, no one points to the favourable ones, give up the ridiculous conspiracy nonsense and look at your own clubs failings, celebrate their successes, whatever club that is.

It’s crazy how remembered that Onana one is. Can you name the other identical situations that have occurred this season that haven’t led to penalties either ?

 

[LochGormanAbú]

It’s crazy how remembered that Onana one is. Can you name the other identical situations that have occurred this season that haven’t led to penalties either ?

I'm not that obsessed with it, just enjoy watching games in general, I could google a bit and come back to you with this and that decision, and you could do the same or maybe you know them off the top of your head for Liverpool, anyway, I stick by my belief that there are no agendas, conspiracies or corruptness, plenty of mistakes yes, but every club can call that, the lesser clubs I feel maybe suffer more as they get less attention and if anything less pressure on the officials.

 

[Kingofwinners]

I find this whole thing particularly egregious because:

1) The decision is just so blatantly wrong. If he had given Liverpool a free kick you could say maybe in real time he thought there was a foul or a high boot etc. and mistakes like that can happen. But he didn’t he stopped it for a head injury when Forest clearly had possession. Now if he had dropped the ball at that spot between the teams you could say maybe he didn’t understand the rules, not great but he’s only human etc. But in what world can he just drop it uncontested to Liverpool?

2) The decision clearly impacted the outcome of the game. What’s the point for a team like Forest fighting relegation to put in that effort for nearly a hundred minutes and then have this happen.

3) The general media coverage just brushed over it. A normally good sports journalist on Virgin media Ireland Sunday morning spent three minutes (which is a long enough segment) covering the match gushing over the great Liverpool spirit and fighting to the end etc. Also reminded us how their kids beat Chelsea. They showed a decent length highlight reel but never even mentioned the incident. With some exceptions this is the general tone of the coverage. I can’t believe this would be the case if roles were reversed and Forest won in these circumstances.

My wife’s (not a huge football fan but a big social observer) take, it’s like the American political media reflect back to people what they want to hear and Liverpool are very popular. I asked what about the other side why is there no reaction like the ABUs we generated back in the day, her response- they haven’t won enough for people to be bothered turning against them….

 

[HappyCamper]

I find this whole thing particularly egregious because:

1) The decision is just so blatantly wrong. If he had given Liverpool a free kick you could say maybe in real time he thought there was a foul or a high boot etc. and mistakes like that can happen. But he didn’t he stopped it for a head injury when Forest clearly had possession. Now if he had dropped the ball at that spot between the teams you could say maybe he didn’t understand the rules, not great but he’s only human etc. But in what world can he just drop it uncontested to Liverpool?

Bingo.

He did the exact same thing more than once that game.

 

[Jeppers7]

I'm not that obsessed with it, just enjoy watching games in general, I could google a bit and come back to you with this and that decision, and you could do the same or maybe you know them off the top of your head for Liverpool, anyway, I stick by my belief that there are no agendas, conspiracies or corruptness, plenty of mistakes yes, but every club can call that, the lesser clubs I feel maybe suffer more as they get less attention and if anything less pressure on the officials.

Did you Google the Onana one?

 

[JustCoco]

The ESPN stats dont include stats for occurances where VAR has incorrectly stuck with the on-field decision, for example when TAA scored the winner for Liverpool at Anfield against Fulham VAR should have intervened and disallowed the goal as their was a clear foul on a Fulham defender which played a part in the goal being scored but VAR didnt intervene they incorrectly stuck with thr on-field deciosion and the goal stood so that VAR so that VAR assistsnce isnt in those stats.

Correct, the "that was wrong but isn't wasn't a clear and obvious error so it's fine" not being counted is just a rubbish attempt to trick people into thinking VAR has turned a new leaf

 

[Pogue Mahone]

Blooming heck, every fanbase is the same, convinced there are agendas, there really isn't, it's not that deep. Liverpool have had loads of questionable decisions go for and against them this season, couple of obvious ones both ways. Still on any stats thing, Liverpool have been done out of most VAR decisions wrongly, whatever, it's not a conspiracy. I remember first game of the season, Onana almost decapitated a Wolves player in the last act of the game, would have resulted in a pen and a probable equalizer, am sure there was not the same outrage on here for that as this Liverpool one that resulted in a Liverpool kick out. Seriously, every fan base the same, and rightly so, every team can point to the bad ones, no one points to the favourable ones, give up the ridiculous conspiracy nonsense and look at your own clubs failings, celebrate their successes, whatever club that is.

I'm not that obsessed with it, just enjoy watching games in general, I could google a bit and come back to you with this and that decision, and you could do the same or maybe you know them off the top of your head for Liverpool, anyway, I stick by my belief that there are no agendas, conspiracies or corruptness, plenty of mistakes yes, but every club can call that, the lesser clubs I feel maybe suffer more as they get less attention and if anything less pressure on the officials.

Pains me to say it but I agree with these posts. All clubs feel harshly done by when it comes to officiating but the clubs most likely to be actually harshly treated are the smaller clubs. If there’s any kind of unconscious bias in the officiating it will be in favour of big clubs. All of the big clubs. Because errors that cause big clubs to drop points get so much more media attention. That’s the closest we get to actual “corruption” here.

 

[RedRocket9908]

It’s crazy how remembered that Onana one is. Can you name the other identical situations that have occurred this season that haven’t led to penalties either ?

Why do people keep going on about the Onana one? It was never a penalty and if it was any other club or if it had have been the Wolves keeper on a Utd player at the other it wouldnt even be being mentioned

 

[RedRocket9908]

Blooming heck, every fanbase is the same, convinced there are agendas, there really isn't, it's not that deep. Liverpool have had loads of questionable decisions go for and against them this season, couple of obvious ones both ways. Still on any stats thing, Liverpool have been done out of most VAR decisions wrongly, whatever, it's not a conspiracy. I remember first game of the season, Onana almost decapitated a Wolves player in the last act of the game, would have resulted in a pen and a probable equalizer, am sure there was not the same outrage on here for that as this Liverpool one that resulted in a Liverpool kick out. Seriously, every fan base the same, and rightly so, every team can point to the bad ones, no one points to the favourable ones, give up the ridiculous conspiracy nonsense and look at your own clubs failings, celebrate their successes, whatever club that is.

Im sorry but I cant remember any big decision incorrectly go against Liverpool this season except for the penalty shout for handball against Arsenal but I can remember quite a few that have gone their way.

 

[NotThatSoph]

Im sorry but I cant remember any big decision incorrectly go against Liverpool this season except for the penalty shout for handball against Arsenal but I can remember quite a few that have gone their way.

That's the point. You're not a Liverpool fan, so why would you remember? It's like this for every fan of every team. You remember every wrong decision going against your team, you forget or don't see the rest.

They had what is probably this season's worst decision by a distance go against them.

 

[RedRocket9908]

That's the point. You're not a Liverpool fan, so why would you remember? It's like this for every fan of every team. You remember every wrong decision going against your team, you forget or don't see the rest.

They had what is probably this season's worst decision by a distance go against them.

Which decision was that? If you are referring to the disallowed goal against Spurs that wasnt a bad decision against them it was just mis-communication between the officials.

Garnacho's incorrectly disallowed goal against Arsenal was a worse then Liverpools against Spurs.

 

[Oranges038]

Im sorry but I cant remember any big decision incorrectly go against Liverpool this season except for the penalty shout for handball against Arsenal but I can remember quite a few that have gone their way.

That "offside" vs Spurs? Was a terrible decision, not just a mix up. The questionable var screenshot for the Jones red card in the same game. A game they finished with 9 men and ended up losing to a last minute og.

We keep hearing about the handball in the Utd Spurs game, Garnacho offside vs Arsenal, the Hojlund penalty vs Arsenal etc.. Liverpool were screwed over against them even more than Utd were.

 

[NotThatSoph]

Which decision was that? If you are referring to the disallowed goal against Spurs that wasnt a bad decision against them it was just mis-communication between the officials.

Garnacho's incorrectly disallowed goal against Arsenal was a worse then Liverpools against Spurs.

This is an insane thing to say. They got a perfectly legitimate goal disallowed.

 

[MegadrivePerson]

Which decision was that? If you are referring to the disallowed goal against Spurs that wasnt a bad decision against them it was just mis-communication between the officials.

Garnacho's incorrectly disallowed goal against Arsenal was a worse then Liverpools against Spurs.

It wasn't a mis-communication between the officials.

The linesman incorrectly flagged for offside.
The VAR team failed to overturn it and then even when they realised they'd made the wrong decision they did nothing to try and correct it.

Garnacho's goal against Arsenal was disallowed because it was offside.

 

[RedRocket9908]

That "offside" vs Spurs? Was a terrible decision, not just a mix up. The questionable var screenshot for the Jones red card in the same game. A game they finished with 9 men and ended up losing to a last minute og.

We keep hearing about the handball in the Utd Spurs game, Garnacho offside vs Arsenal, the Hojlund penalty vs Arsenal etc.. Liverpool were screwed over against them even more than Utd were.

It wasnt a terrible decision the VAR ref did everything right, it was just that he thought the on-field decision was goal so said check complete when the on-field decision was actually offside so he he should have said goal instead.

 

[RedRocket9908]

It wasn't a mis-communication between the officials.

The linesman incorrectly flagged for offside.
The VAR team failed to overturn it and then even when they realised they'd made the wrong decision they did nothing to try and correct it.

Garnacho's goal against Arsenal was disallowed because it was offside.

By the time the officials realised the mistake the game had already restarted so there was absolutely nothing they could do.

Garnacho was onside but VAR drew the lines on at the wrong point when checking it and incorrectly ruled it out.

 

[MegadrivePerson]

By the time the officials realised the mistake the game had already restarted so there was absolutely nothing they could do.

Garnacho was onside but VAR drew the lines on at the wrong point when checking it and incorrectly ruled it out.

They could have easily and quickly stopped the game to inform the referee that the goal needs to be given.

Garnacho was offside mate, see below

Fans all spot the same thing about Arsenal star as new angle of Alejandro Garnacho offside call emerges (sportbible.com)

 

[Oranges038]

It wasnt a terrible decision the VAR ref did everything right, it was just that he thought the on-field decision was goal so said check complete when the on-field decision was actually offside so he he should have said goal instead.

As above poster says, on field decision was offside? VAR didn't correct it. Huge error and one we'd never hear the end of on here if it were Utd on the receiving end.

 

[Alex99]

It wasnt a terrible decision the VAR ref did everything right, it was just that he thought the on-field decision was goal so said check complete when the on-field decision was actually offside so he he should have said goal instead.

You're arguing semantics here.

As an overall piece of officiating, it might be the single worst decision since VAR was introduced.

 

[LochGormanAbú]

It wasnt a terrible decision the VAR ref did everything right, it was just that he thought the on-field decision was goal so said check complete when the on-field decision was actually offside so he he should have said goal instead.

That's a bizarre take, surely trying a wind up? actually funny though. Fact the two VAR guys missed the on field offside decision is a huge mistake, everyone looking at the game could see that, the camera cut to it and showed Diaz stopping his celebrations. Missing that was ok? Not a huge failure?

 

[RedRocket9908]

You're arguing semantics here.

As an overall piece of officiating, it might be the single worst decision since VAR was introduced.

How? The decision VAR made was correct, the only thing that was wrong was that the VAR official said check complete (because he thought the onfield decision was goal) instead of decision goal

 

[RedRocket9908]

That's a bizarre take, surely trying a wind up? actually funny though. Fact the two VAR guys missed the on field offside decision is a huge mistake, everyone looking at the game could see that, the camera cut to it and showed Diaz stopping his celebrations. Missing that was ok? Not a huge failure?

I meant they did everything correct with regards to the way they checked the goal.

 

[MegadrivePerson]

How? The decision VAR made was correct, the only thing that was wrong was that the VAR official said check complete (because he thought the onfield decision was goal) instead of decision goal

The decision VAR made wasn't correct! If it was correct they would have overturned the offside!