VAR, Refs and Linesmen | General Discussion

Clear pen against United.
Not so much if Arsenal/Liv/City commit it. Refs have no ball to call these kind of soft pens in title race.
 
Stupid tackle by AWB but clear dive from Elliott. He has played the ball in one direction and clearly sticks his foot out in another direction in the hope he will get a penalty. Unfortunately, our players don't put the ref under any pressure to reconsider his decision. The same thing happened against Chealse twice. Why should VAR intervene if even our players seem to accept the decision?
 
That’s a penalty. Left foot takes the ball away from AWB’s lunge. Right foot clips AWB twice. First on the foot, then on the upper leg. How is that not a penalty?
Watch his right foot. He engineers the contact himself. He drags his foot along the ground expecting to get caught, when he doesn’t he puts it between Wan Bissaka’s legs. To do that he moves in the opposite direction of the ball. It’s only a foul if running into your opponent is enough for it to be a foul.
 
Watch his right foot. He engineers the contact himself. He drags his foot along the ground expecting to get caught, when he doesn’t he puts it between Wan Bissaka’s legs. To do that he moves in the opposite direction of the ball. It’s only a foul if running into your opponent is enough for it to be a foul.

Running into your opponent is a foul if the opponent happens to be sliding across the ground in front of you, trying - and failing - to win the ball.
 
That’s a penalty. Left foot takes the ball away from AWB’s lunge. Right foot clips AWB twice. First on the foot, then on the upper leg. How is that not a penalty?
It clearly doesn't clip him twice. He moves into the tackle rather than the ball, which he was never getting to after that heavy touch. The fact that his right foot clips AWB rather than the other way round tells you everything you need to know. Clear dive.
 
It clearly doesn't clip him twice. He moves into the tackle rather than the ball, which he was never getting to after that heavy touch. The fact that his right foot clips AWB rather than the other way round tells you everything you need to know. Clear dive.

I have no idea why some of you are so hung up on the idea that Harvey Elliot’s foot moves into AWB? That is literally what happens when you trip over something. If that something is a defender sprawling on the ground in front of you then it’s a penalty.

I do get the argument that he was looking for that contact but I think that’s reading too much into very slowed down footage. It’s normal for your back foot to drag like that, if you’re reaching with your other foot like he was. In real time it was an absolutely nailed on penalty. Hence nobody, including AWB, tried to argue otherwise.
 
I have no idea why some of you are so hung up on the idea that Harvey Elliot’s foot moves into AWB? That is literally what happens when you trip over something. If that something is a defender sprawling on the ground in front of you then it’s a penalty.

I do get the argument that he was looking for that contact but I think that’s reading too much into very slowed down footage. In real time it was an absolutely nailed on penalty. Hence nobody, including AWB, tried to argue otherwise.
Exactly. He was looking for contact, misaligned his right foot from a natural ball carrying path to hit AWB. Clear dive. Clever dive. The Arjen Robben special.
 
I have no idea why some of you are so hung up on the idea that Harvey Elliot’s foot moves into AWB? That is literally what happens when you trip over something. If that something is a defender sprawling on the ground in front of you then it’s a penalty.

I do get the argument that he was looking for that contact but I think that’s reading too much into very slowed down footage. In real time it was an absolutely nailed on penalty. Hence nobody, including AWB, tried to argue otherwise.
But the slowed down footage makes it abundantly clear Elliot places his foot between Wan Bissaka’s leg after initially dragging his right foot along the ground in preparation to fall over. His movement is ridiculously unnatural and there’s no reason to do what he did than try to fall over a tackle. That isn’t a foul.
 
Wan Bissaka actually does well to pull his right foot away when he realises he’s not getting the ball.
 
But the slowed down footage makes it abundantly clear Elliot places his foot between Wan Bissaka’s leg after initially dragging his right foot along the ground in preparation to fall over. His movement is ridiculously unnatural and there’s no reason to do what he did than try to fall over a tackle. That isn’t a foul.

As I said it my edit, the way he dragged his right foot is a normal response to the way he reaches with his left to nick the ball away from AWB. In extreme slo mo it looks suspicious but extreme slo mo is a shitty way to judge these things. Hence VAR is a load of wank.
 
The ball was kicked away to his left.

If he wanted to get the ball after his heavy touch, the right foot wouldn’t be anywhere near AWB.

He realised that the ball was gone and realigned his foot progression to hit AWB. It’s so clear. Huge dive. He won it well. Fair fecks. I’d be impressed if Garna did the same.
 
As I said it my edit, the way he dragged his right foot is a normal response to the way he reaches with his left to nick the ball away from AWB. In extreme slo mo it looks suspicious but extreme slo mo is a shitty way to judge these things. Hence VAR is a load of wank.
No it’s not. You don’t drag your foot along the ground unless you’re looking to fall over. He expects Wan Bissaka’s leg to come across his right leg and wants to make sure he catches him. The natural thing to do is to move in the direction the ball is going. He does the opposite.
 
Been a topic of conversation for me and a few friends as Tony Harrington is the cousin of one of them.

Seems to me that he applied the rules. Apparently he's sat down with Howard Webb last night and they're happy that the rules were applied correctly.

Maybe I'm getting it wrong here, but the player was deliberately stood, directly in front of the keeper, obviously to obstruct his view, and (as I understand it) is offside once the ball is touched by his team mate.

On Match of the Day the pundits (three strikers, by the way) say the keeper should have moved. By that analogy, can you stand 4 players directly in front of the keeper at a corner and then just have someone attack the corner and head it in? How can you not be interfering with play from that position?

I take the point that on the face of it, the keeper looks like he can move but the rule doesn't say that you're not offside if the keeper can move to see it. Maybe the rule needs changing.

On a general point, O'Neil said nothing post match about the soft goal West Ham had chalked off.

I have also been told this by a relative of Tony Harrington :lol:
 


Clear dive. But VAR does nothing. It's just pointless at this stage.

I thought that penalty was certain. But looking at that replay it doesn’t look like it was. Just another day when it comes to us. I don’t know how many points we have lost like this. 15-20?
 
I thought that penalty was certain. But looking at that replay it doesn’t look like it was. Just another day when it comes to us. I don’t know how many points we have lost like this. 15-20?
Well his trailing foot runs into him and he buys the foul, Stupid of Bissaka to go to ground there.
 
Our manager says "clear penalty". Refs must love him. If it is 50:50 no problem giving it against us.
 
No it’s not. You don’t drag your foot along the ground unless you’re looking to fall over. He expects Wan Bissaka’s leg to come across his right leg and wants to make sure he catches him. The natural thing to do is to move in the direction the ball is going. He does the opposite.

Yes you do. Sometimes. Dragging your back foot is a natural response when you’re lunging to reach a ball, full stretch. It’s the reason sliding tackles are called sliding tackles.
 
Yes you do. Sometimes. Dragging your back foot is a natural response when you’re lunging to reach a ball, full stretch. It’s the reason sliding tackles are called sliding tackles.
Your definition of lunging is wild. Why does he move his right foot in the opposite direction the ball is going?
 
Your definition of lunging is wild. Why does he move his right foot in the opposite direction the ball is going?

Re lunging. Watch the replay. He has to really stretch with his left to get the ball before AWB. That’s a lunge.

The reason his right foot doesn’t follow the ball would be on account of his right foot being jammed between AWB’s legs before he gets a chance to move it anywhere. Hence the penalty.
 
What I don't understand is if there was even an element of doubt for either Dalot or AWB penelties then why did both look as guilty as hell and not protest at all?

This could have been the difference with the Dalot one as the VAR guy clearly wasn't sure.
 
What I don't understand is if there was even an element of doubt for either Dalot or AWB penelties then why did both look as guilty as hell and not protest at all?

This could have been the difference with the Dalot one as the VAR guy clearly wasn't sure.

Same with the Atony one, which also looked soft. To me the players are usually the best judge of what’s happened, so I think all three pens were probably legit. Super slo mo replays can be deceptive for anything other than really basic stuff, like whether or not a ball was deflected.
 
Re lunging. Watch the replay. He has to really stretch with his left to get the ball before AWB. That’s a lunge.

The reason his right foot doesn’t follow the ball would be on account of his right foot being jammed between AWB’s legs before he gets a chance to move it anywhere. Hence the penalty.
Because he plants his foot there deliberately. There is nothing natural about what he’s done there.
 
Same with the Atony one, which also looked soft. To me the players are usually the best judge of what’s happened, so I think all three pens were probably legit. Super slo mo replays can be deceptive for anything other than really basic stuff, like whether or not a ball was deflected.

I'm just not sure about the Dalot one, and the fact VAR looked for so long makes me think they weren't either.
 
Running into your opponent is a foul if the opponent happens to be sliding across the ground in front of you, trying - and failing - to win the ball.
I’ve not looked at your posts in AWB threads but judging by your post history I’d be amazed if you’re a fan.
 
Our manager says "clear penalty". Refs must love him. If it is 50:50 no problem giving it against us.
Yeah but Ten Hag also says things like "we played well" and "I'm seeing a lot of improvements". Maybe he's got an opposite brain?
 
Not a penalty he’s played for it and won it, frankly I just wish our players had the street smarts to try this crap.
 
Ultimately, if that was against us I'd 100% want a penalty.

I suspect most others would too.

Of course you would, just like the Jesus one yesterday, these aren't worthy penalties according to folk on here. Whether or not Elliot "buys" it by putting his leg down is another matter, but he's lunged in and not got anywhere near the ball.

There was also people looking for fouls on Rashford when he was outmuscled by Walker and the Forrest players brushing him off the ball. But sliding in and wiping a player out while also not getting anywhere near the ball is somehow not a penalty.