Ramsdale's shoulder isn't in a natural position anyway.
VAR, Refs and Linesmen | General Discussion
- Thread starter Samid
- Start date
Also, we have one of the goalkeepers least likely to give away a penalty for rushing out and colliding with an opponent so they can start punishing it with prison terms for all I care.
The City keeper does rush out and hits the player with some force. I feel it's a pen.
Then so is the Arsenal one on Bruno
Because he got to the ball first
Written in weasel-worded middle management wank speak. He gave me the vibe that he was all talk the other day on the telly as well so I have no faith in this improving under Webb.
If today’s one was a penalty then this is also a penalty all day long.
I counted three rule-based penalties for Arsenal and none for City. Two and a quarter covention based. Ake diving into Nkethia’s(?) feet 40 cm above ground level is a stonewall penalty by any interpretation of the laws of the game. Trossard getting the ball past Walker who barges into him is also hundred per cent a penalty. The Ederson one is a clear pen by the books, but is only given seldomly when it is judged to be after theball has left the duel and there is a keeper involved. Haaland was two freekicks for Arsenal and none for City, luckily the offside made it theoretical, as it would be a challenge for VAR to turn around the call when two players tug, even if Haaland starts, finishes and does 75% of the effective tugging.
This is just wrong on so many levels. I’d love to be as confident as you when stating things that are blatantly wrong.
Please tell me this is sarcasm of some kind
Well well well, will arsenal fans drum about their penalty tonight? They are bitching about referees the past 2 weeks.
I'm not sure. All I know is I've never seen it given before in the PL, even when defenders wipe someone out after a shot
He didn't have possession. He hit a one touch shot around the keeper just before the keeper got there. Its the exact same thing
This was the refs doing
Anyone have a gif of the Nkethia situation?
Which one? The pen or the 'high foot' on Ake?
The pen, I didnt see the match so curious if it was a pen or not.
Given your line of work, you’d be in jail if you were as confident as him about blatantly incorrect interpretations.
If anyone can find a similar pen given this season in the PL I’d be amazed.
One those where it is a foul but is never given. Strange decision in that respect.
Just saw it on youtube. Yeah that was a weird one. Never a pen in my book.
I agree with this. The commentator I watched made a point that if it was a player, and outside the box, it’s a foul - which I agree with. If it’s the new change and they start giving them all, I’m fine with it. They just need to be consistent with these calls
At least I’d be strutting confidently into my cell every night.
Of course I can be wrong, about many things. It’s my opinions about what I saw. It’d be helpful to point out how you think I was wrong in the four cases. I can’t find the footage now, so it’s all based on watching the live broadcast.
It's a foul for me so it's a pen. The ball is well gone and he gets clattered. I don't understand the logic that getting the shot away means it's fair game. I also saw the argument from Given that it was a coming together but if the keeper doesn't get the ball then he can't legally take out the man imo.
I was in a bit of a minority last night though. Strangely though, for a similar incident in the WC, involving Messi, the majority thought it was a pen.
1) Ake going down to head the ball at Nketiah’s feet is not a stonewall penalty by any rule book. If anything, it’s an indirect free kick for Arsenal for dangerous play.
2) The Trossard incident is one I thought looked like a pen in real time but once the replays came in it was obvious that he threw his right leg out to kick Walker like Ashley Young used to do.
3) The penalty is soft because they are rarely given as penalties. Even the fouled player didn’t appeal for a penalty, he appealed for a goal and started celebrating a goal when . I’d accept that this is a penalty if referees consistently gave them, but a few weeks ago we had the same referee judge a similar incident to not be a penalty when the team who got a penalty were the ones who committed the foul.
Neither is really in control of the ball so no pen for me. If that is a pen then surely Bruno should have had a pen against Arsenal.
thing is we had a perfectly good goal disallowed on Sunday for something similar
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">This was this Sunday btw <a href="https://t.co/NrmJp7NXNo">https://t.co/NrmJp7NXNo</a> <a href="https://t.co/2eP2dXMKXT">pic.twitter.com/2eP2dXMKXT</a></p>— May (@KorverAintMe) <a href="">February 15, 2023</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">This was this Sunday btw <a href="https://t.co/NrmJp7NXNo">https://t.co/NrmJp7NXNo</a> <a href="https://t.co/2eP2dXMKXT">pic.twitter.com/2eP2dXMKXT</a></p>— May (@KorverAintMe) <a href="">February 15, 2023</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
I mean the clear difference here is the goalkeeper touches the ball first, THEN there is a clash.
Nketiah shoots, the keeper doesn't touch the ball then follows through into him. They're quite different scenarios.
I don't really see how people struggle to differentiate things in football? If the keeper missed the ball then clattered Haaland of course it would be a pen.
Thank you. 1) Still based on memory, It looked to me that Ake was taking so much of the man and so little of the ball, that had he used his feet instead of his head, it would still be a clear penalty to me. If he’s judged not to foul the Arsenal player, it would be an indirect free kick for Arsenal and strictly, a yellow card (though those are seldom given) for dangerous play. But to me it looked a foul. Maybe I’ll change my mind if I got to watch the replays again, but that’s how I perceived it.
2) I still think I disagree here. The foul is not to be given based on how a fouled player falls or not, but based on how he is unlawfully hindered. As far as I saw, Walker came late, missed the ball, at speed, hit Trossard in the body more than the feet, and there is no way Trossard could have get by that on his feet. If Walker had stood still, it would have been nothing or at most an obstruction, but he went in forcefully and was late, and clearly hindered the player. Is how I saw it.
3) We agree on, it’s about exactly what I meant by a quarter of a pen convention based.
I’m open to the possibility that I’ve perceived 1) and 2) wrong, but based on my memory of the footage, I was surprised that you can be as certain about them as you sound.
I thought VAR checked every goal and penalty box Incident, otherwise what’s the point of it?
so they didn’t tell the ref to check this but they must have had a look at it and again we fall into this clear and obvious limbo, as a viewer when an incident like that happens you still don’t know what’s going to happen or going on behind the scenes. One week they will intervene the next they won’t, you can’t have consistency with subjectivity, even this thread is saying it was and wasn’t a pen so how can VAR win. Just leave it to the refs.
Tricky one last night with the pen. While he has already taken his shot, Ederson does foul him quite clearly. The Alvarez WC is slightly different as there is a possibility he could have got past the keeper and followed up his shot. This scenario doesn't. I can see why it wasn't overturned and think there is an argument for both a pen and not a pen.
Bruno probably would have last year but that one was a good bit softer.
I don't see how you can claim the guy who got a shot on target wasn't in control of the ball though. How do you work that out?
The problem with leaving it to the refs is the same ref who gave this as a penalty yesterday didn’t a similar incident as a penalty(Bruno and ramsdale). So is VAR being inconsistent here or is the ref being inconsistent.
He got the shot of before he ran into Ederson.
True and good point, I could deal with the ref being inconsistent a lot more with him watching the game real time though instead of having replay footage and still being inconsistent. And like I said lots of fans can or can’t agree with the decision anyway.
if the ref didn’t give the pen yesterday i very much doubt VAR would have intervened anyway as decisions are so subjective.
tbh, if VAR is here to stay I quite like them never getting involved unless it’s an absolute blatant howler of missing something (Henry handball years ago). The refs just need to grow a pair and ref like they would without relying on VAR to bail them out on decisions.
Ok you're making no sense to me at all.
Nketiah gets to the ball first and gets the shot away. He wasn't moving towards Ederson, he was moving towards the ball. Ederson is approaching him from the side in order to block the shot. He fails to do this and collides with Nketiah before his feet have touched the ground after taking the shot on.
Yea the ref gave it but the clear and obvious rule instructed on the var ref means they can rarely meet the threshold to overturn. It wasn't a clear and obvious error anyway.
It's just never ever given
my point is, its a coming together but how has Haaland fouled him, refs are making it up on a week by week basis, I'd have no problem if this was given as a pen every week but we all know it won't be