they came to the conclusion cos it was a safe one to make. "Look sir, my hands were tied guv honest." The ref can claim its a goal kick no issue even though he let off a blatent dive. The var can claim they are not empowered. Brentford get a little nod and arsneal a wink and we all carry on. ONce side gets closer to the top and the other closer to the bottom.
VAR cannot give a 2nd yellow so couldn't get involved. They are thinking of making it do so but then that would mean more interruptions. Seems a bit pointless them judging on it really - i mean what is the point except to annoy Brentfiord fans (and others)? Much like the Liverpool Man C call which was probably more of a case of the VAR not wanting to go against a top referee in a critical moment.
The review panel is there to look at how effective refereeing is, that’s all. It’ll all get added into whatever judgements they make at the end of the season on what’s effective or not. Its purpose isn’t really to appease fans or whatever. At this point I’m over it and don’t really care. We all knew it was a 2nd yellow at the time, it was a blatant dive, but we also all knew VAR couldn’t overrule it. There’s no new info here.
Which one! Both were a case of Gordon playing for them really. Craig Bellamy obviously been told not to say anything about the Chelsea penalty decision as I am sure he would love to!
Definitely the 2nd Newcastle pen, totally changed the game and wasn't even a foul. That said, the genius MOTD 'pundits' didn't even mention it, whilst going on and on about the Chelsea decision.
Worst decision of the season so far today which is saying something considering a Fulham player literally headbutted Kilman in the face and didn't get sent off earlier in the season. Sent from my Pixel 7a using Tapatalk
Is it really up to the ref to decide if a player will get to the ball or not? Unless it's clear cut surely just another subjective view point.
the rules state that if you have only one players between you and goal then your position when the balm is playered (the header is an offside position) the rules also state that you may not be active unless going for ball or impeding, nothing about will the keeper ever save it or not. for me the player wanders across the keepers line of sight as the ball is headed forward. technically he is in an offside player and at least distracting to a keeper who was never ever ever saving it. so in the letter of application of the law the referee and var have applied "the rules" but in common sense terms it's ridiculous. funnily enough nobody seems too pushed (pun intended) about the goal chalked off for a hand in the back where the defender should be stronger.
Gary Lineker said there should be an appeals system . How many would they have and want though ? We could be there all day ! And doesn’t mean we would get the “right decision “ of course. Still be down to the VAR and ref to make a decision subjectivity.
I think there should.be no var without a manager appealing for the thing. if nobody appeals then let the decision stand. yesterday's decision would.then not even occur (maybe)
If you can trust the managers to use it wisely and actually appeal when there really is a bad decision gone against them rather than to waste time or for minor things but as I say it's all subjective. Who is to to say the official would change their mind to satisfy the team making the appeal and then how would the opposition feel if they thought was was unfair? Just not sure it was work like in cricket when the decisions are factual and generally accepted. If they all said ok fair enough decision accepted then fine but you know that probably wouldn't happen. In general think VAR is too subjective and doesn't bring anything but more debate and confusion really.
Yeah I think by the letter of the law it should have been ruled out. O’Neil is wrong in that respect. The refs don’t have to (and shouldn’t) judge if the keeper can save it, what they have to judge is if the offensive player was active, and the rules clearly show that if you are in the goalkeeper’s eye line you are active. In reality, whether he was there or not that goal is going in. But by the rules it was correct to rule it out.
Suppose again it will come down to consistency. Is that the sort of goal that will always be ruled out or not?
