A&H

United v Wolves

george.g said:
Not sure I 100% follow, not from a point of disagreement, just confusion :)
Click to expand...
My point is that if you are saying that it should have gone to the ref on the field, you are saying it should have been reversed by the ref. When you say “wasn’t even recommended for review,” it sounds like ”well, at least the R should have taken another look,” which isn’t how the system works. The R is absolutely the final arbiter. But when the R disagrees, it means either the R or VAR is wrong, as they are both using the very same C&O standard.

Here, I think it should be a PK (and by a straight application of the LOTG it is hard to even argue that this is not carelessly jumping at, challenging, or striking- take your pick). But I’m not as convinced that the powers that be for the professional game really want a PK for GK contact that takes place after the ball gets away when the GK is trying to play the ball--this isn’t the same as the GK knee to the head with no chance at the ball.
 
The Referee Store
Yet again, pundits / Wolves manager glossing over the fact that Wolves had multiple chances to score in the game and didn’t. Of corse, the fact that they came away with nothing from the game was all down to the penalty that wasn’t given not the individual performances of the Wolves players.
 
es1 said:
https://twitter.com/x/status/1691192841031090177

This seems clear as day...everyone is expecting a penalty here
Click to expand...
Yes, if any out field player had made a challenge that late, it would be a DFK and caution; so I think that the SG! are already behind public opinion on this one. Simon Hopper was excellent last season, but a terrible start to this one.

I also think the Brentford v Spurs goalkeepers challenge, which was given as a goal kick, should have been a penalty and a YC (and therefore, a RC as he had been cautioned in the first half).

We need clarity from the PGMOL as to why they weren't penalties; as we are given them at grassroots level.
 
Redref34 said:
Yet again, pundits / Wolves manager glossing over the fact that Wolves had multiple chances to score in the game and didn’t. Of corse, the fact that they came away with nothing from the game was all down to the penalty that wasn’t given not the individual performances of the Wolves players.
Click to expand...

pretty irrelevant to the point though right? at this point in the game with 2 mins left the decision is huge
 
Wonder whether the bar for RP has been raised to accommodate all the other C2s & C4s

Anyway, enough said about VAR above... Fuels the argument about how difficult it is for minnows to get a decision in these intimidating arenas
I felt for Gary O'Neil
 
Away from this decision I felt hooper missed 3 clear yellows in the second half, varrane celebrated in the crowd, Antony pulled a shirt to stop a break and wan bissaka made a reckless tackle. 2 of those 3 are mandatory yellows (AWB is more my opinion) and inconsistencies game to game isn't helping
 
es1 said:
Away from this decision I felt hooper missed 3 clear yellows in the second half, varrane celebrated in the crowd, Antony pulled a shirt to stop a break and wan bissaka made a reckless tackle. 2 of those 3 are mandatory yellows (AWB is more my opinion) and inconsistencies game to game isn't helping
Click to expand...
You do see it often though don't you when a referee usually give quite a few yellows in the first half then in the second half, the cards usually stay in the pocket so they don't end up giving like double figures in the amount of cards by the end of the game therefore being accused of being card happy.

As for the pen, it's a stonewaller really, this is one where you would love to hear the audio and see what the VAR thought process was for not recommending an review.
 
es1 said:
Away from this decision I felt hooper missed 3 clear yellows in the second half, varrane celebrated in the crowd, Antony pulled a shirt to stop a break and wan bissaka made a reckless tackle. 2 of those 3 are mandatory yellows (AWB is more my opinion) and inconsistencies game to game isn't helping
Click to expand...
If they're hell bent on keeping everyone on the FOP, something has to give
Refs have been increasingly tolerant of Goal Celebrations over the last year or so, but I don't agree with them raising the bar on RP
Like I've said, I feel strongly that C7s need to be a threat for this Behaviour Charter to work, so RP can't be ignored. From what I've seen, when a player is on a cheap caution, the Ref's judgement of that player's subsequent Foul Play has been compromised over the weekend (which equates to it impacting Referee performance)
 
I've just watched the penalty incident again, I may have a slightly plausible explanation.

It's possible that Salisbury thinks Onana might get a touch on the ball because if you watch the angles and the amount of times it's replayed to him, he looks like he's looking for a touch.

Not that this changes anything, still a penalty 🫠
 
Big Cat said:
If they're hell bent on keeping everyone on the FOP, something has to give
Refs have been increasingly tolerant of Goal Celebrations over the last year or so, but I don't agree with them raising the bar on RP
Like I've said, I feel strongly that C7s need to be a threat for this Behaviour Charter to work, so RP can't be ignored. From what I've seen, when a player is on a cheap caution, the Ref's judgement of that player's subsequent Foul Play has been compromised over the weekend (which equates to it impacting Referee performance)
Click to expand...
but we're seeing other referees within PGMOL give this. consistency is everything, we cant have situations where the same incident results in different outcomes, especially in matter of fact/black and white decisions
 
Supposedly Hopper, Salisbury and the AVAR all off games for MW2. I do feel like VAR has let Hooper down, ticks the boxes for a C&O, although I take on @socal lurker ’s point about my earlier wording
 
I feel a bit sorry for Hooper, he should be seeing it real time but we all know there's a lot going on in the penalty area at set pieces and things do get missed. Had there not been VAR he would have got a 7.9 but almost certainly not be dropped for the next game, so he is effectively getting excessively punished for someone else's error. But I can't really find any excuse for Salisbury and West not spotting it and recommending a review.

I thought Hooper was having a really good game to this point as well, he had a really good nature with the players with loads of laughs and smiles, he looked way more confident even than he did last season. Hope this doesn't dent his confidence. Accept people saying there were potential missed cautions, but I think they have been told to continue the approach that we have seen in recent years of managing situations (unless delaying restart or dissent obviously)
 
My main frustration is that the process is clearly still not quite right as these mistakes are still occurring. I have refrained from commenting today as I am a Wolves fan (and obviously have much bias). Not sure if it is a fear of admitting getting it wrong, but clearly the taboo of them reviewing their decisions needs to be removed.

Mistakes happen, but in the professional level, there is a way to rectify these.

Not happy with the hate towards the officials on social media, this is not pleasant.
 
We all know a lot of reffing is subjective but there needs to be something done or don’t have VAR at all and when you apologize for mistakes that can’t be rectified, it makes it worse. If MU win the league by a point, this will come up again.
 
Whether you agree with it or not the standard for var has changed from "Henry level howler" to "the preferred decision is..."

But England continues to remain the outlier. We're seeing decisions made in the Women's World Cup, La Liga, Serie A, MLS, ect that would never be given in the PL.

But if the rest of the World has VAR intervening at an 8 out of 10 but the PL requires a 9.5, its insane to be suspending refs for missing a 9.7. (Obviously a simplification but I hope my point is made)
 
cwyeary said:
Whether you agree with it or not the standard for var has changed from "Henry level howler" to "the preferred decision is..."

But England continues to remain the outlier. We're seeing decisions made in the Women's World Cup, La Liga, Serie A, MLS, ect that would never be given in the PL.

But if the rest of the World has VAR intervening at an 8 out of 10 but the PL requires a 9.5, its insane to be suspending refs for missing a 9.7. (Obviously a simplification but I hope my point is made)
Click to expand...
This wasn't a 9.7 though, it wasn't a 9.5, it was an absolutely blatant penalty. Hence the outcry, the immediate apology from Jon Moss (within 10 minutes of the game ending) and Howard Webb following not long after. There isn't any possible debate about whether this should have been a penalty or not, the only debate is about how senior officials managed to make such a mess of it.

What annoys me more than anything though is the Man Utd reaction. Onana saying it wasn't a foul, and then Ten Hag coming out in his interview and saying it wasn't a penalty. They would both be screaming blue murder if it had happened at the other end and wasn't given, it really is hypocrisy of the very highest order.
 
RustyRef said:
This wasn't a 9.7 though, it wasn't a 9.5, it was an absolutely blatant penalty. Hence the outcry, the immediate apology from Jon Moss (within 10 minutes of the game ending) and Howard Webb following not long after. There isn't any possible debate about whether this should have been a penalty or not, the only debate is about how senior officials managed to make such a mess of it.

What annoys me more than anything though is the Man Utd reaction. Onana saying it wasn't a foul, and then Ten Hag coming out in his interview and saying it wasn't a penalty. They would both be screaming blue murder if it had happened at the other end and wasn't given, it really is hypocrisy of the very highest order.
Click to expand...

If Henry's handball or Maradonna would be a 10 on the var scale, are we going to say this wasn't a 9.7? It's bad but it's not Maradona.
 
cwyeary said:
If Henry's handball or Maradonna would be a 10 on the var scale, are we going to say this wasn't a 9.7? It's bad but it's not Maradona.
Click to expand...
Sorry, meant it wasn't as low as an 8, which would imply debatable. Nowhere near as bad as Maradona or Henry, but enough for almost every referee to say it was a penalty.

I'm in both referee and footballer WhatsApp groups. For the first time ever both went into meltdown at the same time and for the same reason, I actually had to post a screenshot of the referee reaction to placate the footballers 😂
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top