A&H

Arsenal Vs Man Utd

CA1992 said:
Havertz penalty/non-penalty a perfect example of how VAR should work - none of this clear and obvious nonsense, just find the correct decision.
Click to expand...
It’s only nonsense because they are not keeping to that criteria. What we saw today was re-refereeing as the onfield decision was supportable.
 
The Referee Store
QuaverRef said:
It’s only nonsense because they are not keeping to that criteria. What we saw today was re-refereeing as the onfield decision was supportable.
Click to expand...
Very much agree Quaver
Why can't they just come out and say what VAR is there for.... primarily to re-referee match changing situations?
It wouldn't get my back up so much if they weren't disingenuous by saying 'VAR is there for C&O'
It's never really has been about C&O, even in the early days
 
Big Cat said:
Very much agree Quaver
Why can't they just come out and say what VAR is there for.... primarily to re-referee match changing situations?
It wouldn't get my back up so much if they weren't disingenuous by saying 'VAR is there for C&O'
It's never really has been about C&O, even in the early days
Click to expand...
Read this thread and you’d lost me until I read this message! C&O always seemed such a weird and unnecessary caveat that just hamstrung VARs. would love to see it go
 
OnlyUseMeWhistle said:
Read this thread and you’d lost me until I read this message! C&O always seemed such a weird and unnecessary caveat that just hamstrung VARs. would love to see it go
Click to expand...
Problem with that is games would be going on for days. Aside from offsides and ball in and out of play, almost every decision in football is subjective. If you take away clear and obvious it would at least triple the number of decisions VAR gets themselves involved with.

I'm comfortable with clear and obvious, but there will always be some inconsistencies, and that is why they need to release the audio. For today's one I'm certain Anthony Taylor gave it because he thought the attacker had been tripped by the defender's leading leg, and that was very clearly and obviously wrong as it made zero contact. If they released the comms it would just make it so much more clear to everyone and shut down a lot of the conspiracy theory nonsense.
 
RustyRef said:
Problem with that is games would be going on for days. Aside from offsides and ball in and out of play, almost every decision in football is subjective. If you take away clear and obvious it would at least triple the number of decisions VAR gets themselves involved with.

I'm comfortable with clear and obvious, but there will always be some inconsistencies, and that is why they need to release the audio. For today's one I'm certain Anthony Taylor gave it because he thought the attacker had been tripped by the defender's leading leg, and that was very clearly and obviously wrong as it made zero contact. If they released the comms it would just make it so much more clear to everyone and shut down a lot of the conspiracy theory nonsense.
Click to expand...
But surely C&O isn't what decides not to look at every ball in and out of play. You can remove C&O and still only focus on goals and red cards
 
I can’t believe the moaning about Evans being fouled during the second goal. If anything he starts the foul by a horrid shirt pull around the neck of Gabrielle.

Should saka have seen red?
 
Ori said:
I can’t believe the moaning about Evans being fouled during the second goal. If anything he starts the foul by a horrid shirt pull around the neck of Gabrielle.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I thought this as well. Gabriel stands his ground and doesn't seem to actively hold the defender at all, then is thrown out the way at the end of the move. Definitely penalty shout if Rice's shot didn't go in.
 
On the MOD highlights the commentator, at least twice, mentioned the outcome of a 'VAR appeal' whatever that is?
 
GraemeS said:
Yeah, I thought this as well. Gabriel stands his ground and doesn't seem to actively hold the defender at all, then is thrown out the way at the end of the move. Definitely penalty shout if Rice's shot didn't go in.
Click to expand...

Sky showed an edited clip of this that pretty much started with Evans reacting to having been held almost the entire flight of the ball. The 3 mins Skysports highlight clip on YouTube shows it better.
Def a foul on Evans but we all know holding in the area is pretty much ignored.

As for ETH, if you insist on sticking a mic in the face of a manager 10 mins after losing in that fashion, expect stupid comments.
 
deusex said:
Sky showed an edited clip of this that pretty much started with Evans reacting to having been held almost the entire flight of the ball. The 3 mins Skysports highlight clip on YouTube shows it better.
Def a foul on Evans but we all know holding in the area is pretty much ignored.

As for ETH, if you insist on sticking a mic in the face of a manager 10 mins after losing in that fashion, expect stupid comments.
Click to expand...
Are you sensuous? Evans starts by pulling on his shirt by the neck which in itself is dangerous. IMG_9553.jpeg
 
es1 said:
nah not having that that action is in anyway dangerous
Click to expand...
It’s considered dangerous as it pulls on a players neck.
That’s the start of the pull and he pulls harder and harder and brings Gabriel to the floor that way in the end. Had the goal not gone in, var would have had to make a decision here and I suspect a penalty would have been given.
 
Ori said:
It’s considered dangerous as it pulls on a players neck.
That’s the start of the pull and he pulls harder and harder and brings Gabriel to the floor that way in the end. Had the goal not gone in, var would have had to make a decision here and I suspect a penalty would have been given.
Click to expand...
it's a shirt pull, i wouldnt read anything more into it than that
 
es1 said:
it's a shirt pull, i wouldnt read anything more into it than that
Click to expand...
I remind you of a shirt pull on saka in the euro final by the neck is very dangerous (should have been a red). A shirt pull is bad, but by the neck it’s dangerous.
 
Ori said:
I remind you of a shirt pull on saka in the euro final by the neck is very dangerous (should have been a red). A shirt pull is bad, but by the neck it’s dangerous.
Click to expand...
the difference being that one was from the front and one from behind. this wont do anything but pull gabriel to the ground
 
es1 said:
the difference being that one was from the front and one from behind. this wont do anything but pull gabriel to the ground
Click to expand...
I agree with you about the difference. However the action continued and he pulls him to the ground.
Regardless a shirt pull like that in the box is a foul.
 
It simply isn't a foul on Evans, and as far as I can see the only people who thought it was are associated in someway with his club. If anything it would be a penalty as Evans holds Gabriel first, although obviously not as a goal was scored.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top