That s exactly why I hate the prem.

[Stan Tastic]

It was the correct decision to send Foster off, but he elbowed the defender because he was being held, which with the ball in play should've been a penalty.

If he saw the elbow on VAR why did he ignore the holding onto Foster?

[Vegas Claret]

You are a good fellow poster but you are 5000 miles away and I was 50 metres away facing head on. The ball did not deflect at all which is why I though armpit at the time. So did McKenna. So did the ref. Instinct counts for a lot.

VAR in slow mo is not real life. It can distort reality. It wasn't a handball, even allowing for the rules that are stricter when it leads to a goal.

I take it you haven't you seen the replay mate, the ball deviates without question (I mean it's crystal clear). It's not conclusive enough to rule out a goal because you just can't accurately see where the ball hits his arm. Knob Jones

[Staniola]

Correct, they aren’t interested in the bigger picture, just the headline.

[Vegas Claret]

It was the correct decision to send Foster off, but he elbowed the defender because he was being held, which with the ball in play should've been a penalty.

If he saw the elbow on VAR why did he ignore the holding onto Foster?

this, they completely over look the first offence

[Vegas Claret]

Sky were reporting it as if it touched he's hand, and was deliberate, it clearly didn't touch he's hand but there was contact further up the arm, but not enough to dictate a hand ball because it was practically under he's armpit, the forest one appears to touch the lower arm and clearly changes the direction of the ball. They just need to be consistent and stop being so biased against us, the commentary was embarrassingly biased against us tonight, just pathetic.

I was watching it on TV over here, like I said earlier I genuinely don't know if we see the same replays - that's something I questioned last time we were in the PL where there were a few things I didn't see and things you folks back home didn't.

[THEWELLERNUT70]

I take it you haven't you seen the replay mate, the ball deviates without question (I mean it's crystal clear). It's not conclusive enough to rule out a goal because you just can't accurately see where the ball hits his arm. Knob Jones

No Arm, No Foul

VAR Denies Burnley Winner At The City Ground

(backpage of The I newspaper 19/9/23 )

[Vegas Claret]

No Arm, No Foul

VAR Denies Burnley Winner At The City Ground

(backpage of The I newspaper 19/9/23 )

are you suggesting the newspaper is factual ? Good headline though

I don't think it should be ruled out, it's not clear and obvious. I expect we will get a call from Howard Webb in the morning

[distortiondave]

I'm not sure it's conspiracy or even inadequacy, I think it's mainly confusion.
Berge made a deliberate movement towards the ball to better shield the ball from an oncoming opponent.
No one could argue that he deliberately handled the ball, but neither could you argue that he didn't move an illegal part of his body towards the ball.
Both things can be true without it being an offence.
It is clearly not deliberate handball, yet he deliberately moved a part of his body that could handle the ball towards the ball, and a part of that body that could be construed as being culpable in a handball offence did in fact graze the ball, but did not alter the motion of the ball in any way, and no professional footballer within 100 yards, and none of the ~ 15,000 football fanatics who have watched Nottingham Forest for the past 150 years in that quadrant displayed anything other than dismay at their team conceding a goal. Maybe one of them, probably a bloke who always shouts 'Handball' because there's one in every ground', got it right.

But no right minded football fan rules out our second goal.

[dsr]

I'm not sure it's conspiracy or even inadequacy, I think it's mainly confusion.
Berge made a deliberate movement towards the ball to better shield the ball from an oncoming opponent.
No one could argue that he deliberately handled the ball, but neither could you argue that he didn't move an illegal part of his body towards the ball.
Both things can be true without it being an offence.
It is clearly not deliberate handball, yet he deliberately moved a part of his body that could handle the ball towards the ball, and a part of that body that could be construed as being culpable in a handball offence did in fact graze the ball, but did not alter the motion of the ball in any way, and no professional footballer within 100 yards, and none of the ~ 15,000 football fanatics who have watched Nottingham Forest for the past 150 years in that quadrant displayed anything other than dismay at their team conceding a goal. Maybe one of them, probably a bloke who always shouts 'Handball' because there's one in every ground', got it right.

But no right minded football fan rules out our second goal.

Like I said elsewhere - they need to show these things at normal speed. At normal speed, even from the camera that showed the ball touching the sleeve, it wouldn't be visible at normal speed.

I wonder if the ref and linesman will be marked down for missing such a clear and obvious error?

[distortiondave]

I'm willing to give refs the benefit of the doubt, like traffic wardens or parking peoples, they are following the laws of the game as they understand them, they might be simple, stupid even, but rarely malicious.

But away at Nottm Forest, in the 10th minute of the game, there is no way that Onana, Ederson, Allison, summon a defender, usher him away, summon him back, usher him away again, and get booked. And that would be worse than what we did which was just be disorganised. No malice in our timewasting, 10 minutes into a winnable away game.

[Taffy on the wing]

I feel sick tonight.

I’m done with it and I will welcome the chance to return to a fairer league. If VAR ends up down there I’m out altogether.

Does that mean we won't hear from you as often?

[Stockbrokerbelt]

I’ve said for a few years now the prem is bent & nothing is going to change my mind, just look at Everton’s money issue & the way the prem has tried to hide it, it’s all about the brand, too much money for the prem board & hangers on, agents & hangers on.

[ksrclaret]

Does that mean we won't hear from you as often?

[Healeywoodclaret]

The money men/corporate overlords and tinkerers have ruined our beautiful game.

It’s a conspiracy. Nothing has changed since last time we were in this league. They’d rather have the likes of Leicester than little Burnley in this league because they can make more money. Pure greed. Biased beyond belief and gives us all an idea of how tough they are going to make it for us this season.

[agreenwood]

Watched the replays.

Their goal was fine.

Foster’s red was deserved.

Foster’s goal should have stood. The decision to disallow it was an extremely harsh interpretation of the handball rule.

[ArmchairDetective]

there guy didn't handle the ball, ours did. Do you not get replays in the UK anymore ?

Vegas is right, the ball doesn't touch their player's arm for their goal.

I think the ball might lightly brush Berge's arm for ours. But it is VERY hard to know for sure. I don't think it diverts the direction of the ball. And I think it's equally as difficult to know for sure that it was deliberate. Looks to me that Berge goes to shield the ball from the defender, rather than attempting to play the ball. Certainly not clear and obvious and I don't think that is given against City, United etc. Feels very hard done by.

As for VAR attempting to find a way to rule out each and every goal just takes the fun out of the game. With this format of VAR I'd get rid.

[Tall Paul]

It’s a conspiracy. Nothing has changed since last time we were in this league. They’d rather have the likes of Leicester than little Burnley in this league because they can make more money. Pure greed. Biased beyond belief and gives us all an idea of how tough they are going to make it for us this season.

They're not very good at this conspiracy business then, given that big clubs Leicester and Leeds were relegated last season and replaced by little Burnley and Luton.

[superdimitri]

What I don't understand is why the refs are happy with the way defenders wrap their arms around attackers and tug on their shirts, but the moment a player retaliates by simply shoving them with an elbow it's a foul. Worrel is a big guy but fell down and feigned being hurt just to try and get Foster sent off. What a farce.

Foster had no idea he was going to elbow him in the middle of the chest, he didn't know exactly where he was, he wasn't even looking at the player. He was just trying to shove the guy away who was wrestling him. I hope we appeal the ban.

Also, why was it not a penalty when Al-Dakhil was tripped in their box?

What happened to a decision only being made if it was clear and obvious with Berge's supposed handball? He wasn't trying to control the ball with his hand, he was pushing his chest and shoulder forward.

Their goal wasn't handball, but why on earth is Gudmundson marking a player who gets time to hold up the ball in our box and lay it off to a teammate. He should never get that much space or time on the ball, and Hudson-Odoi should have been closed down.

[claretonthecoast1882]

There is a very fine line between being inept and being a cheat.

For anyone who watches a replay and decides that is deliberate handball they should have no involvement in professional football ever again. Be that playing, a referee or a spectator.

[tarkys_ears]

If it was a deliberate handball, by god he's got some quick reactions and skills!

[CryerBFC]

What I don't understand is why the refs are happy with the way defenders wrap their arms around attackers and tug on their shirts, but the moment a player retaliates by simply shoving them with an elbow it's a foul. Worrel is a big guy but fell down and feigned being hurt just to try and get Foster sent off. What a farce.

Foster had no idea he was going to elbow him in the middle of the chest, he didn't know exactly where he was, he wasn't even looking at the player. He was just trying to shove the guy away who was wrestling him. I hope we appeal the ban.

Also, why was it not a penalty when Al-Dakhil was tripped in their box?

What happened to a decision only being made if it was clear and obvious with Berge's supposed handball? He wasn't trying to control the ball with his hand, he was pushing his chest and shoulder forward.

Their goal wasn't handball, but why on earth is Gudmundson marking a player who gets time to hold up the ball in our box and lay it off to a teammate. He should never get that much space or time on the ball, and Hudson-Odoi should have been closed down.

Even the darkest of claret tinted glasses will struggle to agree with you on some of that

[Burnley1989]

Even the darkest of claret tinted glasses will struggle to agree with you on some of that

The Al Dakhil one is hilarious to be honest

[claretonthecoast1882]

The Al Dakhil one is hilarious to be honest

I read that and thought he was having a laugh, I have just read it again and said he isn't being serious.

He isn't is he ?

[Jakubclaret]

There is a very fine line between being inept and being a cheat.

For anyone who watches a replay and decides that is deliberate handball they should have no involvement in professional football ever again. Be that playing, a referee or a spectator.

It's irrelevant if the handball is intentional or not.

[claretonthecoast1882]

It's irrelevant if the handball is intentional or not.

In what way ?

[Jakubclaret]

In what way ?

Handball is handball - accidental or deliberate.

[claretonthecoast1882]

Handball is handball - accidental or deliberate.

Ah right ok. You are wrong (some may say no surprise) but I will leave it at that I am enjoying my coffee too much to get involved.

[Tall Paul]

lol Jakub.

The offence is deliberate handball

[claretonthecoast1882]

lol Jakub.

The offence is deliberate handball

Anyone else and I might have been surprised

[THEWELLERNUT70]

Handball is handball - accidental or deliberate.

Well it was, but isn't this season after the rules were amended in the summer

[Jakubclaret]

lol Jakub.

The offence is deliberate handball

Before posting I had a look at the rules, take away the intention it's irrelevant, we all know it wasn't deliberate that shouldn't be debatable & another day with another ref it'd slide, it's an harsh call, I listened to the game on talksport & danny Murphy made a lot of sense & I've also watched the incident.

[Jakubclaret]

Well it was, but isn't this season after the rules were amended in the summer

VAR is a load of made up nonsense I saw the Aston villa penalty award as well, the sooner you realise & accept something as bo**ocks it's less frustrating, people (officials) seem to be over analysing certain incidents & coming up with the wrong conclusions imo.

[Tall Paul]

Before posting I had a look at the rules, take away the intention it's irrelevant, we all know it wasn't deliberate that shouldn't be debatable & another day with another ref it'd slide, it's an harsh call, I listened to the game on talksport & danny Murphy made a lot of sense & I've also watched the incident.

How can intention be irrelevant? Do you know what deliberate means?

[Jakubclaret]

How can intention be irrelevant? Do you know what deliberate means?

It was deemed that the ball struck his hand, plain & simple I'm not going around in circles with it.

[claretonthecoast1882]

It was deemed that the ball struck his hand, plain & simple I'm not going around in circles with it.

I will try one last time, it was deemed deliberate handball. Had the ref decided it hadn't been deliberate the goal would have stood due to Berge not being the scorer. Now I realise your knowledge seems to come from Talksport but I imagine there are even a few who work there who know this.

[Jakubclaret]

I will try one last time, it was deemed deliberate handball. Had the ref decided it hadn't been deliberate the goal would have stood due to Berge not being the scorer. Now I realise your knowledge seems to come from Talksport but I imagine there are even a few who work there who know this.

You can persist all you like but at the end of the day handball is handball regardless of intentions or in this case accidental.

[claretonthecoast1882]

Genuinely dumb or a constant troll I honestly can't tell, either way I am done.

[groove]

The defender stitched Foster up. That little nudge to the chest wouldn't have knocked my granny over. 3 contentious VAR decisions last night, and they all went against us.

[Newcastleclaret93]

I will try one last time, it was deemed deliberate handball. Had the ref decided it hadn't been deliberate the goal would have stood due to Berge not being the scorer. Now I realise your knowledge seems to come from Talksport but I imagine there are even a few who work there who know this.

I thought the rule has changed this season to even accidental hand balls in the immediate run up to a goal will be disallowed?

[Tall Paul]

I thought the rule has changed this season to even accidental hand balls in the immediate run up to a goal will be disallowed?

No, only accidental handball by the goalscorer immediately before the goal is scored means the goal is disallowed. That change was made at least one season ago, maybe longer.

Edit: The change was made for the 21/22 season.

[Colburn_Claret]

VAR was brought in on the surmise that the refs were getting decisions wrong, because the game was too fast, and they couldn't see every angle.
All VAR has done is highlight that it wasn't because the refs couldn't see it, they are just incompetent.

The obvious tell was McKenna who had the closest view, literally 2 feet from the ball, the goalkeeper who had the next best view, neither appealed for anything. How any fair minded assistant can claim that was deliberate, I still don't think he handled it in the first place, is just cheating.
When you weigh it against the handball in their goal, which I thought was, but didn't have a problem with it being given as it had to be subjective, it just makes the feeling even worse.

[Newcastleclaret93]

No, only accidental handball by the goalscorer immediately before the goal is scored means the goal is disallowed. That change was made at least one season ago, maybe longer.

Edit: The change was made for the 21/22 season.

Got to say that’s a poor decision then

[Conroy92]

Stinks doesn't it. Bitter taste in my mouth this morning.

Something I've not seen mentioned, before Fosters "incident" he was clearly being held in the area. He only lashed out due to it. Along with giving the red card for Fosters reaction, I see no reason VAR should not equally be awarding a penalty for the infringement on Foster before it, the defender clearly has an arm round him and is holding him. I'm not sure how they can show that incident without deciding that Foster is being held in the build up. It really is a total farce VAR and about time it was abolished.

[Culmclaret]

Even some of the Forest fans were saying the same! It was clear to them that Foster was being held

[Stayingup]

VAR has brought a scourge to the game, particularly when incompetent people are operating it.

[superdimitri]

I'm not sure what's funnier. The old man missing blatant sarcasm or his complete and utter misunderstanding of the the game. Next he'll be telling us that throw ins should be taken with your feet or that their keeper illegally touched the ball with their hands in their own box. I love this forum sometimes.

[Hipper]

Not one Forest player when you watch it back appealed for handball which says it all.

This whole thread amuses me but this sort of argument tops everything.

Players appealing or not appealing says nothing. They are not to be trusted. Surely you know that?

Since when does a player appealing or not appealing have any bearing on the correctness of a decision. Players appeal for throws, corners, handballs and anything else and nine times out of then they are just trying it on. Referees can certainly not take any notice of such behaviour. It's even got to the stage that when a player drops down apparently mortally wounded or unconscious it is usually ignored because players play act. One day something serious may be missed. Players have brought this on themselves.

[quoonbeatz]

This whole thread amuses me but this sort of argument tops everything.

Players appealing or not appealing says nothing. They are not to be trusted. Surely you know that?

Since when does a player appealing or not appealing have any bearing on the correctness of a decision. Players appeal for throws, corners, handballs and anything else and nine times out of then they are just trying it on. Referees can certainly not take any notice of such behaviour. It's even got to the stage that when a player drops down apparently mortally wounded or unconscious it is usually ignored because players play act. One day something serious may be missed. Players have brought this on themselves.

Utterly dumb post is this. Yes, players appeal for absolutely everything, even when they know they are trying it on. Which makes it even more telling when they don't appeal.

[Healeywoodclaret]

They're not very good at this conspiracy business then, given that big clubs Leicester and Leeds were relegated last season and replaced by little Burnley and Luton.

Yes and if they have their way they will remedy that at the end of this season. Just out of interest…. Happy with the decisions last night?

[Healeywoodclaret]

The defender stitched Foster up. That little nudge to the chest wouldn't have knocked my granny over. 3 contentious VAR decisions last night, and they all went against us.

Agreed …. Game changing decisions