Spurs v Chelsea

[Marney&Mee]

Romero penalty isn't even a foul.

I’m with you QB. It’s a funny one tho as he wins the ball first. The follow thru is unacceptable. My immediate thought was red card but no penalty! Bit like Ben mee v villa and barnes at Chelsea

[ClaretTony]

3-1 and just after Son missed a chance

[IanMcL]

Tremendous effort by the nine!.

[ClaretTony]

4-1 and it really doesn’t reflect the Spurs performance

[Rileybobs]

Spurs absolutely battered. Embarrassing.

[kentonclaret]

When Son swept the ball into the Chelsea net following a flowing Spurs move you would never have imagined the drama to follow. Disallowed goals, sendings off and Chelsea running out 1-4 winners.

[IanMcL]

Spurs absolutely battered. Embarrassing.

Hardly! They scored (offside), had chances keeper saved and all with 9.

[beddie]

What a brilliant game to watch, it had everything.

[Ampth7]

What a mental game of football that was!! Really enjoyable game to watch.
Such a shame that the s**tshow that is VAR tried its best to ruin it. I don’t understand why it takes them so long to draw a bloody line to check if it’s offside or not!!!

[elwaclaret]

What a brilliant game to watch, it had everything.

Not for me, a great effort by Spurs but the officials decided the game in the first half. The result reflects the actions of the officials not the effort of the Spurs team.

[Lowbankclaret]

He’s followed through. Red for me.

So your thoughts on the Trafford tackle, Palace player didn’t get the ball and hit him studs up. Should have been a red for me,

[ClaretTony]

So your thoughts on the Trafford tackle, Palace player didn’t get the ball and hit him studs up. Should have been a red for me,

I'd take a look at my report

[Lowbankclaret]

I'd take a look at my report

Apologies, I will read it.

[Lowbankclaret]

I'd take a look at my report

Think you were restrained in your words.

[Vegas Claret]

Postecoglu's after match interview compared to Arteta, top class

[Florian]

Mental game

[FCBurnley]

Great game for the neutrals. 52 home games without defeat before tonight for the Aussie. Just marginally better than us !!!!

[n_ero]

Not for me, a great effort by Spurs but the officials decided the game in the first half. The result reflects the actions of the officials not the effort of the Spurs team.

Lol, sorry but there's no way in hell anybody actually believes that. The result reflects the actions of two sp*rs players who lost their heads. If i was the rest of the squad, I'd be fuming at them. Yes, great effort from the 9 (or 3 and subs as it became), but they got a bit too excited thinking they could beat Chelsea at home for only the fifth time in 31 years, maybe plus a mickey mouse cup win. Hopefully this is the start of their season going a bit Spursy.

[THEWELLERNUT70]

I've said it for years on here that Oliver is absolutely dreadful but because he had a good season about 12 years ago he more often than not gets a free pass when , whether he's on VAR duties or actually reffing a match not a round of games goes by without him causing a stink

Probably the most overrated ref in PL history, he is absolutely Dogsh!t imo

[Taffy on the wing]

What a mental game of football that was!! Really enjoyable game to watch.
Such a shame that the s**tshow that is VAR tried its best to ruin it. I don’t understand why it takes them so long to draw a bloody line to check if it’s offside or not!!!

It'll end up like American football with lines drawn all over the pitch!

For the life of me i don't know why they don't adopt the Rugby Union time-clock & then have the challenges ...like Cricket...2 per team..per half. At least then we'd have a semblance of the game we loved!
VAR is a travesty currently.

[Lord_Bob]

Agree Taffy.

I keep banging this drum, let the managers use VAR, not the officials. Let the officials officiate the game.

If the manager thinks the official has missed something, then challenge and use VAR to help make the decision. As in the NFL, it may be necessary to limit what can and cannot be challenged, but I think if you put it in the hands of the manager, it's only the really egregious decisions that are going to get challenged and the game will "flow" as it used to.

[Hipper]

Agree Taffy.

I keep banging this drum, let the managers use VAR, not the officials. Let the officials officiate the game.

If the manager thinks the official has missed something, then challenge and use VAR to help make the decision. As in the NFL, it may be necessary to limit what can and cannot be challenged, but I think if you put it in the hands of the manager, it's only the really egregious decisions that are going to get challenged and the game will "flow" as it used to.

I hope you are joking. Managers will use it like they use everything else, to try and win the game, either by time wasting, stopping the flow of the game etc.. You have to assume that, like players, they will cheat as often as they can to gain an advantage.

Just look at the farce with injuries. Some injuries are actually real but most are play acting. In the last few seasons with the greater awareness of head injuries the feigned head injury has become more common, forcing the ref to stop the game. One day a ref won't do this and a player will be seriously incapacitated as a result. The reason players have to go off after an injury is because of this abuse to waste time.

[quoonbeatz]

I hope you are joking. Managers will use it like they use everything else, to try and win the game, either by time wasting, stopping the flow of the game etc.. You have to assume that, like players, they will cheat as often as they can to gain an advantage.

Not if you limit how many times they can use it, like in cricket. Two reviews a game is enough.

Better still scrap the whole thing. It doesn't work now and isn't going to work in future because the people making decisions don't understand the game. The ones in an office miles away have even less of an understanding than those on the pitch.

[Rileybobs]

The problem I have with manager reviews is that say for example it is two reviews per game, managers will just use the review for the first two goals they concede hoping for any infraction that could cause the goal to be ruled out. If anything this would further advantage the bigger teams who concede less goals and therefore have more challenges remaining for spurious incidents or to use tactically to affect the flow of the game. And what happens if the review is upheld, does the team keep that challenge like in cricket? It would seem unfair if not, but if they did then my first point is only reinforced.

[daveisaclaret]

Crazy if your takeaway from that game is to moan about VAR. One of the most entertaining matches I've ever seen. Try and enjoy the sport lads.

[quoonbeatz]

They're already reviewing every goal anyway though, so I doubt there would be much difference there. Really the biggest issue with var in football, and the reason why it can never truly work, is that football is not like cricket and rugby, for example, which are stop start and are really a series of individual events. Football is a free flowing game where everything that happens affects what happens next. A ball going out of play, a throw in given the wrong way, a corner instead of a goal kick - no matter how small the decision, it can have a huge effect on the outcome of the game. That's why we should either review everything or nothing. I vote nothing.

[Scampi]

Manager review. 3 per season in the league, one in each of the cups. Then you really do get only the most egergious errors caught and for everyhting else we can just to go back to playing and watching football.

[Scampi]

And manager has to state what they think the error was and it is only that, and nothing else, that gets checked

[Rick_Muller]

Crazy if your takeaway from that game is to moan about VAR. One of the most entertaining matches I've ever seen. Try and enjoy the sport lads.

yes, exciting watching at home with the insight to whether it's gone to VAR almost instantly and commentators telling us what they can see on the VAR screens etc, so for the millions watching on TV yes, granted quite exciting.

For those 60k in the ground for what was close to 20 minutes of their lives actually at the event they paid to watch live, they're just unfortunate bystanders in the whole process who aren't informed straight away, and yes it is irritating while you're there watching live.

[dougcollins]

The tendon/muscular injury to the Spurs CB could easily have been caused by standing around in the cold waiting for a VAR decision. I wouldn't be surprised if teams start bringing cones out.

[jrgbfc]

Crazy if your takeaway from that game is to moan about VAR. One of the most entertaining matches I've ever seen. Try and enjoy the sport lads.

Don't know, the first half just felt like one long VAR check.