Was that a penalty.
The cheat outstretches his leg and makes a meal of it !

Gutted...

I agree .

F*****g joke. Absolutely fuming

Unfortunately it was. He went through the back of him.

He actually fouled pieters

Not seen it but in the spurs game they should’ve had a penalty and VAR didn’t give it. VAR is a joke. It’s not consistent!
Only ourselves to blame though I suppose. Don’t take your chances early on and sit on a 1 goal lead this often happens. Very cruel it happened so late but that’s life. The media will love this as wolves are the new West Ham, media darlings for some reason.

Will have to see it again. But for me, it is a case of VAR sticking with the onfield decision. Had that not have been given by the ref I am certain that VARA wouldn’t have overturned it.

Guller Bull wrote:Unfortunately it was. He went through the back of him.

Went for the ball and Jiminez manipulated his leg in the way. Never a foul. Pawson can't wait to impact a game though, he loves it.

I would have been gutted if we hadn't got that the other way round.

the Portugese diver overstretched his leg to get in front of Pierters and then went down like a sack of cement

When you see the replay, he's totally out of balance

Really disappointing ...for me Pieters had no need to be risking the pen ..just stand up behind him man !

wait whilst u see the tackle on silva in the game today that was not given by var....far far more obvious than pieters,,var will not improve game other than offsides,,

Stalbansclaret wrote:Really disappointing ...for me Pieters had no need to be risking the pen ..just stand up behind him man !

Didn't think he was doing anything more than that

Guller Bull wrote:I would have been gutted if we hadn't got that the other way round.

Well I wouldn’t, because it was never a penalty and I wouldn’t want to benefit from such a massive injustice

that was a foul on pieters not the other way around , absolute joke

Rileybobs wrote:Will have to see it again. But for me, it is a case of VAR sticking with the onfield decision. Had that not have been given by the ref I am certain that VARA wouldn’t have overturned it.

And that is exactly why it is rubbish. If he doesn’t give it, it ends up as no penalty. There was a blatant holding push in the back the other day not given. It is rubbish if they can’t actually let the bloke watching the replay make the decision. I am absolutely convinced that we would never get that decision up the other end..... absolute joke

2 players went for a ball, one of them dived and screamed - should have been sorted by VAR

We would have been up to third place...

I've seen 4 angles of it and it's a pen, I'd be furious if that wasn't given to us

Hibsclaret wrote:And that is exactly why it is rubbish. If he doesn’t give it, it ends up as no penalty. There was a blatant holding push in the back the other day not given. It is rubbish if they can’t actually let the bloke watching the replay make the decision. I am absolutely convinced that we would never get that decision up the other end..... absolute joke

No. Just.. no. VAR for decisions like that will of course take into account what the referee initially awarded. Why wouldn't they?

If they aren't sure - they roll it back to what was the referee's decision. I'm as gutted as anybody but that's totally understandable. They didn't turn the decision over because they either (a) thought it was a penalty or (b) didn't see enough to overturn what the referee saw from his angle.

Vegas Claret wrote:I've seen 4 angles of it and it's a pen, I'd be furious if that wasn't given to us

Time for a visit to spec savers then

I thought we were always harshly treated and VAR would help? Or have the unbalanced simply moved the object of their paranoia?

To me it is a penalty, but the lad plays for it by almost falling infront of Pieters as he's about to clear the ball - at speed, nothing could be done. A penalty, but cheated to get one.

FactualFrank wrote:No. Just.. no. VAR for decisions like that will of course take into account what the referee initially awarded. Why wouldn't they?

If they aren't sure - they roll it back to what was the referee's decision. I'm as gutted as anybody but that's totally understandable. They didn't turn the decision over because they either (a) thought it was a penalty or (b) didn't see enough to overturn what the referee saw from his angle.

Var is a nonsense. Uphold decisions that most people think are wrong is why it is bs

Course it was a penalty.. VAR check all angles.. it's not a inplay instant judgment decision.
Like said above if that was us, we would be fuming if it wasn't given.

VAR makes things 100% fair (wether certain rules are fair or not) but VAR follows the rule by the letter. We will get rightful decisions from VAR in the months to come.

Hibsclaret wrote:Var is a nonsense. Uphold decisions that most people think are wrong is why it is bs

They uphold decisions if they aren't convinced enough to overturn it - or agree with it.

Its a penalty if we had not had that awarded in our favour i would be livid
Pieters should just have held firm behind his man you can't do that so late in the game when all on sundry are baying for it.
If that had been the other way round in the last seconds at the Turf you would see it in truth

Hibsclaret wrote:Time for a visit to spec savers then

Original

Vegas Claret wrote:I've seen 4 angles of it and it's a pen, I'd be furious if that wasn't given to us

Sorry Vegas, have to disagree with you there.

Just look at the way Jiminez attempts to get to the ball - he basically makes a forward tackle to get to the ball, then falls on his side

If the referee waved play on, VAR would’ve ruled it as ‘No Penalty’ like the Man City one due to ‘lack of evidence’.

It’s not about making the correct decisions it’s about protecting the referees decisions.

Hibsclaret wrote:Time for a visit to spec savers then

It's actually Specsavers

VAR us only as good as the people officiating on it, it just takes 10 times as long to make the wrong decision.

Football is a victim of it's own rules and acceptance that any contact in the area is a penalty.

Yes it’s a Penalty, is what it is, the fact 99% of neutrals agree should help the bias clarets sun glasses

Wembley09 wrote:Course it was a penalty.. VAR check all angles.. it's not a inplay instant judgment decision.
Like said above if that was us, we would be fuming if it wasn't given.

VAR makes things 100% fair (wether certain rules are fair or not) but VAR follows the rule by the letter. We will get rightful decisions from VAR in the months to come.

It’s not 100% fair if an incompetent ref does not give one to us at the other end for a similar incident because if he doesn’t give the pen it wouldn’t have been overturned.

Var will only work if you go with the correct decision irrespective of what the muppet with the whistle gives

Belgianclaret wrote:Sorry Vegas, have to disagree with you there.

Just look at the way Jiminez attempts to get to the ball - he basically makes a forward tackle to get to the ball, then falls on his side

So did Pieters go down the back of his ankle ? 100% he did, completely irrelevant if Jiminez played for it or not, you see free kicks all over the pitch when a player is late on an opponent and there was no difference. Undeserved but still a good point for us

FactualFrank wrote:It's actually Specsavers

Can you spell that in capital letters please?

Difficulty in reading that

Just you wait until Match of the Day give their 17 seconds thoughts on it. Then you'll be sorry.

Burnley1989 wrote:Yes it’s a Penalty, is what it is, the fact 99% of neutrals agree should help the bias clarets sun glasses

I agree it was a penalty, but let me know where you've pulled that gem of a stat' from!

Belgianclaret wrote:Can you spell that in capital letters please?

Difficulty in reading that

Wait until next year - everything will become much more clear.

Vegas Claret wrote:So did Pieters go down the back of his ankle ? 100% he did, completely irrelevant if Jiminez played for it or not, you see free kicks all over the pitch when a player is late on an opponent and there was no difference. Undeserved but still a good point for us

The position of his body at the time he puts his foot in says it all for me.

Nothing to do about it though, good point indeed but all three would have been terrific !

The referee didn't wave play on though, even without VAR that would have been a penalty.
At least we get the opportunity to check his decision was correct via VAR now.

Regardless of wether VAR is is there or not today, I think he would have given that pen.

If only we had VAR some 14 years ago, when at Deepdale.. the ball went out of play... our player never even touched him (and it was out of play) and the pen was awarded to give PNE a 1-0 win over us. At least things like that have been removed with VAR.. if only at PL level for now.

Bigger gripe than it being a penalty or not was how the **** there was 5min added time. Gutted but first half was fantastic and if we play like that we will be fine this season!

I want to see that again, but for me that wasn't a penalty, and the addition of another minute after the five was up was poor too.

great barnes goal , chances spurned as well as hitting the woodwork, and 2 points lost after what seemed like an eternity.
Good battling away performance though, well done clarets.

CharlieinNewMexico wrote: manipulated his leg in the way.

But that’s what they do. Draw contact go down, fk or pen. This is exactly what Zaha does. Runs like Bambi on ice and draws pens all the time.

Wembley09 wrote:The referee didn't wave play on though, even without VAR that would have been a penalty.
At least we get the opportunity to check his decision was correct via VAR now.

Regardless of wether VAR is is there or not today, I think he would have given that pen.

I’m not arguing if it was a penalty or not, it was, it was soft but it was... all I’m saying is that if ref gave the gave the penalty appeal for Manchester City, VAR wouldn’t overrule it.

So which is the correct decision? Have you seen that one on Harry Kane today? That was more clear than the one against us yet that wasn’t given after review... but I suspect it would if the ref had given it.

We have created a monster with VAR, there’s no turning back now though

claptrappers_union wrote:If the referee waved play on, VAR would’ve ruled it as ‘No Penalty’ like the Man City one due to ‘lack of evidence’.

It’s not about making the correct decisions it’s about protecting the referees decisions.

VAR would never have even reviewed it without Pawsons insanity’s

FCBurnley wrote:VAR would never have even reviewed it without Pawsons insanity’s

Yes it would, that's how VAR works

VAR = Very Annoying Referee...

claptrappers_union wrote:I’m not arguing if it was a penalty or not, it was, it was soft but it was... all I’m saying is that if ref gave the gave the penalty appeal for Manchester City, VAR wouldn’t overrule it.

So which is the correct decision? Have you seen that one on Harry Kane today? That was more clear than the one against us yet that wasn’t given after review... but I suspect it would if the ref had given it.

We have created a monster with VAR, there’s no turning back now though

No not seen it yet, I get what you mean. There was also an incident last week where there was a clear and obvious foul from a corner but the ref missed it.

Apparently VAR can only get involved if the referee as seen/or thinks he's missed something.. otherwise they can't say anything. Which is abit daft, cause what about the stuff he didn't see, nevermind thinks he didn't see. Neville and Carragher got into a debate about this last week, saying should the var just ref the game and the person at the game just carry a whistle and listen to his ear piece.

Yeah I agree it seems like a monster (in terms of how decisions are given/reviewed) but it's very very early. Like the first season in the PL and it's used different to the others that were already around.. so teething problems. As much as I hate the delay, removing goals etc.. I think it's for the better. Example, if the shoe was on the other foot today. We would be telling Wolves fans it was a pen, and it's all part of the game to go down in the box upon contact etc.