Leicester looking really good....

...Southampton looking really bad.

“Sean Dive”

Loyalclaret wrote:“Sean Dive”

I don't agree with them, I think he went down looking for it. At 4-0.

Jermaine Genius thinks the dive by Hudson-Odoi did not deserve a yellow card. I feel like rubbing his face on a cheese grater

I'm sure I saw Erik Pieters in Southampton's back line

Jenas (and Keown) thinks it shouldn't have been a yellow on the diver as he was pushed, what a load of rubbish.

Thought it odd that they deemed Keane’s accidental clip of the Brighton players foot picked up by VAR as harsh, ‘if you’re going to give penalties for those .....’, the week after deeming the accidental clip on the foot of Wood on Evans picked up by VAR as the correct decision.

Claret wrote:Jermaine Genius thinks the dive by Hudson-Odoi did not deserve a yellow card. I feel like rubbing his face on a cheese grater

He mentions that he was pushed in the back which takes him down. Lineker to be fair seems to suggest it was a dive, but Jenas doesn't see the totally unnatural drop to the floor like a hotpot.

beddie wrote:Jenas (and Keown) thinks it shouldn't have been a yellow on the diver as he was pushed, what a load of rubbish.

I think what they meant to say is that it shouldn’t have been a yellow as it’s a young English player playing for Chelsea.

martin_p wrote:Thought it odd that they deemed Keane’s accidental clip of the Brighton players foot picked up by VAR as harsh, ‘if you’re going to give penalties for those .....’, the week after deeming the accidental clip on the foot of Wood on Evans picked up by VAR as the correct decision.

Different summarisers with differing opinions


Which is what’s wrong with using VAR

martin_p wrote:Thought it odd that they deemed Keane’s accidental clip of the Brighton players foot picked up by VAR as harsh, ‘if you’re going to give penalties for those .....’, the week after deeming the accidental clip on the foot of Wood on Evans picked up by VAR as the correct decision.

Stuart Pearce thought the goal with Evans-Wood was ruled out incorrectly, but Pearce does seem to talk quite a lot of sense so it was no surprise that he was correct.

beddie wrote:Jenas (and Keown) thinks it shouldn't have been a yellow on the diver as he was pushed, what a load of rubbish.

They are correct...

Another VAR nonsense for me. Ref says pen for contact. VAR says there was no contact so has to be dive and yellow.

The only explanation can be:

VAR asks ref what have you seen - Ref says he saw a Tarky trip. VAR definitely no Tarky contact therefore yellow and dive, no pen.

However, when viewing the incident the VAR can surely see the push but obviously the ref has not seen this. Is this at the threshold for the decision of the ref not seeing the push to be given as a pen....? This is probably not at the threshold to overturn but the incident is a good example of where you could get a pen for one thing, have it overturned and then re given for something else. Absolute shambles it is and will continue to be....

martin_p wrote:Thought it odd that they deemed Keane’s accidental clip of the Brighton players foot picked up by VAR as harsh, ‘if you’re going to give penalties for those .....’, the week after deeming the accidental clip on the foot of Wood on Evans picked up by VAR as the correct decision.

Pretty sure that, although they did say it was the correct decision, they also said it was harsh to disallow the goal.

martin_p wrote:Thought it odd that they deemed Keane’s accidental clip of the Brighton players foot picked up by VAR as harsh, ‘if you’re going to give penalties for those .....’, the week after deeming the accidental clip on the foot of Wood on Evans picked up by VAR as the correct decision.

So did I initially, but then in some ways it was entirely predictable, because we’re Burnley and they’re Everton.

Given Lineker said, "We got away with one" regarding the Wood decision, the bleating of our fans just sounds like the usual fact-free chip-on-the-shoulder stuff.

thatdberight wrote:Given Lineker said, "We got away with one" regarding the Wood decision, the bleating of our fans just sounds like the usual fact-free chip-on-the-shoulder stuff.

He certainly didn’t say that on MOTD. In fact he said ‘if it was the other way you’d definitely want a penalty’.

Loyalclaret wrote:“Sean Dive”

Supercilious two-hat !!!

These are the same pundits who believe that

"He felt a touch, he has a RIGHT to go down!"

**** Off! YOU are the problem!!!

Where's that cheese grater?!

Hibsclaret wrote:They are correct...

Another VAR nonsense for me. Ref says pen for contact. VAR says there was no contact so has to be dive and yellow.

The only explanation can be:

VAR asks ref what have you seen - Ref says he saw a Tarky trip. VAR definitely no Tarky contact therefore yellow and dive, no pen.

However, when viewing the incident the VAR can surely see the push but obviously the ref has not seen this. Is this at the threshold for the decision of the ref not seeing the push to be given as a pen....? This is probably not at the threshold to overturn but the incident is a good example of where you could get a pen for one thing, have it overturned and then re given for something else. Absolute shambles it is and will continue to be....

I agree. The push, when you see it, is pretty blatant and a clear penalty.

Hipper wrote:I agree. The push, when you see it, is pretty blatant and a clear penalty.

The lad was already diving when Lowton puts a hand on him. He's got both feet off the floor when the "contact" occurs. And I'm not sure it is a push. Still amazed that it got overturned. Probably because it was 4-0.

As for Lampard laughing afterward. Sickening, utterly sickening. If I'd have been his manager I would have dragged the cheating scrote off and played with 10.

Hipper wrote:I agree. The push, when you see it, is pretty blatant and a clear penalty.

That’s the problem though. Is it at the threshold we keep hearing about. I think it would have been a soft one (actually don’t agree that it should be a pen) but the VAR appears to be only acting on what the refs decision is which is a nonsense because we want the right decisions not the approval/disapproval of what the ref has or has’nt seen. Also, what if the ref looks at the monitor on that one. He’ll realise straight away that there is no contact with Tarky and see the nudge that he has missed and probably stick with his pen decision...

Either way we are going to be getting different decisions based on how the ref and var refs review the evidences...which defeats the object

We'll end up with a no contact sport at this rate, like basketball. Can only imagine what's going through the minds of some of the 60's and 70's defenders.

Lol @ 'push.

Lineker has accelerated to the top of the prick list.
Not just for his blue tainted specs, but he's growing into a cameo of his own worst traits, a muppet caricature of himself, on everything. If that was a push by Lowts then there would be about 20 penalties every game. Its not just that he never pushed him hard enough to knock over, even if H-O was stood still, but when you are running away from the man behind you the force needed to knock you forward would be clear from Gawthorpe. He's a tit of the highest order. I was flicking the channel last Saturday when Wood equalised, all the pundits on Sky said it was a goal, all the pundits on the BBC said it was a goal. Lineker says it was a foul, and Shearer and the other muppet just grunted, they didn't say they agreed with him, more they were frightened of disagreeing with him.
I had a great view of yesterday, and I was screaming for VAR, because from where I sat the dive was obvious, I'm just amazed that the ref in the studio had the guts to overturn it for a change.

If it had been 1 nil to Burnley or 1 - 1 then 100% a pen would of been given

Lowton’s ‘push’ is nothing compared to what happens at every corner on every match. The push certainly isn’t enough to warrant his fall, a frail old lady wouldn’t even notice it. His fall is simulation- for which he was rightly booked

Cheeky little push by Lowts, with the ref behind him. Can't see, can't give. Moving at pace, feels a hand in his back, sees Tarks with his leg out and goes down before he reaches Tarks. Tarks then complicates it all by taking his leg away. Very clever and makes Hudson Odoi look suspect. No penalty from a defender's point of view, but a pen from an attacker's.

Darnhill Claret wrote:Cheeky little push by Lowts, with the ref behind him. Can't see, can't give. Moving at pace, feels a hand in his back, sees Tarks with his leg out and goes down before he reaches Tarks. Tarks then complicates it all by taking his leg away. Very clever and makes Hudson Odoi look suspect. No penalty from a defender's point of view, but a pen from an attacker's.

But he wasn’t pushed. HE DIVED

Why do i sense VAR will dominate MOTD2 tonight

Claret wrote:But he wasn’t pushed. HE DIVED

That's what I saw. The way he fell was totally unnatural. If he was pushed - still unnatural.

tiger76 wrote:Why do i sense VAR will dominate MOTD2 tonight

This is what the modern fan craves! The game doesn't matter any more, it is the media-driven controversy which is important.

At the top level we now have 6 officials looking after a game that, on a Sunday morning, is refereed by one official who is trying to make sense of what he sees whilst trying to control 22+ players who may or may not be fuelled with all sorts of substances from the previous night.

Meanwhile, fans are criticising onfield officials for making mistakes when making a split second decision with one instant view and the media just love it.
HIghlight of the day today was Souness and Keane talking about the dismissal of Longstaff at Newcastle. Neither of those two would last 5 minutes in today's game with its interpretation of "reckless", "dangerous to an opponent", "using unnecessary force" etc., etc.

tiger76 wrote:Why do i sense VAR will dominate MOTD2 tonight

It’s quite funny how it’s exposing just how bad the referees are.

Bordeauxclaret wrote:It’s quite funny how it’s exposing just how bad the referees are.

As I have said before, the answer is that they should get rid of the onfield officials and do everything on a screen.
The fans would then be happy that everything is 100% correct and no arguments would ensue because it would just be two officials who were making the call, if they operate it as they are now and they coudln't possibly be wrong because they are using technology.
FIFA are working on getting rid of the ARs in the future so they are obviously thinking along the lines that the game does not need onfield officials.

Perhaps MOTD will then concentrate on the games rather than have lots of punditry, in fact, they could get rid of the pundits and save lots of money.

SalisburyClaret wrote:Lowton’s ‘push’ is nothing compared to what happens at every corner on every match. The push certainly isn’t enough to warrant his fall, a frail old lady wouldn’t even notice it. His fall is simulation- for which he was rightly booked

I don't disagree. By the same token Brighton's Connolly should have been booked for exaggerating the impact of Keane standing on his foot.

VAR has seen context removed from refereeing decisions. They look at a freeze frame moment in time and judge based on imagined force/impact/effect. The common sense view on Wood on Evans was that the ball was going in no matter if there was accidental contact. The common sense view on Keane on Connolly was that the ball was going out of play no matter if there was accidental contact. A referee sets the tone of what is acceptable in the context of a game and, as far as I'm concerned, there is room for common sense within that.

On a slightly different note, I liked the ref in the Swansea vs Cardiff game earlier today. He raced over to get his body in between opposing players and gave the Swansea player a shove in the process. How long before he is being sued for laying hands on a player?

VAR can add value on more objective areas such as offsides but the current application is damaging to the game. Fans have always forgiven refs for mistakes on the basis that they have one look at an incident and a potentially obscured view. However, the trust goes when the VAR officials make baffling decisions based on the same information that we see. Perhaps it is holding a magnifying glass to very different and inconsistent interpretations by officials but, whilst this remains the case, it is more damaging than it is helpful to inflict multiple officials and their opinions on a single game. It results in incoherent decisions and very confused, and increasingly angry, fans.

I would like to suspend VAR with immediate effect and prevent the award of a free kick or penalty if the referee deems there to be any exaggeration of contact. Since when has it become acceptable to 'feel contact and go down'? You go down because you cannot stand up, not to catch the referee's eye. Yes that is subjective in itself but who has ever claimed that officiating a football match could be stripped of subjectivity or opinion?

UTC!

Excellent post Duffer!!

'Ian Wright Wright Wright' and 'Peter hows the weather up there Crouch' are the pundits tonight,is this the 1st time 2 ex-clarets have had such an honour?.

tiger76 wrote:'Ian Wright Wright Wright' and 'Peter hows the weather up there Crouch' are the pundits tonight,is this the 1st time 2 ex-clarets have had such an honour?.

I reckon Peter is the one most likely to admit they played for us

Yep! probably true,i've never understood what Wrighty's gripe is or was with his time at Burnley,i know he didn't play week in,week out,but i'm pretty sure that was also the case during his spell at Celtic,i think we all accept that Stan is an abrasive character,so whether there was a clash of personalities who knows.

tiger76 wrote:'Ian Wright Wright Wright' and 'Peter hows the weather up there Crouch' are the pundits tonight,is this the 1st time 2 ex-clarets have had such an honour?.

You must’ve missed it the week they had Peter Mumby and Les Thompson.

tiger76 wrote:Yep! probably true,i've never understood what Wrighty's gripe is or was with his time at Burnley,i know he didn't play week in,week out,but i'm pretty sure that was also the case during his spell at Celtic,i think we all accept that Stan is an abrasive character,so whether there was a clash of personalities who knows.

I don't think Ian Wright has any gripe with Burnley, in fact he enjoyed it here at the end of his playing career. He was very pleased that he'd ended with a promotion, and he got on very well with Stan Ternent.

Stan tried to persuade him to stay on for another season, but he'd decided to concentrate on his media career.

He has no issues with Burnley at all.

Where have I got this from? His 2016 autobiography, which I've just finished reading.

lakedistrictclaret wrote:I don't think Ian Wright has any gripe with Burnley, in fact he enjoyed it here at the end of his playing career. He was very pleased that he'd ended with a promotion, and he got on very well with Stan Ternent.

Stan tried to persuade him to stay on for another season, but he'd decided to concentrate on his medua career.

He has no issues with Burnley at all.

Where have I got this from? His 2016 autobiography, which I've just finished reading.

Fair enough in that case,plenty of posters on this forum seem to take umbrage over his attitude,as far as i'm concerned he played a small but important role in our history,without his late goals we would have faced the lottery of the play-offs and not been automatically promoted,that was nearly 20 years ago and we've occupied the top 2 tiers ever since,and all being well we'll at worst drop to the Championship,and never again experience the dark days of the 80's/90's,nothing is certain in football but our solid set-up should allow us to sustain a decent level for the foreseeable future.

Wright is a p*** poor , inarticulate pundit, he is disinterested in small clubs struggling to survive, he said as much on his radio 5 slot.
His course is to espouse black players, specifically London based.
His apathy on a prime football programme is insulting and useless. He has nothing in his bank apart from schoolboy giggling with the equally puerile cohort shearer.

Man U get 2 pens and the analysis is let’s not talk about VAR on that one......

The first one is never a pen in a million years...the second one well let’s just see if we get a similar one to that....