Fair play Antonio.

He said he’s stopped celebrating because of VAR and doesn’t want to look stupid by running off going mad, and says VAR has killed it.

Spot on.

Came across really well

But how many like it when it saves our sides?

It’s here to stay but needs to be utilised better.

how about the tackle when their lad left the ground? no way was he in control of that challenge with studs showing, JBG bricked it.

diamondpocket wrote: ↑

Mon May 03, 2021 10:41 pm

how about the tackle when their lad left the ground? no way was he in control of that challenge with studs showing, JBG bricked it.

We commit 4 fouls all night and receive 2 cautions, one of them being Joey who was very lucky not to be injured in the studs up challenge on him earlier. No caution, not even spoken to and then, withon 5 minutes he cautions 2 Burnley players for nothing challenges and Dawson for time wasting.
The game is finished as far as I am concerned because there was no logic at all in letting that studs up challenge go.

I don't know what was said because I watch with the sound off, however, I was amazed that there was no card for that challenge in the modern game!

Ashingtonclaret46 wrote: ↑

Mon May 03, 2021 10:47 pm

We commit 4 fouls all night and receive 2 cautions, one of them being Joey who was very lucky not to be injured in the studs up challenge on him earlier. No caution, not even spoken to and then, withon 5 minutes he cautions 2 Burnley players for nothing challenges and Dawson for time wasting.
The game is finished as far as I am concerned because there was no logic at all in letting that studs up challenge go.

I don't know what was said because I watch with the sound off, however, I was amazed that there was no card for that challenge in the modern game!

no malice was the general consensus but that's just commentator diplomacy and not wanting to bring up any controversy. It was dangerous and should have been a yellow at least. I suspect if there had been some player injury or scream it might have been looked at.

bf2k wrote: ↑

Mon May 03, 2021 10:32 pm

But how many like it when it saves our sides?

It’s here to stay but needs to be utilised better.

Not me. Was actually really ****** off when villas goal was disallowed when grealish heal was offside. Ruined the game.

Ashingtonclaret46 wrote: ↑

Mon May 03, 2021 10:47 pm

We commit 4 fouls all night and receive 2 cautions, one of them being Joey who was very lucky not to be injured in the studs up challenge on him earlier. No caution, not even spoken to and then, withon 5 minutes he cautions 2 Burnley players for nothing challenges and Dawson for time wasting.
The game is finished as far as I am concerned because there was no logic at all in letting that studs up challenge go.

I don't know what was said because I watch with the sound off, however, I was amazed that there was no card for that challenge in the modern game!

VAR looked at the challenge you refer to but didn't deem it a red and Taylor had given nothing. I've no argument with the Mee card but JBG's wasn't a yellow.

Ashingtonclaret46 wrote: ↑

Mon May 03, 2021 10:47 pm

We commit 4 fouls all night and receive 2 cautions, one of them being Joey who was very lucky not to be injured in the studs up challenge on him earlier. No caution, not even spoken to and then, withon 5 minutes he cautions 2 Burnley players for nothing challenges and Dawson for time wasting.
The game is finished as far as I am concerned because there was no logic at all in letting that studs up challenge go.

I don't know what was said because I watch with the sound off, however, I was amazed that there was no card for that challenge in the modern game!

Saw that studs up 'challenge' pretty much the same, Ash.
Playing in my day could have seen a booking. The Powers that Shouldn't Be seem to have put a protective screen around the onfield refs recently.
Interpretation several times in the Prem seems to have little to do with what VAR originally intended as much as not making their colleagues on the pitch looking like total tits.

Ashingtonclaret46 wrote: ↑

Mon May 03, 2021 10:47 pm

We commit 4 fouls all night and receive 2 cautions, one of them being Joey who was very lucky not to be injured in the studs up challenge on him earlier. No caution, not even spoken to and then, withon 5 minutes he cautions 2 Burnley players for nothing challenges and Dawson for time wasting.
The game is finished as far as I am concerned because there was no logic at all in letting that studs up challenge go.

I don't know what was said because I watch with the sound off, however, I was amazed that there was no card for that challenge in the modern game!

Good shout to miss the commentary. Totally biased. When Coufal gave away a needless corner Crocker (sh*t) said "that could be costly". Hendrie replied "hope not". Great impartiality !

diamondpocket wrote: ↑

Mon May 03, 2021 10:41 pm

how about the tackle when their lad left the ground? no way was he in control of that challenge with studs showing, JBG bricked it.

If JBG hadn't seen it coming and jumped out of the way, it would have been a certain red. Probably if he had been slightly touched and gone down screaming like a baby, it would have been a red. Because he jumped out of the way, that downgraded it to a yellow. (But because the referee wasn't looking at the play, it was ignored.)

diamondpocket wrote: ↑

Mon May 03, 2021 10:41 pm

how about the tackle when their lad left the ground? no way was he in control of that challenge with studs showing, JBG bricked it.

I was surprised there was no mention of var looking at it, unless I missed it.

I really do not see where Sky see a pundit in Henry. He is inarticulate often putting the words of a simple sentence in the wrong order and offers no insight to the game. The bloke even sounds dim.

Is Henry the same Henry who was an out-and-out thug as a player?

dougcollins wrote: ↑

Tue May 04, 2021 8:57 pm

Is Henry the same Henry who was an out-and-out thug as a player?

Henry was a brilliant striker for arsenal
Hendrie was a player for villa, and Co comentator last night

The player I have in mind is neither of those.

Hilarious decision making again tonight.

Well there’s one thing. They cancelled themselves out.

But how their keeper doesn’t go for the handball or the foul is hilarious.

No possible reason in this or any other universe why that wasn't a sending off.

"VAR acknowledges it was a handball but it didn’t deem it to be a denial of a goalscoring opportunity because of the presence of a covering defender so didn’t recommend a red card.

"VAR does not intervene to recommend a booking as that’s not part of their remit."

The defender was on his arse.

You know when they say "you couldn't make it up" well Peter Banks did tonight, it's beyond farcical.

Regardless of the obstruction it was also deliberate handball.

Embarrassing that they just make stuff up.

brought in to clear up human error, but assessed by humans, daft, I call it.

I had to witness Brian Jensen get sent off and watch John Spicer in goal for 70 minutes at Luton for being a yard out of his box but that’s not a red. What is VAR there for?

CombatClaret wrote: ↑

Mon May 10, 2021 9:53 pm

"VAR acknowledges it was a handball but it didn’t deem it to be a denial of a goalscoring opportunity because of the presence of a covering defender so didn’t recommend a red card.

"VAR does not intervene to recommend a booking as that’s not part of their remit."

I think they changed the rules about keepers handballing outside the area, I'm pretty sure a ''deliberate'' handball outside of the area was always a red card, I don't think it is anymore. I wonder how Brian Jensen running out of his area and picking the ball up at Luton would be reffed these days, the rules are a farce, the referees are weak and the game in general is ruined.

VAR is not the problem. The muppets looking at the replays are the problem!

Taylor - penalty. Went through the Fulham player
Their keeper - sending off. Moved his hand to the ball

What is the point of VAR? Seriously both decisions are mistakes from the ref and should have been overturned.

the defender could cover? he was literally on his arse, even if he wasn't, it was still a ''clear goalscoring opportunity''.

The game atm is terrible, I don't even think that should be handball, headed at him from centimeters away, they use the term ''deliberate handball'' yet constantly give decisions where it's clearly not deliberate. Which rules are we working by? different rules for different referees.

Of course that was deliberate, the keeper came out and spread himself, he may as well have dived at the ball!

If it was a defender making the same challenge as the goalkeeper then you could maybe accept the argument that it wasn’t a clear goalscoring opportunity. But I would suggest that having possession of the ball with nothing between yourself and an open goal is the very definition of a clear goalscoring opportunity. Crazy stuff - but not in the least bit surprising to see the keeper stay on the pitch.

Rileybobs wrote: ↑

Mon May 10, 2021 11:32 pm

If it was a defender making the same challenge as the goalkeeper then you could maybe accept the argument that it wasn’t a clear goalscoring opportunity. But I would suggest that having possession of the ball with nothing between yourself and an open goal is the very definition of a clear goalscoring opportunity. Crazy stuff - but not in the least bit surprising to see the keeper stay on the pitch.

I wasn’t surprised either, I was fecking amazed! Incredible decision, if we weren’t two up I wouldn’t have laughed at it!!

Isn’t refs using VAR just to back up the on field official mates by purposely ignoring things and making the rules up as they go along not a form of match fixing?
Also what happened to using the pitch side monitors? This is fast becoming a scandal. It reeks.

I would love to know how the recovering defender who was on the floor would have fairly stopped Vydra from scoring. You can smell the stench coming from stockley park for hundreds of miles.

If a players is fouled by a defender when he would otherwise be through one-on-one with the keeper, that is deemed a clear goal scoring opportunity and the defender would be sent off.

So, even if you ignore the fact that, in this case, the defender was flat on his back, why is it deemed not a clear goal scoring when all that stands between you and the goal is a player who can’t even use is hands?

I mean, surely it’s easier to score one-on-one with against a defender than against a goalkeeper?

The real problem is the TV ref not wanting to make a different or controversial game changing decision especially if it doesn’t concur with his mate on the pitch.
Next step must be an independent panel at Shockley Park made up of ex footballers who can’t ref a game for a team they’ve played for.
At the moment there’s too much finding excuses or justification for bad decisions

I think it's about time that we got the football equivalent of AC-12 on the job at Stockley Park and that reports about the referee's decisions are open for scrutiny.
Then we could learn about the (asses) apologies "the wee little donkeys " in charge of VAR decision making !!!!!!!!

Awful use of VAR yet again. I too thought it was a penalty for the Taylor tackle. He touched the ball but took so much of the man that we are now told that is a foul?!

The 'keeper incident is even worse. He spread himself as he would if it was a one on one in the box. It was deliberate. It stopped Vydra passing him. He knew exactly what he was doing - his 'keeper instinct dictated that. The most infuriating part of the farce is, after 20 minutes, Stockly Park finally dream up the "defender was covering so couldn't be a red" to back their useless decision. The defender is sat on his ass and would never be anywhere near Vyds. It's just embarrassing from the ref's "team" and stinks of corruption to ensure they and their mates are never wrong. This isn't just because it went against us as we have also benefitted from VAR incompetence but it undermines the whole use of VAR due to the clowns running it.

KRBFC wrote: ↑

Mon May 10, 2021 10:28 pm

the defender could cover? he was literally on his arse, even if he wasn't, it was still a ''clear goalscoring opportunity''.

The game atm is terrible, I don't even think that should be handball, headed at him from centimeters away, they use the term ''deliberate handball'' yet constantly give decisions where it's clearly not deliberate. Which rules are we working by? different rules for different referees.

Subjective isn’t it. Everyone loves it when a ref ‘lets it play.’ A different ref could blow for every niggle. However they interpret it they are the ref and that, my son, is that.

They need some kind of independent input with the VAR. Ex players like ex drivers do in motor racing.

At the moment it's just the old boys sticking up for each other and using past moments/appeals to make decisions that should be independent.

It's still a positive thing in my opinion. I don't personally think the it wrecks celebration and I enjoy the drama it brings. I think it gets flack for being new when really it's the way it's run (and who it's won by) thats the issue.

Defender on deck.
Keeper handball.
Keeper stops Vydra.

Must be Christmas in Fulham.

I think VAR should be manned by AI.

I really mean ex players, they are artificially intelligent.

If the Taylor penalty incident hadn’t happened just before they would have sent the keeper off there I am sure of it.

It’s not just VAR itself, it’s refs bottling decisions in the knowledge that VAR will review.

The handball by the keeper looked a handball in real time, so even if you buy the covering defender argument, it’s a freekick and yellow card. Not sure how the ref (and lino if he was on that side) missed it.

Mentioned when CT posted who the officials were that the VAR official was the one who sent off Valbuena then the next week ignored the stamp on Lo Celso's head, shocking that despite proving he can't do the job he gets another go with our game. 3 weeks running and a key mistake in each.

Surely he gets stood down now.

chorleyhere wrote: ↑

Tue May 11, 2021 12:32 am

I think it's about time that we got the football equivalent of AC-12 on the job at Stockley Park and that reports about the referee's decisions are open for scrutiny.
Then we could learn about the (asses) apologies "the wee little donkeys " in charge of VAR decision making !!!!!!!!

I will 2nd that proposal!

Maybe not strictly one for VAR, but are we convinced that Vydra carried the ball out of play in the build up to Wood’s disallowed goal? On first view it appeared so, there was grass visible between the bye line and the ball, but on the second view along the line I wasn’t convinced.

Rileybobs wrote: ↑

Tue May 11, 2021 9:31 am

Maybe not strictly one for VAR, but are we convinced that Vydra carried the ball out of play in the build up to Wood’s disallowed goal? On first view it appeared so, there was grass visible between the bye line and the ball, but on the second view along the line I wasn’t convinced.

We thought the same Riley. It can't have been looked at for long by VAR as play was soon back running. That second view was not convincing at all and, when you look at some of the decisions they spend an hour looking at, I thought they would have double checked to be sure.

bf2k wrote: ↑

Mon May 10, 2021 10:27 pm

Taylor - penalty. Went through the Fulham player
Their keeper - sending off. Moved his hand to the ball

What is the point of VAR? Seriously both decisions are mistakes from the ref and should have been overturned.

Exactly as I saw it as well. Clear pen and clear handball

Just watched the keeper handball again and defender definitely on his backside so don't know how he would have stopped Vyds. When you compare it to the sending off of the Brighton defender against Wolves when the forward still had to go on and beat the keeper the decision is ridiculous.