Dogawful Officiating

[El Prontonise]

Just now, Rod said:

You know nowt about football.  Go somewhere else.

 

Coming from you. 

 

Fuck off you bore.

 

 

Edited Thursday at 06:31 by El Prontonise

[Rod]

9 hours ago, Dr Venkman said:

Aye this is 100% what happened. Ref approaches Pope on the pitch after it’s given, Pope says I got the ball, ref replies ‘you didn’t, I’ve just seen it’. But he did. It’s not easy to see but he did touch the ball.

 

 

 

Yip, the ref got it wrong.

[Rod]

1 minute ago, El Prontonise said:

 

Coming from you. 

 

Fuck off you bore.

 

 

 

You still know fuck all about football.

[Rod]

40 minutes ago, Wilson said:

Couldn't see what happened from the other end of the pitch, got home expecting a proper travesty decision the way people were going on...obviously in the minority here but really don't have any issue with it being given. 

Wrong!

[gbandit]

Just now, Rod said:

You still know fuck all about football.

Not true Rod, expect this from you after a couple of bottles but not first thing in the morning. My issue is that it took them five mins of reviewing it, that’s not what VAR is for. It would never be given as a penalty pre-2020 but we’re going to see officials give these as penalties more and more now. Anytime a keeper collided with a player’s head there’s going to be a decent chance the refs will give a pen, unless they’ve made full contact with the ball beforehand

[Rod]

10 minutes ago, El Prontonise said:

 

This place was would be up in arms if it was at the other end and not given.

 

 

 

No likes eh? What does that tell you? Perhaps you are wrong? Or an idiot?

[r0cafella]

I think it's a debatable pen which means it wasn't a clear and obvious error, the fact they took so long to decide tells you all you need to know.

TLDR guy on Var is a thundercunt. 

[Rod]

Just now, gbandit said:

Not true Rod, expect this from you after a couple of bottles but not first thing in the morning. My issue is that it took them five mins of reviewing it, that’s not what VAR is for. It would never be given as a penalty pre-2020 but we’re going to see officials give these as penalties more and more now. Anytime a keeper collided with a player’s head there’s going to be a decent chance the refs will give a pen, unless they’ve made full contact with the ball beforehand

Oh it has to "full contact"? I'll have a quick look at the rule book .......... no you are also wrong.  Go stand in the corner.

[El Prontonise]

I do get the clear and obvious stuff with VAR about the decision but I think that's a pen.

[El Prontonise]

2 minutes ago, gbandit said:

Not true Rod, expect this from you after a couple of bottles but not first thing in the morning. My issue is that it took them five mins of reviewing it, that’s not what VAR is for. It would never be given as a penalty pre-2020 but we’re going to see officials give these as penalties more and more now. Anytime a keeper collided with a player’s head there’s going to be a decent chance the refs will give a pen, unless they’ve made full contact with the ball beforehand

 

Generally agree with this.

 

Btw I've put rod onto my ignore list as I can't be arsed with such a bore.

[Hanshithispantz]

He's more than entitled to come and punch that man, it's a head height ball dropping in his box.

 

Maybe 'keepers need less protection' but you cannot just start making rules up 3/4 of the way through a season. They were playing the frame back repeatedly to see if there was a touch so it's pretty clear they fucked up dragging the ref to the monitor, then as we see time and time again he has to just go along with it.

[Rod]

2 minutes ago, El Prontonise said:

 

Generally agree with this.

 

Btw I've put rod onto my ignore list as I can't be arsed with such a bore.

Ooooh, (clutches handbag). Don't like being wrong eh?

[Rod]

2 minutes ago, Hanshithispantz said:

He's more than entitled to come and punch that man, it's a head height ball dropping in his box.

 

Maybe 'keepers need less protection' but you cannot just start making rules up 3/4 of the way through a season. They were playing the frame back repeatedly to see if there was a touch so it's pretty clear they fucked up dragging the ref to the monitor, then as we see time and time again he has to just go along with it.

Spot on!

[Rod]

7 minutes ago, El Prontonise said:

I do get the clear and obvious stuff with VAR about the decision but I think that's a pen.

Wrong!

[Kid Icarus]

Don't think it's hugely controversial tbh, Pope's entitled to go for it, but even if he gets it he's taken out their player to get it. The problem with ones like that for me is that sometimes you see them given but more often than not you don't. Definitely agree that if it happened to us we'd want it like.

 

 

[David Edgar]

You just know there will be half a dozen such incidents at the weekend which VAR won't care about.

 

Our players need to make sure that they lie down and hold their heads if they get so much as brushed in the box.

[Yorkie]

In a non-VAR world, I don't think it's a pen; Pope is entitled to come for that. In a VAR world, I'm still not convinced because the footage suggests the possibility of a touch on the ball.

 

But my main issue with the incident is that you've got that absolute tit Craig Pawson re-refereeing a borderline-at-worst decision that would be impossible to call in the moment. In a non-VAR world, the ref is only pointing to the spot if he's taking a total gamble on there being an infringement.

 

It's highly debatable whether there is one and on that basis there should be no grounds for VAR to intervene. Just another case of it's unnecessary existence changing the nature of the rulebook. 

[Rod]

10 minutes ago, Kid Icarus said:

Don't think it's hugely controversial tbh, Pope's entitled to go for it, but even if he gets it he's taken out their player to get it. The problem with ones like that for me is that sometimes you see them given but more often than not you don't. Definitely agree that if it happened to us we'd want it like.

 

 

It's not controversial, it's scandalous.  Shocking decision!

[Rod]

2 minutes ago, Yorkie said:

My issue with the incident is that you've got that absolute tit Craig Pawson re-refereeing a borderline-at-worst decision that would be impossible to call in the moment. In a non-VAR world, the ref is only pointing to the spot if he's taking a total gamble on there being an infringement.

 

It's highly debatable whether there is one and on that basis there should be no grounds for VAR to intervene. Just another case of it's unnecessary existence changing the nature of the rulebook. 

 

In a non-VAR world, I don't think it's a pen; Pope is entitled to come for that. In a VAR world, I'm still not convinced because there footage suggests the possibility of a touch on the ball.

Good post but there wasn't just a "possibility" of a touch on the ball, there WAS touch on the ball.  Everyone saw it.  The referee fucked up, it's as simple as that.  Pope actually said to the ref "I got the ball". The referee replies "no you didnt". The referee got it wrong so it's not even debatable.

[Tsunami]

Haven’t seen it on tv but at the game it looked like he got at least some of the ball and I didn’t see any Palace shouts for a penalty?

[r0cafella]

Just now, Tsunami said:

Haven’t seen it on tv but at the game it looked like he got at least some of the ball and I didn’t see any Palace shouts for a penalty?

Absolutely they didn't even appeal until the cunt on VAR gifted them it. Thankfully Eze  agrees it the wrong choice and did his little back pass. 

[Dandy Man]

I was 50/50 on it, can see why it was given but it was a ridiculous VAR review and there wasn't really enough there to overrule the ref, but also did not feel like the worst decision we have ever been on wrong end of, it's not an exact science and things can be ambiguous I guess?

[duo]

The issue i have is VAR decided Popes was a pen which whilst reckless was clearly accidentally. Yet decided VVD shoulder on Gordon which was 100% intentional wasn't a pen. Ney consistency.

[El Prontonise]

1 minute ago, duo said:

The issue i have is VAR decided Popes was a pen which whilst reckless was clearly accidentally. Yet decided VVD shoulder on Gordon which was 100% intentional wasn't a pen. Ney consistency.

 

There's the fundamental flaw with VAR.  It brings objectivity into subjective decisions based on what referee's see and manage games.

[Cf]

After 5 minutes reviewing it they'd just backed themselves into a corner where they had to give it or they'd look like absolute tits.

 

I can see why some people think it might be a penalty but ultimately when there's a ball there to be legitimately played for there has to be a certain amount of leeway given. It can't just be a case of whoever gets there second is deemed to have committed a foul. 

 

Another one that comes up but it never given is when the last defender takes a striker out just as they get a shot away. You could argue that tackle puts them off the shot but we never give these as penalties. 

 

Essentially I do think goalies/defenders should get a certain amount of leeway so they can actually do their jobs and the bar for a foul in the box should be higher. If a penalty was given was every instance of technically a foul the game would be shit.