Dogawful Officiating

[John P]

Maybe I should watch it again 

[Groundhog63]

Neither one a penalty. Sure the first one had contact but as VAR directed to the ref "minimal" & not enough to warrant even a look at the screen. We've seen them given tho but. 

The second one, Burn didn't touch him, at all. 

I suspect the latter given because, human nature being human nature, VAR/Ref trying to be fair instead of accurate. 

[Benwell Lad]

Irrespective of the merits of the first penalty claim, it is not within the rules of the game to later correct a wrong or dubious decision by a retrospective action.

However that did appear to happen yesterday and both referee and VAR should face the strongest sanctions for effectively "making it up as they go along".

[John P]

The second one was weird, as there looked to be no contact at all yet Burn threw his head up as if he'd completely fucked up and committed a clear foul

[El Prontonise]

The first one's a clear penalty.

[Benwell Lad]

1 minute ago, El Prontonise said:

The first one's a clear penalty.

 

Which two PL referees, one in real time and one with the benefit of multiple slow motion replays, didn't think was 

[Zero]

The problem is Burn simply acts like he’s fucking fed up

 

 

Edited November 10, 2025 by Zero

[Groundhog63]

3 minutes ago, Benwell Lad said:

 

Which two PL referees, one in real time and one with the benefit of multiple slow motion replays, didn't think was 

Which could've been Dogawful officiating 😂

I think they got it right. No where near enough contact to send him flying the way he did. But, as I say, seen them given. 

The second was a token 

[Lush Vlad]

I think they just went down the not clear and obvious route and not enough to overturn the decision. 
 

Real time, I think the ref makes the right decision both times. But then when you see the replays back. The first one could easily be given, even though it is a dive and minimal contact. The second he doesn’t touch him. 

[The Prophet]

Can see football becoming virtually non-contact in the coming years. The fact fans are buying into the idea that incidental contact should be penalised tells you the direction its heading in.

[Benwell Lad]

3 minutes ago, The Prophet said:

Can see football becoming virtually non-contact in the coming years. The fact fans are buying into the idea that incidental contact should be penalised tells you the direction its heading in.

 

Hopefully it's addressed because in the VAR leagues and cups even the most minimal of contact induces a fall to the ground to get the penalty.

Minimal contact needs a very clear definition if it's not to become zero contact.

[Lush Vlad]

52 minutes ago, The Prophet said:

Can see football becoming virtually non-contact in the coming years. The fact fans are buying into the idea that incidental contact should be penalised tells you the direction its heading in.

 

At most set pieces, players are almost Rugby tackling each other and it is widely accepted.  Slight touch to the foot.  "Well there's contact.  So it's a penalty."

 

Strange logic. 

[Abacus]

I can see the argument for why the first could have been a penalty. Watched MOTD last night and even the pundits didn't agree - Rooney thinking it was, Murphy thinking it was also minimal contact and a dive. So you stick with the onfield ref.

 

The second one to me wasn't a penalty. By that point Burn's head was gone, though, and he seemed to accept it. He shouldn't have been on the pitch by then, but that's beside the point.

 

It looked like a levelling up decision from something neither the ref nor VAR were sure about from their first call. That is the mistake. Either that or VAR just finding ways to justify whatever the onfield ref has decided. In either case, that's not what VAR should be for, if it should be there at all.

[Erikse]

1 hour ago, John P said:

The second one was weird, as there looked to be no contact at all yet Burn threw his head up as if he'd completely fucked up and committed a clear foul

 

I think he hit his thigh? Need to watch the replay again. I also think the first one would have been too soft, despite the contact.

[Abacus]

1 minute ago, Erikse said:

 

I think he hit his thigh? Need to watch the replay again. I also think the first one would have been too soft, despite the contact.

 

Actually that's what they were saying on MOTD too. Not sure, personally. 

 

Though contradicting my own logic above, if so then it stands with the ref's decision as a pen.

[Shays Given Tim Flowers]

1 hour ago, El Prontonise said:

The first one's a clear penalty.

 

 Would be absolutely raging if that wasn't given to us. 

[madras]

3 hours ago, Lush Vlad said:

I think they just went down the not clear and obvious route and not enough to overturn the decision. 
 

Real time, I think the ref makes the right decision both times. But then when you see the replays back. The first one could easily be given, even though it is a dive and minimal contact. The second he doesn’t touch him. 

Are you not saying the first one could easily uave been given purely because they often are with mamy refs buying lnto the "there's contact so he has every right to go down" line of thinking.

 

Its quite simple really, even if there's contact the contact has to be sufficient to to impede the other player. Its a no on both occasions, if not every time a player challenges for the ball and doesnt get it its a foul. Every header in the box a defender challenges for but gets beaten to is a foul if the player who wins it is put off by the challenge, its a pen.

[Lush Vlad]

4 minutes ago, madras said:

Are you not saying the first one could easily uave been given purely because they often are with mamy refs buying lnto the "there's contact so he has every right to go down" line of thinking.

 

Its quite simple really, even if there's contact the contact has to be sufficient to to impede the other player. Its a no on both occasions, if not every time a player challenges for the ball and doesnt get it its a foul. Every header in the box a defender challenges for but gets beaten to is a foul if the player who wins it is put off by the challenge, its a pen.

100% that is what I am saying. It happens far too often. But that is the modern game, sadly. 
 

2 hours ago, Lush Vlad said:

 

At most set pieces, players are almost Rugby tackling each other and it is widely accepted.  Slight touch to the foot.  "Well there's contact.  So it's a penalty."

 

Strange logic. 

 

[AyeDubbleYoo]

5 hours ago, Abacus said:

I can see the argument for why the first could have been a penalty. Watched MOTD last night and even the pundits didn't agree - Rooney thinking it was, Murphy thinking it was also minimal contact and a dive. So you stick with the onfield ref.

 

The second one to me wasn't a penalty. By that point Burn's head was gone, though, and he seemed to accept it. He shouldn't have been on the pitch by then, but that's beside the point.

 

It looked like a levelling up decision from something neither the ref nor VAR were sure about from their first call. That is the mistake. Either that or VAR just finding ways to justify whatever the onfield ref has decided. In either case, that's not what VAR should be for, if it should be there at all.

The second one was just a make-up call for the first one. Cowardly officiating in both cases but who the hell knows with how VAR is being applied now. 

 

 

Edited November 10, 2025 by AyeDubbleYoo

[TheHoob]

Liverpool have written to the PGMOL twisting their tits about VVDs disallowed goal yesterday. 

 

 

[Rafalove]

Thought the ref made some terrible decisions in our favour. We don’t usually get the rub if the green so I’ll take it, but if those decisions went against us, I’d be fuming.

[Kid Icarus]

When did this looking at Doku is a freekick rule come in?

[Stifler]

7 minutes ago, Rafalove said:

Thought the ref made some terrible decisions in our favour. We don’t usually get the rub if the green so I’ll take it, but if those decisions went against us, I’d be fuming.

The only decision that went in our favour was the penalty, and he didn’t make the decision.

He was fucking awful, and gave them everything they asked for.

[joeyt]

Hilarious that the first booking was in the 92nd minute

 

So many obvious yellows in the game before that

[Lush Vlad]

Don’t think we can complain about the ref tonight. He let so many yellow cards go for both teams and he could have given a couple of pens against us.
 

I didn’t think either were. The handball his arms were tight into his body. The Schar one I think should be. But you see one of them every week and they never get given after the shot has been taken.