Jump to content

Newcastle United 1 - 0 Aston Villa (13/02/2022)


Recommended Posts

37 minutes ago, AyeDubbleYoo said:


They’re different rules though, aren’t they? We know offside is judged exactly by VAR. Some other offences are judged by this ‘clear and obvious error’ test. 
 

Really just asking if the rules were applied properly. 

 

As far as I understand it's only subjective decisions that have to meet the clear and obvious error test, a call as to whether a foul was in or outside of the box will probably be seen as a factual decision.

 

 

Edited by Jackie Broon

Link to post
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, AyeDubbleYoo said:

Yeah, but I just can’t see how it could be a clear error, since it’s so close to the line. It’s arguably on the line.
 

Which means it’s understandable that the ref gave a pen, and it should not have been overturned? 
 

Clear evidence based on the replay is not the same as deciding that the error was clear and obvious. Or is it?

 

I thought the point was that they don’t re-referee the game, they decide if the error itself is obvious. Which here is isn’t. 

 

 

 

I agree. VAR shouldn’t of overturned the penalty as it wasn’t and still isn’t a clear & obvious error.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, 54 said:

The beginning of this :aww:

 

Great listen, those first 12 minutes or so. Think he's been a bit wide of the mark when it comes to Benitez' time here but in regards to us in general he only ever speaks incredibly highly of us. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, AyeDubbleYoo said:

Yeah, but I just can’t see how it could be a clear error, since it’s so close to the line. It’s arguably on the line.
 

Which means it’s understandable that the ref gave a pen, and it should not have been overturned? 
 

Clear evidence based on the replay is not the same as deciding that the error was clear and obvious. Or is it?

 

I thought the point was that they don’t re-referee the game, they decide if the error itself is obvious. Which here is isn’t. 

 

 

 

 

I see what you're asking, but when you say "it's arguably on the line", I didn't see a single angle which showed any of Willock's boot touching the line. Personally, I felt there was enough evidence to say the foul was outside the box based on the angles/ freeze frames shown.

 

"Clear evidence based on the replay is not the same as deciding that the error was clear and obvious. Or is it?"

 

The location of the foul is an objective matter i.e. it was in or not in the box. As it's objective it is easy to see if the referee was correct or not and thus overturn. Whether it was a foul or not is a subjective matter and this is where you are less likely to overturn the referee even if it was a dubious call. The fact we're arguing about an objective matter makes it easier for VAR to intervene imo but as you saw the EPL website, it is a grey area.

 

Anyways, upwards and onwards. West Ham next.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Chris_R said:

 

True, but by that metric it shouldn't rule out their goal either.

I wouldn’t of ruled out the goal. Advantage should go to the forward IMO. We want goals yet VAR overruled a penalty (thought defenders studs were on the line) and a goal (thought Watkins was level). 

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Geordiebri said:

 

On what I've seen Gayle is better than Lurch, sorry, Wood.

Dwight Gayle has scored fewer PL goals for us in total than Wood did just last season for Burnley. And doesn't offer a lot else. Not raving about Wood, but howay.

 

edit: soz, ended up a few pages back by accident

 

 

Edited by Inferior Acuña

Link to post
Share on other sites

The disallowed goal came from two mistakes from krafth; the first was the abominable pass/clearance he tried to make while clearing from a defensive situation and the second was his backing off/imitation defending.

The team really suffered after manquillo and Trippier went off, really do not want either Dummet or Krafth near the team again. Championship level at best...

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, buzza said:

The disallowed goal came from two mistakes from krafth; the first was the abominable pass/clearance he tried to make while clearing from a defensive situation and the second was his backing off/imitation defending.

The team really suffered after manquillo and Trippier went off, really do not want either Dummet or Krafth near the team again. Championship level at best...

Agreed, Krafth is an awful football, any one of us could have made that pass and find a team-mate that he failed miserably to do. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Makes no sense putting Targett on the right instead of his natural position just to put Dummet at LB instead. Much rather have the best possible LB available play LB and work it out for the right side, if that means Krafth then so be it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, AyeDubbleYoo said:

Just thinking, our pen… VAR is checking for a ‘clear and obvious error’ or is it checking whether the foul was inside the box?

 

If the former, it clearly wasn’t obvious and the ref gave it, so by the rules it should be a pen? 
 

 

I have a feeling that as it is a line decision, like offside, VAR tells the referee what decision to make.

Link to post
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, LFEE said:

I wouldn’t of ruled out the goal. Advantage should go to the forward IMO. We want goals yet VAR overruled a penalty (thought defenders studs were on the line) and a goal (thought Watkins was level). 

 

FWIW I think both decisions were right.

 

First contact did look fractionally outside, whereas the goal did look offside. Both were so incredibly marginal though that either or both could be deemed "not a clear error" and allowed to stand as the on-field decision.

 

The problem then comes from consistency - If only one decision stands and the other is overruled, then there's angry fans on one side or the other. Thankfully both were scrutinised, which leads to anger in the stands about what a clear and obvious mistake represents, but otherwise you run the risk of it being open to interpretation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, McCormick said:

Krafth is honestly the worst senior right-back in the league. Unfathomably terrible at most things needed for that position.
 

He’s genuinely hopeless and negatively impacts us all across the field.

Not on yesterday's performance and the one before that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Chris_R said:

 

FWIW I think both decisions were right.

 

First contact did look fractionally outside, whereas the goal did look offside. Both were so incredibly marginal though that either or both could be deemed "not a clear error" and allowed to stand as the on-field decision.

 

The problem then comes from consistency - If only one decision stands and the other is overruled, then there's angry fans on one side or the other. Thankfully both were scrutinised, which leads to anger in the stands about what a clear and obvious mistake represents, but otherwise you run the risk of it being open to interpretation.

They were both factual line decisions so 'clear and obvious' does not apply.

Link to post
Share on other sites

morning peeps - just wanted to pop on and say congrats for the win, well deserved.  we weren't at it - you bossed the first half and we didn't have an answer for it.

 

inconsistency is our nemesis - great going forward on weds night but yesterday we didn't click at all.  if you weren't confident of staying up, i think you have to be now - other results went your way (apart from everton) but you don't need to rely on other teams now.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...