lejackal
Grand Master
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2015
- Messages
- 9,025
Did you just not get bribed for confirming they also didn't send bribes?
Premier League 23/24 Thread
- Thread starter lejackal
- Start date
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2014
- Messages
- 9,033
I don't really blame Liverpool it's farcical what happened and although a replay won't happen it probably should. VAR hasn't ruined football but the muppets running it have.Nt seen enough of Hojland to pass fair comment. Amir Zacki (spelling) looked amazing at Wigan all those years ago, then after xmas his form nose dived and he disappeared. Hojland looks solid enough so far, but too early to say for certain.
I don't like the can of worms a replay would open. I suspect/hope its Klopp trying to show the FA/PGMOL that apologies when you keep making incredibly basic errors is no good. It needs sorted, two years ago.
Subjective calls I can kind of excuse, is it a pen/red or not? A lot of the time even neutrals will be split, albeit 90% agreed Wolves should have had a pen and the City goal against Fulham shouldn't have stood.
But offside, like the ball crossing the line, is black and white. You are either off or on. There is no interpretation. I think/hope that's Klopp's point.
And that "they have restarted we can't do anything" rule, is recipe for disaster, should never have existed, and needs to go.
We all know nothing will change though and we'll be here talking about someone else being shafted in a few weeks.
I don't like the can of worms a replay would open. I suspect/hope its Klopp trying to show the FA/PGMOL that apologies when you keep making incredibly basic errors is no good. It needs sorted, two years ago.
Subjective calls I can kind of excuse, is it a pen/red or not? A lot of the time even neutrals will be split, albeit 90% agreed Wolves should have had a pen and the City goal against Fulham shouldn't have stood.
But offside, like the ball crossing the line, is black and white. You are either off or on. There is no interpretation. I think/hope that's Klopp's point.
And that "they have restarted we can't do anything" rule, is recipe for disaster, should never have existed, and needs to go.
We all know nothing will change though and we'll be here talking about someone else being shafted in a few weeks.
Yeah as long as nobody has scored, I don't see the damage stopping the game again after restarting to correct a mistake, surely doing that and then just adding some time back on is the logical answer.
The replay can of worms has lots of issues, as many people have said should that replay have Liverpool start with 10 men because that's what they had when the goal was disallowed? Otherwise it's "unfair" on the other team.
The replay can of worms has lots of issues, as many people have said should that replay have Liverpool start with 10 men because that's what they had when the goal was disallowed? Otherwise it's "unfair" on the other team.
Good point
First up, I don't want a replay and don't think you can have one, but if you do………feck knows.
You're right you can't restart from zero mins and give Liverpool 11 men, if you do then Jones' three match ban (any other bookings players picked up and Jota's ban) need to be cancelled, and that's hardly fair or sensible.
If you restart from when the incident happened, do Liverpool get the goal? A bit unfair on Spurs to start a game after half an hour ish and be a goal down at kick off. Do bookings stand? So those who has already been booked pre the disallowed goal, do they start the game booked?
First up, I don't want a replay and don't think you can have one, but if you do………feck knows.
You're right you can't restart from zero mins and give Liverpool 11 men, if you do then Jones' three match ban (any other bookings players picked up and Jota's ban) need to be cancelled, and that's hardly fair or sensible.
If you restart from when the incident happened, do Liverpool get the goal? A bit unfair on Spurs to start a game after half an hour ish and be a goal down at kick off. Do bookings stand? So those who has already been booked pre the disallowed goal, do they start the game booked?
I think the one action they can take from this is to up their professionalism in communications. Goal, no goal, red card, that's about the only words that should be coming out of their mouths. Yes, no and other arbitary comments should be avoided
Aye the whole procss for VAR needs to be looked at. In Hockey and Cricket (possibly rugby, I dunno I don't watch it) the TV umpire/VAR checks what he is being asked to look at and then talks the on-field ref through what he is seeing. Or at least you can hear him talking through what he is seeing.
VAR should be a case of, in the disallowed goal, "Ok ref, goal scored, VAR will check (that's routine for every goal). Can you confirm what the onfield decision was?" At which point the ref obv says "offside" and the non goal issue is resolved. Likewise for fouls etc. ref says "I gave a yellow cos I thought he got part of the ball, or it was a case of six of one etc." Then VAR knows and can advise him that he got it right, wrong, or to look at the screen etc.
All of this isn't rocket science FFS. If I can work it out and I have no involvement with stuff like this you have to wonder why PGMOL haven't. It's not like they are the first sport to try TV reviews and I'm pretty sure they all watch Cricket/rugby/some other sport with a VAR equivalent.
But it all boils down to the same issue, the guys running VAR are incompetent but they are also their own bosses so there is no punishment when they **** up. A week away from "work" is as much a punishment as it sounds. Until they are properly held to account for mistakes and their general incompetence nothing will change. Some other club will get shafted in a few weeks, get another meaningless apology and we'll all be expected to carry on and pretend they aren't killing the game.
Rant over.
VAR should be a case of, in the disallowed goal, "Ok ref, goal scored, VAR will check (that's routine for every goal). Can you confirm what the onfield decision was?" At which point the ref obv says "offside" and the non goal issue is resolved. Likewise for fouls etc. ref says "I gave a yellow cos I thought he got part of the ball, or it was a case of six of one etc." Then VAR knows and can advise him that he got it right, wrong, or to look at the screen etc.
All of this isn't rocket science FFS. If I can work it out and I have no involvement with stuff like this you have to wonder why PGMOL haven't. It's not like they are the first sport to try TV reviews and I'm pretty sure they all watch Cricket/rugby/some other sport with a VAR equivalent.
But it all boils down to the same issue, the guys running VAR are incompetent but they are also their own bosses so there is no punishment when they **** up. A week away from "work" is as much a punishment as it sounds. Until they are properly held to account for mistakes and their general incompetence nothing will change. Some other club will get shafted in a few weeks, get another meaningless apology and we'll all be expected to carry on and pretend they aren't killing the game.
Rant over.
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2014
- Messages
- 9,033
VAR in Rugby is much better executed. They have a yellow card which means the player goes into a sin bin and the refs in VAR have 10 minutes and can upgrade to a red card.
Thing that pisses me off with the off side VAR is the ECL and World Cup have the full screen animation automated system where as the PL has the **** lines that are manually applied. Why? It's not as if the PL are hard up for cash. It's like UEFA use a PlayStation 5 and The FA use a Atari 500.
Thing that pisses me off with the off side VAR is the ECL and World Cup have the full screen animation automated system where as the PL has the **** lines that are manually applied. Why? It's not as if the PL are hard up for cash. It's like UEFA use a PlayStation 5 and The FA use a Atari 500.
It's a funny old game part #426
After not being able to get anywhere near Liverpool's 18 yard box against 9 men last week, Spurs have just squandered about 10 open goal chances, and then had Bissouma sent off for diving
After not being able to get anywhere near Liverpool's 18 yard box against 9 men last week, Spurs have just squandered about 10 open goal chances, and then had Bissouma sent off for diving
More VAR / refereeing inconsistencies today. Everton were very unlucky to get two soft yellows resulting in a red card, then 5 minutes later a Liverpool player already on a yellow does exactly the same thing and somehow dodges it. Understandably Dyche is furious and gets a yellow card himself instead.
Then a few minutes later a Pool player dives in the box trying to get a penalty, and again even after VAR agreeing he dived, no punishment. Bissouma got sent off for diving OUTSIDE the box a couple of weeks ago!
Liverpool were VERY lucky today, credit to Everton, they deserved a point.
Then a few minutes later a Pool player dives in the box trying to get a penalty, and again even after VAR agreeing he dived, no punishment. Bissouma got sent off for diving OUTSIDE the box a couple of weeks ago!
Liverpool were VERY lucky today, credit to Everton, they deserved a point.
Everton strung together fewer successful passes than ANY team EVER in ANY PL game. They spent the majority of the game sitting ten yards outside their box hoofing it back to VVD and Alison on the Half Way line. I can't agree that deserves point. Though there were some great defensive blocks, I thought Tarkowski played really well. They created nothing though. Steven Hawking (RIP) could have done nets for Liverpool and they still would have won.
I missed Young's first yellow, and while his second wasn't a particularly bad tackle, as such, it was the area he made it in and the situation. Had he not fouled/stopped Diaz then he was clean in on goal. Granted it was along the bye line but that's the kinda position that City score bucket loads of goals from pull backs etc. Ashley Young is experienced enough to know if you dive in there you're asking for trouble. He can't have any complaints.
The Konate foul, the second one, looks like a stonewall yellow in real time but then BTSport showed another angle where you can see there is FA contact and the Everton boy made a meal of it. I put that down as good refereeing, being in the position to see the exaggeration, rather than falling for it. Apparently MOTD showed a trip in slow mo, I haven't seen it so cant comment. I have seen a shitty Twitter clip of a supposed trip but it looks innocuous to me.
Even if that was a let off for Pool, I doubt it would have affecetd the game. Everton barely tried to attack or play football when it was 11 a-side. Also, it would only cancel out the over turned MacAllister red from a few weeks ago. Though I still think the ref got it right and a free kick but no card was the right call.
I missed the Pool player diving. Who was it? I genuinely haven't heard it mentioned elsewhere, so I cant comment on it.
I missed Young's first yellow, and while his second wasn't a particularly bad tackle, as such, it was the area he made it in and the situation. Had he not fouled/stopped Diaz then he was clean in on goal. Granted it was along the bye line but that's the kinda position that City score bucket loads of goals from pull backs etc. Ashley Young is experienced enough to know if you dive in there you're asking for trouble. He can't have any complaints.
The Konate foul, the second one, looks like a stonewall yellow in real time but then BTSport showed another angle where you can see there is FA contact and the Everton boy made a meal of it. I put that down as good refereeing, being in the position to see the exaggeration, rather than falling for it. Apparently MOTD showed a trip in slow mo, I haven't seen it so cant comment. I have seen a shitty Twitter clip of a supposed trip but it looks innocuous to me.
Even if that was a let off for Pool, I doubt it would have affecetd the game. Everton barely tried to attack or play football when it was 11 a-side. Also, it would only cancel out the over turned MacAllister red from a few weeks ago. Though I still think the ref got it right and a free kick but no card was the right call.
I missed the Pool player diving. Who was it? I genuinely haven't heard it mentioned elsewhere, so I cant comment on it.
Oh you're right they barely got the ball in Pool's half, but I think their defending deserved a point (as soul destroying as it is to watch) as until the penalty it looked pretty certain to end a goalless draw, even when they only had ten men (as they just had one less player upfront!) I thought the handball for Salah's penalty was harsh but he had to give it considering some of the others that have been, but again it begs the question of why is it no longer what is deemed to be a deliberate handball, it now seems any contact with arms that are not at your side like a soldier is a penalty.
I can't find any mention of it either now, but it was before Liverpool scored their first goal. But... you go to ground, look at the ref for a penalty, VAR review it and decide no penalty, what other explanation is there!?
I can't find any mention of it either now, but it was before Liverpool scored their first goal. But... you go to ground, look at the ref for a penalty, VAR review it and decide no penalty, what other explanation is there!?
Salah's pen is one of them, most football fans may not like to see them given, but that is the interpretation of the laws now. I have long since given up trying to work out what is handball. I do think Keane left his hand out there a second or two longer than would have been necessary. If you watch it back you can tell he hasn't moved his hand a quickly as he could. He almost leaves it there to block the angle or dare the Pool player to try and hit it. If you see the replays you'll see what I mean.
For me, and I am biased on this one, it's a lot more of a pen than quite a few of those "unintentional" handballs you see (the nonsense pen Pool got in the CL final against Spurs being a prime example).
As for the dive, I guess, playing devil's advocate, the player could have felt contact/been tackled and he felt it was enough to go down (or it was enough to knock him down) but the Ref and VAR don't deem the contact enough for a foul and thus a pen. It is a contact sport, and as I have said a few times when we get soft pens "contact does not equal a foul."
For me, and I am biased on this one, it's a lot more of a pen than quite a few of those "unintentional" handballs you see (the nonsense pen Pool got in the CL final against Spurs being a prime example).
As for the dive, I guess, playing devil's advocate, the player could have felt contact/been tackled and he felt it was enough to go down (or it was enough to knock him down) but the Ref and VAR don't deem the contact enough for a foul and thus a pen. It is a contact sport, and as I have said a few times when we get soft pens "contact does not equal a foul."
Good result for Arsenal. Not seen any of the game, decent?
Utd continue to look pish. They really should only have a point, yer man choked on that penalty. The fact they can qualify with a win in Denmark and Turkey is scary. But then, given how poor Utd have been this season, I'm not sure I would put money on them winning those games.
They just don't seem to have clicked this season. Not really sure why. They will, probably rediscover their mojo just before Xmas, say about the 16th or so.
Utd continue to look pish. They really should only have a point, yer man choked on that penalty. The fact they can qualify with a win in Denmark and Turkey is scary. But then, given how poor Utd have been this season, I'm not sure I would put money on them winning those games.
They just don't seem to have clicked this season. Not really sure why. They will, probably rediscover their mojo just before Xmas, say about the 16th or so.
