… awaits VAR apologists to justify the Calvert-Lewin sending off
These idiots are fucking ruining our game
And more disliked, even hated by some.Referees must hate all this VAR nonsense. It's making their jobs impossible.
Apart from our games I can't remember the last time I watched any game.Wasn’t VAR introduced for ‘clear & obvious’ error correction…. Decisions nowadays do not fall into that category.
It’s taking away so much enjoyment from the game
do you not think their complete incompetence is also contributing to making their jobs harderReferees must hate all this VAR nonsense. It's making their jobs impossible.
said that the other day, take var out of the equation why have neither jota or clyne been called out for cheating because thats what it isNever mind VAR, Clyne is a fucking ****
Just seen the Everton one last night. Was there any contact ? Personally thought perhaps a yellow for both players ! But more a yellow for the palace player for play acting.
I've just watched the Calvert-Lewin red card after hearing all the fuss and I don't really understand why people think it's an outrageous red card?
Contact doesn't matter, it hasn't done for 20 years, the law is about endangering the opposition and going into challenges studs up and a foot off the ground has been a red card for about as long. It was a bit slow, which is why it's not a red 100 times out of 100, but I think most referees would give that if shown the full speed replay.
I actually think Roy Hodgson summed it up perfectly.
"Lots of people who played in the past watching that will say that's not a red card, but people playing recently will probably say it is a red card because of the way the studs were up and he [Calvert-Lewin] was leading with a straight leg."
Absolute rubbish, anyone who has played the game can see that there's not enough force to do any injury. It's a tackle that players do all the time - getting their foot between the player and the ball and hooking it away. Which is why the referee who was perfectly placed to see it didn't give a free kick.yep, I've just watched it, can totally see how that is a red, 'if' Clynes leg was couple inches across that could have done some serious damage. of course i'll now be accused of being a VAR loving WUM.
problem is as always, so many people see incidences like that differently - there would be loads outraged had that not been a red after watching the replay and the usual 'what is VAR for!'
Absolute rubbish, anyone who has played the game can see that there's not enough force to do any injury. It's a tackle that players do all the time - getting their foot between the player and the ball and hooking it away. Which is why the referee who was perfectly placed to see it didn't give a free kick.
It's been hard to avoid articles about Jota diving - and most pundits have come out against him.said that the other day, take var out of the equation why have neither jota or clyne been called out for cheating because thats what it is
fair play i tend to try and stay away from the media as much as possible as their bias tendencies get on my nerves but im glad theyve called it out.It's been hard to avoid articles about Jota diving - and most pundits have come out against him.
However, there were also quite a few about Dubravka saying it was a penalty, which I think are wrong. As far as I can see, he was stating a fact, i.e. the penalty was given, so that can't be changed now. I got the impression that he agreed it shouldn't have been given.
Rugby Union has a framework for high tackles / shoulder charges etc which allows the refs to reach the right decision. They also have the discussion with the TMO and their line judges but ultimately it's the refs decision. I think this is the latest framework
chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://passport.world.rugby/media/0w1dhpp1/2019-playerwelfare-hightackledecision_v2_en.pdf
Refs in football have nothing like this to help them make a decision and of course we don't get to hear how they have reached their decision. The LOTG state the following should be red card offences:
SERIOUS FOUL PLAY
A tackle or challenge that endangers the safety of an opponent or uses excessive force or brutality must be sanctioned as serious foul play.
Any player who lunges at an opponent in challenging for the ball from the front, from the side or from behind using one or both legs, with excessive force or endangers the safety of an opponent is guilty of serious foul play.
VIOLENT CONDUCT
Violent conduct is when a player uses or attempts to use excessive force or brutality against an opponent when not challenging for the ball, or against a team-mate, team official, match official, spectator or any other person, regardless of whether contact is made.
In addition, a player who, when not challenging for the ball, deliberately strikes an opponent or any other person on the head or face with the hand or arm, is guilty of violent conduct unless the force used was negligible.
Why didn't the ref have the balls to say fuck off it isn't a red, at best a yellow. Everton should demand the transcripts and then release it to the world. Webb needs to either come out and say under his watch it's getting worse or just resign. The other oddity is that if Neverton had been playing away at a Championship side or below then there wouldn't have been VAR to interfere. Same competition, different rules.