Is the club going to put in an official complaint about the officiating on Saturday?

[abu13]

To a point I can understand the decision not to award Foden a penalty as it is deemed subjective. However the offside call was shocking, the rules are the the entire arm can not be offside, it even stipulates the underside of the armpit. The measurement was clearly taken from the sleeve of the shirt, this is correct for deciding handball but not offside.

This is a terrible error to be made at a key time in the match. An acknowlegement of this would be nice but im not expecting one.

 

[blueste41]

I think the team will be galvanised tonight. They, especially Pep, respond well to injustice. We will batter Leverkusen.

Well TBH I would have hoped we would have battered Leverkusen regardless!

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

So, why has the PL chosen a system that is open to human interpretation when it could so easily have gone for a system that almost eliminated any element of doubt about offside lines?

You've answered this yourself in the rest of the post but the obvious answer is precisely so that it's open to "human interpretation" aka manipulation. We saw the evidence of that quite clearly on Saturday.

 

[Len Rum]

My quote at the time was along the lines of he was fucking offside as fuck.

I’m not staggered by your view, it’s simply just your view. I can see it from both ways, but for me if a shot is already released but a foul comes after, I can’t see how a penalty can be given. I can see how it would be given as a foul in any other area of the pitch, but in the box it has to be different in that unique scenario. The defender got lucky.

This would be my personl and unofficial take on it (what the rules are or guidance to referees I don't know).

If the defender's run influences the direction and timing of the attacker's shot you can't ignore the subsequent foul and the penalty should be given.

If the defender's run doesn't influence the direction and timing of the attacker's shot but the subsequent foul is considered serious then the foul can't be ignored and the penalty should be given. If the foul is not considered serious then the referee can exercise discretion whether to award the penalty.

You cannot distinguish between serious fouls inside and outside the penalty area.

So IMO to not award the penalty in Phil's case, the defender's run has to be judged as not impacting Phil's shot and the subsequent foul not consdered serious.

 

[Axel Freed]

Didn’t see the Phil potential penalty incident and the offside was so marginal as to be acceptable but the real cause for outrage was the way this muppet failed to get a grip of their persistent fouling.

The better referees have an informal totting up system under which they’ll firstly have a quiet word with recidivists, then give them a final warning and then book them. Saturday’s clown didn’t have the strength of character to impose a sense of discipline on their thugs and so, like any criminal who gets away with it, they felt emboldened to carry on offending.

Teams trying to kick us off the park happens in many games and has done for years. It’s almost certainly a major contributory factor as to why we suffer so many injuries. Why don’t we get our video analysis team to produce a little film highlighting the differences in the way fouls against us are dealt with in comparison to those against other teams.

And if the PGMOL cunts dismiss it out of hand, give it to a friendly journalist like Martin Samuel to help highlight it.

 

[Gingers Dad]

Var is shite, its just another layer of incompetence. I would rather the ref just made his decision and that's it like it used to be. We gained last week when Liverpool had one struck off for nothing. Both decisions at Newcastle were marginal. Once you get your shot off refs rarely give you a penalty. And the offside uses technology so you got to go with the tech as it effects everyone the same.

I thought Liverpool's goal was disallowed on the pitch?

 

[CheshireExpat]

Phil's incident was still a card surely? It is dangerous play. As were the consecutive fouls by tonali who didn't see a card at all. Nevermind the completely pointless barge by Joelinton. Then there's the offside. Thats without a penalty given.

 

[mayo31]

My quote at the time was along the lines of he was fucking offside as fuck.

I’m not staggered by your view, it’s simply just your view. I can see it from both ways, but for me if a shot is already released but a foul comes after, I can’t see how a penalty can be given. I can see how it would be given as a foul in any other area of the pitch, but in the box it has to be different in that unique scenario. The defender got lucky.

So if a player gets his pass off in the pen area and is then taken out but the pass is made, would you give a pen?

Or if a player gets his shot off outside the area and then fouled, is it a foul?

All these questions that need answering

 

[LangleyBlue1970]

So if a player gets his pass off in the pen area and is then taken out but the pass is made, would you give a pen?

Or if a player gets his shot off outside the area and then fouled, is it a foul?

All these questions that need answering

It’s been done to death now. My view is that the penalty decision was correct. Not going over and over it as it was 3 days ago.

 

[.db.]

This would be my personl and unofficial take on it (what the rules are or guidance to referees I don't know).

If the defender's run influences the direction and timing of the attacker's shot you can't ignore the subsequent foul and the penalty should be given.

If the defender's run doesn't influence the direction and timing of the attacker's shot but the subsequent foul is considered serious then the foul can't be ignored and the penalty should be given. If the foul is not considered serious then the referee can exercise discretion whether to award the penalty.

You cannot distinguish between serious fouls inside and outside the penalty area.

So IMO to not award the penalty in Phil's case, the defender's run has to be judged as not impacting Phil's shot and the subsequent foul not consdered serious.

Foden’s poor control enticed Schar into the tackle. Schar coming into the tackle made Foden take an early snap shot. They defintely influenced each other in that incident.

 

[Tomblue]

jesus get a grip you’re arguing about which frame of the game they stopped on and which pixel they drew a line in powerpoint

theres no conspiracy you mental

Yes no problem, stop it on which ever frame suits the narrative. I think you’d be great at doing the VAR you should definitely apply.

 

[Tomblue]

Is that before, after or as well as using a different graphic?
Is it generally accepted fact that the line is where his sleeve finishes or is it only select Blues that can see that?

This makes zero sense. Drinking on a Monday night, I like it.

 

[spacecadet]

We were fucking done over AGAIN big time. They have been manufacturing results more since VAR was brought in. Corrupt as fuck. Last year's FA Cup final (Henderson) handball- fucking rat boy offside at the swamp in Treble run-in. Nothing but scandalous. You can add the Grealish finger on ball while looking the other way in the Treble Cup Final in as well. Bent bastards.

 

[west didsblue]

To a point I can understand the decision not to award Foden a penalty as it is deemed subjective. However the offside call was shocking, the rules are the the entire arm can not be offside, it even stipulates the underside of the armpit. The measurement was clearly taken from the sleeve of the shirt, this is correct for deciding handball but not offside.

This is a terrible error to be made at a key time in the match. An acknowlegement of this would be nice but im not expecting one.

They’re never going to admit that the measurement was taken from an AI version of Dias in the wrong place. That would be an admission of corruption at levels way above the refereeing team on the day.

 

[.db.]

So if a player gets his pass off in the pen area and is then taken out but the pass is made, would you give a pen?

Or if a player gets his shot off outside the area and then fouled, is it a foul?

All these questions that need answering

The LotG does have strange explanations for some incidents.

This incident happened a few years back and it was said that the ball wasn’t in playing distance for Fraser, but for me it’s a stonewall penalty:

Were Newcastle denied a penalty?

Were Newcastle denied a penalty?

www.skysports.com

Ederson fouled Fraser. Even if the ball wasn’t in playing distance, it stopped Fraser being able to close down Cancelo. Say we’d gone up the other end and scored would VAR have come back and disallowed the goal for that foul on Fraser, but not given a penalty, and if not a penalty, what would they give, because it is foul play?

The Foden Schar one; Schar could have broken Foden’s metatarsal through reckless play and seen him go off and miss six weeks. How they can deem it’s not a foul is bizarre.

But as I keep saying, there’s absolutely no point fans moaning as individual fanbases about individual decisions or games anymore. We need to get together and get the FSA involved and demand officiating improves.

 

[Indaparkside]

They’ve made a complaint about the ref

 

[waspish]

To a point I can understand the decision not to award Foden a penalty as it is deemed subjective. However the offside call was shocking, the rules are the the entire arm can not be offside, it even stipulates the underside of the armpit. The measurement was clearly taken from the sleeve of the shirt, this is correct for deciding handball but not offside.

This is a terrible error to be made at a key time in the match. An acknowlegement of this would be nice but im not expecting one.

Subjective now your taking the piss

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

They’re never going to admit that the measurement was taken from an AI version of Dias in the wrong place. That would be an admission of corruption at levels way above the refereeing team on the day.

Let's hope the UAE Intelligence Services have bugged Stockley Park then.

 

[remember arthur mann]

If they do, it'll be 116.

 

[Father Paul]

The referee must be in charge of the VAR team not the other way round. The ref should have asked to see the screen on the Foden pen shout. The VAR is refereeing games. The offside was marginal and it’s ok to give the attacker the benefit of the doubt.

People are forgetting the bad defending involved in that goal too. We are starting to transition into dipper mode and it's a wee bit embarrassing.