Trevor Morley's Tache
Well-Known Member
Said exactly that at the time.
Eddie gave him the opportunity to con the ref, and he took it.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
VAR impact and consequence log - game 27
- Thread starter flook
- Start date
-
- Tags
- consequence impact lost points var
Eddie gave him the opportunity to con the ref, and he took it.
Metalartin
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 15 Jul 2015
- Messages
- 12,291
Yeah it's not that we've not seen red cards given without VAR for that(which is probably where flook was coming from) but it's annoying for two reasons for me:Said exactly that at the time.
Eddie gave him the opportunity to con the ref, and he took it.
1) The idea that a ref has to automatically give a red card if it is a penalty, hasn't been true for a few years now, why do people keep saying it? Especially the commentary, selective amnesia?
2) I'm pretty certain they(VAR) would have looked for a way not to send Alisson off had Liverpool been in that situation and quickly remembered the above law change.
If that's true that they have changed the interpretation of the handball rule from what they told us when Jesus' goal was ruled out, that just takes the biscuit. That's basically an admittance that they got it wrong/wanted to rule that goal out enough to deliberately misinterpret it.
Last edited:
Rorz88
Well-Known Member
Anyone got a link to the Scudamore interview? Can’t find it anywhere and want to show a mate
MillionMilesAway
Well-Known Member
There's a mistake on the review of the Wolves game, Jota dipped his shoulder and leaned into Ederson, looking for the contact the second Ederson missed the ball. An honest mistake from Eddie and he tried to pull out/avoid contact. Not a red card for those two reasons, ontop of that wasn't there a rule change which specified that a yellow can be given if there was no intent to deny a goalscoring opportunity? You've gone with the commentary's call on the incident. Watch the replay without audio it's obvious IMO.
While I did think that the Wolves player created the contact, you're wrong on the rule change, I think.
The change was that a genuine attempt to play the ball that results in a penalty should cause a yellow card not red. A pullback should still be red, as it's not an attempt at the ball - a main reason was to allow keepers/defenders to make an attempt and take the player out.
The other point is that it must result in a penalty to count - I assume the reasoning is that that is still a clear goal-scoring opportunity. Bayern fell foul of this earlier in the season - a penalty and yellow card was given against the keeper; Bayern players insisted that it was outside the area, so the ref checked the monitor; he agreed with them, changed the penalty to a freekick and sent the keeper off! Clearly the Bayern players hadn't worked that part out, and Bayern got hammered about 5-1.
MillionMilesAway
Well-Known Member
Yeah it's not that we've not seen red cards given without VAR for that(which is probably where flook was coming from) but it's annoying for two reasons for me:
1) The idea that a ref has to automatically give a red card if it is a penalty, hasn't been true for a few years now, why do people keep saying it? Especially the commentary, selective amnesia?
2) I'm pretty certain they(VAR) would have looked for a way not to send Alisson off had Liverpool been in that situation and quickly remembered the above law change.
If that's true that they have changed the interpretation of the handball rule from what they told us when Jesus' goal was ruled out, that just takes the biscuit. That's basically an admittance that they got it wrong/wanted to rule that goal out enough to deliberately misinterpret it.
Why do you think they have changed the interpretation? Elleray (head of the international rules group IFAB who write the laws) has said the interpretation was always that the ball going to a teammate was covered, rather than retaining the ball himself. Riley has instructed that the PL ignore the VAR protocol to some extent, but he can't/shouldn't overrule IFAB. It happened to Wolves a week or two before the Spurs match, and has happened several other times as well, including last night; it's when it's not applied that it looks curious, e.g. an Alli one for Spurs.
Ederson vs Wolves was yards outside the area, so the penalty/red card issue isn't relevant.
Dave Ewing's Back 'eader
Well-Known Member
Said exactly that at the time.
Eddie gave him the opportunity to con the ref, and he took it.
But surely the correct use of video assistance would notice that 'con' and book the guy for diving, wouldn't it? If naivety ever got the better of my cynicism it would be time to start watching tiddlywinks!
Trevor Morley's Tache
Well-Known Member
We've got to the position where the inconsistency and subjectivity mean that any contact these days is given as a foul (in most cases). The guy dipped his shoulder into Eddie and initiated the contact. VAR was never going to give it any other way against City. Maybe they would have looked a little closer if it had been another team, and I genuinely believe this. They need to start getting tough on cheats, and someone needs to have the balls to call it as a foul for simulation. I know they won't though.But surely the correct use of video assistance would notice that 'con' and book the guy for diving, wouldn't it? If naivety ever got the better of my cynicism it would be time to start watching tiddlywinks!
King KdB of Belgium
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 1 May 2018
- Messages
- 1,228
Did anyone notice that a Aston Villa player got booked for putting a arm into the face of a City player during the on Sunday close to the half way line. However when the same incident happened in the Villa penalty area nothing happened. two questions need to be answered
1st did the ref. Mr J. Moss see the incident, and if not why did VAR not give a pen by reviewing the incident.
2nd if the Villa player got booked for that incident, why didn't the Villa player get booked for the 1st one.
1st did the ref. Mr J. Moss see the incident, and if not why did VAR not give a pen by reviewing the incident.
2nd if the Villa player got booked for that incident, why didn't the Villa player get booked for the 1st one.
Did anyone notice that a Aston Villa player got booked for putting a arm into the face of a City player during the on Sunday close to the half way line. However when the same incident happened in the Villa penalty area nothing happened. two questions need to be answered
1st did the ref. Mr J. Moss see the incident, and if not why did VAR not give a pen by reviewing the incident.
2nd if the Villa player got booked for that incident, why didn't the Villa player get booked for the 1st one.
On field Refs and VAR Refs are mates!
Dave Ewing's Back 'eader
Well-Known Member
We've got to the position where the inconsistency and subjectivity mean that any contact these days is given as a foul (in most cases). The guy dipped his shoulder into Eddie and initiated the contact. VAR was never going to give it any other way against City. Maybe they would have looked a little closer if it had been another team, and I genuinely believe this. They need to start getting tough on cheats, and someone needs to have the balls to call it as a foul for simulation. I know they won't though.
They get tough on the cheats who play for teams who have no particular outcome on things! How many retrospective bans have been issued for diving? I think at the last count it was two, and those two must wonder why, when their cheating is replicated every fucking weekend, nothing is done!