Says it all really..
Arsenal and Chelsea were the biggest beneficiaries of video assistant referee and on-field errors this season.
www.bbc.co.uk
It's a bit of a weird list they've got there and it would be good if there was more information available about how the Key Match Incident panel actually works.
For example, they say Everton should have had a penalty against us for Bernardo holding in the box but don't mention the holding by Arsenal players multiple times per game in every single game of the season. If Bernardo holding should have been a penalty why wasn't it a penalty for West Ham due to the holding by Trossard, Rice and Gabriel?
It also mentions the Dalot red card but not the red card that should have been given in the Everton game. It seems very unlikely that a panel of 5 people looked at those decisions and the majority decided the decision made by the referee and VAR was correct.
Do they actually look at every decision in every game or just the ones higlighted by the media or on social media?
Do the clubs request certain decisions are reviewed?
Is that the exhaustive list of wrong decisions seen by the BBC or is it just a list of the ones leaked to the BBC?
They say they judge decisions on both the Laws of the Game as well as 'what football would expect' so who is 'football' and who decides what 'football expects'? Is it what the fans expect or what Howard Webb expects as they are two very different things.
These KMI reports are useless to fans as we have no idea the answers to so many of the questions around them as they aren't written for fans. They're only supplied to the Premier League, the clubs and PGMOL so we only really hear about them when they're leaked, more than likely by a party attempting to take the heat off a decision going their way which is why we suddenly heard of their decision that Everton should have had a penalty against us when the entire footballing world was calling out the match fixing in the Arsenal - West Ham game.
