Ref Watch

[jjctid]

If Oliver and Coote were under orders to keep things interesting, why the fuck did Coote go to the effort to find an angle showing Whites big toe was playing Stones onside, rather than using the tv angle where Stones looked clearly off and which nobody would’ve questioned…..

You sir are spot on regarding the second goal. What was interesting though was the different footage shown. At first viewing it looked clearly offside but if you re-watch it the ball has left Kev's foot and is probably a frame or 2 late. On the review which I think uses the official VAR footage the still frame looks totally different and is certainly a frame or 2 earlier. However you can't see Kev crossing the ball on the 2nd view which all goes to show how it is possible to achieve either decision. I was amazed we got the goal as were most of us I suspect.

 

[SebastianBlue]

At no point did KDB have possession. The ball was free, Partey got to within playing distance of the ball first and KDB kicks him. If Partey was not within instant playing distance, then it's no lo ger a shield, but a trip.

Partey literally took Kev out at the legs.

Have no idea which incident you were looking at but this is the one we’re discussing.

 

[Sir peace frog]

It is a nailed on penalty.

Any of our players doing what Partey did to one of theirs anywhere on pitch would be given as foul (as it should).

That is running in, perpendicular to the attacking players movement, to block their leg to prevent a run/shot, with no intention to play the ball (only Ramsdale and Kev were even in a position to do that), which is always a foul.

He actually takes Kev out at the legs and people are arguing that Kev fouled Partey.

It’s laughable.

how the fuck is that shielding the ball,its as clear as daylight, the two claiming to be refs saying that's not a penalty well that's quite fucking scary

 

[SebastianBlue]

how the fuck is that shielding the ball,its as clear as daylight, the two claiming to be refs saying that's not a penalty well that's quite fucking scary

I have no idea. It’s the literal definition of blocking/obstruction. It is a foul anywhere on the pitch.

 

[CatMan]

these part time refs are like full time refs fucking clueless.

I would have liked it to have been a penalty as much as anyone, but the laws were interpreted correctly, first by Oliver, and then by VAR. As bizarre as it may look, and as much as many may not like it, it was not a penalty, but a foul on Partey. Incidentally it was the same VAR team that overruled the on field offside decision for Stone's goal, when at 1st glance nobody would have disagreed with the initial offside. So it’s fair to say, that they do have some modicum of knowledge of the laws of the game.

 

[Roachy]

Just before the Kev- Partey incident, there looked like a handball shout. Anyone else notice this and was there anything in it?

 

[SebastianBlue]

I would have liked it to have been a penalty as much as anyone, but the laws were interpreted correctly, first by Oliver, and then by VAR. As bizarre as it may look, and as much as many may not like it, it was not a penalty, but a foul on Partey. Incidentally it was the same VAR team that overruled the on field offside decision for Stone's goal, when at 1st glance nobody would have disagreed with the initial offside. So it’s fair to say, that they do have some modicum of knowledge of the laws of the game.

In what upside down world is this Kev fouling Partey?

 

[Coljj]

Funny how the ref and VAR couldn't wait to give the tarquins a penalty at the Emirates when their forward clattered into Eddy..

As I recall Nketiah thought the ref had blown because his watch had buzzed and the ball had crossed the line. Never did he think he'd been fouled. He just went to celebrate what he thought was given as a goal.

 

[Roachy]

I have no idea. It’s the literal definition of blocking/obstruction. It is a foul anywhere on the pitch.

Obstruction, now there's a blast from the past. Indirect free kick iirc as well.

 

[mattcity5]

I would have liked it to have been a penalty as much as anyone, but the laws were interpreted correctly, first by Oliver, and then by VAR. As bizarre as it may look, and as much as many may not like it, it was not a penalty, but a foul on Partey. Incidentally it was the same VAR team that overruled the on field offside decision for Stone's goal, when at 1st glance nobody would have disagreed with the initial offside. So it’s fair to say, that they do have some modicum of knowledge of the laws of the game.

One thing I 100% guarantee you - if Oliver had given that as a penalty VAR wouldn't have overruled it.