Ref Watch

[Trevor Morley's Tache]

The Arsenal and Wolves sendings off were obvious, you couldn’t possibly say anything other than how stupid both players were to pick up second yellows so soon after getting the first, so there’s no question about them.

I have no problem with the rags or dippers getting decisions if they’re justified. If Salah gets fouled in the box it’s a penalty. The problem I have is that they get a huge proportion of 50/50 decisions going in their favour.

And a fair few 70/30s as well.

What I find is the people all too often use the number of contentious incidents as a metric, when it's a strawman argument.

It's not the number of dodgy decisions it is how and when those incidents influence the game. Jota penalty a prime example. At 2-1 Palace always had a chance of getting back into the game, but that 'penalty' killed the game as a contest. And how many other times have the Dipper's benefited from a dodgy decision that has changed the outcome of the game? I can think of a few non-freeckicks that they've scored from in recent seasons.

 

[kippaxwarrior]

Watching the rags game on Saturday afternoon by 60 minutes fatty Moss was puffing harder than someone who smokes 60 a day

 

[Chris in London]

Did I say none at all? I say we have had very few, especially game changing decisions. I'll give you the same platform.....give me ten game changing decisions. To be kind, I'll let you have the last ten years. Should be a doddle according to you.

We've had lots of game changing decisions. If your complaint is that we get far fewer than we should, or that we get very few 50/50 decisions, or that we don't get a lot of the free kicks that other teams would get, or that we get far fewer than the rags and dippers, I agree completely, but to say we get none at all, or very few, is simply wrong. In the last half a dozen games we have had four penalties and two sendings off in our favour. The decisions we get tend to be the ones where there's not really any argument about them, but to say we don't get any, or very few, is unsustainable.

 

[mat]

Today was quite disgusting -- but worth remembering the FA spent the whole season trying to engineer a Scouser title in 2018/19. But to no avail - we were just too fucking good. I am sure pep will use this weekend as a motivation. Nothing is ever certain, but I'd be surprised if we lost it from here.

I believe we won't lose the title. We're too good to surrender this lead.

However, I'm intrigued to see how desperate PiGMOL get to ensure we have a few draws to make the league title race more interesting to the armchair plastic.

Also our game at home with the dippers. The ref and VAR selection should confirm which way the wind will be blowing.

 

[TonyColemansbagofapples]

We've had lots of game changing decisions. If your complaint is that we get far fewer than we should, or that we get very few 50/50 decisions, or that we don't get a lot of the free kicks that other teams would get, or that we get far fewer than the rags and dippers, I agree completely, but to say we get none at all, or very few, is simply wrong. In the last half a dozen games we have had four penalties and two sendings off in our favour. The decisions we get tend to be the ones where there's not really any argument about them, but to say we don't get any, or very few, is unsustainable.

Which sendings off?
Don't say Gabriel at Arsenal because he avoided a first yellow card for scuffing the penalty spot. Hence, there must be two others. Which are they?
Maybe the other is Jimenez.
Both were totally deserved so, if they weren't given, then it would suggest even worse bias.
The Milner incidents at Klanfield confirm any suspicions as regards corruption in football.
Strange how Mr Tierney is now awarded substantially more of the "big" matches following that game.

 

[Chris in London]

What I find is the people all too often use the number of contentious incidents as a metric, when it's a strawman argument.

It's not the number of dodgy decisions it is how and when those incidents influence the game. Jota penalty a prime example. At 2-1 Palace always had a chance of getting back into the game, but that 'penalty' killed the game as a contest. And how many other times have the Dipper's benefited from a dodgy decision that has changed the outcome of the game? I can think of a few non-freeckicks that they've scored from in recent seasons.

Well it can be the number as well. You will recall that 5-2 defeat by Leicester last season when Michael Oliver awarded them three penalties, all for upper body challenges. We had a number of similar claims not given by the same referee both in that game and in others that season.

Likewise, until the third week of December we had zero penalties awarded to us this season. (Well, there was one but it was overturned by VAR.) As numbers go, that's a fairly revealing metric, it seems to me.

 

[The blue phantom]

Favouritism has been around for many years .Just that we have never been a beneficiary.

Fuckinhel you need to read other clubs Forums mate, They don't just think we get the odd decision. We in fact run PIGMOL. Even influence them over other games to benefit us. Am not joking either. Corrupt oil owners corrupting Officials.

 

[Chris in London]

Which sendings off?
Don't say Gabriel at Arsenal because he avoided a first yellow card for scuffing the penalty spot. Hence, there must be two others. Which are they?

He still got sent off, didn't he?

Gabriel's first yellow at Arsenal seems to have been for dissent because he gave it after the penalty had been scored, when the players were on their way back to the centre circle. Then he got a second yellow for a fairly obvious bodycheck. (Also, if yellows were being given for scuffing the spot, the goalkeeper should have got one too because he was at it for a good 30 seconds while the ref was at the VAR monitor.)

The other was against Wolves, the guy who got a yellow for a foul that sometimes gets a yellow, sometimes doesn't but then 30 seconds later tried to block a free kick when he was about a yard away from the ball.

 

[TonyColemansbagofapples]

He still got sent off, didn't he?

Gabriel's first yellow at Arsenal seems to have been for dissent because he gave it after the penalty had been scored, when the players were on their way back to the centre circle. Then he got a second yellow for a fairly obvious bodycheck. (Also, if yellows were being given for scuffing the spot, the goalkeeper should have got one too because he was at it for a good 30 seconds while the ref was at the VAR monitor.)

The other was against Wolves, the guy who got a yellow for a foul that sometimes gets a yellow, sometimes doesn't but then 30 seconds later tried to block a free kick when he was about a yard away from the ball.

Yes, but what I am saying is it was the correct decision. We seem to get screwed with decisions that are no brainers that are not given. Examples being Milner not sent off at Anfield, the non-penalty on Foden last season and many, many others.
I really am trying my best not to get too wound up by the corruption in this league but hardly a week goes by where we are on the arse end of a bad decision or dippers / united benefit

 

[Paladin]

I think there has been a spate of questionable decisions this weekend, and many have gone against us and in favour of our direct challengers (and United). Hence a bit of a revival of this thread.

But taking off the blue tints, the United goal was probably ok. Liverpool only had to see out a few minutes and probably would have won anyway. And the De Bruyne penalty decision was arguably correct also. We can't really say the resultant points awarded were affected much, if at all.

When was the last time we had this many contentious decisions in one weekend? Or when we felt we had been treated unfairly by VAR? There havn't been occasions many this season, and this is suggestive to me that things are improving.

There are still some questions I would like answered though, such as why a Match Commander is needed, and what are his actual powers.

Not perfect, but I can see improvements.

 

[Bozzie]

Good point. How many times has the referee been told to check the monitor then not reversed his original decision? I can't think of a single one. Even the commentators know and tell us the decision is going to be overturned.

So is the referee actually making the decision, or is he carrying out an instruction? It wouldn't surprise me if Riley has told them, for the good of their career, to reverse their original decision whenever they are told to consult the monitor. And these decisions are actually being made by those in the VAR room. It again raises the question of the role of the mysterious Match Commanders.

The rationale behind that is that, in theory, VAR only sends the referee to review an incident because they've identified something that the referee hasn't seen. So the Arsenal penalty would presumably have gone something like: VAR: "There was a shirt pull, did you see it?" REF: "No" VAR: "Maybe review it on the monitor then" Ref goes and sees it, reverses his decision and gives penalty which, you could argue, is VAR working exactly as it should.
That doesn't explain what VAR could possibly have seen in the Jota incident yesterday which is why VAR and PGMOL need to become entirely transparent and fans should have an official explanation of the decision making process.

 

[TonyColemansbagofapples]

For what it's worth, I reckon Spurs were badly treated at Chelsea because united need lots of assistance to reach top four. Expect to see West Ham, Spurs and Arsenal receive a few dodgy ones

 

[Bozzie]

Fuckinhel you need to read other clubs Forums mate, They don't just think we get the odd decision. We in fact run PIGMOL. Even influence them over other games to benefit us. Am not joking either. Corrupt oil owners corrupting Officials.

Look if we can afford to 'buy' UEFA, the Premier League and CAS, Riley and his band of cheapskate old bastards at PGMOL will be small change for the Sheik.

 

[Colin Bells Boots]

The PL are responsible for employing PiGMOL ( if I understand correctly ) , and would also like the PL be be competitive . I don't recall any such issues from them when the rags were dominant and winning it regularly.

That to my mind introduces a conflict of interest and the oppoertunity to influence the way that PiGMOL operates . A truly independent organisation to manage the referees and VAR would at least be a level of " influence " removed from the PL and its running of the league.

Also who is the nameles Individual known as the Match Commander and what is his/her remit in the VAR process?

And the transparency of the supporters being able to hear the conversations between the referee and VAR operative would be a massive help for fans, but possibly unpalatable to both PL and PiGMOL because they could be held to account for their
" questionable" decisions.

But as pigs can't fly, probably none of the above will happen !

 

[The Light Was Yellow Sir]

Allow me to put a case forward for the penalty.
The fact that Jota lost control of the ball is irrelevant. If a player loses control of the ball in the area but gets clattered by an opponent including the goalie then it's a still a foul and therefore a penalty.
So then the question arises did he 'buy' the foul by moving into the keeper. I think he did but players do this all the time both outside and inside the box and get rewarded for it.
So on that basis the penalty decision could be justified.

Let’s say that you’re right, your final sentence sums up entirely why VAR should not have got involved.

 

[Chris in London]

Yes, but what I am saying is it was the correct decision. We seem to get screwed with decisions that are no brainers that are not given. Examples being Milner not sent off at Anfield, the non-penalty on Foden last season and many, many others.
I really am trying my best not to get too wound up by the corruption in this league but hardly a week goes by where we are on the arse end of a bad decision or dippers / united benefit

I completely agree, the decisions we get are the ones there's not really much to argue about. The only genuine 50/50 call we have had in our favour I can think of was the Odergaard penalty shout in the Arsenal game.

 

[chaddblue]

Ref watch with Dermot Gallagher about to start on sky sports. This should be interesting

 

[Chris in London]

The rationale behind that is that, in theory, VAR only sends the referee to review an incident because they've identified something that the referee hasn't seen. So the Arsenal penalty would presumably have gone something like: VAR: "There was a shirt pull, did you see it?" REF: "No" VAR: "Maybe review it on the monitor then" Ref goes and sees it, reverses his decision and gives penalty which, you could argue, is VAR working exactly as it should.
That doesn't explain what VAR could possibly have seen in the Jota incident yesterday which is why VAR and PGMOL need to become entirely transparent and fans should have an official explanation of the decision making process.

Likewise the decision to disallow the equaliser against the rags (Villa?) for a foul on Cavani that the referee had seen and said 'no foul'?

 

[Bozzie]

Ref watch with Dermot Gallagher about to start on sky sports. This should be interesting

It was interesting because Gallagher has pretty much confirmed what we all suspected, that VAR has influenced the decision making and therefore the result of the game. To their credit, Sue Smith and Stephen Warnock have agreed and called both decisions (Liverpool's second goal and the penalty) as incorrect.

 

[Colin Bells Boots]

It was interesting because Gallagher has pretty much confirmed what we all suspected, that VAR has influenced the decision making and therefore the result of the game. To their credit, Sue Smith and Stephen Warnock have agreed and called both decisions (Liverpool's second goal and the penalty) as incorrect.

Wow that is totally unexpected.