Referees’ Performances | 2024/2025

[pride in battle]

Not a literal minute!

It was as Haaland was wheeling away to celebrate, as he got about half/three quarters of the way to the corner flag.

I didn't see the ref blow ?

 

[Maly]

I think Matterface just got caught up in the celebrations, all the City players around the ref knew it was no goal and the ref would have told VAR, I've ruled it out, should it be overturned.

The bigger issue is the current handball rule. Been saying it was 3 or 4 years now.

I think each year it’s changed too, which makes it even more inexplicable

 

[homerdog]

That last bit is key. Why would the ref guess at a handball as that's what he would have done

Because he's a useless ****!

 

[VOOMER]

Since Webb came back we have had more injuries

 

[Bluesince1979]

Don't know and under 'clear and obvious' that's huge because basically his decision stands.

I'd just let him watch it at the monitor again with no VAR input.

He should have given it if he wasnt sure THEN gone to var

 

[meltonblue]

I didn't see the ref blow ?

You can hear it and the spurs fans cheering not long at all after he scores.

 

[Eccles Blue]

Score out of 10 for tonight’s referee?
Minus 9

 

[willipp]

I’d also love to know why that linesman put his flag up on doku rather than letting it play out and then see if it was offside.

 

[Chak19]

The ref "seeing" the handball that he blew for, and of course VAR had to stick with his field decision, fucking wankers the lot of them.

 

[daztrueblue91]

I dont care whether the ref disallowed the goal 5 seconds after Haaland scored, 5 minutes after or 5 hours after.

The fact that a goal has been disallowed for handball despite VAR confirming there is no conclusive evidence of handball is utter incompetence.

It shows that the primary purpose of VAR is to protect referees rather than coming to the correct decision.

 

[Shuffs]

The Doku offside is still baffling.

I think the "Rashford" linesman needs putting out to pasture.

 

[meltonblue]

I dont care whether the ref disallowed the goal 5 seconds after Haaland scored, 5 minutes after or 5 hours after.

The fact that a goal has been disallowed for handball despite VAR confirming there is no conclusive evidence of handball is utter incompetence.

It shows that the primary purpose of VAR is to protect referees rather than coming to the correct decision.

It doesn’t to be fair. VAR said there was no conclusive evidence to overturn the decision, which is what it needs to intervene.

It was entirely the ref’s fault.

 

[Blue Mist]

I think you are being a bit harsh on the assistant referee.
The original ref, Maddison had a great game until he was subbed off leaving the aussie to do it all on his own.

 

[willipp]

It doesn’t to be fair. VAR said there was no conclusive evidence to overturn the decision, which is what it needs to intervene.

It was entirely the ref’s fault.

Surely the evidence suggested there was no handball. Ref asks did he handball it? vAR looks and respond nothing from what we can see suggests he handballed it. The only handball we can see is the spurs player. Ref - ok great, stick with my decision.

 

[Blue Mist]

Ref did disallow it, it just took a minute, that's why only 1 or 2 lads were over with Haaland.

Matterface just didn't realise.

Well Var didn't realise either then. Matterface can hear what Var are saying and took his lead from them.

 

[daztrueblue91]

It doesn’t to be fair. VAR said there was no conclusive evidence to overturn the decision, which is what it needs to intervene.

It was entirely the ref’s fault.

That’s precisely the point I’m making.

The emphasis is on conclusive evidence to overturn a decision rather than coming to the correct decision.

The ref claimed handball and there’s no conclusive evidence that it happened. The idea that players have to prove they didn’t commit an offence, as opposed to the ref proving they did is utter stupidity.

 

[meltonblue]

Surely the evidence suggested there was no handball. Ref asks did he handball it? vAR looks and respond nothing from what we can see suggests he handballed it. The only handball we can see is the spurs player. Ref - ok great, stick with my decision.

The ref doesn’t ask anything, he’s already given his decision, which is he believes (or his assistant) that it’s a handball. VAR then can’t find enough evidence to say he definitely didn’t handball it.

This isn’t applicable to this one but there will be times where the ref does have a better view than even VAR, which is why they need to have evidence to intervene to overturn a decision.

I didn’t think the spurs one was a handball. He handled it but I didn’t think it was a penalty.

 

[The Future’s Blue!]

Bad decision at the end but that just capped a quite dreadful performance all round.

Poppycock.

 

[meltonblue]

That’s precisely the point I’m making.

The emphasis is on conclusive evidence to overturn a decision rather than coming to the correct decision.

The ref claimed handball and there’s no conclusive evidence that it happened. The idea that players have to prove they didn’t commit an offence, as opposed to the ref proving they did is utter stupidity.

That’s just how any decision works though!

 

[The Future’s Blue!]

That’s precisely the point I’m making.

The emphasis is on conclusive evidence to overturn a decision rather than coming to the correct decision.

The ref claimed handball and there’s no conclusive evidence that it happened. The idea that players have to prove they didn’t commit an offence, as opposed to the ref proving they did is utter stupidity.

The ref’s aren’t exclusive, they are a team that are directed.