Southampton (A) - Post Match Thread

[flook]

Another one who hasn't read/understood my post properly. I know full well that VAR doesn't re-ref possible free kicks - I was commenting on the fact that there was no debate by anyone - pundits/commentators as to whether or not a foul had occurred, but where it occurred - inside or outside the area. My post was lamenting the issue that in this situation you either get 'all' - the penalty, or 'nothing' - not even a free kick on the edge of the box. My comment was a criticism of VAR and its application.

I don't believe the pundits/commentators suggested there was no foul, only the referee thought that. But you can't criticise the application of VAR here. It's remit is to review for clear and obvious error within its jurisdiction, which in this instance was "was it a penalty". It wasn't clear and obvious, it was too close to call even after many angles and viewings (imo of course) so VAR performed perfectly.

You are of course free to criticise the jurisdiction under which VAR operates, but are you advocating VAR is used to determine whether a foul has taken place irrespective of whether its in the box, just outside the box, or near the corner flag (for example)? In which case the game would cease to function as a sport as every tackle would have to be reviewed for a possible foul, Or just when it might have been in the box, in which case you blur the lines of its jurisdiction.

Or what exactly are you suggesting?

 

[Shaggy]

Harder for those who made the journey to watch that opening 45 minutes.

Grealish isn't doing anything wrong, he's just not doing much right, either.

I'm a big fan, but think Gundo being back in the team would improve us in the final third right now.

Jack just needs time and sure his big moment will come.

Yes indeed, that 45 minutes was footballing torpor from City.

Agree about Grealish, like I mentioned, I think he is still learning to adapt to City's/Guadiola's style and way of playing.

with regards to Sterling, I think in front of goal or when presented with an opportunity, he does better when he reacts or is spontaneous, rather than if he takes his time or thinks about what he's going to do.

 

[ancoats]

We are so lucky to have the opportunity to watch the best footballing team in Europe. Our players have proved in recent years that they are fantastic fighters when it comes down to a close finish. The team has been amazing under pressure so let's enjoy the forthcoming battle. The only reservation I have is whether the age old question of a proper striker will bite us in the end. Our front 3 yesterday was Foden, Sterling and Grealish. Liverpool's normal front 3 is Salah, Mane and Jota...three top strikers.

I think it's gonna be one hell of a race to the title... come on City.

you can bet the officials will make it one hell of a race ?

look liverpool was always in the race in my book and pretty much like the city first title we won we had a home game vs united only this time its liverpool and its a 6 pointer. so let hope we don't drop to many more points until then.

i also have a feeling pep and city have something up their sleeves in the coming weeks with the international break
maybe a new player could be added ?

 

[Gingers Dad]

Ok fair point.. if they get booked the first time they do it at the Etihad after 3 minutes like most do then they ain’t doing it again for the rest of the game.

The ref would get slaughtered if he booked a keeper for the first time wasting offence after 3 minutes. He definitely isn't going to send off a keeper for two bookings for time wasting

 

[BelfastBlue66]

I don't believe the pundits/commentators suggested there was no foul, only the referee thought that. But you can't criticise the application of VAR here. It's remit is to review for clear and obvious error within its jurisdiction, which in this instance was "was it a penalty". It wasn't clear and obvious, it was too close to call even after many angles and viewings (imo of course) so VAR performed perfectly.

You are of course free to criticise the jurisdiction under which VAR operates, but are you advocating VAR is used to determine whether a foul has taken place irrespective of whether its in the box, just outside the box, or near the corner flag (for example)? In which case the game would cease to function as a sport as every tackle would have to be reviewed for a possible foul, Or just when it might have been in the box, in which case you blur the lines of its jurisdiction.

Or what exactly are you suggesting?

I'm suggesting, that, as in this case, the game has already been stopped and deliberations are under way regarding the positioning of a foul. I at no point suggested that every tackle be VAR'd, but that where the game is paused, and a foul has been shown to have been committed and the only argument is whether it is on or in front of the 18 yard box line, if it's adjudged to be outside the box, then a free kick should be awarded to the attacking team.

 

[the-ecstacy-of-eight]

I don't believe the pundits/commentators suggested there was no foul, only the referee thought that. But you can't criticise the application of VAR here. It's remit is to review for clear and obvious error within its jurisdiction, which in this instance was "was it a penalty". It wasn't clear and obvious, it was too close to call even after many angles and viewings (imo of course) so VAR performed perfectly.

You are of course free to criticise the jurisdiction under which VAR operates, but are you advocating VAR is used to determine whether a foul has taken place irrespective of whether its in the box, just outside the box, or near the corner flag (for example)? In which case the game would cease to function as a sport as every tackle would have to be reviewed for a possible foul, Or just when it might have been in the box, in which case you blur the lines of its jurisdiction.

Or what exactly are you suggesting?

Ok, so here's the thing, VAR's remit is to also decide whether or not an offence is deemed worthy of a red card, especially those that have not been seen by the referee; correct?

So, in situations like yesterday's, VAR is looking to see if the offence was inside the box and as such attempting to decide whether or not it is a penalty (which would be a yellow card offence due to the double jeopardy clause)

However, once the decision has been made that the offence was outside the box, should it not then decide whether or not it was denying a clear goal-scoring opportunity, and as such, be worthy of a red card, which IS within the remit of VAR and given that the ref gave nothing, is clearly a "clear and obvious" error that the on field referee has failed to see?

Would you not agree that the lines are already somewhat blurred?

 

[GoatersLeftShin]

I agree with what most others have said - the first half wasn't great at all and we just didn't get going. I don't know why, but we've seen it happen before and my biggest fear was that in the second half it wouldn't change, Pep wouldn't make any changes and we'd lose.

However, second half I thought some of our play was outstanding. We powered-up a lot and the intensity and movement really improved.

I've said it before about Sterling, but he's a footballer with great movement and able to get into positions. However, if he has to think then he will choose the worst option. If he has to react then he will score. I really can't make my mind about him - his movement is world class, his football brain isn't. Personally, if a decent offer came in I would sell him. This isn't about yesterday, but over the last 2/3 years really.

I also thought Southampton were superb as well. Hassenhuttl is a VERY good manager in my opinion. They could easily have had 3 goals against us, maybe more on a good day. They defended very well and their midfield just didn't give up at all.

It is frustrating sometimes with these games, but dropping 2 points in something out of 33 is league winning form. The way we play means we won't rely on the brilliance of KdB, Mahrez, Sterling etc pulling something out of the hat. We're a team that creates a lot of changes and more often that not wins the game. Sure, we will have games EVERY season that we dominate and lose and in some ways, it felt like that yesterday.

However, overall we're still on course for another title. COME ON CITY!!

 

[Grassland Blue]

So is Raz given what he’s given to the success of our club over the years, and like it or not he’s been a large part of it. The shit this lad gets without being an ounce of trouble is astounding.

He did buy his mum a nice house though...

 

[jimmygrimblesboots]

so you are saying you want VAR to review every single tackle for a foul?

no, where did i state that ?

 

[East Level 2]

It's worth noting that in a game like this the officials can play a huge part in determining the outcome. Football is a game where scoring is at a premium, certainly when compared to other sports.
About 15 years ago someone researched the subject and found there were fewer goals per minute at whatever level of football he was researching, than there were tries in rugby (probably union but I'm not sure), touchdowns in American football, baskets in basketball and goals in ice hockey.
Consequently top football teams are more likely to draw or lose against mid or lower table teams, or lower division teams in cup games, than their counterparts in other sports. It means the occasional bit of skill, a bad bounce, or a poor decision from the officials is more likely to affect the result.
We weren't at our best yesterday but saying the officials were not a part of the problem is disingenuous at best. The penalty might have been outside the box, but for the ref not to even give a free-kick was ludicrous. The scars on Laporte's leg show how incorrect the VAR investigation was for the second incident.
As for the question of whether we need a striker: The table says no, yesterday's performance and possibly the one at Brentford say yes.