Southampton (A) - Post Match Thread

[LongsightM13]

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

And therein lies the problem. Referee the match and the offence due to the laws of the game, not because of some form of convention that ‘you don’t do that’.
It is cheating and should be treated as such

 

[flook]

no, where did i state that ?

you implied it when you said it wasn't right that VAR couldn't award a free kick......if VAR was empowered to award a free kick, every contact or near contact would have to be reviewed wouldn't it, or if it was only selective challenges which were reviewed then imagine the uproar on here ;)

 

[flook]

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?

its a good point you make however that situation wasn't a denial of a clear goalscoring opportunity because the foul wasn't by the last defender, which is basically how that criteria is measured

 

[flook]

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.

OK fair point, I don't agree it would be beneficial as it takes even more onus off the referee, but it's definitely worthy of discussion

 

[14aguero]

It was going to be a long slog until May, and the draw just confirmed it. On to Brentford.

 

[ancoats]

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.

all very good points matey

i do feel its our achilles heel going one down because of the lack of a striker in the team and the defending teams can sort of just let us have the ball and sit deep knowing there is nothing to hit in the box. yesterday was one of them days when you knew don't go one down because they are good at closing the space and defend really well

having a haaland or kane gives the defending teams a problem because they don't know to hold the line a bit deeper or come out and attack the ball. city do struggle with pressure after going one down and we do need to address it sooner or rather than later because it will cost of big time in bigger games

 

[mat]

Pleased to see Jack has embraces our play as a team culture. Bonus points for wanting in the tunnel to spark out the dirty Soton ****.

 

[Fordyboy46]

Pleased to see Jack has embraces our play as a team culture. Bonus points for wanting in the tunnel to spark out the dirty Soton ****.

To be fair mate my money would've been on Romeu to do the sparking if it came to blows

 

[laplandblue]

After 2 VAR decisions against City, confirmation today that Operation PiGMOL really has started after the ridiculous penalty given to the Dippers. Jiota put his right leg into the goalkeeper, with the ball going out, so it should have been a free-kick to Palace.

Probably the worst VAR penalty I've seen.

The one against Villa was on a par. Just like a couple of seasons ago against Wolves with the handball or two? leading to a goal. the same type of decisions for LiVARpool turned a one nil loss into a one nil win, with a potential goal for the opposition ruled out giving them another undeserved three points. Full marks for the Platoon scene reenactment though.

 

[2infinity&beyond]

In recent weeks I recall piss easy chance being missed by Bernardo and Jack, so Raz is not alone in missing sitters, although he doe have previous

He misses them consistently. Thats the problem.