| If that was a penalty then we might aswell call it a day 15:48 - Jan 23 with 828 views | hype313 |
Clearly the VAR checker is a scouser |  |
| |  |
| If that was a penalty then we might aswell call it a day on 15:54 - Jan 23 with 796 views | Sarge |
VAR has ruined the Premier League, which is quite something because it was a crap entity anyway. |  | | |
| If that was a penalty then we might aswell call it a day on 15:54 - Jan 23 with 796 views | peterleeblue |
Why? What part of the ball did the keeper get? Its a foul anywhere else on the pitch as the attacker is taken out of the game. VAR allows that subjective view when ordinarily this would not have been given. And of course the ability to look at it countless times. The benefit of which is not afforded to any ref at any other level. |  | | |
| If that was a penalty then we might aswell call it a day on 16:05 - Jan 23 with 761 views | berkstractorboy |
| If that was a penalty then we might aswell call it a day on 15:54 - Jan 23 by peterleeblue |
Why? What part of the ball did the keeper get? Its a foul anywhere else on the pitch as the attacker is taken out of the game. VAR allows that subjective view when ordinarily this would not have been given. And of course the ability to look at it countless times. The benefit of which is not afforded to any ref at any other level. |
Are you serious?? Jota CLEARLY alters direction just after the ball gets away from him to ensure there is a collision with the keeper.
Oh and VAR is used to look for a clear and obvious error, having to look 15 or more times is not clear or obvious. The application of the technology has failed as it was neither clear or obvious. [Post edited 23 Jan 2022 16:07]
| | | |
| If that was a penalty then we might aswell call it a day on 16:11 - Jan 23 with 733 views | peterleeblue |
| If that was a penalty then we might aswell call it a day on 16:05 - Jan 23 by berkstractorboy |
Are you serious?? Jota CLEARLY alters direction just after the ball gets away from him to ensure there is a collision with the keeper.
Oh and VAR is used to look for a clear and obvious error, having to look 15 or more times is not clear or obvious. The application of the technology has failed as it was neither clear or obvious. [Post edited 23 Jan 2022 16:07]
|
I'm not saying I agree with it. I am trying to rationalise it. I think where VAR is used and we see umpteen repeats of the incident then we can say many incidents aren't clear and obvious. VAR decision still prevails though in most cases clear and obvious or not. | | | |
| If that was a penalty then we might aswell call it a day on 16:12 - Jan 23 with 729 views | Nthsuffolkblue |
| If that was a penalty then we might aswell call it a day on 16:05 - Jan 23 by berkstractorboy |
Are you serious?? Jota CLEARLY alters direction just after the ball gets away from him to ensure there is a collision with the keeper.
Oh and VAR is used to look for a clear and obvious error, having to look 15 or more times is not clear or obvious. The application of the technology has failed as it was neither clear or obvious. [Post edited 23 Jan 2022 16:07]
|
Hadn't spotted that but just watched a replay and see what you mean. Ultimately it isn't for the ref to decide whether the player still has control of the ball but rather whether he has been fouled. Did Jota move in order to ensure the contact? I can see that argument. Was he moving to shield the ball and then get clattered? It is a body movement that I can see the argument that he is initiating the contact. I still think the penalty was the correct call. From the keeper's perspective he come out to get the ball, completely misjudged it and caught the player.
It was a bad misjudgement from the keeper. If it had not been a penalty, I think it would be fair to say that the keeper had been a bit fortunate. |  |
| |
| If that was a penalty then we might aswell call it a day on 16:28 - Jan 23 with 669 views | Wickets |
| If that was a penalty then we might aswell call it a day on 15:54 - Jan 23 by peterleeblue |
Why? What part of the ball did the keeper get? Its a foul anywhere else on the pitch as the attacker is taken out of the game. VAR allows that subjective view when ordinarily this would not have been given. And of course the ability to look at it countless times. The benefit of which is not afforded to any ref at any other level. |
Never a Penalty in a million years , How can 2 premier Ref's decide that was a Penalty Keeper stops a yard in front of Jota who loses control of the ball he than deliberately take another step and just about manages to make soft contact with the keeper than drops to the ground Dreadful decision . |  | | |
| If that was a penalty then we might aswell call it a day on 16:43 - Jan 23 with 621 views | berkstractorboy |
| If that was a penalty then we might aswell call it a day on 16:11 - Jan 23 by peterleeblue |
I'm not saying I agree with it. I am trying to rationalise it. I think where VAR is used and we see umpteen repeats of the incident then we can say many incidents aren't clear and obvious. VAR decision still prevails though in most cases clear and obvious or not. |
But that's the point VAR is being applied incorrectly in many penalty decisions for fouls and handballs. The rules state VAR is used to correct clear and obvious errors and in many cases they are not. This is just another in a long line of poor calls. To me you should have 3 reviews only (of each camera angle used) to make a judgement on whether the original decision was clear and obviously wrong. | | | |
| If that was a penalty then we might aswell call it a day on 16:48 - Jan 23 with 606 views | berkstractorboy |
| If that was a penalty then we might aswell call it a day on 16:12 - Jan 23 by Nthsuffolkblue |
Hadn't spotted that but just watched a replay and see what you mean. Ultimately it isn't for the ref to decide whether the player still has control of the ball but rather whether he has been fouled. Did Jota move in order to ensure the contact? I can see that argument. Was he moving to shield the ball and then get clattered? It is a body movement that I can see the argument that he is initiating the contact. I still think the penalty was the correct call. From the keeper's perspective he come out to get the ball, completely misjudged it and caught the player.
It was a bad misjudgement from the keeper. If it had not been a penalty, I think it would be fair to say that the keeper had been a bit fortunate. |
I think we will agree to disagree on this one as my opinion is never a pen. The keeper misjudged it but he was clearly trying to angle his body back and avoid any contact that Jota ensured would happen by moving towards him. If the keeper is not allowed to come out and attempt to get the ball for always fearing a forward will try to make contact to win the penalty they may as well just stay on the line and the advantage is all for the attacker.
The referee did review it again so I would love to know what he saw differently on VAR to change his mind or was he (over) influenced by Craig Pawson on VAR who showed equally inept refereeing to call that a penalty. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
