| Still a bit annoyed by our non penalty award on Saturday 08:22 - Aug 26 with 5085 views | Dubtractor |
Inexplicable that it wasn't reviewed/given with VAR. None of us are particularly enthused by the VAR factor this season, but the one comfort was that we'd get the sort of penalty awards that refs seemed determined not to give us last year (but which Leeds and Leicester got every week). Seemingly we can't even have that.
Not kidding myself that it would have changed the result at 90 minutes, not for one moment, but it would have given us a glimmer of hope and a bit of a foothold at least. |  |
| |  |
| Still a bit annoyed by our non penalty award on Saturday on 08:44 - Aug 26 with 4272 views | portmanking |
Agreed. I thought we were meant to be hearing more from the VAR team during the decision-making process this season? I just don't like how the game is effectively in the hands of people outside the stadium, making it just as subjective as a referee's decision. The fact VAR are making non-binary decisions over the referee makes a mockery of it all IMO. |  | | |
| Still a bit annoyed by our non penalty award on Saturday on 08:49 - Aug 26 with 4220 views | tractorboy1978 |
I know it shouldn't make a difference but the players seemed so placid about it. We sort of made it easy not to give it. | | | |
| Still a bit annoyed by our non penalty award on Saturday on 08:54 - Aug 26 with 4180 views | Miaow |
I can't believe it wasn't even mentioned on Match of the Day. Not shown during the highlights, not even touched on during the analysis afterwards. |  |
| |
| Still a bit annoyed by our non penalty award on Saturday on 08:55 - Aug 26 with 4171 views | norfsufblue |
| Still a bit annoyed by our non penalty award on Saturday on 08:44 - Aug 26 by portmanking |
Agreed. I thought we were meant to be hearing more from the VAR team during the decision-making process this season? I just don't like how the game is effectively in the hands of people outside the stadium, making it just as subjective as a referee's decision. The fact VAR are making non-binary decisions over the referee makes a mockery of it all IMO. |
Seconded... can't understand why subjective decisions are not wholly dealt with by the officiating referee on an appeal basis from team captains... one per half and that maintains the long standing " referees decision is final" .... its really always been that simple in my eyes! |  | | |
| Still a bit annoyed by our non penalty award on Saturday on 09:28 - Aug 26 with 4012 views | Garv |
It's weird that MOTD didn't cover it.
But on balance I don't think it's an outrageous one. I need to see it back but at the time I thought Davis went down easily (which he tends to). Their one looked more of a trip whereas they'd probably say Davis was eased off the ball for his. I think if we had that given against us we'd be saying it was soft.
McKenna made the good point that it helped them that play continued for a long time after our appeal, so it was much easier to forget about it.
One thing I hope we don't get wrapped up in is the constant debating of every decision. This is what's killing the game, the entitlement and not allowing for any nuance in decisions or human judgement or error.
Let's not be Forest. |  |
| |
| Still a bit annoyed by our non penalty award on Saturday on 09:33 - Aug 26 with 3952 views | DanTheMan |
| Still a bit annoyed by our non penalty award on Saturday on 08:49 - Aug 26 by tractorboy1978 |
I know it shouldn't make a difference but the players seemed so placid about it. We sort of made it easy not to give it. |
Mentioned this somewhere else but I think it was because they were breaking so we didn't have time to wave our arms and appeal.
Annoying if that really did play a part. |  |
| |
| Still a bit annoyed by our non penalty award on Saturday on 09:34 - Aug 26 with 3919 views | FrimleyBlue |
| Still a bit annoyed by our non penalty award on Saturday on 08:49 - Aug 26 by tractorboy1978 |
I know it shouldn't make a difference but the players seemed so placid about it. We sort of made it easy not to give it. |
Also. Sometimes it might useful for a cheeky mid pitch trip to stop the game so it can be reviewed in the heat of the moment. |  |
| |
| Still a bit annoyed by our non penalty award on Saturday on 09:35 - Aug 26 with 3901 views | FrimleyBlue |
| Still a bit annoyed by our non penalty award on Saturday on 09:28 - Aug 26 by Garv |
It's weird that MOTD didn't cover it.
But on balance I don't think it's an outrageous one. I need to see it back but at the time I thought Davis went down easily (which he tends to). Their one looked more of a trip whereas they'd probably say Davis was eased off the ball for his. I think if we had that given against us we'd be saying it was soft.
McKenna made the good point that it helped them that play continued for a long time after our appeal, so it was much easier to forget about it.
One thing I hope we don't get wrapped up in is the constant debating of every decision. This is what's killing the game, the entitlement and not allowing for any nuance in decisions or human judgement or error.
Let's not be Forest. |
Thing is. Yes he was going down.. but he was then fouled on his way down anyway so its pen imo. | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Still a bit annoyed by our non penalty award on Saturday on 09:40 - Aug 26 with 3876 views | bluearmy4838 |
| Still a bit annoyed by our non penalty award on Saturday on 09:33 - Aug 26 by DanTheMan |
Mentioned this somewhere else but I think it was because they were breaking so we didn't have time to wave our arms and appeal.
Annoying if that really did play a part. |
I said it at the time, always seems like an inconsistency that when the ball goes dead VAR pour over it and find reasons to give something. When the play stays live they seem under pressure to make a quick decision and reluctant to pull the play back. |  | | |
| Still a bit annoyed by our non penalty award on Saturday on 09:45 - Aug 26 with 3827 views | thorpedo |
Martin Keown on Final Score said it was blatant, and more of a penalty than theirs. He said to watch Match Of The Day later to see for ourselves.....then no mention on MOTD! I actually think it was a 50/50 call - Davis was going down a bit anyway from a slight touch, before he was really taken out. As a newly promoted team away at a top team - no chance of it being awarded! |  |
| |
| Still a bit annoyed by our non penalty award on Saturday on 09:47 - Aug 26 with 3811 views | m14_blue |
I'd have been fine with it in isolation, I'd rather see fewer VAR involvements and fewer penalties in general.
However, the fact that it came so shortly after VAR happily intervened in an equally soft appeal at the other end leaves a really bad taste. | | | |
| Still a bit annoyed by our non penalty award on Saturday on 09:54 - Aug 26 with 3766 views | flykickingbybgunn |
| Still a bit annoyed by our non penalty award on Saturday on 09:47 - Aug 26 by m14_blue |
I'd have been fine with it in isolation, I'd rather see fewer VAR involvements and fewer penalties in general.
However, the fact that it came so shortly after VAR happily intervened in an equally soft appeal at the other end leaves a really bad taste. |
Then var bogged it up in the Bournemouth game dissallowing a perfectly good goal. It seems the system still has someway to go to match cricket and rugby checks. |  | | |
| Still a bit annoyed by our non penalty award on Saturday on 10:11 - Aug 26 with 3668 views | Vegtablue |
My commentary team said that VAR had reviewed and cleared the on-field decision during City's following attack. Had the ball gone out of play quickly then there may have been a pause, though based on the speed with which comms confirmed VAR were happy, it wouldn't have been a long one. Having watched a few Prem games now since the start of 2024, VAR appears to replay incidents while the ball is still in play and is constantly re-refereeing. It's a team so they can multitask like this I guess, which speeds up decisions when something is deemed worthy of picking through with a fine-tooth comb, as they've often already had a headstart.
Why they decided this incident was worthy of little more than a quick rubber stamp only they know. 🧐🤔 [Post edited 26 Aug 2024 10:12]
| | | |
| Still a bit annoyed by our non penalty award on Saturday on 10:19 - Aug 26 with 3571 views | Alberto_the_frog |
| Still a bit annoyed by our non penalty award on Saturday on 10:11 - Aug 26 by Vegtablue |
My commentary team said that VAR had reviewed and cleared the on-field decision during City's following attack. Had the ball gone out of play quickly then there may have been a pause, though based on the speed with which comms confirmed VAR were happy, it wouldn't have been a long one. Having watched a few Prem games now since the start of 2024, VAR appears to replay incidents while the ball is still in play and is constantly re-refereeing. It's a team so they can multitask like this I guess, which speeds up decisions when something is deemed worthy of picking through with a fine-tooth comb, as they've often already had a headstart.
Why they decided this incident was worthy of little more than a quick rubber stamp only they know. 🧐🤔 [Post edited 26 Aug 2024 10:12]
|
I read somewhere that 4th official told VAR not to bother looking at it. Don't know if he's able to do that |  |
| |
| Still a bit annoyed by our non penalty award on Saturday on 10:21 - Aug 26 with 3562 views | EastTownBlue |
| Still a bit annoyed by our non penalty award on Saturday on 10:19 - Aug 26 by Alberto_the_frog |
I read somewhere that 4th official told VAR not to bother looking at it. Don't know if he's able to do that |
The fourth official may have provided an opinion on the incident but he has no authority to tell VAR not to bother with a review. [Post edited 26 Aug 2024 10:22]
| | | |
| Still a bit annoyed by our non penalty award on Saturday on 10:22 - Aug 26 with 3556 views | badadski |
| Still a bit annoyed by our non penalty award on Saturday on 10:11 - Aug 26 by Vegtablue |
My commentary team said that VAR had reviewed and cleared the on-field decision during City's following attack. Had the ball gone out of play quickly then there may have been a pause, though based on the speed with which comms confirmed VAR were happy, it wouldn't have been a long one. Having watched a few Prem games now since the start of 2024, VAR appears to replay incidents while the ball is still in play and is constantly re-refereeing. It's a team so they can multitask like this I guess, which speeds up decisions when something is deemed worthy of picking through with a fine-tooth comb, as they've often already had a headstart.
Why they decided this incident was worthy of little more than a quick rubber stamp only they know. 🧐🤔 [Post edited 26 Aug 2024 10:12]
|
The issue was with there penalty - the ref blew the whistle to stop play but hadn’t actually stated what he was awarding and then waited for a var review to tell him what to award. That is not what is is supposed to be for. The ref was the worse I can remember for a long time.
With Leif the ref waived away a penalty during the moment so var had to look to see if he was clear and obvious to overrule the ref. It actually was but due to play continuing we didn’t get it.
We were the masters of our own downfall as if Leif had of
Not got up and rolled around like he had been snipered it would have forced the action, we will no doubt learn from this and have to be unfortunately more dishonest and more dark arts. | | | |
| Still a bit annoyed by our non penalty award on Saturday on 10:54 - Aug 26 with 3262 views | OldFart71 |
| Still a bit annoyed by our non penalty award on Saturday on 08:44 - Aug 26 by portmanking |
Agreed. I thought we were meant to be hearing more from the VAR team during the decision-making process this season? I just don't like how the game is effectively in the hands of people outside the stadium, making it just as subjective as a referee's decision. The fact VAR are making non-binary decisions over the referee makes a mockery of it all IMO. |
What you say is exactly what I have said before. What difference does it make if you have one biased guy on the pitch or three sitting in front of tv screens. Not a halfpenny worth of difference. Until they completely mechanise VAR and do away with the human element it will be no different to a refs decision. But much more expensive to run. | | | |
| Still a bit annoyed by our non penalty award on Saturday on 10:59 - Aug 26 with 3231 views | PioneerBlue |
Ipswich were not supposed to be 1 nil up in the first place. There was no chance they were going to help Ipswich peg back to 3:2. That would be way to close for the champions elect. It’s not supposed to be competitive. | |
| |
| Still a bit annoyed by our non penalty award on Saturday on 11:11 - Aug 26 with 3163 views | badadski |
| Still a bit annoyed by our non penalty award on Saturday on 10:59 - Aug 26 by PioneerBlue |
Ipswich were not supposed to be 1 nil up in the first place. There was no chance they were going to help Ipswich peg back to 3:2. That would be way to close for the champions elect. It’s not supposed to be competitive. |
It’s ironic as I thought with promotion at least we won’t have any issues with the horrendous non pen decisions we had last season where stone Waller after stone Waller was turned away/. Oh how little did I know. Absolute farce already and during just match 2 of the season. I hope we have written off to complain. | | | |
| Still a bit annoyed by our non penalty award on Saturday on 11:20 - Aug 26 with 3107 views | tonybied |
| Still a bit annoyed by our non penalty award on Saturday on 10:54 - Aug 26 by OldFart71 |
What you say is exactly what I have said before. What difference does it make if you have one biased guy on the pitch or three sitting in front of tv screens. Not a halfpenny worth of difference. Until they completely mechanise VAR and do away with the human element it will be no different to a refs decision. But much more expensive to run. |
That's never going to happen for a lot of decisions in football as there's too many that are subjective. How does a computer decide intent? |  | | |
| Still a bit annoyed by our non penalty award on Saturday on 11:26 - Aug 26 with 3042 views | Mullet |
I think it’s the rank hypocrisy and fact that it’s meant to level the playing field but has the opposite effect.
Either they check everything or they only check when the ref wants it checked. Theirs was a penalty, but the ref and the Lino missed it. We then collapsed.
To then not give ours only rubs salt in.
Liverpool got a lot of marginal decisions and leniency with the book last week. The only credit I’ll give him is he had the nuts to book Grealish for his ridiculous dive. |  |
| |
| Still a bit annoyed by our non penalty award on Saturday on 11:29 - Aug 26 with 3023 views | Jimmy86 |
Bearing in mind it involved the same players in each penalty shout and in fact ours was more stonewall a penalty than theirs was, it's disgraceful...
Sam Allison was possibly the worst ref we had at PR last season.. he didn't have VAR to bail out his incompetence then, whereas Sat he did.. what we then needed was competent VAR and we didn't have that either..
How it can be a penalty to them, after he had to check the screen at least 5 times, but not even be sent to view our shout is simply not on | | | |
| Still a bit annoyed by our non penalty award on Saturday on 14:45 - Aug 26 with 2635 views | ElephantintheRoom |
You dont get a penalty for diving - Davis was very fortunate not to be booked.
Very similar in its way to the deliberate handball by Wes Burns in the Liverpool game that could and should have led to a second booking and a dismissal.
I dont remember one-eyed Ipswich supporters with little knowledge of the laws of the game complaining about that one either. | |
| |
| Still a bit annoyed by our non penalty award on Saturday on 15:35 - Aug 26 with 2552 views | Illinoisblue |
A big problem is people blame VAR this, VAR that. Fk that. The ref who is is the VAR needs to be named and shamed for their blatant incompetence. They have the luxury of sitting in a room, no crowd pressure, no players yelling in their ears, and have a hundred different angles to review incidents and STILL they make horrendous errors. Fk them they need to be answerable for their mistakes. |  |
| |
| Still a bit annoyed by our non penalty award on Saturday on 15:56 - Aug 26 with 2487 views | Wickets |
| Still a bit annoyed by our non penalty award on Saturday on 09:28 - Aug 26 by Garv |
It's weird that MOTD didn't cover it.
But on balance I don't think it's an outrageous one. I need to see it back but at the time I thought Davis went down easily (which he tends to). Their one looked more of a trip whereas they'd probably say Davis was eased off the ball for his. I think if we had that given against us we'd be saying it was soft.
McKenna made the good point that it helped them that play continued for a long time after our appeal, so it was much easier to forget about it.
One thing I hope we don't get wrapped up in is the constant debating of every decision. This is what's killing the game, the entitlement and not allowing for any nuance in decisions or human judgement or error.
Let's not be Forest. |
Match of the day nothing but Sky this morning said it qas a nailed on Penalty! |  | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
