VAR

[Footy-Vill]

Ref Watch
Former Premier League referee Dermot Gallagher believes officials made the correct decision to rule out Kai Havertz's late goal against Aston Villa.

https://www.skysports.com/watch/video/sports/13028091/ref-watch-kai-havertz-goal-disallowed-unlucky-but-right-decision

[Somniloquism]

Havertz handballs it.

Presenter:- Could the goal have been ruled out but the second Matty Cash handball be given and a penalty. Dermot Gallagher looking like "are you stupid?" whilst politely stating "no as the Havertz handball is the offence given" (first).

[Somniloquism]

And the Penalty one:
https://www.skysports.com/watch/video/sports/13028094/if-you-give-one-youve-got-to-give-both-penalty-pain-at-villa-park-and-selhurst-park

What none of the presenters, or Dermot are asking is what did the ref see and state to the VAR team. For the Palace one, I reckon he said he saw the defender get to the ball first and clear it. VAR goes back and states to the Ref, actually, the defender never touched the ball so do you want to review it again. He does and then gives the Pen. For our one, the ref had a perfect view and he states to VAR, there is contact but not a foul for him. VAR reviews it and can only show, yes there was contact but that is the same as the refs call on the pitch so nothing obvious to over rule it.

[tomd2103]

And the Penalty one:
https://www.skysports.com/watch/video/sports/13028094/if-you-give-one-youve-got-to-give-both-penalty-pain-at-villa-park-and-selhurst-park

What none of the presenters, or Dermot are asking is what did the ref see and state to the VAR team. For the Palace one, I reckon he said he saw the defender get to the ball first and clear it. VAR goes back and states to the Ref, actually, the defender never touched the ball so do you want to review it again. He does and then gives the Pen. For our one, the ref had a perfect view and he states to VAR, there is contact but not a foul for him. VAR reviews it and can only show, yes there was contact but that is the same as the refs call on the pitch so nothing obvious to over rule it.

Which is how it should work.  The referee on the field is officiating the game and it shouldn't be the role of the VAR official to be refereeing it as well. 

The Jesus penalty incident is a good example.  Penalty not awarded on the field, quick check on VAR while the game is going on and if there's nothing clear and obvious to change the decision then a quick word in the ref's ear to play on. 

I just think the 'clear and obvious' part has to be reinforced to the VAR officials and that they should only intervene when it's very apparent a mistake has been made.

[Bad English]

Ref Watch
Former Premier League referee Dermot Gallagher believes officials made the correct decision to rule out Kai Havertz's late goal against Aston Villa.

https://www.skysports.com/watch/video/sports/13028091/ref-watch-kai-havertz-goal-disallowed-unlucky-but-right-decision

BE Watch

H&V poster present at the game notes that the score was 1-0 so who gives a shit Dermot. FTF!

[baddowvillans]

And the Penalty one:
https://www.skysports.com/watch/video/sports/13028094/if-you-give-one-youve-got-to-give-both-penalty-pain-at-villa-park-and-selhurst-park

What none of the presenters, or Dermot are asking is what did the ref see and state to the VAR team. For the Palace one, I reckon he said he saw the defender get to the ball first and clear it. VAR goes back and states to the Ref, actually, the defender never touched the ball so do you want to review it again. He does and then gives the Pen. For our one, the ref had a perfect view and he states to VAR, there is contact but not a foul for him. VAR reviews it and can only show, yes there was contact but that is the same as the refs call on the pitch so nothing obvious to over rule it.

Which is how it should work.  The referee on the field is officiating the game and it shouldn't be the role of the VAR official to be refereeing it as well. 

The Jesus penalty incident is a good example.  Penalty not awarded on the field, quick check on VAR while the game is going on and if there's nothing clear and obvious to change the decision then a quick word in the ref's ear to play on. 

I just think the 'clear and obvious' part has to be reinforced to the VAR officials and that they should only intervene when it very apparent a mistake has been made.

Warnock felt it should have been a penalty for me Jesus after he made a minor contact with ball moves his leg into Luiz so making contact inevitable after which he theatrically throws himself to the ground.  I reckon the ref saw that and and so stuck to his guns.  Personally I would have carded the little price for simulation.

[tomd2103]

And the Penalty one:
https://www.skysports.com/watch/video/sports/13028094/if-you-give-one-youve-got-to-give-both-penalty-pain-at-villa-park-and-selhurst-park

What none of the presenters, or Dermot are asking is what did the ref see and state to the VAR team. For the Palace one, I reckon he said he saw the defender get to the ball first and clear it. VAR goes back and states to the Ref, actually, the defender never touched the ball so do you want to review it again. He does and then gives the Pen. For our one, the ref had a perfect view and he states to VAR, there is contact but not a foul for him. VAR reviews it and can only show, yes there was contact but that is the same as the refs call on the pitch so nothing obvious to over rule it.

Which is how it should work.  The referee on the field is officiating the game and it shouldn't be the role of the VAR official to be refereeing it as well. 

The Jesus penalty incident is a good example.  Penalty not awarded on the field, quick check on VAR while the game is going on and if there's nothing clear and obvious to change the decision then a quick word in the ref's ear to play on. 

I just think the 'clear and obvious' part has to be reinforced to the VAR officials and that they should only intervene when it very apparent a mistake has been made.

Warnock felt it should have been a penalty for me Jesus after he made a minor contact with ball moves his leg into Luiz so making contact inevitable after which he theatrically throws himself to the ground.  I reckon the ref saw that and and so stuck to his guns.  Personally I would have carded the little price for simulation.

There was contact, but it would have been an extremely soft penalty and there was no clear and obvious reason to overturn the decision.  That would have probably been the case as well had it been given. 

[LeeB]

And the Penalty one:
https://www.skysports.com/watch/video/sports/13028094/if-you-give-one-youve-got-to-give-both-penalty-pain-at-villa-park-and-selhurst-park

What none of the presenters, or Dermot are asking is what did the ref see and state to the VAR team. For the Palace one, I reckon he said he saw the defender get to the ball first and clear it. VAR goes back and states to the Ref, actually, the defender never touched the ball so do you want to review it again. He does and then gives the Pen. For our one, the ref had a perfect view and he states to VAR, there is contact but not a foul for him. VAR reviews it and can only show, yes there was contact but that is the same as the refs call on the pitch so nothing obvious to over rule it.

Which is how it should work.  The referee on the field is officiating the game and it shouldn't be the role of the VAR official to be refereeing it as well. 

The Jesus penalty incident is a good example.  Penalty not awarded on the field, quick check on VAR while the game is going on and if there's nothing clear and obvious to change the decision then a quick word in the ref's ear to play on. 

I just think the 'clear and obvious' part has to be reinforced to the VAR officials and that they should only intervene when it very apparent a mistake has been made.

Warnock felt it should have been a penalty for me Jesus after he made a minor contact with ball moves his leg into Luiz so making contact inevitable after which he theatrically throws himself to the ground.  I reckon the ref saw that and and so stuck to his guns.  Personally I would have carded the little price for simulation.

Fucking right.

I cannot believe those tossers were on MOTD were claiming the two incidents were the same, the Palace lad touches the ball away then gets clattered, Doug lifts his leg and then drops it away as does mouse-face, who then arcs his body like 15,000v are passing through him. Get to fuck.

[Exeter 77]

This is the audio of the discussion between Jared Gillett and VAR for the disallowed goal with some explanation by Howard Webb (and unfortunately Michael Owen).

https://youtu.be/TI11_iBm9Sk?feature=shared

[Somniloquism]

At least they have got more professional with the communications after the Livarpool fiasco. Maybe the VAR lot hadn't just flown back from Saudi/UAE.

[Risso]

Christ, is anybody else completely bored with the tears regarding the fact that a referee made a right decision, and VAR made the correct decision not to overturn it?

[Grocer]

Christ, is anybody else completely bored with the tears regarding the fact that a referee made a right decision, and VAR made the correct decision not to overturn it?

Yes. It's ridiculous, as is the continued whining from Spurs fans about Cash's challenge.

[The Edge]

Christ, is anybody else completely bored with the tears regarding the fact that a referee made a right decision, and VAR made the correct decision not to overturn it?

This. Four days on and a couple of hairline decisions still being waffled on about. On talk sport this morning Alan Brazil (who has never forgiven us for stealing the title off Ipswich in 1981) was banging on about the disallowed goal saying it should of stood. Jesus christ it was a close call that could have gone either way and it went our way but not the kind of travesty to still be banging on about four fucking days after. It's almost like there's an agenda. Could it be that we've ruffled the feathers of the cosy cartel, the scab six? So if they kick up enough stink about us getting a couple of tight decisions go our way maybe they can influence referee's going forward to not be so favourable to clubs outside the cosy club? Maybe I'm getting a bit Arsenal but it seems they don't like it up em.

[SamTheMouse]

Christ, is anybody else completely bored with the tears regarding the fact that a referee made a right decision, and VAR made the correct decision not to overturn it?

Yes. It's ridiculous, as is the continued whining from Spurs fans about Cash's challenge.

The irony of Spuds fans all clutching their pearls at Cash's "thuggery", when they've got Romero in their team.

[Mouse Potato]

Christ, is anybody else completely bored with the tears regarding the fact that a referee made a right decision, and VAR made the correct decision not to overturn it?

This. Four days on and a couple of hairline decisions still being waffled on about. On talk sport this morning Alan Brazil (who has never forgiven us for stealing the title off Ipswich in 1981) was banging on about the disallowed goal saying it should of stood. Jesus christ it was a close call that could have gone either way and it went our way but not the kind of travesty to still be banging on about four fucking days after. It's almost like there's an agenda. Could it be that we've ruffled the feathers of the cosy cartel, the scab six? So if they kick up enough stink about us getting a couple of tight decisions go our way maybe they can influence referee's going forward to not be so favourable to clubs outside the cosy club? Maybe I'm getting a bit Arsenal but it seems they don't like it up em.

The video on Exeter 77's link above, makes it absolutely clear that both the Ref and VAR were 100% correct with the handball decision.  It astounds me that 70% of Arsenal fans (and the manager) cannot see the handball.  If the ref hadn't given it then VAR were obliged to, due to the (silly) rule.  Just because the rule is daft, it doesn't mean that it can be ignored.