VAR

[baddowvillans]

No problem.  I think despite the win the game left us all wanting a little.  It was a good win and yet there was still an element of hanging on.  Its been a while since we looked good amd cruised to a win against a decent team (ie ignoring Sheffield U.  Let's hope we can put Forest to the sword at the weekend

[baddowvillans]

Just caught up with Ref Watch and heard Dermot Gallaghers interpretation of the penalty incident.  As I've said I thought it fell under the I've seen them given but also not and if the onfield referee had given it VAR wouldn't have disallowed it.

When Gallagher dismissed it however by saying that no because Watkins got into from of him so no penalty.  How many times have we seen penalties given against us where Kane, Salah, Fernandez is described as "clever" because he gets in front of the defender and just stops and allowed our players momentum to take him down.  Penalty given.  I'm still convinced it was a pen, but I am convinced that if it had been one of the above mentioned it 100% would have been.

[Somniloquism]

I thought it might have been because Watkins lost control of it with his touch (just before contact) and the keeper was claiming it anyway. As you mentioned, Gallaghers decision makes no sense as Watkins got in front of him because he was IN FRONT OF HIM. Does that mean no penalties should be given with defenders who are behind the striker.

As an aside, did they cover the penalty not given to Forest?

[Paul.S]

Just caught up with Ref Watch and heard Dermot Gallaghers interpretation of the penalty incident.  As I've said I thought it fell under the I've seen them given but also not and if the onfield referee had given it VAR wouldn't have disallowed it.

When Gallagher dismissed it however by saying that no because Watkins got into from of him so no penalty.  How many times have we seen penalties given against us where Kane, Salah, Fernandez is described as "clever" because he gets in front of the defender and just stops and allowed our players momentum to take him down.  Penalty given.  I'm still convinced it was a pen, but I am convinced that if it had been one of the above mentioned it 100% would have been.

You can’t win as they’ve got an excuse for everything.

[Somniloquism]

I had a quick look at what videos were available on Ref watch to see for myself but they don't currently have the Watkins decision for free viewing. However I watched the Newcastle penalty one. You can see Dermot trying so hard to defend the decision that it was right for VAR to over-ride the offside on-field call even though he didn't really believe it himself.

[baddowvillans]

I had a quick look at what videos were available on Ref watch to see for myself but they don't currently have the Watkins decision for free viewing. However I watched the Newcastle penalty one. You can see Dermot trying so hard to defend the decision that it was right for VAR to over-ride the offside on-field call even though he didn't really believe it himself.

Agreed.  I thought Stephen Warnock did a great job of tripping him up with his own word soup.  For those who haven't seen it Gallagher argues that Schar that although was in an offside position he wasn't interfering because the ball hadn't yet been played into that area so the shirt pulling was the offence and a penalty awarded.  Warnock pointed out that as Schar was deemed not to be active then pulling his shirt wouldn't have made any difference so why give a pen.  By the sound of it the match VAR officials potentially went beyond their remit here by literally making up a new rule live in game. 

[Drummond]

I had a quick look at what videos were available on Ref watch to see for myself but they don't currently have the Watkins decision for free viewing. However I watched the Newcastle penalty one. You can see Dermot trying so hard to defend the decision that it was right for VAR to over-ride the offside on-field call even though he didn't really believe it himself.

Agreed.  I thought Stephen Warnock did a great job of tripping him up with his own word soup.  For those who haven't seen it Gallagher argues that Schar that although was in an offside position he wasn't interfering because the ball hadn't yet been played into that area so the shirt pulling was the offence and a penalty awarded.  Warnock pointed out that as Schar was deemed not to be active then pulling his shirt wouldn't have made any difference so why give a pen.  By the sound of it the match VAR officials potentially went beyond their remit here by literally making up a new rule live in game.

Just because he wasn't in an offside position doesn't mean fouls don't count though.

[chrisw1]

Dermot Gallagher is a pointless monumental bellend.

His only agenda is to defend refs and just give reasons why the ref may have given a decision.  I guarantee you if the ref had given the Watkins pen he would have whole heartedly agreed with it and come up with a narrative to defend it.  He very rarely gives his own opinion of an incident irrespective of the onfield decision.  He's the very definition of a fence sitter and it's remarkable they pay him for it.

[baddowvillans]

I had a quick look at what videos were available on Ref watch to see for myself but they don't currently have the Watkins decision for free viewing. However I watched the Newcastle penalty one. You can see Dermot trying so hard to defend the decision that it was right for VAR to over-ride the offside on-field call even though he didn't really believe it himself.

Agreed.  I thought Stephen Warnock did a great job of tripping him up with his own word soup.  For those who haven't seen it Gallagher argues that Schar that although was in an offside position he wasn't interfering because the ball hadn't yet been played into that area so the shirt pulling was the offence and a penalty awarded.  Warnock pointed out that as Schar was deemed not to be active then pulling his shirt wouldn't have made any difference so why give a pen.  By the sound of it the match VAR officials potentially went beyond their remit here by literally making up a new rule live in game.

Just because he wasn't in an offside position doesn't mean fouls don't count though.

No but by making a challenge to win the ball he becomes active - remember Jacob Ramsey at the Red filth on VAR 3rd attempt to disallow Ings goal. 

[Risso]

Dermot Gallagher is a pointless monumental bellend.

His only agenda is to defend refs and just give reasons why the ref may have given a decision.  I guarantee you if the ref had given the Watkins pen he would have whole heartedly agreed with it and come up with a narrative to defend it.  He very rarely gives his own opinion of an incident irrespective of the onfield decision.  He's the very definition of a fence sitter and it's remarkable they pay him for it.

It's just about the worst football related thing on TV. "Why wasn't that given as a penalty?" "Because the ref didn't think it was a penalty." Well thank you for that insight.

[baddowvillans]

Or VAR thought it was a penalty but didn't think it was clear and obvious.  They're starting to disappear up their own backsides

[Toronto Villa]

Dermot Gallagher is the most painful example of fence sitting you will ever witness. He squeezes out the words he uses like he’s constipated taking a painful dry shit. He does the bare minimum in analyzing controversial issues and never, ever criticizes the refereeing establishment. The whole exercise of having him provide “analysis” is a complete waste of time.

[paul_e]

I like the idea of refwatch but he's a really poor choice for it because he is clearly biased towards trying to ensure every decision is correct.

[DB]

Dermot Gallagher is the most painful example of fence sitting you will ever witness. He squeezes out the words he uses like he’s constipated taking a painful dry shit. He does the bare minimum in analyzing controversial issues and never, ever criticizes the refereeing establishment. The whole exercise of having him provide “analysis” is a complete waste of time.

The weird thing is his put on English accent.

[Risso]

I've watched the Watkins penalty shout again, and it's unbelievable. Ollie is in full control of the ball, and he gets both a shoulder barge AND his leg being taken away. It's as clear a foul as you'll ever see, and if it was in the middle of the park it would be both a foul and a yellow card. Thank god we won anyway, but even so, it was abysmal from the ref and VAR.