Not a good weekend for VAR!

[Lordedmundo]

Not a good weekend for VAR.

During our game (trying to be impartial here):
1. Should have been a penalty for the clear foul on Pereira (and probably a red for the defender)
2. Should not have been a penalty for Reid (as he trod on Trippiers foot)
3. Encroachment by at least 3 players as Mitro took the penalty (should have been re-taken)

Other games:
1. Rashford goal (it had to disallowed - how was he not infering with play?!)
2. Toney pen (he was clearly locking the Bournemouth defenders arm and twisted him around as he ran at goal - it has to be a foul the other way!)

These are just the ones that I have seen - there could have be more screw ups in other matches...!

[junior white]

I thought that both of those against us today were pens, BDR may have been on Trippiers foot but he also caught the back of BDR's ankle.

You are right for encroachment it hsould have been taken again as thats the first infringement, unless it is the attacking team players, then it is only retaken if it is scored not if it is missed.

As for Rashford goal under the law (as bad as it is) then i guess it was correct, yes he was offside but the law says he has to touch the ball oe the impede th e player or something, thats all rubbish as we know. I ask though if that had been Mitro (Rashford role) and Andreas (Bruno Role) would we have wanted the goal to stand?

I agree re Toney 100%, I also do not know how he is allowed to play, he has a charge against him for bett son matches, close to 400 not a small number, now how can he be allowed to play when he could still be doing similar things? Really do not get that
Overall I always think with decisions would i want those for us if so i am not disappointed if they were given against is

[H4usuallysitting]

I blame parker

[hovewhite]

VAR is not working is the to many people looking at decisions.

[junior white]

VAR is not working is the to many people looking at decisions.

Been saying this since it came in, people do not see things te same way so ref in a room and ref on the pitch may have different views. Ref the scared to stick to his decision if sent to a screen

[SP]

I blame parker

Not TK?   :005:

[LittleErn]

Not gonna talk about the fact it should’ve been retaken, huh? 🤔 pic.twitter.com/XkHeY3DOge

— Matt Reed (@MattReedFutbol) January 15, 2023

/photo/1

[Mince n Tatties]

The game was a lot simpler before it came along.
In places like Bahrain and Saudi for instance,they check nearly every goal...One game had 21 mins injury time because of it all.

[H4usuallysitting]

I blame parker

Not TK?   :005:

TK get's it tomorrow

[Fulham1959]

I blame parker

Finally, a bit of common sense !

[Beamer]

I think what we are getting now are refs not making decisions and letting VAR make the call but as the guidance stands they will only intervene if a clear error has been made. So if the ref avoids making a decision he dramatically reduces the chances of VAR getting involved. It shouldn't matter what the ref has or hasn't said, if VAR think their is a decision to make either for or against they should get the ref to review.

[Jamie88]

People don't seem to understand the encroachment law - the penalty is only retaken if the offending player is involved in play directly after a missed penalty. In other words, if the penalty taker blazes it over the bar or in Mitro's case, hits the ball twice, then it is irrelevant.

[Motspur Park]

Not according to the laws as I read them.....
The players other than the kicker and goalkeeper must be:
at least 9.15 m (10 yds) from the penalty mark
behind the penalty mark
inside the field of play
outside the penalty area

[toshes mate]

Has VAR actually had a really successful usefulness as in visibly improving consistency in the game?  My measure of consistency was irritated when early in yesterday's game Trippier got quite aggravated not having a player to throw the ball to and he took a long time over his throw - perhaps 30 seconds.  Mr Jones (the co called referee) made no movement toward Trippier.  Later in the game Tete had a similar problem and the referee was much quicker to point to his watch.   It is simple game to officiate if, as Motspur Park states above, the laws are applied as written and in the same way every time.  There are no partial breaches of, or degrees of guilt in breaking a rule - it is either broken or not.  Encroachment at free kicks is broken time and time again in every match I have watched in the PL this season.  Is it time for the authorities to stop the rot because it is in danger of ruining football as a fair sport?  Letter to the PL - Can we have our game back please?

[wback]

Unfortunately, for the encroachment rule to kick in, the Premier League's interpretation is that the encroacher must have had a material impact on the outcome.

https://www.premierleague.com/news/1297433#:~:text=For%20player%20encroachment%20in%20the,the%20outcome%20of%20the%20kick.

Frankly, given the slip, Mitro was lucky it went in at all. If he'd kicked it off one foot, onto the other and it had gone wide, he probably would be done as the penalty taker.

[Bill2]

Unfortunately, for the encroachment rule to kick in, the Premier League's interpretation is that the encroacher must have had a material impact on the outcome.

https://www.premierleague.com/news/1297433#:~:text=For%20player%20encroachment%20in%20the,the%20outcome%20of%20the%20kick.

Frankly, given the slip, Mitro was lucky it went in at all. If he'd kicked it off one foot, onto the other and it had gone wide, he probably would be done as the penalty taker.

How can the encroached have a material impact, the taker may be able to say he heard the player running but he won't know if he was in the box or not. So penalty taken, keeper saves but player who encroached then gets to the ball first and clears it. He had no material effect on the outcome of the penalty but has on subsequent play. So what would happen then?

[Sting of the North]

Unfortunately, for the encroachment rule to kick in, the Premier League's interpretation is that the encroacher must have had a material impact on the outcome.

https://www.premierleague.com/news/1297433#:~:text=For%20player%20encroachment%20in%20the,the%20outcome%20of%20the%20kick.

Frankly, given the slip, Mitro was lucky it went in at all. If he'd kicked it off one foot, onto the other and it had gone wide, he probably would be done as the penalty taker.

How can the encroached have a material impact the taker may be able to say he heard the player running but he won't know if he wasin the box or not. So penalty taken, keeper saves but player who encroached then gets to the ball first and clears it. He had no material effect on the outcome of the penalty but has on subsequent play. So what would happen then?

Material effect on the "outcome" [of the situation]. If he gets to the ball first to clear it, surely that is a material effect on the outcome? Just like if it is an attacking player coming first and putting in the rebound, he would also have a material effect on the outcome. It is a logical rule that ensures fairness as much as possible.

The problem with the referee's involvment in yesterday's penalty fiasco is not that Mitro didn't get to retake it (it was a correct decision). It is that we should have gotten a penalty for the pull on Pereira and it should also have been a red card on Burn. It was clear as day, even to Howe (always easier to admit such things when the outcome was in your favour, though). That would likely have changed the game, regardless of whether or not we score on the penatly. The referee didn't give anything until VAR forced him, clearly not wanting to disappoint the home fans. He must have been absolutely delighted with the double kick.

[wback]

How can the encroached have a material impact the taker may be able to say he heard the player running but he won't know if he wasin the box or not. So penalty taken, keeper saves but player who encroached then gets to the ball first and clears it. He had no material effect on the outcome of the penalty but has on subsequent play. So what would happen then?

I mean, sure, but it's pretty clear professional players can hardly hear each other at the best of times (example in the first half where Tete was running forward, must have got a load of 'man on' screams and was totally surprised by the tackler arriving from behind). Ref's gonna call BS on this I think.

[Motspur Park]

Unfortunately, for the encroachment rule to kick in, the Premier League's interpretation is that the encroacher must have had a material impact on the outcome.

https://www.premierleague.com/news/1297433#:~:text=For%20player%20encroachment%20in%20the,the%20outcome%20of%20the%20kick.

Frankly, given the slip, Mitro was lucky it went in at all. If he'd kicked it off one foot, onto the other and it had gone wide, he probably would be done as the penalty taker.

I agree with your interpretation as per the Premier League guidance to VAR..... only the LAWS of the game make no such tolerance, therefore the laws needs to be re-written otherwise it is left for the referee and assistant referee to enforce this law.

[bencher]

The rule that says that if a player taking a penalty makes two touches then it is an indirect free-kick is an atrocious rule, isn't it? I understand if they do it deliberately, but surely there should be a carve-out for an accidental two touches such as in this case? At the very least it should be a re-take, rather than a freekick to the other team, surely??