Simon Hooper is the ref, and no VAR

[Nick Bateman]

No VAR is a good thing IMO. VAR helps the so-called "big teams" and hammers clubs like Fulham. But aside from that, it's wonderful when one of our players scores and they can instantly celebrate, as can the crowd, if the lino & on field ref have no objection.

Even if the scorer is possibly offside by a small margin but the lino doesn't flag, it counts. I would accept this if it were against us. How many Mo Salah goals did he score looking marginally offside?

This system in place since the beginning of football actually works. VAR is killing football. It adds in millimeters of "offsideness" which goes against the spirit of the game. And it is getting decisions wrong making subjective overrules of the ref as in the Raul Jiminez call, which I felt the referee got right and was in no way a "clear and obvious error".

As a spectacle it is great to return to instant judgements and keeps the play flowing. I'll trust in Simon Hooper not to judge that the EFL would prefer a Liverpool-Chelsea final and just do his best in the interests of fairness and may the best team win.

COYW 

[SerbianLad]

I can't remember Hooper making any serious mistakes when he refereed our games before. Hopfully he'll do an adequate job again.

[AJW48361]

Haven't seen a decent a Ref all season.

[gang]

No VAR is a good thing IMO. VAR helps the so-called "big teams" and hammers clubs like Fulham. But aside from that, it's wonderful when one of our players scores and they can instantly celebrate, as can the crowd, if the lino & on field ref have no objection.

Even if the scorer is possibly offside by a small margin but the lino doesn't flag, it counts. I would accept this if it were against us. How many Mo Salah goals did he score looking marginally offside?

This system in place since the beginning of football actually works. VAR is killing football. It adds in millimeters of "offsideness" which goes against the spirit of the game. And it is getting decisions wrong making subjective overrules of the ref as in the Raul Jiminez call, which I felt the referee got right and was in no way a "clear and obvious error".

As a spectacle it is great to return to instant judgements and keeps the play flowing. I'll trust in Simon Hooper not to judge that the EFL would prefer a Liverpool-Chelsea final and just do his best in the interests of fairness and may the best team win.

COYW 

Agree with most but if Fulham are or not the best team may they win.

[KeydGV21]

No VAR is a good thing IMO. VAR helps the so-called "big teams" and hammers clubs like Fulham. But aside from that, it's wonderful when one of our players scores and they can instantly celebrate, as can the crowd, if the lino & on field ref have no objection.

Even if the scorer is possibly offside by a small margin but the lino doesn't flag, it counts. I would accept this if it were against us. How many Mo Salah goals did he score looking marginally offside?

This system in place since the beginning of football actually works. VAR is killing football. It adds in millimeters of "offsideness" which goes against the spirit of the game. And it is getting decisions wrong making subjective overrules of the ref as in the Raul Jiminez call, which I felt the referee got right and was in no way a "clear and obvious error".

As a spectacle it is great to return to instant judgements and keeps the play flowing. I'll trust in Simon Hooper not to judge that the EFL would prefer a Liverpool-Chelsea final and just do his best in the interests of fairness and may the best team win.

COYW 

Like when United had a goal called back because McGuire was marginally offsides and made a run?

[Bassey the warrior]

No VAR was good for us in the previous leg as arguably we should've conceded a penalty. However, if it happens in the reverse and we go on to lose after failing to get a penalty, will people still be saying no VAR is better?

[Nick Bateman]

No VAR was good for us in the previous leg as arguably we should've conceded a penalty. However, if it happens in the reverse and we go on to lose after failing to get a penalty, will people still be saying no VAR is better?

Yes, because if the ref didn't give it VAR would not interfere, not with "Gnasher" Klopp prowling around. They might on the other end intervene to award Liverpool a 'soft' penalty.

[hovewhite]

I thought he reffed the game well and allowed it to flow.

[bog]

I thought he reffed the game well and allowed it to flow.

Totally agree.

[bencher]

Yes. Both teams were quite physical at times, using their bodies in all kinds of ways, and the ref was even-handed in keeping the bar for free kicks quite high. I do think he got Cairney's yellow card wrong though. It wasn't even a foul.

[bill taylors apprentice]

Yes. Both teams were quite physical at times, using their bodies in all kinds of ways, and the ref was even-handed in keeping the bar for free kicks quite high. I do think he got Cairney's yellow card wrong though. It wasn't even a foul.

The TC booking was bizarre, he won the ball cleanly, both players momentum carried them into each other but because he got there first he was penalised.
Bonkers decision and I do wonder what goes on in referees minds!