A&H

Southampton v Liverpool

JamesL said:
That's not how I see it, I see it as an attempt at shoulder to shoulder contact whilst running together, the ball is in playing distance so I think it is fair to challenge in this manner.
My problem with it, and why I view it as a penalty is he is a fraction late, as Mane is quicker than him which pushes it into a careless challenge for me. It doesn't end up being a fair coming together, the contact is more in the back and as One shows above his legs then end up between Mane's causing a trip.
Very much like my observation on the Pogba incident, just as an upper body challnege, Its not enough. But when you throw it all together including the trip, it just has to be a penalty.
Click to expand...
This is a very good paragraph. Have reviewed the footage again there and can see all these points
 
The Referee Store
JamesL said:
Yes this is in that very small window of
Given - Not Reviewed
Not given - Not Reviewed
Click to expand...
Not sure I'd describe that as a "small" window - it seems to be rapidly becoming the go-to excuse for any event where the VAR has failed to get involved.
 
GraemeS said:
Not sure I'd describe that as a "small" window - it seems to be rapidly becoming the go-to excuse for any event where the VAR has failed to get involved.
Click to expand...
Not sure it's an excuse. There are always going to be edge cases. Despite me being 100% in my conviction it's a pen naturally I should feel that it should have been reviewed. But I dont. I accept its not clear and obvious, and appreciate the fact that had it been given it would not have been overturned either.
The window is small, doesn't mean that this will only be a few cases, there might be 100s of decisions that fit the small overlap between right and wrong and what is clear and obviously so.
 
For me, VAR should only get involved in the clangers and leave the rest to the option of the referee hence "clear and obvious". This means that window shouldn't be a small one since there aren't too many clangers and the Mane incident certainly wasn't one.
 
JamesL said:
Not sure it's an excuse. There are always going to be edge cases. Despite me being 100% in my conviction it's a pen naturally I should feel that it should have been reviewed. But I dont. I accept its not clear and obvious, and appreciate the fact that had it been given it would not have been overturned either.
The window is small, doesn't mean that this will only be a few cases, there might be 100s of decisions that fit the small overlap between right and wrong and what is clear and obviously so.
Click to expand...
Despite my attempts to be reasonable in my first post in this thread, I do think the Mane trip is a much clearer penalty than a lot that we've seen VAR give. And the same for the handball really: although them messing around with the law mid-season complicates that one further, a direct comparison with the one where it hits the back of Dier's shoulder and is given does again feel inconsistent.

Honestly, I don't really like the whole concept of C&O. It's a pointless buffer put in to appease people who thought VAR would result in games being re-refereed, and it's added an extra level of subjectivity (and therefore inconsistency) to the process. Instead of the VAR being an experienced referee who can look at an incident and go "Is that a foul?", they first have to work that out, and then have to work out if it's clear enough that they can persuade the referee they're wrong. I'm not going to witter on about a challenge system again, but I do think such a system would allow C&O to be binned off, and I think that's definitely a good thing.
 
GraemeS said:
Despite my attempts to be reasonable in my first post in this thread, I do think the Mane trip is a much clearer penalty than a lot that we've seen VAR give. And the same for the handball really: although them messing around with the law mid-season complicates that one further, a direct comparison with the one where it hits the back of Dier's shoulder and is given does again feel inconsistent.

Honestly, I don't really like the whole concept of C&O. It's a pointless buffer put in to appease people who thought VAR would result in games being re-refereed, and it's added an extra level of subjectivity (and therefore inconsistency) to the process. Instead of the VAR being an experienced referee who can look at an incident and go "Is that a foul?", they first have to work that out, and then have to work out if it's clear enough that they can persuade the referee they're wrong. I'm not going to witter on about a challenge system again, but I do think such a system would allow C&O to be binned off, and I think that's definitely a good thing.
Click to expand...
With you on the challenge system. Always have been.
Havent seen the handball so can't comment on it.
 
Oh. New debate 🤣.
Not sure I think that is handball offence.
It's not deliberate.
The arm is not extended above or beyond the shoulder.
The arm does not make the body unnaturally bigger.
Deliberately played by another player who was close.
 
JamesL said:
Oh. New debate 🤣.
Not sure I think that is handball offence.
It's not deliberate.
The arm is not extended above or beyond the shoulder.
The arm does not make the body unnaturally bigger.
Deliberately played by another player who was close.
Click to expand...
I'm very much not sure, I will admit. The only reason I mention it is that again, it feels inconsistent with others that have been given this season.
 
That handball would've been given at the start of the season,and still would be in Europe.

Natural position for me.
 
The Mane one I didn't think it was a foul originally. I've wavered a bit since but I still think Mane tried to initiate contact and succeeded, bottom line is I'm certainly not confident enough either way to say the referee made a clear and obvious error.

Certainly not a handball, his arms are where they are expected to be.

The Walcott on Milner one is interesting as I think Milner's reaction, and possibly Walcott's reputation, scoped the outcome. Had it been a different player who had screamed and rolled around I suspect Walcott would have been off after a VAR review.
 
Challenge on Mane - Pen for me but not clear and obvious
Handball decision - Play on, no handball. Natural position etc etc
Walcott challenge - At the very least a yellow. When I saw it live I couldn’t believe they didn’t even given give the foul, especially the AR right next to it
 
Lots of debatable decisions.
In the end, VAR again was totally pointless. All it did was get in the way of assistants fiagging and wasted our time.

My conclusion from this game is that Liverpool players need to up their play acting. The difference between Utd and Lpl right now is the hounding the ref, blocking every free kick, milking every decision as a team. Liverpool had it too easy last season. The players need to "help" the officials more!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top