The Ref Stop

Newcastle v Spurs penalty

Donate to RefChat

Help keep RefChat running, any donation would be appreciated

D

DJIC

RefChat Addict
Thomas Bramall called to the monitor for holding offence penalty.

Jamie Carragher adamant not a penalty, Jonathan Woodgate “I'd be surprised if this is a penalty”

Clinton Morrison “We've got six games tomorrow, there'll be loads of defending like that, let's see if VAR calls that. Just stay out of it because there's no pulling of the shirt or anything. He's just standing his ground and not looking at it.”

Izzy Christiansen “You're giving a penalty every single game if you're giving a penalty for that.”

Video to follow, but I’m outlier penalty for me, no intention to play the ball, but to foul the opponent.

TBF, Dan Burn doesn’t complain or claim a penalty.

https://youtube.com/clip/UgkxfEsH_1zN9esYfQhRKgNCA9Vda_yPkWdH?si=tdQJDXNY6vzGroGR
 
Last edited:
The Ref Stop
I was very surprised it was reviewed, thought it would be what they normally refer to as mutual holding. But once the review was initiated I was sure it was going to be a penalty, there’s very little doubt that Bentancur pulled Burn down.
 
Interesting, as it does fit the guidelines for a penalty kick for holding. (Source Dale Johnson)

The ball did go exactly where Dan Burns would have been.
1764716207095.png
 
Like @RustyRef as soon as it went to monitor it was foregone.

Outside of what I think is a valid point by Clinton Morrison (if that’s a penalty there should be penalties for it every EPL game), it did look to me that Burn was the reason Betancur went down.
 
I thought Burn constantly had his hands up in the air to show he's not holding the defender but it does look a little bit on the soft side especially for a VAR intervention. It's one of those where if the ref gives it onfield it won't be overturned but if nothing is given then it will stay that way.

Nevertheless it's poor defending by the Spurs player in terms of just concentrating on the Newcastle player instead of the ball but you do feel we may see similar other incidents and nothing will be given.
 
Paul_10 said:
I thought Burn constantly had his hands up in the air to show he's not holding the defender but it does look a little bit on the soft side especially for a VAR intervention. It's one of those where if the ref gives it onfield it won't be overturned but if nothing is given then it will stay that way.

Nevertheless it's poor defending by the Spurs player in terms of just concentrating on the Newcastle player instead of the ball but you do feel we may see similar other incidents and nothing will be given.
Click to expand...
If Spurs captain hadn’t equalised with his overhead/bicycle kick then there could have been another VAR referral with a similar pulling to ground by a Newcastle defender.
 
I was at a game recently where a striker was being held / pulled at every corner.

On the FOURTH occasion the ref awarded the penalty.
 
One of the first rules of Refereeing... 'No surprises'
This recommended review has opened a can of worms for future games. The constantly changing (and often nonsense) guidelines have referees tied in knots
It's painful watching the VAR process, with the Public Announcement of the decision the excruciating icing on the cake

I rarely watch an EPL game from start to finish now (not involving Newcastle) and I can't remember the last time I engaged with MOTD
I've drowned in commercialisation. VAR is part of that, a specific aspect that shames me to be a grass roots referee
 
Big Cat said:
One of the first rules of Refereeing... 'No surprises'
This recommended review has opened a can of worms for future games. The constantly changing (and often nonsense) guidelines have referees tied in knots
It's painful watching the VAR process, with the Public Announcement of the decision the excruciating icing on the cake

I rarely watch an EPL game from start to finish now (not involving Newcastle) and I can't remember the last time I engaged with MOTD
I've drowned in commercialisation. VAR is part of that, a specific aspect that shames me to be a grass roots referee
Click to expand...

I think that is what causing the controversy here, yes the review maybe backed up via the guidelines but is it a clear and obvious error. I do think the Spurs defender created more of an offense and the only reason he was in a "headlock" was his own doing really.

I be okay with this decision if we seen loads of pens given for this kind of stuff but I can only recall one or two incidents which resulted in a penalty.

I'm also sick of the constant nonsense that the referee of heading into the box to remind the players about holding each other before corners are taken, it seems to be getting more frequent and just slows the game down even more.
 
Paul_10 said:
I think that is what causing the controversy here, yes the review maybe backed up via the guidelines but is it a clear and obvious error. I do think the Spurs defender created more of an offense and the only reason he was in a "headlock" was his own doing really.

I be okay with this decision if we seen loads of pens given for this kind of stuff but I can only recall one or two incidents which resulted in a penalty.

I'm also sick of the constant nonsense that the referee of heading into the box to remind the players about holding each other before corners are taken, it seems to be getting more frequent and just slows the game down even more.
Click to expand...
I would agree with your last para if they constantly did this & especially more than once at the same incident. At the end of the day, hopefully what the Newcastle penalty will do is to highlight to players, don’t do it or you run the risk of a penalty being awarded.
 
DavidObs said:
I would agree with your last para if they constantly did this & especially more than once at the same incident. At the end of the day, hopefully what the Newcastle penalty will do is to highlight to players, don’t do it or you run the risk of a penalty being awarded.
Click to expand...
As is most often the case, the referees won't win with this
'Mutual grappling' is part of the game. Arguably, Dan Burn was bulldozering his way through the defender. It's impossible to definitively identify an offence. Nobody in football expected a PK, including Dan Burn whose appeal was meek
It amounted to a 'big surprise'. I don't blame the Referees so much. Ever changing guidelines which are never consistent across different Leagues and Countries. Is it such a surprise we get these surprises?

Did we see the impact during the last 10 mins of the game? Yes we did. Richarlison saw the perfect opportunity to deceive (cheat) the Referee at the other end. The self induced pressure with regards to the minor grappling in the opposite penalty area would've been a serious problem for the Ref/VAR had the equalizer not gone in. Ignorance of mutual grappling was a promising tactic for referees, but they've shot themselves in the foot with this one
 
Last edited:
Big Cat said:
As is most often the case, the referees won't win with this
'Mutual grappling' is part of the game. Arguably, Dan Burn was bulldozering his way through the defender. It's impossible to definitively identify an offence. Nobody in football expected a PK, including Dan Burn whose appeal was meek
It amounted to a 'big surprise'. I don't blame the Referees so much. Ever changing guidelines which are never consistent across different Leagues and Countries. Is it such a surprise we get these surprises?

Did we see the impact during the last 10 mins of the game? Yes we did. Richarlison saw the perfect opportunity to deceive (cheat) the Referee at the other end and the refereeing team would've put themselves under intense pressure for a lesser incident in the lead-up to the equalizer. This decision will encourage players to cheat the referee with appeals, whereas ignoring mutual grappling was a promising tactic for referees. A can of worms has been opened
Click to expand...
It’s lucky Richarlison didn’t receive a 2nd caution but it was so blatant it was almost laughable. Had it been his first offence I reckon he would have received a yellow.
 
DavidObs said:
It’s lucky Richarlison didn’t receive a 2nd caution but it was so blatant it was almost laughable. Had it been his first offence I reckon he would have received a yellow.
Click to expand...
Yes, such behaviour would be relatively easy to clamp down on in comparison. But we know why they're nervous about doing so
I think the only aspect of the guidelines above I agree with, is defenders must not be looking in the opposite direction to the ball. I guess they could get some consistency with this one stipulation, but it's very dangerous territory and I think it's safer to just ignore grappling with a 'mutual flavour'
 
Big Cat said:
One of the first rules of Refereeing... 'No surprises'
This recommended review has opened a can of worms for future games. The constantly changing (and often nonsense) guidelines have referees tied in knots
It's painful watching the VAR process, with the Public Announcement of the decision the excruciating icing on the cake

I rarely watch an EPL game from start to finish now (not involving Newcastle) and I can't remember the last time I engaged with MOTD
I've drowned in commercialisation. VAR is part of that, a specific aspect that shames me to be a grass roots referee
Click to expand...
I am not a fan of this either, they do this in the NBA in America. Its like a massive drama which isn't needed. I understand what they are trying to do, but for me it doesn't suit the game
 
If I understand it correctly PGMOL have told officials to penalise if the ball was going towards the location of the player being held, and if the player committing the holding isn't looking at the ball. If so I'd say that cost Bentancur on both grounds, the ball was clearly heading towards Burn and Bentancur had absolutely no interest where the ball was. Whilst we see grappling in most games, those two criteria / considerations aren't met more often than not.

Danny Murphy was talking about it earlier and his view was that defenders not looking at the ball should be penalised, and I tend to agree. If they don't know where the ball is it has to be asked what the defender is actually doing, their sole intention can only be purely to block or hold the attacker. Attackers clearly aren't going to ignore the ball, as unless you get extremely lucky you can't score if you don't know where it is.
 
Agent47 said:
I am not a fan of this either, they do this in the NBA in America. Its like a massive drama which isn't needed. I understand what they are trying to do, but for me it doesn't suit the game
Click to expand...
Yes, the Stadium Announcements are excruciating. They fiddle with their bits for quite a while (like all young men!) to ensure they're 'turned on' before painfully orating the decision using language that valiantly attempts to regurgitate the book. It's like a trainspotter communicating their passion to an audience that couldn't give a monkeys. The announcements do nothing more than broaden the cavernous gap between referees and the football community whilst further perpetuating the delay incurred by the charade of going to the screen in the first place
 
Big Cat said:
Yes, the Stadium Announcements are excruciating. They fiddle with their bits for quite a while (like all young men!) to ensure they're 'turned on' before painfully orating the decision using language that valiantly attempts to regurgitate the book. It's like a trainspotter communicating their passion to an audience that couldn't give a monkeys. The announcements do nothing more than broaden the cavernous gap between referees and the football community whilst further perpetuating the delay incurred by the charade of going to the screen in the first place
Click to expand...
What the game wanted though. The complaint was always that viewers on TV knew what had happened but those in the ground were oblivious. now at least they know what the decision was.
 
Kent Ref said:
I think this was a penalty BUT i don't like the inconsistency in the EPL.
Click to expand...
Subjective calls are always going to have some level of inconsistency. It would be interesting to see (though not sure it is possible because of subjectivity) to evaluate the level of inconsistency in ultimate calls now and 10 years ago. As much as I would like to get rid of video review, I'd still bet that the answer is there is more consistency now. But it doesn't feel like it because VAR leads to a different level of scrutiny that does more to highlight the differences. Every close VAR decision gets met with "well what about what happened in that other game."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top