Search results

You're right, one missed KPI (however obvious) doesn't make a poor performance. The fact he had a wildly erratic foul/caution threshold, complete failure to act against multiple delayed restarts and some basic out of play decisions wrong is why his overall performance was poor.

I think he handball when he falls?

I don't think it was a great decision at all TBH. DOGSO, but he's waving it off rather than signalling advantage. He's been saved from further scrutiny by the play ending in a goal.

But you have to realise how confusing that is when compared to what VAR considers fact/not a fact? There are decisions VAR can (effectively) make solo if they are considered "factual". But if a VAR incorrectly decides a penalty decision was outside the area, or misses the fact that the GLT has...

Same as @Kes - RP is when the nature of the tackle is what draws the card, FT is when the tackle itself is only a foul but it draws a card for some other reason.

It's a kick out after the ball has gone that connects high on an opponent studs first. I thought it was red when Fernandes did similar a few weeks ago (even though that got reversed) and I think this should be red too.

I'd suggest having a think about persistent infringements (PI) as well. You describe one player being constantly pushed and tripped - was it the same player doing it or were multiple players switching over to have a dig? If the former, you've effectively identified PI but just not realised...

Of course it has potential issues. But it's only mention of a challenge system that seems to provoke people into throwing up their hands and going "you haven't preemptively solved every single issue so it will never work" rather than actually trying to think about it.

I don't understand why every time I mention a challenge system, people are so creative at coming up with problems and simultaneously so uncreative when it come to trying to fix them. Have you tried to think about how to solve this problem or have you skipped that in favour of telling me I'm...

There are easy fixes to this issue. And regardless, in any other sport when this happens, it's always seen as the team's fault rather than the officials.

Challenge system. Challenges from teams replace C&O and it leaves the ref/VAR to review and decide the correct decision, rather than having to juggle "CORRECT" and "C&O" as competing subjective standards.

There's also a barge that puts Trent in the net and stops him clearing after it hits the post that is a third at least coin-flip reason the goal could be disallowed. Between that, the HB and the initial foul, this goal was never being given and it's a red herring to focus on it.

Abandonment is an overreaction to something that is basically an administrative issue.

Surely to try and hide the swap.

Exactly, one of those where it depends what was said by the ref. If the pen/caution was due to a reckless tackle (and that's how it looked to me), VAR should have stayed quiet. If the ref says the GK missed the ball then there's more of a case for an overturn. But what was the caution for...

Tiniest touch on the ball sends the attacker spinning into the air. That's just a reckless challenge (hence the yellow) regardless of nominal contact on the ball.

If that is the case, it brings C&O back into it. Did the striker clearly and obviously have no impact on the keeper?

That is what we get our first rejected review at the monitor of the season for?

Subjective reviews in football currently have two levels of subjectivity: a) is the decision wrong and b) does it meet the C&O threshold? The benefit of any challenge system is that it gets rid of that second level of subjectivity and puts the "should we do a review?" question on the club...

Ask IFAB. I can promise you, they won't give you an answer based on percentage of referees who think it's wrong.