The Ref Stop

Arsenal v Liverpool

The Ref Stop
Not VC because they just don't care about setting the right example, and damn the rest of us. Keep the stars on the pitch however possible.
Also because Havertz was being a clown.
 
There were some strange officiating moments in this.

The disallowed Arsenal goal: AT seems to wait before blowing after Slob fails to jump. Foul or not, AT confused everyone and then he had a very difficult sell to the players. You could see him repeatedly saying something like ”it was ages before”… well why didn’t blow Ant?!

The ones that irked me in the second half were Trossard (just off the field) and Jesus (close to full time) with blatant dissent at the far side AR. OK, he got a few ”wrong” but these were textbook cards based on this season’s expectations. It took until after the final whistle for Jesus’ repeated protests to get his YC.

(Thought Arsenal presses really well and Liv were poor in 2h)
 
The last second corner/goal kick decision didn't help. If you're unsure use the players reactions to help. Was obviously a corner.
 
santa sangria said:
The disallowed Arsenal goal: AT seems to wait before blowing after Slob fails to jump. Foul or not, AT confused everyone and then he had a very difficult sell to the players. You could see him repeatedly saying something like ”it was ages before”… well why didn’t blow Ant?!
Click to expand...
I was watching the game at the pub with my two mates, one being an Arsenal fan and the other Liverpool. We were all jointly convinced we could hear a faint whistle as Havertz put the ball over the keeper, so if that was the case I think the crowd noise was able to overpower AT's whistle in this case.

As for the Van Dijk situation I can see the claim for violent conduct but I simply don't think it was enough, was surprised not to see a yellow for it though (unless I missed it).
 
Samuel said:
I was watching the game at the pub with my two mates, one being an Arsenal fan and the other Liverpool. We were all jointly convinced we could hear a faint whistle as Havertz put the ball over the keeper, so if that was the case I think the crowd noise was able to overpower AT's whistle in this case.

As for the Van Dijk situation I can see the claim for violent conduct but I simply don't think it was enough, was surprised not to see a yellow for it though (unless I missed it).
Click to expand...
He did. Sky showed a replay that showed him whistle and indicate the free kick long before the ball was in the net which is what he was saying
 
bloovee said:
How is this not VC?

www.skysports.com

Arsenal vs Liverpool: Virgil van Dijk clashes with Kai Havertz off the ball

Virgil van Dijk clashed with Kai Havertz off the ball during their match at the Emirates Stadium.
www.skysports.com www.skysports.com

And presumably these days with no VAR intervention there's no post-match review.
Click to expand...
I am an Arsenal fan and have tried to analyse this whole game without bias (as far as possible).
Konate just got enough on the ball to avoid conceding a penalty; Taylor made the right call with the whistle for Havertz; but this one has completely baffled me and compounded my deep disaffection with VAR.
 
Think I am a minority as usual with these situations..

I didn't think it was violent Conduct.

The force used was not excessive (if as I do you don't subscribe to the any force is excessive when no force is expected) and it's not brutality (i.e. it's not a violent, savage, or ruthless action) in my view.

I was however surprised at no sanction. I felt it was deserving of a yellow card.
 
JamesL said:
Think I am a minority as usual with these situations..

I didn't think it was violent Conduct.

The force used was not excessive (if as I do you don't subscribe to the any force is excessive when no force is expected) and it's not brutality (i.e. it's not a violent, savage, or ruthless action) in my view.

I was however surprised at no sanction. I felt it was deserving of a yellow card.
Click to expand...
That's fair enough. I also know that ambiguity is the greater enemy than genuine injustice. However, the lack of a check fuels the idea that it is deliberately ignored. He also made two movements and attempts to hurt Havertz more than he did, in my eyes.
 
JamesL said:
Think I am a minority as usual with these situations..

I didn't think it was violent Conduct.

The force used was not excessive (if as I do you don't subscribe to the any force is excessive when no force is expected) and it's not brutality (i.e. it's not a violent, savage, or ruthless action) in my view.

I was however surprised at no sanction. I felt it was deserving of a yellow card.
Click to expand...
Am with you. Don't think it was VC... but one of my "BABE" yellows.
(Being a Bellend)
 
JamesL said:
Think I am a minority as usual with these situations..

I didn't think it was violent Conduct.

The force used was not excessive (if as I do you don't subscribe to the any force is excessive when no force is expected) and it's not brutality (i.e. it's not a violent, savage, or ruthless action) in my view.

I was however surprised at no sanction. I felt it was deserving of a yellow card.
Click to expand...
The first time van Dijk throws out his leg it looks like an attempt to trip, but the second time is clearly a stamping action.
 
santa sangria said:
He whistled before it was in… but he delayed the whistle after the ”foul” - I think he was hoping he wouldn’t have to blow;)
Click to expand...
Nope. He blew almost immediately. He blew again as the players hadn't stopped playing which is the whistle you are referring to. Will try and.get the point of the first whistle
 
santa sangria said:
I thought i saw different but fair enough
Click to expand...
I think we are somewhere in the middle.

I went back and checked there is an initial hesitation. Then he blows as havertz and keeper are about to collide and havertz takes the shot and then he blows again before the goal is scored as play carries on after the 1st whistle.
 
JamesL said:
He did. Sky showed a replay that showed him whistle and indicate the free kick long before the ball was in the net which is what he was saying
Click to expand...
Agreed, though I was surprised he delayed the whistle at all as if he was seeing whether or not there was an advantage? If he'd have whistled straight away play would have halted before the "goal" went in.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top