A&H

Brentford PK

Big Cat

Big Cat

RefChat Addict
Level 4 Referee
Brentford get a PK via the VAR OFR cherade
However, whilst the game plays out waiting for Stockley Park to Referee the game, Brentford spurn a golden opportunity to score
If they'd scored, would the goal be chalked off to allow for the PK? I don't think so

Two for the price of one. Happy Days 🍻
 
Last edited:
The Referee Store
Far too often we see a disparity between the decision given for similar offences in the penalty area depending on if they were committed by the defending or attacking team. Had that been a raised attacking boot, I suspect the whistle would have gone straight away.

Nailed on penalty for me, VAR did it's job and ultimately the correct decision was made! 👍
 
Mooseybaby said:
Far too often we see a disparity between the decision given for similar offences in the penalty area depending on if they were committed by the defending or attacking team. Had that been a raised attacking boot, I suspect the whistle would have gone straight away.

Nailed on penalty for me, VAR did it's job and ultimately the correct decision was made! 👍
Click to expand...
VAR at the other end (shirt pull in the PA); quote,
'not a C&O mistake, but if the R had awarded a PK, very little chance it would've been overturned!'
Both PKs AFAIC. One given, the other ignored
Problems solved by VAR = None
Problems created by VAR = Many
 
Mooseybaby said:
Far too often we see a disparity between the decision given for similar offences in the penalty area depending on if they were committed by the defending or attacking team. Had that been a raised attacking boot, I suspect the whistle would have gone straight away.

Nailed on penalty for me, VAR did it's job and ultimately the correct decision was made! 👍
Click to expand...
Not sure @Big Cat is questioning the validity of the call. More 2 bites of the cherry thing we talk about with advantage.
My thoughts are if Brentford had scored then, no VAR would not have intervened a ordered a PK disallowing the goal. I think the goal being scored becomes implied advantage.
I get your point about 2 for the price of one but, if C&O is properly applied then the referee should have stopped play there and then and awarded a PK unless there was an amazing advantage to be played and I don't think the team should be denied that based on subsequent play before the OFR can be conducted
 
I said penalty straight away, the only slight doubt I had was whether there was any contact. That was proven on first replay, and credit to Jon Moss as he did tell Darren England very quickly that he needed to go and review.

Whilst I think the shirt pulling should have also been a penalty, I don't think they really compare when it comes to VAR. It was impossible to say that the first one wasn't a clear and obvious error, given he's kicked an opponent in the face 5" off the ground and drawn blood. I was actually very surprised there was no card coming with the penalty. Whereas shirt pulling is more subjective, although for me the holding was so obvious I do think VAR should have recommended a review.

As an aside, I can't help but think that Rafa is heading towards being the next managerial casualty. Everton are slipping towards the drop zone, and have Liverpool, Arsenal, Chelsea and Leicester as four of their next five opponents. He might be pointing at not getting the penalty here as a contributor towards that.
 
Last edited:
Clearly they won’t wipe a goal to give a PK instead. But a nightmare scenario is if the other team scores before the OFR, which would wipe out the goal. The VAR-driven PK then becomes a two goal change (assuming they make the PK).
 
socal lurker said:
Clearly they won’t wipe a goal to give a PK instead. But a nightmare scenario is if the other team scores before the OFR, which would wipe out the goal. The VAR-driven PK then becomes a two goal change (assuming they make the PK).
Click to expand...
The breakaway goal could also have happened in this case. However, a PK (decided after review) nullifies any subsequent opportunity for the opposition, but there's absolutely no barrier preventing two bites of the cherry for the team awarded the PK. It's stupid
 
Big Cat said:
The breakaway goal could also have happened in this case. However, a PK (decided after review) nullifies any subsequent opportunity for the opposition, but there's absolutely no barrier preventing two bites of the cherry for the team awarded the PK. It's stupid
Click to expand...
What’s the alternative? (Other than abolishing video review…)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top