Brentford v Liverpool VAR overrule

[Kent Ref]

Is getting a toe to the ball but then taking the man out a penalty, or not?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/live/crx2d6pvzwg1t

I think this example IS a penalty.

 

[Tim Punter]

Was thinking the same. Outside the penalty box that is still a foul, getting the ball is irrelevant, but inside the box, getting the ball seems to be relevant. Do we. Red a law change?

 

[ladbroke8745]

Watched it back a few times yesterday and you'll also notice Mac Allister going down just before the contact.
Liverpool spent a lot of time going down too easily and it was bought most times.

 

[DJIC]

I don’t see that as a penalty, defender reaches for the ball and plays the ball, its not reckless, so play on for me.

 

[bester]

I don’t see that as a penalty, defender reaches for the ball and plays the ball, its not reckless, so play on for me.

Reaches for the ball? He jumped in both feet off the ground.

 

[ARF]

Can completely see why in real-time JB gives it, but it's not a foul IMO. Defender gets there first and plays the ball, attacker gets there second and then the two players make contact. The direction of the challenge makes a big difference here - had the defender been diving in like that directly towards the attacker, then he'd know full well he would wipe him out on the follow through, and it would be (IMO) reckless. Here the defender is tackling into space in front of the attacker, where the ball is, and then the attacker goes over the recumbent defender.

 

[betterlatethannever]

I know he only has a few seconds and it’s hard to go in to detail with the decision while everyone is looking at you, but on the mic he says “After review, the Brentford player plays the ball, final decision dropped ball”
Pedantic from me but you can see why fans/ players then shout “he got the ball he got the ball” when there are tackles that are still RP.

 

[ARF]

Outside the penalty box that is still a foul, getting the ball is irrelevant, but inside the box, getting the ball seems to be relevant.

I would argue that in normal circumstances, outside the area it would be called a foul because in full speed and without the benefit of replays, it looked like a foul, and it's only because it's inside the area that it's been reviewed at less than full speed and from multiple angles. Had it been outside the area but in a DOGSO situation, I can only presume that VAR would have still recommended a review and JB would have still overturned his initial decision.

 

[Tim Punter]

I would argue that in normal circumstances, outside the area it would be called a foul because in full speed and without the benefit of replays, it looked like a foul, and it's only because it's inside the area that it's been reviewed at less than full speed and from multiple angles. Had it been outside the area but in a DOGSO situation, I can only presume that VAR would have still recommended a review and JB would have still overturned his initial decision.

I get your point, and don't think this was a clear case of wiping the player out to win the ball, but still think you can do this in the penalty area and get away with it.