And then appeal for a foul at the slightest contact or touch on their team’s players.
As we all seem to be saying - it’s one or the other.
CHE vs FUL
- Thread starter Joshref
- Start date
Donate to RefChat
Help keep RefChat running, any donation would be appreciated
As we all seem to be saying - it’s one or the other.
As with almost everything in football - when it suits.
Danny Murphy did say that at the contentious penalty awarded to Chelsea the Referee made 3/4 correct decisions during the same phase of play, but got the ‘build-up’ decision which disallowed the Fulham goal was wrong. I don’t think it was. I am no expert on when VAR intervenes & doesn’t intervene, but my understanding in build up incidents is that if the Referee didn’t see it, then can draw the Referee’s attention to it, which is what happened here. I think what the Referee is saying by cancelling out the goal, is that if he identified the incident in real time, he would have penalised the Fulham player.
I get that but can’t get my head around the comparison between the two challenges and the resulting decision. The game is full of contact incidents that go unpunished. I know I’m in a minority here but I just don’t see it as a foul, I wouldn’t have given it in real time and although the majority on here support the decision I wouldn’t give it as a free kick if it happened again.
So I think everyone gets it was an excellent piece of skill with absolutely no intention to foul/hurt the Chelsea player. The sole question is, was there an offence committed by him placing his foot upon the opponent - there being nowhere else to put it is not a reason for a foul not to have been committed. Many will say no, many will say yes. Whatever the outcome it was subjective & could have gone either way.I get that but can’t get my head around the comparison between the two challenges and the resulting decision. The game is full of contact incidents that go unpunished. I know I’m in a minority here but I just don’t see it as a foul, I wouldn’t have given it in real time and although the majority on here support the decision I wouldn’t give it as a free kick if it happened again.
Last edited:
This is one where if it does get included in the mic'd up show(assuming there will be a show this season), I hope Howard Webb backs up his VAR and does not try and please "the people in the game" by saying we dont think this reaches the threshold for intervention and should stay with referees call.
Especially as Howard always says, if your the VAR and you see something on the video which sticks out then you should be recommending a review, I think most VAR's would intervene here I feel.
Now just imagine the fury if that landed foot raked down the back of the Achilles and that careless foul turns into a dangerous one. Thank goodness for the officials that was not the case.
Edit: I see Salisbury has been removed as the VAR for today's big game, maybe this may give an indication of where the PGMOL is seeing this.
Especially as Howard always says, if your the VAR and you see something on the video which sticks out then you should be recommending a review, I think most VAR's would intervene here I feel.
Now just imagine the fury if that landed foot raked down the back of the Achilles and that careless foul turns into a dangerous one. Thank goodness for the officials that was not the case.
Edit: I see Salisbury has been removed as the VAR for today's big game, maybe this may give an indication of where the PGMOL is seeing this.
Harsh for Salisbury if it is for his VAR intervention, though if it went against protocol then I could understand it.
David F
Active Member
I don’t think this met the threshold for VAR intervention outlined at the start of the season, and hope that the PGMOL apology dissuades re-refereeing of other similar incidents.
In general I think when a player is not making a challenge or committing a holding offence, and his actions are not reckless or excessive, VAR should be staying out of it.
In general I think when a player is not making a challenge or committing a holding offence, and his actions are not reckless or excessive, VAR should be staying out of it.
I think this is absolutely a foul and a VAR intervention basically everywhere but England. I also think fouls in the APP occurring near the halfway line have had an extremely high bar in the PL for better or worse.
Personally I think the game is better when we use the tech to get as many calls right as possible but clearly those in power in England disagree.
Dissapointing too see the PGMOL is not backing the VAR. I mean a stamp on the top of the foot is a foul anyday of the week but perhaps unsurprisingly Howard will be using the referees call and high bar to justify a non intervention. Once again he will use his "we always listen to our stakeholders" line instead of focusing on the laws of the game.
Salisbury's intervention in the Fulham Everton game at the end of last season is far worse going by the high bar for handball intervention but you can understand why he did intervene. Just like you can understand why he intervened on this one and for the PGMOL to say it's wrong must be frustrating for the refs/VARs, no wonder some refs don't seem to want to be a VAR(Barrott/Taylor).
Salisbury's intervention in the Fulham Everton game at the end of last season is far worse going by the high bar for handball intervention but you can understand why he did intervene. Just like you can understand why he intervened on this one and for the PGMOL to say it's wrong must be frustrating for the refs/VARs, no wonder some refs don't seem to want to be a VAR(Barrott/Taylor).
Half think it's a foul, half don't. Half think VAR was right to get involved, half don't. Most have a disdain the wider football community. That same community hold revile for referees. It's all about the referee and VAR these days. Constantly detracting from the game and evermore hyped controversy.
What a state the pro game is in. I lean heavily towards the wider football community when it comes to this acrimony having batted for both sides
What a state the pro game is in. I lean heavily towards the wider football community when it comes to this acrimony having batted for both sides
See I disagree if PGMOL agree it was a mistake which I think by current interpretation of Law it is then it’s right they take action.
I work in a sport where if I make a error my licence can be temporarily suspended as punishment.
This just heaps pressure on VARs and will probably lead to more mistakes. If it was an absolute clanger then by all means remove the official(s) involved, but not when there was clearly a foul that the officials missed. Was it a clear and obvious error, possibly, possibly not, but it wasn’t a howler.
Just feels like this is PGMOL bowing to media pressure
Just feels like this is PGMOL bowing to media pressure
Clearly the secret is for VAR to attempt to interpret what the high threshold is that HW set prior to the start of the season - and probably not an exhaustive list covering every scenario. So on the face of it, it looks like PGMOL bowing to media pressure. However, I would also say that there are occasions when taken out of context/in isolation, the outcome may be different. So at a meeting of say non Chelsea & Fulham spectators as well as Referees then may be they would agree with VAR, but if watching the game up to this point and beyond (following the struck off goal), they may have the opposite view.
The issue will be it was a key match incident as I say different sport but if I do something which is viewed as a negative impact on the sport I am sanctioned or made to explain.
So the PGMOL are effectively saying it's not a foul on the opposition if you stamp on their foot aslong as your doing a piece of skill because you got nowhere for your foot too land? This is like the excuse the VAR made for the Tarkowski challenge in the Liverpool game last season but no one was saying that is a justifiable reason for it not being a red card.
The pundits should know better in terms of the laws of the game and not on a players point of view.
The pundits should know better in terms of the laws of the game and not on a players point of view.
No I don’t think that’s what they are saying. Stamp is too dramatic a word for what it was. It was a careless challenge whereby his skill happened to have led his foot on top of the Chelsea player which could have gone either way with the decision. What the PGMOL are saying is that whilst it may be said that it was a penal offence, under the high threshold identified before the start of the season, VAR should not have brought it to the attention of the Referee.
