A&H

Spurs v Newcastle - guess what?

JamesL

RefChat Addict
Level 3 Referee
Thoughts on the pen shout, Lascelles on Kane? Penalty for me. Can't believe a VAR check has let that one go...
 
The Referee Store
I was 75% it was a pen. 25% Kane was going down to make it look worse than it was.

If it was me on the VAR duties I would not have overruled the ref.

Miguel Almiron was wearing his wedding ring. How do match officials at this level miss that?
 
Thoughts on the pen shout, Lascelles on Kane? Penalty for me. Can't believe a VAR check has let that one go...
It was a penalty for me, but not a C&O error. Again, PGMOL showing a commitment to not using the pitch side monitor and only intervening for calamitous refereeing errors, rather than re-refereeing the game. I like it
 
I think if they had asked Mike Dean to look at it again he would have given the penalty.

Thought Dean had a really good game actually.
 
I think if they had asked Mike Dean to look at it again he would have given the penalty.

Thought Dean had a really good game actually.
Like I say, I thought it was a pen even through black & white glasses, but it wasn't C&O, they don't want the pantomime of the pitch side nonsense, so I think it was the right outcome. The PGMOL were transparent about setting a high bar and they are doing so with admirable consistency
The City pen was not as subjective however, it was pretty much fact that it was a pen, so maybe the bar needs to come down a couple of cm
 
As an aside, Australia burned their reviews (VAR) today and then the umpire gives not out to a blatant LBW.... Just imagine if managers could challenge a certain number of incidents per game instead of this lottery we have now!!
 
That’s not clear and obvious? All I’m seeing is Lascelles clattering into Kane. Always a penalty. It at least warrants Dean getting a second look
 
The referees know what Kane is like
It matters not one jot, what Kane is like, if he was fouled then he was fouled. Having said that, while I think that on balance, that probably was a foul, I'm not convinced there was quite enough there for it to be subject to reversal. Remember, the question being asked is not (as I've heard pundits say several times now) "was that a clear and obvious foul?" but "was it a clear and obvious error not to award the foul?"
 
"Was the referee clearly wrong?"?
I have yet to hear one person say it shouldn't have been a pen...
I suppose you have to know what Dean says he saw because surely that has to influence the VAR intervention.
 
I have yet to hear one person say it shouldn't have been a pen...
I suppose you have to know what Dean says he saw because surely that has to influence the VAR intervention.
I haven't seen it. Only saying that is the question to ask. It sounds like PL have gone the opposite of what others have done by under using VAR while others have overused it.
 
I haven't seen it. Only saying that is the question to ask. It sounds like PL have gone the opposite of what others have done by under using VAR while others have overused it.

Or better yet, they have underused in the right areas and overused in the wrong ones
 
I have yet to hear one person say it shouldn't have been a pen...
I suppose you have to know what Dean says he saw because surely that has to influence the VAR intervention.

I’ll say it.

Lascelles hits the deck near Kane - no immediate movement of body or hand towards him which is expect for a tactical foul in this situation.

As a striker, Kane now has his marker pancaked on the floor with room to touch the ball on and shoot.

Instead of exploiting the space he moves a leg toward the defender to try and win a penalty. Like Tottenhams overall performance, lazy and lacking effort and application.
 
I’ll say it.

Lascelles hits the deck near Kane - no immediate movement of body or hand towards him which is expect for a tactical foul in this situation.

As a striker, Kane now has his marker pancaked on the floor with room to touch the ball on and shoot.

Instead of exploiting the space he moves a leg toward the defender to try and win a penalty. Like Tottenhams overall performance, lazy and lacking effort and application.
Point being, there was doubt; and for the first time I can ever recall, MD did the mags a favour (with AT giving the green light for 3 points from his shipping container)
 
It was a penalty for me, but not a C&O error. Again, PGMOL showing a commitment to not using the pitch side monitor and only intervening for calamitous refereeing errors, rather than re-refereeing the game. I like it

Agree Big Cat - perhaps people will now accept that the PL refs are NOT going to use the pitchside monitor - as Anthony Taylor told us many months ago!
 
Agree Big Cat - perhaps people will now accept that the PL refs are NOT going to use the pitchside monitor - as Anthony Taylor told us many months ago!
And not one of us (over 100 referees) offered any objection to this or the 'high bar'
 
Remember that the VARs are told to not think "was that a penalty or not" and rather "has the referee obviously and clearly got that wrong". I haven't seen it as been away, but I've seen others describe it as 75/25 and in that case it probably won't get overturned.
 
It was a definite pen, but it looks like Dean chose not to award it because he had some slight niggling doubt and knew he could check afterwards. Then, because it needs to be a "clear and obvious decision" the VAR needs to meet a certain standard to overrule, which wasn't present. The VAR makes referees more inclined to bottle a call to wait for the video and for that reason alone, I can't stand it in it's current use. I wouldn't mind if it was used simply to check offside decisions on goals or major incidents, but checking fouls and other things is, imo, causing irreparable damage to the authority of the referee.
 
Back
Top