I've seen them given in other competition and they should always have been given. It sucks that we are on the receiving end of this. It should never not be a pen when a keeper punches a player whilst being nowhere near the ball
VAR and Refs | General Discussion
- Thread starter Samid
- Start date
All the penalty decisions were correct today.
With that logic no player could ever make a foul from kicking or tackling, since they're allowed to use their feet, right? What are they supposed to do? Not miss the ball and hit the opponent?!
Agreed, I have zero complaints.
All ire should be aimed towards our shocking team and manager... Anywhere what is simply misplaced and let's them off the hook
It's exactly because a similar one v AWB was given we can "cry" about it today.
Although I'd probably never give a pen for a ball lashed against someone's hand/arm from that close. Unless they're really doing something ridiculous with their hands.
I just don't understand with all the video why a proper video doesn't exist. Its inexplicable. I know every club feels hard done by but I'm struggling to remember many i felt lucky to get, while think we've been unlucky to get calls against us almost every week. Apart from city, officials have been the biggest factor in the league going to shit
Really think that penalty should be treated like when refs leave advantage. The ball has already been cleared, let play continue and punish Onana when play stops next.
If you’re going to be so fecking obtuse about it, then surely the handball should be scrutinized just as harshley.
If you’re going to be so fecking obtuse about it, then surely the handball should be scrutinized just as harshley.
That is not not how "advantage" works
By all means, point out the inconsistency, but if you think the AWB one wasn't then why should that one be?
Making a bad decision one week shouldn't make all subsequent similar incidents result in a bad decision.
People are literally pointing out the inconsistency and you’re telling them not to?
Don’t be daft. I’m not counting it as actually leaving advantage obviously, but I just can’t accept situations like that being punished by penalty.That is not not how "advantage" works
But the point is PMGOL haven't apologised for that one. It's clearly been reviewed and they're happy that's a penalty. To then not give a penalty in an identical situation the following week is a cause for a grievance.
No complaints on the burnley penalty debatable on others, have seen penalties given for similar incidents already this season so pure lack of consistency on decisions made by Refs and VAR.
How am I being daft? Are you actually advocating that play should never be stopped for fouls off the ball even if the fouling team is in possession?
Didn't see the pen begging (pegging?) in the match thread then?
I don't think they are inconsistent in this case as the two incidents are different for me. The one today is never given. It was very close and his hands were by his sides and didn't move. If it was given on the pitch it gets over-turned by VAR.
For the AWB one, while soft and shouldn't be given in my view, he moves his hand towards the ball. It was also given on the pitch so that clear and obvious bollox kicks in.
They were, unfortunately.
But there was contact on Garnacho, as much as 2 of the pens we've conceded just in the last few weeks.
And the handball wasn't any different from the one against AWB last week.
So while we can't really complain about today, we were crap after all, it makes those recent decisions even more ridiculous and has cost us many points. VAR was supposed to fix this and it hasn't, so isn't worth it.
I honestly don't know what's a penalty and what isn't game to game now. It feels like a lottery whether it will be given or not.
I'm not even gonna say today's ones were wrong but how can they have one decision one game then another game for almost a carbon copy not give it.
I understood pre var but now it's ridiculous.
I'm not even gonna say today's ones were wrong but how can they have one decision one game then another game for almost a carbon copy not give it.
I understood pre var but now it's ridiculous.
Another reason why I don’t like ETH, as he doesn’t have the balls to call this out. He would make a slight comment but it does make a big difference subconsciously when a referee is hesitant about decision to go your way.
You don’t have to do what Forrest did, but SAF would never have stood for this.
You don’t have to do what Forrest did, but SAF would never have stood for this.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
No way different to the AWB last weekend. The lack of consistency is a joke.
Only thing I can think is AWBs was arm coming out to in? But ultimately what difference should that make?
Mute as AWB or avoiding a fine, does'nt want part ways with his pounds
I’m posting too soon post game and I’m fecking fuming.. The laughing emoji probably set me off.
Still don’t feel it should be a penalty once the ball has already been cleared.
That's scandalous. I know Forest got bantered on but I think every club (except the ones who can afford to fly referees out to nation states and pay them good money to officiate football matches) should actually look past the tribalism and stand up to the poor levels of refereeing.
His arm is close to his body, awbs was not.
The way I judge pens is by asking myself would I think it was a pen at the other end. Match threads are full of people screaming blatant pen for things that would be scoffed at in the Utd box.
Hand ball is ridiculous these days, that one against Burnley, the guy has his arms in a natural defensive stance, not extended to make himself bigger, the ball is kicked off his arm from 2 meters away, it should never, ever, ever be a pen but I wouldn't have been surprised if it had been given. The AWB one is not a pen either IMO.
Cant wait to here what justification Dermott has for this being given as a penalty when AWB had already headed the ball away
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
What is the context here. Didn't see the game and no sound so it looks as he is setting up a free kick. However Gapko running in makes it look like he either fielded a long ball or caught a cross(unlikely given the box is clear)
Was this in live play? Ref looks super confused.
This whole thread is so funny, just pure lunacy. At least now we know how Liverpool fans felt back in 09, when they cheered Benitez and his fachts on.I'm sorry, are you guys complaining over Onana trying to decapitate someone?
It's more a case of how little you'll ever see a pen given for that sort of incident.
The two VAR decisions I feel most hard done by today were on Garnacho. Second half was marginal but first half one looked barn door.
That's right, though of course it can be difficult in the heat of a match.
But if VAR doesn't solve that problem by bringing some consistency to decisions, then why should we put up with it?
https://x.com/alternativemufc/status/1784266753406628338?s=61&t=ZvGzfV2Qafn11jKrPfufuA
Its the fact that we see so many decisions made/not made in similar situations when for/against us that’s frustrating
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Its the fact that we see so many decisions made/not made in similar situations when for/against us that’s frustrating
Always more galling in a match where VAR makes the ref reconsider a big decision given in our favour.
Sorry I wasn't meaning to be derisive. What I give you is that this is a situation that happens sometimes and is NOT given as a penalty. Just as players are often kicked/tackled after they gave off a shot. Probably because refs have a similar feeling as you. But if a punch is that clearly mistimed and only into the player, I actually feel they should be given. Anything that is a foul outside the box should be one inside.
But then minimal (or microscopical) contact like the one from Antony vs Chelsea should not be a pen either, and no ref would give a foul for that outside (also of course due to the fact that players will not necessarily go down under minimal contact in the middle of the pitch as there is no pen to be gained)..
Nice freeze frames which are conveniently chosen and don't show the details of the incidents at all.
I’m sure it was live play. Areola had collected ball from some set piece/cross but had gone down injured afterwards. Only briefly and got back up to continue. Then he does that roll out.
I remember thinking why the feck has he rolled it out and not paid attention!? I fully expected a Liverpool player to exploit it and low and behold Gakpo appears. It reminded me of the Ronaldo incident against Newcastle the other season.
I know we all hate Liverpool but there’s something fishy going on for sure with this one. Taylor literally tells Areola to go down to save his own skin ffs
Live play. No whistle blown. That’s it. Var agreed with ref with no explanation. Gakpo never should have stopped.
A player doesn't have to have the ball (or even be near it) for a foul to be a penalty.
I thought the same about the one in the first half, even after a couple of replays, but one angle showed the defender got the ball first so it was the correct call.
Ok my two cents on the Onana penalty. 100% NOT a penalty for me and here is why:
Firstly, AWB cleared it so there was no chance denied.
Secondly, a goalkeeper is allowed to use their hands, so have every right to challenge for the ball with their hands where another player has to use their head. If that was the coming together of two heads, it would never be given as a penalty because it’s a 50/50 challenge. So same rule applies here.
Onana wasn’t late, evidenced by the fact he was occupying the same space as the attacker. It’s just that because of AWB there was no challenge for the ball to be made so instead it was a coming together of two players, with the collision being parts of the body both players are legally allowed to use.
Firstly, AWB cleared it so there was no chance denied.
Secondly, a goalkeeper is allowed to use their hands, so have every right to challenge for the ball with their hands where another player has to use their head. If that was the coming together of two heads, it would never be given as a penalty because it’s a 50/50 challenge. So same rule applies here.
Onana wasn’t late, evidenced by the fact he was occupying the same space as the attacker. It’s just that because of AWB there was no challenge for the ball to be made so instead it was a coming together of two players, with the collision being parts of the body both players are legally allowed to use.