VAR and Refs | General Discussion | Forest go into meltdown

Forest Red

Full Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2022
Messages
1,050
Supports
Nottingham Forest
What do you mean by «only in private»? Every team can request the audio and get access to it, doesn’t mean it’s going to make public for everyone else. It’s not like you’re being refused access.
We can listen to it but cannot make public what was said.
 

The Purley King

Full Member
Joined
Mar 26, 2014
Messages
4,273
I think there is also a case where the PGMOL have been forced to admit they got it wrong on 4 separate occasions.
Getting it wrong is one thing and to a certain extent is part of the game, but deleting a recording you perhaps don’t want anyone to hear is another.
The Liverpool one for instance was completely wrong but was “just” a miscommunication.
The bullshit decisions Utd have had against us this year are someone’s incorrect opinion, I’m talking more about something provably deliberate
 

didz

Full Member
Joined
May 17, 2014
Messages
1,766
I think there is also a case where the PGMOL have been forced to admit they got it wrong on 4 separate occasions.
Haven't we kind of been here before with that ghost goal with Villa Vs Bournemouth? It turned out the PL rules were pretty ironclad is shutting down any legal challenge in that instance, so I'd assume they'd have covered themselves against errors for VAR too.
 

Pexbo

Winner of the 'I'm not reading that' medal.
Joined
Jun 2, 2009
Messages
68,745
Location
Brizzle
Supports
Big Days
We can listen to it but cannot make public what was said.
Which is madness when other recordings have been made public as soon as they were requested. If there is nothing to hide, PGMOL are making themselves look awful for no reason.
 

Cassidy

No longer at risk of being mistaken for a Scouser
Joined
Oct 2, 2013
Messages
31,492
It makes no sense that the audio isn't available immediately for every decision to anyone who give a shit.
They said Atwell decided not to review that decision, so essentially it was not reviewed according to PGMOL even though Sky reported it was reviewed.
Forrest obvious in light of this were right to raise the alarm bells even though most mocked them
 

Cassidy

No longer at risk of being mistaken for a Scouser
Joined
Oct 2, 2013
Messages
31,492
Was the VAR official actually a Luton fan? If so, why are the likes of Neville not kicking off about that, instead of telling Forest they are naughty for pointing it out?
Atwell has never managed a Luton game in his career so you can be sure PGMOL know hes a Luton fan
 

Cassidy

No longer at risk of being mistaken for a Scouser
Joined
Oct 2, 2013
Messages
31,492
I don’t think you can legally complain about a subjective decision but if the recording of the 3rd one against Everton was deleted for example then you’d have a case. Maybe.
It was not deleted, it was not reviewed
 

NotChatGPT

Brownfinger
Joined
Jul 3, 2023
Messages
582
Which is madness when other recordings have been made public as soon as they were requested. If there is nothing to hide, PGMOL are making themselves look awful for no reason.
They‘ve been made available to the club when requested, but they haven’t been made public at the same time.
 

NotChatGPT

Brownfinger
Joined
Jul 3, 2023
Messages
582
They said Atwell decided not to review that decision, so essentially it was not reviewed according to PGMOL even though Sky reported it was reviewed.
Forrest obvious in light of this were right to raise the alarm bells even though most mocked them
Bizarre.
 

Mmm-Qatarian

Full Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2016
Messages
1,480
That was genuinely poor refereeing there. I know we scored so ultimately it didn't matter but had we missed that penalty, we may well have been denied a goal just because the ref blew too early.
 

Josep Dowling

Full Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2014
Messages
7,661
Equally as bad.
Every single penalty shout is reviewed no?
Why not this one?
Just proves the refs aren’t doing their job correctly which is why more clubs need to call out the ineptness. We also need full recording, live when decisions are being made for transparency.
 

NotThatSoph

Full Member
Joined
Sep 12, 2019
Messages
3,806
Just proves the refs aren’t doing their job correctly which is why more clubs need to call out the ineptness. We also need full recording, live when decisions are being made for transparency.
A full recording might be bad for us here. We got an incredibly cheap penalty.
 

Withnail

Full Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2019
Messages
30,247
Location
The Arena of the Unwell
That first Wolves goal was a shocking decision. There was a hardly a foul and it had not impact on the play going on.
Well he swings at him. Then a few seconds later looks over his right shoulder, as the player approaches him, to make sure he's there and swings at him again with the left and connects this time. There wasn't much contact but it was deliberate and pretty stupid.

I don't have much of a problem if they get published for that type of thing.
 

Oranges038

Full Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2020
Messages
12,256
Wolves being screwed over again with VAR.

For me that's a shocking decision, both players are having a little tussle, there's a push and a bit of afters, but there's no real contact, player doesn't whinge or go down, nothing.

VAR is a joke.
 

Pogue Mahone

The caf's Camus.
Joined
Feb 22, 2006
Messages
134,043
Location
"like a man in silk pyjamas shooting pigeons
Wolves being screwed over again with VAR.

For me that's a shocking decision, both players are having a little tussle, there's a push and a bit of afters, but there's no real contact, player doesn't whinge or go down, nothing.

VAR is a joke.
Yet more proof that coming out and having a moan about how VAR is screwing you over has zero bearing on whether or not you’ll get screwed over again.
 

Oranges038

Full Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2020
Messages
12,256
Yet more proof that coming out and having a moan about how VAR is screwing you over has zero bearing on whether or not you’ll get screwed over again.
Football is a far better and far more enjoyable game without VAR.

This sort of nonsense decision just makes no sense, there's no clear and obvious error there that leads to that goal being scored. But it's Darren England and Stuart Atwell so not really a surprise.
 

UnrelatedPsuedo

I pity the poor fool who stinks like I do!
Joined
Apr 15, 2015
Messages
10,271
Location
Blitztown
Was the VAR official actually a Luton fan? If so, why are the likes of Neville not kicking off about that, instead of telling Forest they are naughty for pointing it out?
It was a horrible result for a Luton fan. They needed the pair to draw.

Also, people in football support football teams. You trust people to make the right decisions.
 

Remember the geese

Full Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2018
Messages
7,079
Location
Northampton
It was a horrible result for a Luton fan. They needed the pair to draw.

Also, people in football support football teams. You trust people to make the right decisions.
I don't think Luton were ever catching Everton. Pretty sure there's a rule in place to prevent officials from officiating sides who are rivals of or in close competition to the team they support.
 

Forest Red

Full Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2022
Messages
1,050
Supports
Nottingham Forest
It was a horrible result for a Luton fan. They needed the pair to draw.

Also, people in football support football teams. You trust people to make the right decisions.
I don't think Luton were ever catching Everton. Pretty sure there's a rule in place to prevent officials from officiating sides who are rivals of or in close competition to the team they support.
Agreed - before Sunday, we were the easiest to catch so an Everton win suited Luton. Who ever stays up there will probably only be a point in it at most. So a point each suited Everton and Forest more than Luton.
There used to be such a rule in place when Keith Hackett was in charge. Neil Webb removed it when he took over (according to an interview with Hackett a couple of days ago).
 

SilentWitness

ShoelessWitness
Staff
Joined
Jan 14, 2010
Messages
30,645
Supports
Everton
A draw was the best result. Luton still play Everton. It's better to be chasing two teams than just one.

It would have had the table very close with Luton on 25, Forest on 27 and us on 28. It's only with the benefit of hindsight and last nights result which nobody expected that it now looks like we were too far ahead. We've gone from 2 points ahead to 8 points ahead within 4 days.
 

Annihilate Now!

...or later, I'm not fussy
Scout
Joined
Nov 4, 2010
Messages
49,957
Location
W.Yorks
Well he swings at him. Then a few seconds later looks over his right shoulder, as the player approaches him, to make sure he's there and swings at him again with the left and connects this time. There wasn't much contact but it was deliberate and pretty stupid.

I don't have much of a problem if they get published for that type of thing.

I can't find a fuller video - does he have an initial swing before this? Because if its just for this its pretty harsh.
 

Matt Varnish

Full Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2023
Messages
933
It's the inconsistency with refs decisions that get a lot of people's backs up. I've been saying it for years, but football needs to move on from having just one ref on the pitch, the pace of the game has changed dramatically since the inception of '1 ref and 2 linesmen'.

American Football has dozens of refs dotted around the pitch and sidelines, along with full motion replay systems. They hardly ever get decisions wrong because an important call is analysed to death to make sure its right.

For me, when it comes to handballs in the penalty area, all you have to ask is did the hand/arm change the trajectory of the ball? In the case of AWB it did because it blocked the cross that otherwise would have gone into the 6yrd area.
Likewise, the corner we had just afterwards where the Coventry player jumps up for a header and its clear as day the ball coming towards him in the air, rolls up his arm and off at an angle off his shoulder, is a penalty. His arm is forward of his body and its changed the trajectory of the ball coming in (that could have resulted in a United header on target) For the the exact same reasons AWB is a pentaly, the Coventry one has to be a penalty. It can't be 'either/or'.

Same with Grealish the day before in the semi, free kicks taken by Chelsea, Grealish jumps up, brings his arm in and changes the flight path of the ball, that potentially was heading for goal or another Chelsea player. But the ref and VAR doesn't even look at it.

All 3 should have been penalties in my view, but only 1 was and that's just not acceptable in the top tier of football. Its not good enough.
And a game lasts all day and has more breaks than a snooker final.
If football went down that route, I'd stop watching.
You'll be wanting the players wearing crash helmets and shoulder pads next.
 

SilentWitness

ShoelessWitness
Staff
Joined
Jan 14, 2010
Messages
30,645
Supports
Everton
Think it's maybe a foul if given on the field but not sure if it's one of those that you'd change in the VAR room. Once again an on the fence decision that will cause controversy because of the clear and obvious rule.
 

Pogue Mahone

The caf's Camus.
Joined
Feb 22, 2006
Messages
134,043
Location
"like a man in silk pyjamas shooting pigeons

I can't find a fuller video - does he have an initial swing before this? Because if its just for this its pretty harsh.
That does get worse with every watch. It's right at the very start of the video, so a little difficult to see. He very clearly looks the guy first, to see where he his, then swings his elbow at him. It's only a glancing contact and the fact the guy does his best to dodge and doesn't react at all makes it look a lot less nasty. If yer man had Harry Kane'd himself that would have been an obvious foul and possible red card.

It does seem like a really weird incident to get hung up on to rule a goal out, mind you. It had zero effect on the passage of play that led to them scoring.
 

Bubz27

No I won’t change your tag line
Joined
Aug 17, 2009
Messages
21,589
Yeah, the look before makes it worse in my opinion.
 

NotChatGPT

Brownfinger
Joined
Jul 3, 2023
Messages
582
Think it's maybe a foul if given on the field but not sure if it's one of those that you'd change in the VAR room. Once again an on the fence decision that will cause controversy because of the clear and obvious rule.
The Wolves player literally has a proper look to see where his opponent is and then lashes out his arm, not sure why it's not viewed as violent conduct.

It's funny because they both foul each other at pretty much the same time. Bournemouth player comes in and goes for a push with straight arms while the Wolves player is obviously swinging to hit him, it's not like one incident is a result of the other. You can also see it clearly impacts the Bournemouth players ability to go for the ball afterwards, but then again he's also more focused on the Wolves player as he's running towards him to push him.

I reckon it's one where the ref on the pitch should've been sent to the screen.
 

SilentWitness

ShoelessWitness
Staff
Joined
Jan 14, 2010
Messages
30,645
Supports
Everton
The Wolves player literally has a proper look to see where his opponent is and then lashes out his arm, not sure why it's not viewed as violent conduct.

It's funny because they both foul each other at pretty much the same time. Bournemouth player comes in and goes for a push with straight arms while the Wolves player is obviously swinging to hit him, it's not like one incident is a result of the other. You can also see it clearly impacts the Bournemouth players ability to go for the ball afterwards, but then again he's also more focused on the Wolves player as he's running towards him to push him.

I reckon it's one where the ref on the pitch should've been sent to the screen.
You said it yourself though, the Bournemouth player is actively running to try and push the Wolves player prior to the swing rather than interested in the game itself. I'd probably say it's possible to give the goal and give a red to the Wolves player and a yellow to the Bournemouth one.