[Albion] Burnley VAR

[Deportivo Seagull]

It never ceases to amaze me how many people who regularly watch football and consider themselves supporters of the game lack knowledge about the basic laws of the game. you can not be offside by any means of restarting the game after it has left the field of play, goal kick, throw in or corner. It's the same when people question a penalty taker hits the post and is first to the ball and touches it again, he/she has touched the ball twice, indirect free kick to the opposition.

Guilty as charged.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Swansman]

Thought the ref and VAR got the pen decision spot on, Rodriguez made a point to hook his leg around Stephens knowing that contact would be made. Glad VAR failed Burnley as they are a bunch of thugs.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

Agree, Rodriguez didnt go for the ball, but for the Stephens contact. Brighton free-kick.

 

[PILTDOWN MAN]

Guilty as charged.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

You have some close season reading to do

 

[Garry Nelson's Left Foot]

I was surprised it wasn't a penalty. Rodriguez did what everyone is taught to do and get your body between the defender and the ball then it's down to the defender not to be clumsy. Stephens was clumsy. I'd be miffed it was the other way round and it wasn't given as would most of the people saying it's not a penalty I suspect.

The only thing I can think of that made the ref not give it is Rodriguez does flick his leg out a bit so maybe he overplayed his hand(or foot...) a little too much.

The other two are perfectly correct, uncontroversial decisions.

 

[clockend1983]

Rodriguez knew Stephens was behind him, so hooked his foot around Stephen’s leg, knowing they’d both fall forwards.

Disallowed goal, player offside was interfering with play.

MOTD showed a graphic which had a vertical line proving the whole of the ball didn’t cross the line.

This...
On the goaline only the keeper no other defender
Offside end of story
More to the point woeful defending yet again from a corner it will be our undoing next season

 

[Deportivo Seagull]

You have some close season reading to do

I used ref the odd rugby game when at university? It always surprised me how many players didn’t fully understand the rules.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[hans kraay fan club]

I used ref the odd rugby game when at university? It always surprised me how many players didn’t fully understand the rules.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

That is an entirely different matter. NOBODY understands the rules of rugby - each and every ref just interprets them as they see fit.

 

[Super Steve Earle]

I've said it before and I'll say it again. 'I bloody love VAR'.
P.S. can't believe Stephens is getting stick for a penalty he didn't give away. You would think some fans would rather concede a penalty to support their narrative.

 

[Sheebo]

Stephens Pen - no clear and obvious error - if ref had given it it wouldn’t have been overturned - so good use of VAR. As [MENTION=14365]Thunder Bolt[/MENTION] stated, Rodtwat deliberately went in front of Stephens and caused the contact like the cheat he is - unfortunately doesn’t mean it wasn’t a pen but that would have gone against him.

Connolly goal - clear whole ball hadn’t gone out and even clearer you couldn’t have told from any camera angle other than directly along the middle of the line - like the goal line tech - can’t believe fans, players & pundits still don’t get the rule or the science of it or the angle trickery and bored of saying it now!

J***** header - player obstructing Ryan so undoubtedly correct decision.

VAR got everything right but I felt it was used too long and often and the operator wanted to be a bit ‘look at me’ and get involved. WE JUST NEED CONSISTENCY please!

 

[maltaseagull]

Having just seen highlights what did you think of decisions
Penalty decision against Stevens could have easily have gone other way. Looked clear Stevens pushed him in the back but assume VAR backed the ref.
Disallowed goal. On the basis Ryan didnt have a hope of getting to it thought decision was harsh.
Connelly goal. On angle they showed on highlights no evidence to show ball went out of play. Has anybody seen a better angle down the line

I thought that the replay from behind the goal line showed Rodrigues jumped across Stephens (but I am probably biased.)

As for the offside, surely if Woods was standing in front of the goalie he is interfering with play and wether or not the goalie could get to it is irrelevant. (but I am probably biased.)

Never went out of play and a superbly taken goal ! (but I am probably biased.)

 

[dingodan]

I thought it was a clear pen at first. But if you look closely, even though stephens does give him a shove, he's already lifted his feet and started to go down, before any contact. As soon as he feels Stephens behind him he starts to go down, he was trying to buy one. If he had stayed on his feet and only gone down with the shove he probably would have got the pen.

 

[Stato]

VAR gives the referees more tools to make decisions, but there will still always be subjectivity in the making of those decisions. Moss didn't think either penalty shout was a strong enough claim. VAR would not overrule his interpretation. It did make the offside decision as it should have done. The rule doesn't care whether Matt Ryan would have got there, just that there was a player in an offside position interfering with play.

I liked that Graham Potter, in his pre-match press conference said that he would rather get rid of VAR and roll with the punches of human error. I'd agree, it's been good enough for over a century and the idea that technology can eradicate the subjectivity of the humans viewing it is a bit silly. The introduction is a result of the ridiculous fuss made by some managers and media talking heads when these things go wrong.

The fuss made by managers has almost all been self serving and Dyche is one of the worst for only ever noticing when he is sinned against. Last season when Hendrick's handball was missed, he brushed aside the ref's error with a 'evens itself over the season' remark. Yesterday, he wanted to talk about each decision that didn't go in his favour. He's not the only one that does it, but his hypocrisy is particularly galling because, like his comments about diving, he invariably cloaks it in a pretence that he is arguing for the good of the game. He isn't. He is arguing for Sean Dyche and Burnley Football Club and it's an insult to the viewer's intelligence to try to pretend otherwise.

MotD of course followed his lead and, once again, concentrated on these minor incidents rather than the performances of the two teams. This is probably to Dyche's advantage in the long term, but it's to the detriment of football. I'm glad that we have had two managers in the Premier League who are generally above this kind of thing. We may lose out on some decisions, but I'd rather that than to contribute to 'the complain about everything', 'win at all cost' hypocrisy that forgets that for all to enjoy the benefits of any system, all participants must agree to respect its rules and institutions. When Gus used to do it, it left a bad taste. The childish partiality should be left to us fans. We are perfectly placed to do it, as nobody listens to us anyway.

 

[mreprice]

Stephens one was a clear penalty if it is done to one of the big six. It's usually not given when it is done to us. VAR has to back refs call.

Personally it was one where Rodriguez caused the contact by cutting in front then slowing down so I think it shouldn't be given. But he did it so well it is given more often than not.

Sent from my Mi 9T Pro using Tapatalk

 

[Dick Swiveller]

Wood was also offside when the corner was taken ....

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

If he was offside then it means the ball went forward from a corner. Which means we should have had a goal kick.

 

[One Teddy Maybank]

Stephens. I was very surprised the ref didn't give it. Much less so it wasn't overturned.

Rodriguez header. It's immaterial whether Ryan would have got it, (it wasn't for a foul, it was offside). The bloke was clearly interfering with play. Spot on decision.

Connolly. If I had to guess it was probably out. Luckily there was no decent footage available. VAR has to allow it.

All of this


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Deportivo Seagull]

That is an entirely different matter. NOBODY understands the rules of rugby - each and every ref just interprets them as they see fit.

That is called a win-win.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Guy Fawkes]

Rodriguez knew Stephens was behind him, so hooked his foot around Stephen’s leg, knowing they’d both fall forwards.

Disallowed goal, player offside was interfering with play.

MOTD showed a graphic which had a vertical line proving the whole of the ball didn’t cross the line.

This...

I thought there were actually 2 Burnley players offside when the ball was crossed in, one ran along the goal line, then behind the keeper before challenging for the ball (Wood i think) plus the one who stayed in front of the keeper, so it could have been given against both but obviously given against the one on the line from the freeze frame images shown during the highlights

We've had some like that ruled out this season too for offisde (Burn given offside whilst doing the same as the one in front of Ryan did for Burnley, if i remember correctly)

 

[Uh_huh_him]

Stephens Pen - no clear and obvious error - if ref had given it it wouldn’t have been overturned - so good use of VAR. As [MENTION=14365]Thunder Bolt[/MENTION] stated, Rodtwat deliberately went in front of Stephens and caused the contact like the cheat he is - unfortunately doesn’t mean it wasn’t a pen but that would have gone against him.

Connolly goal - clear whole ball hadn’t gone out and even clearer you couldn’t have told from any camera angle other than directly along the middle of the line - like the goal line tech - can’t believe fans, players & pundits still don’t get the rule or the science of it or the angle trickery and bored of saying it now!

J***** header - player obstructing Ryan so undoubtedly correct decision.

VAR got everything right but I felt it was used too long and often and the operator wanted to be a bit ‘look at me’ and get involved. WE JUST NEED CONSISTENCY please!

This!

It reminds me of when a slip catcher picks up a really low catch.
The replay looks like it has bounced before the catch. The professionals insist that is an optical illusion caused by 2D representation of the event.

No way you can tell if the whole of the ball is over the whole of the line just from a replay.
In my view it is more common to see a ball that looks out being in, than something looking marginal being out.

 

[amexer]

As far as penalty is concerned right or wrong much prefer decision is made by ref when just an opinion if a foul. In general VAR going down this route and unless terrible error backs ref.
I am one of few who thinks we were lucky with disallowed goal. Cant see why off side when no where near line of ball and goal keeper had no chance of getting there even if attacker was not there

 

[Winker]

View attachment 126541

MOTD graphic for the Connolly goal ^

That photo shows that Maupay would run through walls for this team.

I thought Rodracist was looking for a penalty, might have been better going for a goal?