[Albion] Everton vs Brighton & Hove Albion *** Official Match Thread ***

[Littlemo]

My view, like Sky on the match this evening, is that PGMOL made a very big deal indeed of not micro-analysing decisions on the basis of replays. I can't stand Simon Hooper but it was entirely understandable that, with one look, he felt there was enough contact to award a penalty. Part of improving the implementation of VAR is accepting that some on-field calls will be contentious. Or we can just continue down the rabbit hole of VAR interrupting matches here far more than it does in Europe/international competitions and spoiling the game. Got to take the rough with the smooth.

There is no point in VAR if you don’t reverse a clearly wrong decision. Calvert-Lewin stood on Dunk, it wasn’t a bad challenge or contact initiated by Dunk, this when they look at it, it’s clearly and obviously a wrong decision.

 

[sussex_guy2k2]

My view, like Sky on the match this evening, is that PGMOL made a very big deal indeed of not micro-analysing decisions on the basis of replays. I can't stand Simon Hooper but it was entirely understandable that, with one look, he felt there was enough contact to award a penalty. Part of improving the implementation of VAR is accepting that some on-field calls will be contentious. Or we can just continue down the rabbit hole of VAR interrupting matches here far more than it does in Europe/international competitions and spoiling the game. Got to take the rough with the smooth.

VAR was put in place to stop bad decisions, first and foremost.

Allowing a penalty would’ve been a bad decision.

So VAR did its job. I see no issue with that.

 

[Javeaseagull]

I don’t rate Hooper as a ref and my heart sinks when we get him but fair play to him. You can see why he gave it initially and he had the balls to rescind it. The forward treading on the defenders leg has been given in the past but that does not make it a penalty despite what the dinosaurs think.Think that was a fairly positive weekend for VAR all told. Yes we got some top 6 bias but you can’t win them all.

 

[Hugo Rune]

There is no point in VAR if you don’t reverse a clearly wrong decision. Calvert-Lewin stood on Dunk, it wasn’t a bad challenge or contact initiated by Dunk, this when they look at it, it’s clearly and obviously a wrong decision.

Dyche was convinced it was a penalty.

Came out with the ‘we never get them’ BS.

So glad we beat him. His tactics are Jurassic.

 

[trueblue]

That was a perfectly good example of a good var usage. The infield decision was obviously wrong. They told the referee, they looked and overturned it quickly. No big delay and the correct result was achieved.
I don't see how anyone can have an issue with that instance of var. In fact, the var did a good job today all around.

Except VAR apparently overturned it on the basis that there was no contact, which was wrong.

This is what Howard Webb said this week, which sounded like a step forward, "“What we can do is is really focus on what VAR was always meant for. It was meant for those clear situations that would live large in the memory. It wasn’t meant to re-referee the game on small touches and little contacts and all those things that have created debate and discussion – leave those on the field."

I don't think that situation counted as a mistake that would live large in the memory. There was contact, the ref saw it differently at the time, 'referee's call' wouldn't have been unreasonable.

Anyway, don't give two hoots overall so can't be bothered to argue about it. Was simply pointing out that PGMOL's comments have prompted a few pundits to react the way they have to decisions this weekend.

 

[Littlemo]

Dyche was convinced it was a penalty.

Came out with the ‘we never get them’ BS.

So glad we beat him. His tactics are Jurassic.

Dyche is a wanker. Can’t stand the man and his football is even worse to watch. Glad we beat them.

 

[sussex_guy2k2]

Disagree. No point PGMOL making a big, big deal of less VAR intervention this week if it's going to get involved in calls like that. Sure, he stood on Dunk's foot and therefore lost his balance. If Dunk had stayed on his feet, no decision to make. It was the right decision in the end but out of step with the line they'd very publicly said they'd be taking by backing the ref's call. A line which would be better for the game in the long run. We'd have some subjective decisions go for us, some against us, as it always was. There's no reason, other than your supposition, to doubt what the commentators were saying. VAR called him to the monitor because they thought there was no contact at all.

There was no contact initiated by the defender…

Your issue with this seems to be based around the subjectivity of these decision.

Today was just a bad decision rectified by the referee.

If VAR isn’t used for such refereeing mistakes, then what is it used for?

 

[American Seagle]

"It is a very good feeling, but I don't want to talk about myself so much," said Hurzeler to the BBC. "The players, club and staff deserve this win. They worked quite hard in pre-season and I am very proud and happy for them."

"It was a good result. It was a tough game, especially the first minutes. It was really intense and a loud atmosphere and we suffered in some moments, but we defended quite good. After that we tried to control the game and we had very good chances.

"We went 1-0 up and then it was helpful for us to control the game and have ball possession. In the end, a clean sheet is so important to win games in the Premier League and everyone was responsible today in defending their own box.

"It showed the attitude and character of the players so I am very happy for them. It was a good start, nothing more, and now we try to keep working to stay humble after a win like this."

The Ginger Dalek said: "The way we performed in the first half was decent and as good as I was hoping for, but one of the biggest challenges is finding the clinical moments which we didn't do.

"A big decision on the penalty - I can't really work it out. We go to these meetings, we have literally been told the bar is going to be incredibly high for the referee to make a decision; he makes a clear decision from a perfect viewing point and lo and behold he is called over to overturn the decision.

"You are like, what is the point having a high bar then? We are all confused by it."

The thing Dyche, and some on here it seems, are missing is that being quicky and easily shown to be wrong is most certainly above the highest of bars perceivable.

I understand Dyche as he as a conflict of interest and wants some "luck" in his way later from them, but others....seem to have an odd agenda.

 

[Paulie Gualtieri]

Clean sheet on day 1

We didn’t keep a league clean sheet last season until January

 

[dwayne]

He didn’t win a single battle

Indeed. They targeted him and Harrison murdered him every time. He can't defend we need to play him in his proper position. It's strange managers keep playing him at full back.

Other than that brilliant performance.

 

[Hiheidi]

 

[Change at Barnham]

I haven't read through this whole thread, so I'm sure this has been mentioned previously.....

Sean Dyche always has an excuse for failing.
His teams are always the victims and there is always a reason why they failed to win which is nothing to do with his teams performance.

The bloke is the biggest whinger in the game. I really hope they get relegated along with Palace and Chelsea (and also RB Leeds fail to win promotion).

Tosser.

 

[American Seagle]

Except VAR apparently overturned it on the basis that there was no contact, which was wrong.

This is what Howard Webb said this week, which sounded like a step forward, "“What we can do is is really focus on what VAR was always meant for. It was meant for those clear situations that would live large in the memory. It wasn’t meant to re-referee the game on small touches and little contacts and all those things that have created debate and discussion – leave those on the field."

I don't think that situation counted as a mistake that would live large in the memory. There was contact, the ref saw it differently at the time, 'referee's call' wouldn't have been unreasonable.

Anyway, don't give two hoots overall so can't be bothered to argue about it. Was simply pointing out that PGMOL's comments have prompted a few pundits to react the way they have to decisions this weekend.

I would suggest you get all the information first. VAR never overturned it for he reasons you state. They overturned it as the Everton player landed on Dunk's foot and that's not a foul.
The official decision was tweeted out moments after the incident.

 

[Deportivo Seagull]

Except VAR apparently overturned it on the basis that there was no contact, which was wrong.

This is what Howard Webb said this week, which sounded like a step forward, "“What we can do is is really focus on what VAR was always meant for. It was meant for those clear situations that would live large in the memory. It wasn’t meant to re-referee the game on small touches and little contacts and all those things that have created debate and discussion – leave those on the field."

I don't think that situation counted as a mistake that would live large in the memory. There was contact, the ref saw it differently at the time, 'referee's call' wouldn't have been unreasonable.

Anyway, don't give two hoots overall so can't be bothered to argue about it. Was simply pointing out that PGMOL's comments have prompted a few pundits to react the way they have to decisions this weekend.

If there had been no contact then it would have lived large in my memory. If you can’t turn over a decision where no contact was made then why bother at all. You can’t have a penalty if there is no contact!

 

[trueblue]

I would suggest you get all the information first. VAR never overturned it for he reasons you state. They overturned it as the Everton player landed on Dunk's foot and that's not a foul.
The official decision was tweeted out moments after the incident.

In that case, the commentators - who can hear the conversation - got it wrong. Believe whichever version you prefer.

 

[trueblue]

If there had been no contact then it would have lived large in my memory. If you can’t turn over a decision where no contact was made then why bother at all. You can’t have a penalty if there is no contact!

There was contact

 

[jcdenton08]

My thoughts are a bit jumbled with excitement so I’ll just bullet point my assessment/thoughts in no particular order

- I thought we were pretty poor starting again, and looked nervous for the first 20 minutes or so. Everton pressed us well and looked fired up. It was a very physical half and we lost a lot of duels against a physical, stodgy Dyche side. We were caught in possession numerous times and really it was only a lack of attacking quality from Everton which kept us level in the first quarter of the game. Despite this, they only managed one shot on target all match, in the 4th minute, which was a save you’d expect a professional goalkeeper to make.

- Our first goal - a counter-attacking goal no less(!) - was class and Minteh is going to be outstanding. What a signing.

- I like Steele and have defended him frequently on here from some irrational and unfair criticisms, but he didn’t fill me with confidence today. Sorry to break out a very, very old football joke but he reminded me of Dracula. He really doesn’t like crosses.

- talking of crosses, I was really surprised by how little quality Everton possessed in this area given it’s their entire game plan. Long diagonal to turn the full back around (in this case they constantly targeted Hinsh all game) then a cross. Just a total lack of quality or invention from Everton.

- Everton were very poor after that first 20 minutes. The second goal absolutely killed them and they looked broken men out there.

- Mitoma felt all his Christmases had come at once. He was brilliant, yes, but he must’ve been salivating lining up against a 39 year old playing out of position at right back. He had Young on toast and the red card was as clear cut as you’ll ever see, absolutely stone wall.

- what exactly was Dyche thinking with that line up? I know he doesn’t have the best squad to choose from, but they have to be the slowest, most ponderous team in the league. Just no dynamism at all. They’re in deep, deep trouble this year and I think it might be finally be their turn to go down. Their squad is atrocious, they have absolutely no pace or movement up front or through the midfield lines

- player ratings

Steele - 6
Hinshelwood - 7
Dunk - 7
Van Hecke - 8
Veltman - 7
Wieffer - 6
Milner - 7
Minteh - 8
Mitoma - 9 (MOTM)
Pedro - 8
Welbeck - 9

Adingra - 8
Others n/a

- penalty decision was correct. When it first happened based on the stream I said “penalty” and it looked clear cut, but did wonder about Dunk and JPVH’s reactions being so strong. After a couple of replays it was clear it was never a penalty. My big question is what on earth was Calvert-Lewin doing?! He just needed to side foot that in the corner, instead he went looking for a penalty for some bizarre reason and essentially dived. I have no idea what he was thinking except low confidence. Sums up Everton’s problems. I think they might be f***ed. Good.

- I liked our set pieces. Straightforward, good delivery, good movement: much better than under RDZ. We’ll score a few this season

- all three of our goals were beautiful with direct, flowing attacks. We could’ve had a few more as our wingers streak away - thinking Adingra in the second half and Minteh scaring the shit out of Mykolenko for 40 minutes. Mitoma against Young was farcical. The most one-sided roasting of an opposition fullback since March bs Cucurella at the Amex, where Cucurella was subbed off in tears lol

Everton are a dirt poor side, but we put them away nicely. That said, we do need to improve in many areas, some players need to pick up the pace (Wieffer springs to mind) as getting caught several times the way he did against better sides will be very costly for us.

Mojo rating: 9

 

[pb21]

I don't think that situation counted as a mistake that would live large in the memory.

I think it would, obviously wasn't a penalty, only took one single replay to tell

It wasn't like the VAR took 5-minutes, 20 different angles slowed to 1 frame/second and used chatGPT to establish it wasn't a penalty, just a couple of seconds.

 

[American Seagle]

There was contact

Omg yes there was but 1) VAR never claimed there wasn't any and 2) the contact was CLEARLY not a foul. So the hugh bar was achieved.

 

[American Seagle]

In that case, the commentators - who can hear the conversation - got it wrong. Believe whichever version you prefer.

The commentators don't know the laws of the game half the time so no, I wouldn't believe them in the slightest.

But wait....you think they overturned it because they mistakenly thought there was no contact, did that quickly and efficiently and then at the same time decided to tweet a different official reason knowing the commentators could hear the original decision?

You are just going to crazy extents to try and validate a hatred of var. It has been bad, but today, it has worked well all round. If that stays all season, its fixed and we can be happy about it.