[Albion] Lee Mason

[Worthing exile]

Was just thinking the same. If this was a deliberate act to cancel a legitimate goal then I would say there's a case to answer but I guess they'd ultimately claim incompetence rather a deliberate attempt to subvert the rules.

The trouble is that there is an article where it says he shouldn't have been in charge of such an important game and also the Wolves Manager has previous said he was crap.

In spite of this damning evidence the powers that be sent him in to a match they knew he was out of his depth in.

 

[Kuipers Supporters Club]

Christ, Dermot Gallagher is possibly the most out of touch **** on the planet. He is made for a career in politics.

He is paid by the PGMOL - of course then will defend them.

If you want to hear what's really happening, follow Keith Hackett & Mark Halsey.

 

[origigull]

It clearly doesn't.

Even with freeze frame you can see he has the whistle in his mouth before the ball crosses the line.

What you can't tell without an audio wav form and frame advance is whether the ball crossed the line.

just because the whistle is in his mouth did he blow, as most people would have taken a breath before blowing which adds more milliseconds then more feet the ball was traveling. VAR had to be 100 per cent sure the ball didn't cross the line. I couldn't tell if it was or wasn't from the replays.

 

[clapham_gull]

Not sure why Sky and MOTD haven’t done their usual analysis/ reverse angles, goal line technology as to whether the ball was over the line or not before the 2nd whistle blew. I remember earlier this season some VAR controversy as to whether a ball had bent out and then back into play before a goal was scored and they did all sorts of different angles to prove it had, but they seem to have chosen not to do the same for us.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

It very strange.

In a quiet stadium, all you would need to do is look for a high frequency "peak" on the associated audio wave form. I can't believe for one second that isn't available because it must be there to determine whether a whistle has been blown.

Freeze the video at that point and see where the ball is.

They've must have done that to disallow the goal and I'm surprised as you are that the video wasn't made available to the broadcasters.

That being said, it would have taken them minutes to do it themselves.

 

[Bry Nylon]

It very strange.

In a quiet stadium, all you would need to do is look for a high frequency "peak" on the associated audio wave form..

To be fair, that could have been Sammy Lee.

 

[Insel affe]

It very strange.

In a quiet stadium, all you would need to do is look for a high frequency "peak" on the associated audio wave form. I can't believe for one second that isn't available because it must be there to determine whether a whistle has been blown.

Freeze the video at that point and see where the ball is.

They've must have done that to disallow the goal and I'm surprised as you are that the video wasn't made available to the broadcasters.

That being said, it would have taken them minutes to do it themselves.

which is faster sound or vision ?
The faster the stimulus reaches the brain, the faster the signal is processed and the necessary responses are sent for the necessary motor reaction. ... Therefore, since the auditory stimulus reaches the cortex faster than the visual stimulus, the auditory reaction time is faster than the visual reaction time

 

[Beanstalk]

He definitely blew a second whistle, but it's impossibly to tell whether the ball "was dead" before crossing the line.

On balance and I presume VAR looked at, I say it probably didn't.

Whilst I understand this and agree that it is really difficult to say that the ball had definitely crossed the line when the whistle is blown (I have tried to work it out and only got more confused) the VAR decision to retake the free kick made little to no sense if that was why the goal was disallowed.

There was a clear admittance in both giving the goal (Mason) and not awarding the goal because of the timing of a second whistle (VAR) that the free kick itself had been taken legally but play had been stopped by the second whistle (for no apparent reason). The correct decision in this case would have been a drop ball (uncontested and taken by the West Brom GK as play was stopped in the penalty area) from the place that the referee blew his second whistle. Yes it would've been even more of a farce, but this is what should have happened.

Logically, that leaves us with just two options of what actually happened. Firstly, Mason didn't actually blow his whistle the first time round. We imagined it all and Dunky didn't legally take the free kick. Secondly, in demanding the free kick was retaken, Hooper (on VAR) just made up a new rule to save his pal Mason's blushes and disallow our goal.

 

[Uh_huh_him]

Whilst I understand this and agree that it is really difficult to say that the ball had definitely crossed the line when the whistle is blown (I have tried to work it out and only got more confused) the VAR decision to retake the free kick made little to no sense if that was why the goal was disallowed.

There was a clear admittance in both giving the goal (Mason) and not awarding the goal because of the timing of a second whistle (VAR) that the free kick itself had been taken legally but play had been stopped by the second whistle (for no apparent reason). The correct decision in this case would have been a drop ball (uncontested and taken by the West Brom GK as play was stopped in the penalty area) from the place that the referee blew his second whistle. Yes it would've been even more of a farce, but this is what should have happened.

Logically, that leaves us with just two options of what actually happened. Firstly, Mason didn't actually blow his whistle the first time round. We imagined it all and Dunky didn't legally take the free kick. Secondly, in demanding the free kick was retaken, Hooper (on VAR) just made up a new rule to save his pal Mason's blushes and disallow our goal.

Indeed.

Allowing us to retake the freekick was just throwing us a bone, as an uncontested drop ball would have incensed us even further.
Weak.

 

[drew]

It very strange.

In a quiet stadium, all you would need to do is look for a high frequency "peak" on the associated audio wave form. I can't believe for one second that isn't available because it must be there to determine whether a whistle has been blown.

Freeze the video at that point and see where the ball is.

They've must have done that to disallow the goal and I'm surprised as you are that the video wasn't made available to the broadcasters.

That being said, it would have taken them minutes to do it themselves.

I agree that the technology should allow a definitive conclusion as to whether the ball was over the line or not when the second whistle was blown. What we do know is that Hooper did not have access to that at the time but it appears he told Mason the ball wasn't over the line when the second whistle sounded. That adds to the catalogue of errors by the officials. If Hooper can't definitively show the ball wasn't over the line then they should fall back to the 'clear and obvious' criteria and stick with the onfield decision to award a goal (after Dunk had reminded Mason he has allowed him to take the free kick).

What is rapidly needed is clarification from the FA as to when a team can take a quick free kick (and I would add to that, what punishment a defending team should receive if they deliberately prevent a quick free kick, ie by standing in front of the ball or by holding on to the ball).

 

[Yoda]

Christ, Dermot Gallagher is possibly the most out of touch **** on the planet. He is made for a career in politics.

Talking shit and making stuff up:

"The easy answer is he's just lost focus. When you give a free-kick and it's a ceremonial free-kick like that, because Brighton originally wanted the wall back 10 yards (Err! No. Mason decided that out of his own accord. Matheus Pereira had the ball in his hand as Mason walks out the ten yards from where he's marked the kick to be taken from.), he's got the ball placed, he's got the wall back and then he's then got to get into a position.

"For whatever reason, he is dragged back into the players (Again, no. He goes back himself to make sure the ball is on the right spot), Dunk sees Johnstone on the post and thinks 'I can go quick here'. He asks the referee if he can go, I think the referee has lost a little bit of focus and says yes. He's not in the right position for the free-kick himself because he's just stepping back, Dunk shoots and I think as soon as he shoots, I think Lee thinks 'I shouldn't have had this free kick taken', blows his whistle again to stop it but the consequence is the ball goes in the net."

 

[BluesRockDJ]

How many times in a game do we see free kicks taken quickly ?

 

[raymondo]

I agree that the technology should allow a definitive conclusion as to whether the ball was over the line or not when the second whistle was blown. What we do know is that Hooper did not have access to that at the time but it appears he told Mason the ball wasn't over the line when the second whistle sounded. That adds to the catalogue of errors by the officials. If Hooper can't definitively show the ball wasn't over the line then they should fall back to the 'clear and obvious' criteria and stick with the onfield decision to award a goal (after Dunk had reminded Mason he has allowed him to take the free kick).

What is rapidly needed is clarification from the FA as to when a team can take a quick free kick (and I would add to that, what punishment a defending team should receive if they deliberately prevent a quick free kick, ie by standing in front of the ball or by holding on to the ball).

Yes, and double yes for your second para. In fact, why can't the wronged team ALWAYS have the option of a quick free kick? Should there even be a need for the ref to decide by blowing his whistle. Has the free kick set up (the wall placement, the high or low line, the defensive time wasting, the jostling, the two attackers over the ball...) become so much a piece of theatre that it's now sacrosanct in the game? I'm with Linneker on this one.

 

[CliveWalkerWingWizard]

No var evidence released= no evidence. Is there even a catagory under which car could intervene?

 

[jessiejames]

Still think it misses the point that VAR or more importantly Hooper decided that the ball hadn't gone over the line before the 2nd whistle, It had on every clip I've seen and listened to. That means the error, which was only the 2nd whistle, was covered up. EPL and the ref's complicit in changing the events. If not prove it with proper views such as the goalline camera which hasn't been shown surprisingly. It goes further than the poor ref in the middle

Maybe the cover up goes futher, the West Brom captain on match of the day said that Mason told him that there was pushing in the wall that's why the second whistle. Lineker disproved that as no Brighton player was in the West Brom wall. Someone is telling porkies.

 

[jessiejames]

No var evidence released= no evidence. Is there even a catagory under which car could intervene?

No. The only thing VAR could advise Mason on was that he can not stop play because he made a mistake, that second whistle does not come into play, the only outcome is a goal must be awarded

 

[sams dad]

We are grasping at straws blaming ref. He made two mistakes. Most serious one was blowing for kick to be taken. Next was panicking and allowing goal. Sorry unfortunate but right decision was made in end. It would have been a farce to allow goal when keeper was on far post lining up wall

Under the laws of the game, once the referee has restarted the game ( ie blown his whistle), and the ball is in play ( ie Dunk has taken the free kick), he can't blow again to stop the game even if he realises he has made a mistake, he must let play continue .
It was therefore a legitimate goal, and VAR had no right to intervene.
Obviously Mason and Hooper don't know the laws of the game as well as they should.

 

[Mr Putdown]

just because the whistle is in his mouth did he blow, as most people would have taken a breath before blowing which adds more milliseconds then more feet the ball was traveling.

Slightly off topic, but I train & work dogs to the whistle so I use them every single day, on some occasions several different (pitch) whistles all at the same time. For those commands where you lift the whistle to your mouth, rather than already having it in your mouth - ‘stop’ and ‘here’ for example - held within your teeth, you just naturally take the breath of air as you lift the whistle to your lips so the command is instant.

I’m not saying referees use a whistle as frequently as that, but I’d hazard a guess it may be enough to learn that technique, especially as that’s the only whistle command they use in a game*, but it is a possibility.

It’s a moot point as he totally cocked up whenever he blew it the second time.

*his two peeps on his whistle would have made all my dogs turn left.

*

 

[origigull]

Under the laws of the game, once the referee has restarted the game ( ie blown his whistle), and the ball is in play ( ie Dunk has taken the free kick), he can't blow again to stop the game even if he realises he has made a mistake, he must let play continue .
It was therefore a legitimate goal, and VAR had no right to intervene.
Obviously Mason and Hooper don't know the laws of the game as well as they should.

VAR was checking everything from pushing to offside to try not to award the goal. Have they even got 100% evidence that the whistle was blown before the ball crossed the goal line. I couldn't tell either way. They seem to make up a rule to suit the narrative.

 

[Yoda]

VAR was checking everything from pushing to offside to try not to award the goal. Have they even got 100% evidence that the whistle was blown before the ball crossed the goal line. I couldn't tell either way. They seem to make up a rule to suit the narrative.

I've played the clip back on YouTube at 1/4 speed and you can hear the whistle starting to go about 1 meter our before the ball crossed the line. But that doesn't cover up that Mason had no legal right to blow again according to the rules of the game.

 

[origigull]

Slightly off topic, but I train & work dogs to the whistle so I use them every single day, on some occasions several different (pitch) whistles all at the same time. For those commands where you lift the whistle to your mouth, rather than already having it in your mouth - ‘stop’ and ‘here’ for example - held within your teeth, you just naturally take the breath of air as you lift the whistle to your lips so the command is instant.

I’m not saying referees use a whistle as frequently as that, but I’d hazard a guess it may be enough to learn that technique, especially as that’s the only whistle command they use in a game*, but it is a possibility.

It’s a moot point as he totally cocked up whenever he blew it the second time.

*his two peeps on his whistle would have made all my dogs turn left.

*

Ah but was Lee Mason fit enough after just coming back from a few weeks out to puff/blow on memory.