Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

[Albion] No VAR tonight



Harry Wilson's tackle

Harry Wilson's Tackle
NSC Patron
Oct 8, 2003
56,068
Faversham
Not common knowledge here so thanks for the heads up. Will be nice to be able to celebrate properly and also abuse the ref properly when he balls up. Nostalgic.
I didn't realise you're a Chelsea fan ???
 








Bodian

Well-known member
May 3, 2012
14,211
Cumbria
Despite the fact that if we had had VAR tonight they would have been down to 10 men and/or their second goal may have stood - it was still far better without it.
 


Bozza

You can change this
Helpful Moderator
Jul 4, 2003
57,283
Back in Sussex
The goal was very tight. They'd have checked it and got their lines out.

Screenshot 2023-09-27 at 22.06.13.png
 




Sheebo

Well-known member
Jul 13, 2003
29,319
The goal was very tight. They'd have checked it and got their lines out.

View attachment 167184
Yes I thought at the time it looked off but they showed no angle. Second wouldn’t have happened if they had 10 and weren’t already one up. Therefore I’m calling we were robbed by this rule 😀
 


Sheebo

Well-known member
Jul 13, 2003
29,319






As you can see without VAR, the decisions will go with the bigger brand home team, VAR was brought in because refs will always favour them. We should have been playing 10 men in the second half and we would have won - a rank injustice
 








studio150

Well-known member
Jul 30, 2011
30,226
On the Border
From where we were sitting chilwell looked to have handled late on as well.
Should have been sent off with two yellow cards for time wasting, can only assume that the ref didn't get the memo that Chelsea are no longer a top six side and therefore these rules do apply to them.
 


WhingForPresident

.
NSC Patron
Feb 23, 2009
17,258
Marlborough
It felt weird watching it knowing we didn't have a 'safety net'.

The refereeing was awful, as usual, and I do get the feeling they've become too reliant on VAR bailing them out if they drop a clanger. Ugochuku was lucky not to get a straight red, let alone a second yellow, let alone even give away a free kick. No way VAR wouldn't have intervened on that one.

The ball also 'went out' twice when we were attacking (Mitoma first half, Joao Pedro second), despite the fact it clearly didn't. It's literally impossible for the lino on the other side of the pitch to see that, he just went with the shouts and took a guess. You could probably argue the second one Jackson 'scored' may have been onside had VAR been there as well. Equally the actual goal may have been off.

Typical double standards that Chilwell got away with throwing the ball away and chewing the refs ear off every two minutes and Cucurella, Caicedo and others were allowed to gesticulate and scream at officials without repercussion.
 
Last edited:


trueblue

Well-known member
Jul 5, 2003
10,948
Hove
As you can see without VAR, the decisions will go with the bigger brand home team, VAR was brought in because refs will always favour them. We should have been playing 10 men in the second half and we would have won - a rank injustice
VAR gets on my tits, despite really wanting it to be brought in. But, yes, last night was a reminder of the reality before it existed. Shocking decision not to give their player a second booking and home crowd helping them get free-kicks in every 50/50 tangle. I’d also like to know the difference between Pervis waving an imaginary yellow after a bad challenge (automatic booking) and Chilwell being right in the ref’s face ALL evening, trying to run the game and clearly asking for cards but without doing that little hand gesture. That’s fine apparently.
 






Bozza

You can change this
Helpful Moderator
Jul 4, 2003
57,283
Back in Sussex
As you can see without VAR, the decisions will go with the bigger brand home team, VAR was brought in because refs will always favour them. We should have been playing 10 men in the second half and we would have won - a rank injustice
Only if it was deemed a straight red card. It could have been, but I feel it unlikely.

If the VAR ref determined it wasn't a straight red, even if he felt it should have been a yellow, then the decision would not have been changed.

That one was entirely on the on-field ref - it was a clear yellow all day long.
 


Kalimantan Gull

Well-known member
Aug 13, 2003
13,436
Central Borneo / the Lizard
Only if it was deemed a straight red card. It could have been, but I feel it unlikely.

If the VAR ref determined it wasn't a straight red, even if he felt it should have been a yellow, then the decision would not have been changed.

That one was entirely on the on-field ref - it was a clear yellow all day long.
I think the same as you, but it would have been a really interesting case because its borderline red, would certainly have had the game stopped while they looked at it, do they talk to the ref in his earphone too? There's definitely a case to send him to the monitor, and maybe they'd have decided a soft straight red was better than allowing him to stay on the pitch with no yellow.
 


dazzer6666

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Mar 27, 2013
55,518
Burgess Hill
Only if it was deemed a straight red card. It could have been, but I feel it unlikely.

If the VAR ref determined it wasn't a straight red, even if he felt it should have been a yellow, then the decision would not have been changed.

That one was entirely on the on-field ref - it was a clear yellow all day long.
I’m not so sure……….junior messaged me at the time suggesting it might have been a red.
IMG_6351.jpeg
 




tronnogull

Well-known member
May 17, 2010
602
Their goal may well have been offside. Their disallowed goal may not have been. Doubt that a straight red or a handball penalty would have been given.

Even if all these had gone against us in this particular match, it was a delight to have linos signalling straight away and for no VAR to reduce spontaneity.

The game is much much better without VAR and the poor decisions are no less poor.
 


Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here