[Albion] Premier League 30/12/23 - 2/1/24

[Machiavelli]

I did read like that! I just meant the race for 2nd to 4th is good. I deliberately didn't mention Arsenal because other than playing injury-hit us the other day, imho they haven't pushed on, opposition coaches now nullify the 2022/23 threats ... stop Saka and Martinelli.

Arsenal were really good against us, one of the best oppo performances I've witnessed under RDZ, but there were the injury circumstances you mention.
I think they have moved on this year. Their central defence is more secure, and Rice helps. Just think that Liverpool and City are quite clearly better, with far more options up front. But you're right about Saka and Martinelli.

 

[kevo]

Not seen it myself, but so what? Maybe another team (not us) got on the wrong end of a VAR decision that sucks?

OK, so it (very slightly) reduces the chances of Citeh winning the league yet again (yawn) and (very slightly) improves our chances of finishing ahead of the beheadies and getting a European spot again. So, errrm, what is your beef, exactly? Nearly all of us would prefer to get rid of VAR, I think, but when it does us a good turn..........

Weird take - particularly as you haven't seen it. Of course it's in our interest to see Newcastle lose, but that's not the point. The decision was so absolutely ludicrous it shows again just how appalling the standards of officiating are.

 

[The Grockle]

Arsenal were really good against us, one of the best oppo performances I've witnessed under RDZ, but there were the injury circumstances you mention.
I think they have moved on this year. Their central defence is more secure, and Rice helps. Just think that Liverpool and City are quite clearly better, with far more options up front. But you're right about Saka and Martinelli.

I cant think of many teams who have made us so look poor under RDZ, Perhaps Villa away. We have spells of looking incredible in almost all game.

 

[Joey Jo Jo Jr. Shabadoo]

Which leg was the supposed contact on? From behind it's on his right foot. However, look closely as he runs on and he turns his left from the ankle into the ground. For me it's an inexplicable dive and one can only think he believes for that second that he's knocked it too wide.

From the video footage posted above I'd say it appears the keeper brushes Jota's left calf/ankle with the lightest of touches, but it doesn't appear to be enough to knock him off balance. I agree he probably thinks he's taken it too far wide and with two players getting back onto the line decides to go down.

 

[Triggaaar]

Pretty much every penalty these days wouldn't be given as a foul anywhere else on the pitch. Refs, pundits, players now believe that only contact is necessary in the box for a penalty to be

Yeah pundits are part of the problem here with stupid comments like 'he's got every right to go down'. WTF? If they say that, then it probably wasn't a foul.

 

[Simster]

Yeah pundits are part of the problem here with stupid comments like 'he's got every right to go down'. WTF? If they say that, then it probably wasn't a foul.

I find that annoying too, but I'm not sure it's really "part of the problem". If commentators stopped saying it overnight, I'm pretty confident players would keep reacting as Diaz reacted.

 

[Triggaaar]

I find that annoying too, but I'm not sure it's really "part of the problem". If commentators stopped saying it overnight, I'm pretty confident players would keep reacting as Diaz reacted.

Yes, but it's part of the narrative. I think refs should be told (consistently) that's not a foul, not have influential pundits saying yeah you got that right. We have pundits working alongside ex refs, and I can't believe that what they say is ignored

 

[Simster]

Yes, but it's part of the narrative. I think refs should be told (consistently) that's not a foul, not have influential pundits saying yeah you got that right. We have pundits working alongside ex refs, and I can't believe that what they say is ignored

Yeah, fair comment. Although to be honest, I find the pundit-refs equally annoying, because unless something is a stonewall blatant error, they seem more concerned with covering the latest on-field shit decision than actually telling us how they see it.

If there had been a ref in the studio, I guarantee he'd have said it was a pen even though it's a highly debatable decision.

 

[Triggaaar]

Although to be honest, I find the pundit-refs equally annoying, because unless something is a stonewall blatant error, they seem more concerned with covering the latest on-field shit decision than actually telling us how they see it.

If there had been a ref in the studio, I guarantee he'd have said it was a pen even though it's a highly debatable decision.

Exactly. One big cover your back old boys club

 

[Seagull58]

I also detest both and hate diving. At that speed when clipped a tiny bit it can knock you completely off balance. Why would someone dive when he has successfully rounded the keeper and has an open goal to roll the ball into?

He thought the ball was getting away from him so threw himself to the ground. There is no possible way that the minimal contact caused his collapse four strides later. One of the most obvious, disgraceful dives you'll ever see, both at normal speed and in slo-mo.

 

[GT49er]

Weird take - particularly as you haven't seen it. Of course it's in our interest to see Newcastle lose, but that's not the point. The decision was so absolutely ludicrous it shows again just how appalling the standards of officiating are.

Seeing it or not seeing it was not relevant to the point of my post. Pundits (and NSC) are split on whether it should have been a penalty or not - there are some who, unlike you, think it was a penalty - but nowhere have I taken any side in that debate. Just that if it was a dodgy decision, it was good for us. Simples.

 

[Seagull58]

Just to be clear, it wasn't a VAR decision, the ref gave the penalty.

A clear and obvious error that VAR should have overturned.

 

[Seagull58]

Can’t help but thinking that decision was a massive opportunity for VAR / PGMOL to gain some credibility back by saying actually no, that’s not a penalty. That’s cheating. It would of been a show of strength and sent a message to the players/managers across the league. But they rolled over again.

I wanted to like your post but the use of "would of" prevents me from doing so.

 

[kevo]

Seeing it or not seeing it was not relevant to the point of my post. Pundits (and NSC) are split on whether it should have been a penalty or not - there are some who, unlike you, think it was a penalty - but nowhere have I taken any side in that debate. Just that if it was a dodgy decision, it was good for us. Simples.

Yeah but I can't celebrate something like that. The decision was a joke and we have been at the end of so many of these ourselves. It's becoming absolutely farcical.

 

[Milano]

A clear and obvious error that VAR should have overturned.

On this occasion I disagree as there was contact. Was it enough to make Jota fall over? Only Jota knows that, and that's the point. VAR cannot be subjective, it has to be black and white, therefore Umpire's call on this one.

Anyway as predicted Smug has done a brilliant job of using this to deflect away from the fact that his expensively assembled team were totally outplayed for 90 minutes and he had no answer, he didn't change a thing. 4-2 massively flattered Newcastle.

 

[Lady Whistledown]

On this occasion I disagree as there was contact. Was it enough to make Jota fall over? Only Jota knows that, and that's the point. VAR cannot be subjective, it has to be black and white, therefore Umpire's call on this one.

Anyway as predicted Smug has done a brilliant job of using this to deflect away from the fact that his expensively assembled team were totally outplayed for 90 minutes and he had no answer, he didn't change a thing. 4-2 massively flattered Newcastle.

BUT BUT BUT THEY HAVE INJURIES!!!!

 

[BevBHA]

I wanted to like your post but the use of "would of" prevents me from doing so.

That’s abit strange, perhaps seek some help?

 

[Berty23]

In terms of VAR there was clear contact which as I have said small contact at speed can mean you never quite get your balance back. So VAR can’t say obvious error.

Far worse was the non overturn vs palace when jack’s foot was clearly clipped which meant he scuffed his shot. He was obviously fouled but because he stayed on feet no foul was given. A foul doesn’t always mean someone is flattened. It can be slowing them down etc. he looked like he tried to stay on his feet then realised he couldn’t so went down. So you can end up being called a cheat for trying to be honest. This is why players generally go down under any contact because then they won’t be accused of late dives.

The decision that winds me up more than any at the moment is the thing defenders keep doing or throwing themselves to the ground under any contact at all. Vs palace Guihi did it when Moder (I think) was more trying to hold him up than knock him down. It happens so much in games and refs keep falling for it.

 

[Questions]

Does it say anywhere that football is a contact sport.

 

[Bodian]

In terms of VAR there was clear contact which as I have said small contact at speed can mean you never quite get your balance back. So VAR can’t say obvious error.

Thing is - his left leg was moving perfectly well, and with no difference in trajectory after the feather touch from the keeper. But just before he puts his foot down, he turns his ankle so he can fall over. He could have planted his foot flat. Nothing to do with losing his balance - that would have been higher up his body, it wouldn't affect his ankle movement.