Snatchday 1: Nottingham Forest Vs the PGMOL

[ubik]

So Howard Webb applauded Peter Bankes on VAR for highlighting Man Utd’s Onana crashing into an opponent and recommended a penalty, but the same man on VAR, didn’t feel that the Man City goalkeeper crashing into Boly should have been a pen, I wonder why?

TBF, it looked 50/50 to me.

 

[Cortez the Killer]

I don't disagree with any of that.
My thoughts were how do we improve - because they effect everything so much -this conversation just demonstrates that.
To pick up on your point, maybe we 'hire the best 10 refs from Italy, Germany, Spain where-ever and have a series of workshops - whatever it takes - which would cost some money but not an inordinate amount.
Just throwing ideas out there - because at the moment this is seriously detracting from our game

I doubt the arrogance of our refs would like that.

Sent from my SM-G780G using Tapatalk

 

[ubik]

TBF, it looked 50/50 to me.

Sorry, same point already made. Must keep up.

 

[birkbeck]

Football is subjective which is the problem. You see the referees made the decisions against Everton and their reasons were not unreasonabe even if Howard Webb says we should have had one. Its like in the Playoff final if Youngs on Hudson Odoi's was that means 100% Max Lowes one was a penalty. However this is how difficult it is for refs as some Forest fans see those incidents completely differently.

Also for example I dont think Reyna's one was ever a penalty in fact I thought he went down like a sack of spuds after he felt the contact not during it like most fouls. Some people agree with me and some dont on here so how is the ref meant to win??


I also understand peoples frustrations because we have had softer ones given against us. Like Rashord and that one last year agaisnt Brentford. So I get peoples frustrations but unfortunatley I dont think you can ever do something about consistency from different refs in different games becuase the rules are so vague. All I think you can expect is consistency in one game. Unless you make the rules so simple that takes greyness out the game. However even then there will be problems. Just imagine if all contact was a foul. There would be carnage and you have almost killed defending as we know it. So what I am trying to say is their is no solutions just trade offs.

Out of interest what do think Ashley Young was trying to do when he kicked Reyna, ignore the fact he went down like a sack of potatoes. To me he was trying to kick the ball away from a dangerous position and and dont accept that he was going to kick the ball with minimal contact, look at how far he swung his leg back and how quickly his foot is moving when it hits Reyna. I don't think it is similar to Rashfords minimal contact. You are not comparing like with like.

 

[JohnnyCarey]

Basically, as a general rule of thumb, what they're saying is, if we don't have clear rules, then they can never be accused of applying them incorrectly. If in doubt, make up some new justification, that if you look at previous justification, will tie you up into a logic pretzel... then setup reviews and committees that exist to confirm everything is correct.

You put your finger on it. Leaving aside all the Forest-specific complaints, PGMOL's justifications have succeeded in making the rules of the game seem arbitrary. Everyone knows and accepts that there's always going to be an element of subjectivity and instinctive reaction in real-time decision making by refs. But VAR creates a claim that those inherent biases and errors are being corrected according to some objective standard. That claim has become utterly spurious -- indeed what's actually happened is a doubling down on subjectivity and inherent bias. If they fail to recognise this, they're just setting ups a doom loop in which every "explanation" for a controversial decision just succeeds in making g the rules seem ever more open to interpretation and thus less like rules and more like mere guidelines. It's idiotic.

 

[Red Ray's Redlist]

Watching the Mic'd up program did anyone spot the Dunk/Wissa analysis. The ref, Andy Madeley, states it would be a penalty but Dunk fouls Wissa first.

It's interesting because Wissa hauls Dunk down at a corner and Madeley states the action is enough for it to be a penalty when he views the foul on the monitor.
Then go back and watch Doucore's assault on Yates in the homeme vs Everton.

Threshold must have dramatically reduced for these situations now, which either pisses on Gallagher's chips, or it proves yet again that we're being treated differently to other teams.

 

[EmmersonForest4]

At the end of the day you won’t want to hear this but I watch rugby union a lot. The reffing isn’t better it’s punditry and fan behaviour which is better. It’s highly inconsistent during the same game! Difference is people don’t moan about constantly or scrutinise it to the nth degree. If Rugby did that you’d just have constant arguing. In fluid team games you will always have subjectivity within the rules. That’s par for the course anyone who thinks this can be eliminated is living in cloud cuckoo land. For example Danny Murphy thinks we should have only had 1 penno, souness thinks we should have had 3. Most on here say we should have had 2. So what hope is a ref gonna have really?

 

[Robertson]

At the end of the day you won’t want to hear this but I watch rugby union a lot. The reffing isn’t better it’s punditry and fan behaviour which is better. It’s highly inconsistent during the same game! Difference is people don’t moan about constantly or scrutinise it to the nth degree. If Rugby did that you’d just have constant arguing. In fluid team games you will always have subjectivity within the rules. That’s par for the course anyone who thinks this can be eliminated is living in cloud cuckoo land. For example Danny Murphy thinks we should have only had 1 penno, souness thinks we should have had 3. Most on here say we should have had 2. So what hope is a ref gonna have really?

They could try awarding at least one and take it from there?

 

[apondaway]

At the end of the day you won’t want to hear this but I watch rugby union a lot. The reffing isn’t better it’s punditry and fan behaviour which is better. It’s highly inconsistent during the same game! Difference is people don’t moan about constantly or scrutinise it to the nth degree. If Rugby did that you’d just have constant arguing. In fluid team games you will always have subjectivity within the rules. That’s par for the course anyone who thinks this can be eliminated is living in cloud cuckoo land. For example Danny Murphy thinks we should have only had 1 penno, souness thinks we should have had 3. Most on here say we should have had 2. So what hope is a ref gonna have really?

This is a really poor way to try and excuse professional referees. Sorry, they have one job: get it correct.

 

[Bohinens_chip]

Fletch giving it enough of an in joke vibe on champs league coverage tonight. Like it.

 

[Erik]

For example Danny Murphy thinks we should have only had 1 penno, souness thinks we should have had 3. Most on here say we should have had 2. So what hope is a ref gonna have really?

Most football fans think we should have had, or could easily have been given 2 or even 3 penalties. They are unanimous in that we should have had at least 1.

Only two pricks on the entire planet thought we shouldn't have been given any at all and they just happened to have been the referee and VAR that day.

 

[Mr. Blonde]

At the end of the day you won’t want to hear this but I watch rugby union a lot. The reffing isn’t better it’s punditry and fan behaviour which is better. It’s highly inconsistent during the same game! Difference is people don’t moan about constantly or scrutinise it to the nth degree. If Rugby did that you’d just have constant arguing. In fluid team games you will always have subjectivity within the rules. That’s par for the course anyone who thinks this can be eliminated is living in cloud cuckoo land. For example Danny Murphy thinks we should have only had 1 penno, souness thinks we should have had 3. Most on here say we should have had 2. So what hope is a ref gonna have really?

That's because Rugby is a shit game where you can't see what's going on most of the time

 

[RedRobbo]

The Taylor / Attwell duo strike again ( Champions League Semi )

 

[eyupmeduck]

The Taylor / Attwell duo strike again ( Champions League Semi )

Didn't meet the threshold as no blood was drawn and all limbs and organs remained in place afterwards.

Onfield decision Tails, Taylo, Tone no death, no penalty, play on.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

 

[Statto]

Didn't meet the threshold as no blood was drawn and all limbs and organs remained in place afterwards.

Onfield decision Tails, Taylo, Tone no death, no penalty, play on.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

innit mate, top process bro

 

[Redofheaven2]

Tbf, I suspect there is need on that panel for someone who knows the laws.

I don't imagine the ex-players keep up in the details. And the EPL rep might just be a blazer.

They could drop the 'independent' title to make it more palatable.

Nobody knows the laws as they have deliver been made “subjective”. Mutual contact my arse. Handball very similar given in the cup semi 2 hours later.

 

[Redofheaven2]

The laws themselves need some changes, but then Tierney vs Liverpool? Did he know the law? No he didn't.

Interestingly there was an occasion in the first half last Sunday where City claimed that they should have the ball back, but we got a drop ball because the ref had blown for a 'head injury' and the ball was in our area. So, applying the law as it stands, we got the ball. Tierney, of course, blew after the ball was outside of the `liverpool area and at the feet of CHO. He also blew as their player was rising to his feet!

Two things then:

firstly, the law is an ass (a corners not properly cleared, attacking team has an opportunity so a defender falls down clutching his head, referee feels obliged to blow and halt the game ... that is capable of exploitation and that is happening weekly).

secondly, the inconsistency in decision making is not solely down to "humans being humans' (to paraphrase Howard Webb), it is also down to some officials simply not having a good enough grasp of the laws of the game as they stand.

I don't need to name names, we know who you are!

He did gives us the ball but also gave an instruction to boot in back to Man City so they had possession in their half.

 

[Redofheaven2]

Just take the grey areas out of as many rules as possible. That would help the referees from having to interpret each incident.
Also get VAR to be working with the on field referee to make the correct decision - instead of using it to validate the original decision.

They want the grey areas to remain - that’s where they hide.

 

[Notcher]

Fletch giving it enough of an in joke vibe on champs league coverage tonight. Like it.

I missed the game. What was Fletch saying?

 

[Bohinens_chip]

I missed the game. What was Fletch saying?

Nothing really, just referencing that they atwell had been hwavily involved in penalties reently. You could just sense he was doing it with tongue in cheek for our benefit.

I actually thought Taylor reffed it really well.

 

[Flaggers]

What if any, punishment has been given to Atwell after his now well publicised error, that could possibly have cost us one or maybe three points?

I believe he has been severely, and I mean SEVERELY..er..sent to the European Championships to have a summer jolly there with his little whistle and yellow and red cards under the guise of being the best we've got to send to that most prestigious tournament.

Which is nice for him, isn't it.

The useless incompetent twat.

 

[Alan Akbah]

At the end of the day you won’t want to hear this but I watch rugby union a lot. The reffing isn’t better it’s punditry and fan behaviour which is better. It’s highly inconsistent during the same game! Difference is people don’t moan about constantly or scrutinise it to the nth degree. If Rugby did that you’d just have constant arguing. In fluid team games you will always have subjectivity within the rules. That’s par for the course anyone who thinks this can be eliminated is living in cloud cuckoo land. For example Danny Murphy thinks we should have only had 1 penno, souness thinks we should have had 3. Most on here say we should have had 2. So what hope is a ref gonna have really?

They've got one job..... If they aren't up to it, with a bloke watching the telly to help out, then maybe they're in the wrong one.

 

[Chappers85]

At the end of the day you won’t want to hear this but I watch rugby union a lot. The reffing isn’t better it’s punditry and fan behaviour which is better. It’s highly inconsistent during the same game! Difference is people don’t moan about constantly or scrutinise it to the nth degree. If Rugby did that you’d just have constant arguing. In fluid team games you will always have subjectivity within the rules. That’s par for the course anyone who thinks this can be eliminated is living in cloud cuckoo land. For example Danny Murphy thinks we should have only had 1 penno, souness thinks we should have had 3. Most on here say we should have had 2. So what hope is a ref gonna have really?

There is more inherent respect for refs in rugby. Probably for 3 reasons:

1) The refs are like school masters and all those public school boys would get PTSD if they dissented.

2) Rugby is a dangerous game. If scrums aren't setup and supervised properly, someone could end up with a broken neck. Likewise, high tackles could end in serious injury. The ref is responsible for the safety of everyone out there, probably more so than any other team sport (other than maybe American Football), so there has to be an inherent trust in the officials otherwise the game couldn't function properly. And if a fight between players breaks out, unlike the handbags at dawn in football, with the size of those blokes someone's ending up with a broken jaw or cheekbone.

3) No one knows the bloody rules anyway. I'm sure there must be some, but I reckon most people know you're not allowed to pass it forward and that's about it.

 

[EmmersonForest4]

Out of interest what do think Ashley Young was trying to do when he kicked Reyna, ignore the fact he went down like a sack of potatoes. To me he was trying to kick the ball away from a dangerous position and and dont accept that he was going to kick the ball with minimal contact, look at how far he swung his leg back and how quickly his foot is moving when it hits Reyna. I don't think it is similar to Rashfords minimal contact. You are not comparing like with like.

He was trying to clear the ball. Reyna took a poor touch and knew it. Felt the contact which was obviously there, planted his other foot and as an afterthought tried to threw himself to the ground. I always look at incidents and think would I be peeved if that was against us. My answer on that is a deffo yes.

 

[EmmersonForest4]

There is more inherent respect for refs in rugby. Probably for 3 reasons:

1) The refs are like school masters and all those public school boys would get PTSD if they dissented.

2) Rugby is a dangerous game. If scrums aren't setup and supervised properly, someone could end up with a broken neck. Likewise, high tackles could end in serious injury. The ref is responsible for the safety of everyone out there, probably more so than any other team sport (other than maybe American Football), so there has to be an inherent trust in the officials otherwise the game couldn't function properly. And if a fight between players breaks out, unlike the handbags at dawn in football, with the size of those blokes someone's ending up with a broken jaw or cheekbone.

3) No one knows the bloody rules anyway. I'm sure there must be some, but I reckon most people know you're not allowed to pass it forward and that's about it.

If you watch a game of Rugby and its punditry you will see they dont dwell on refs though. There is terrible inconsitency in the game especially at ruck time,. Rucks are incredibley subjective and I would say most refs dont achieve consistency but I think the fans accept it becuase they know that its a dynamic game if they dont have what they have it would be a poorer game.

If in Football you can take decisions and ask 100 people and its 50/50 than what hope do refs have?

A lot of Footballers and fans thought Reyna's was never a pen whereas there are loads of Forest who are passionate in thinking it was. So with that massive gap in peoples views this almost makes the game unreffable.