They are called Referees

[boonthegoon]

I'm okay with the havertz pen being overturned.

But it'd have never been overturned vs us. They'd have said it's not clear and obvious.

Even Neville was shocked it was overturned.

 

[Black Noir]

If it went the other way round. He gives the pen lol

 

[Melquiades]

Ñ

I'm okay with the havertz pen being overturned.

But it'd have never been overturned vs us. They'd have said it's not clear and obvious.

Even Neville was shocked it was overturned.

Yup.

That was a 50/50 penalty and if it wasn’t given to begin with, whatever.

But once it was given, there’s clear contact visible on the replay and there’s no way that should have hit the ‘clear and obvious error’ threshold.

That play was almost identical to the Rashford penalty from last week (video on previous page of this thread) that was upheld by VAR. If anything, the contact was more obvious in this case.

 

[PoleInGoal]

Don't think anyone would be made if Taylor didn't give the Havertz pen in real time, but why does VAR then intervene? I thought they did not want to re-ref the game? On slow-motion of course it looks much softer because the contact is extremely light, but running at full speed between two defenders even a slight touch can cause you to lose balance. That is why the on-field call should in my opinion be respected unless it is a clear howler, which I do not think it was.

The frustration is again the inconsistency. An identical situation last week for United does not get reviewed. Onana clotheslining Kaladzic does not get reviewed when the situation is far more black and white. Yet yesterday they deemed it necessary to ask for a review. What is the criteria here?

Jarred Gillet on VAR yet again involving himself to Arsenal's disadvantage.

 

[CaseUteinberger]

Don't think anyone would be made if Taylor didn't give the Havertz pen in real time, but why does VAR then intervene? I thought they did not want to re-ref the game? On slow-motion of course it looks much softer because the contact is extremely light, but running at full speed between two defenders even a slight touch can cause you to lose balance. That is why the on-field call should in my opinion be respected unless it is a clear howler, which I do not think it was.

The frustration is again the inconsistency. An identical situation last week for United does not get reviewed. Onana clotheslining Kaladzic does not get reviewed when the situation is far more black and white. Yet yesterday they deemed it necessary to ask for a review. What is the criteria here?

Jarred Gillet on VAR yet again involving himself to Arsenal's disadvantage.

Best is when some commentator said it looked like Havertz initiated the contact! How the hell weirdly would he have to run to do that? It'll be one for Monty Python's silly walks competition!

 

[Gooner Zig]

I'm okay with the havertz pen being overturned.

But it'd have never been overturned vs us. They'd have said it's not clear and obvious.

Even Neville was shocked it was overturned.

I'm not okay with it for the reasons you just listed. When has a PK like that been overturned? It is not clear and obvious - this is another example of re-refereeing the game which VAR was not meant to do.

 

[Melquiades]

I'm not okay with it for the reasons you just listed. When has a PK like that been overturned? It is not clear and obvious - this is another example of re-refereeing the game which VAR was not meant to do.

Yup.

There has been a pretty clear standard set where if the ref calls a penalty and the replay shows that ehhhh it was maybe a borderline call but there still was some contact that it isn't a 'clear and obvious error' and the pen is allowed to stand. And this is applied pretty consistently for our rivals - City got the De Bruyne penalty to win a game late last season when chasing us, and United got the incredibly soft Rashford penalty against Forest the week prior.

But then when we're up, VAR starts looking for ways to screw us and re-referee the game. Standards and consistency go out the window. Same as the Martinelli overturned goal against United last year, where I have never seen VAR go that far back in the play for a minor infraction to overturn a good goal. Different rules.

 

[A_G]

 

[boonthegoon]

I'm not okay with it for the reasons you just listed. When has a PK like that been overturned? It is not clear and obvious - this is another example of re-refereeing the game which VAR was not meant to do.

What I meant is I never like such soft fouls resulting in PK as goals are too valuable in football.

But I want that to be applied overall. Not just to feck only us

 

[drippin]

Okay, so, if someone is running to the box with the ball, you can put your leg or body or whatever in front of him no matter how late you are and don't hit the ball, and it is not a foul.

What if you put the leg there and your leg is in the air? The other player runs to it, it's their fault? No tackle?

This is pretty interesting. In basketball if you're even a bit late having any own movement, and not standing still, it's the defender's fault.

The VAR Gillet says there is minimal contact, but does he realize that minimal contact will affect the running a lot when you're at full speed?

Also one claim has been Havertz putting his leg left to hit Bissaka. But this is an assumption claiming to know how legs move at full speed. It could have also hit anyway. Havertz could have assumed his leg is already ahead of Bissaka as he can't see backwards.

Match Officials Mic’d Up Pt 1: Webb analyses key incidents from Matchweeks 1-4 in 2023/24

PGMOL's Howard Webb reveals the decision-making process for incidents such as Kai Havertz's overturned penalty

www.premierleague.com

 

[field442]

Okay, so, if someone is running to the box with the ball, you can put your leg or body or whatever in front of him no matter how late you are and don't hit the ball, and it is not a foul.

What if you put the leg there and your leg is in the air? The other player runs to it, it's their fault? No tackle?

This is pretty interesting. In basketball if you're even a bit late with own movement, and not standing still, it's the defender's fault.

Match Officials Mic’d Up Pt 1: Webb analyses key incidents from Matchweeks 1-4 in 2023/24

PGMOL's Howard Webb reveals the decision-making process for incidents such as Kai Havertz's overturned penalty

www.premierleague.com

His leg and body wasn't in front of him was it? That's why no foul was given.

 

[drippin]

His leg and body wasn't in front of him was it? That's why no foul was given.

Was Luiz' leg in front of the Wolves attacker when the Wolves attacker hit Luiz' leg when he shot it and Luiz made no foul himself?

Anyway, Bissaka came for the ball, missed his tackle and got in Havertz' running path. So he was "in front" of his running lane.

 

[db10_therza]

This will get more hits than 90% of PL games this season.

 

[field442]

Was Luiz' leg in front of the Wolves attacker when the Wolves attacker hit Luiz' leg when he shot it and Luiz made no foul himself?

They are two separate incidents. If you think they got it wrong/right on the Luiz one it doesn't change the fact they got it right here.

 

[hydrofluoric acid]

Ref basically asks what VAR wants him to see before he gets to the screen. And it looks like ref only get one angle. Awful.

 

[Riou]

Are they going to release VAR discussion for when they make massive errors though?

Ref "The Wolves players are really pissed, did Onana wipe that guy out?"

VAR "Maybe, but Fergie has just walked into the office and has told us no pen"

 

[db10_therza]

Are they going to release VAR discussion for when they make massive errors though?

Ref "The Wolves players are really pissed, did Onana wipe that guy out?"

VAR "Maybe, but Fergie has just walked into the office and has told us no pen"

Spoiler: Translating from Moronic to English

What did the officials say?

Referee Hooper: "No way, that's a collision, we don't give those."

VAR Salisbury: "So Onana goes to challenge the ball..."

Referee Hooper: "Goal-kick."

VAR Salisbury: "Just delay. Delay, delay, checking possible penalty.

Referee Hooper: "No worries mate."

VAR Salisbury: "You'll want to view this because I think Onana collides into it. He tries to go to the ball and he makes aerial contact with the Wolves player. It's late and it's clumsy in my opinion. Dawson wins the header, but it's late, very late in the aerial challenge.

"I think because the Wolves player doesn't head the ball, yeah because Dawson heads it, therefore it's a normal collision as they've both challenged the ball. Check complete.

Referee Hooper: "Check complete."

From https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/66724505

 

[Riou]

Spoiler: Translating from Moronic to English

What did the officials say?

Referee Hooper: "No way, that's a collision, we don't give those."

VAR Salisbury: "So Onana goes to challenge the ball..."

Referee Hooper: "Goal-kick."

VAR Salisbury: "Just delay. Delay, delay, checking possible penalty.

Referee Hooper: "No worries mate."

VAR Salisbury: "You'll want to view this because I think Onana collides into it. He tries to go to the ball and he makes aerial contact with the Wolves player. It's late and it's clumsy in my opinion. Dawson wins the header, but it's late, very late in the aerial challenge.

"I think because the Wolves player doesn't head the ball, yeah because Dawson heads it, therefore it's a normal collision as they've both challenged the ball. Check complete.

Referee Hooper: "Check complete."

From https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/66724505

Well, that was a dumpster fire of a convo

"Normal collision" ffs...sounds like something Saul would say if Tuco or Lalo ran someone over with a car!

 

[db10_therza]

Ref basically asks what VAR wants him to see before he gets to the screen. And it looks like ref only get one angle. Awful.

This wasn’t a penalty in my book. There’s minimal contact but almost at hip level, and anyone who’s actually played football will tell you that’s no way near enough to make someone go down. Minimal contact knees and below can definitely mess you up if you’re running but not if it’s hips.

Was the right decision, but the wrong process (ie overturning on field decision even though there was contact which isn’t sth we’ve seen so far and probably won’t again for the rest of the season).

 

[blaze_of_glory]

Just glad we won so the pk decision doesn't even matter. And Man U fans/Ten Hag have one less excuse to make