4 hours ago, Backbiter said:

One offside on Broja was pretty tight but the linesman got it spot-on. No issues with any of the officials last night (we might have got a bit lucky with the Caicedo foul). Maybe the absence of VAR makes them more focused.

I couldn't believe that off-side call against Broja. It looked onside to me. Incredibly tight and I really don't think the lino knew for sure he was off. 

45 minutes ago, just said:

I couldn't believe that off-side call against Broja. It looked onside to me. Incredibly tight and I really don't think the lino knew for sure he was off. 

One of the easier calls of the night thanks to the groundsman's mower ! Broja clearly off ... 

Game was better without VAR. Enjoyed the quick decisions. Game flowed better and didn't take too long.

Let's put the Genie back in the bottle.

8 hours ago, Sexyfootball said:

One of the easier calls of the night thanks to the groundsman's mower ! Broja clearly off ... 

But Broja scored in the 1st half didnt he. This still is from the 2nd half.

9 hours ago, Oli said:

But Broja scored in the 1st half didnt he. This still is from the 2nd half.

He was even further offside in the first half.

This is one of the worst decisions I have seen.

How can so many refs look at this and come to the conclusion that it's a red card (second yellow) and how many more times are we going to be saying things like this until the Premier League act and do something about it?

Edited December 23, 20232 yr by Scott Harris

18 minutes ago, Scott Harris said:

This is one of the worst decisions I have seen.

How can so many refs look at this and come to the conclusion that it's a red card (second yellow) and how many more times are we going to be saying things like this until the Premier League act and do something about it?

That's not even funnily bad. Who know what difference that makes to Forrest in the game or the season.

If anything the other player stands on Boly (by accident) after he cleared the ball fairly.

2 hours ago, Scott Harris said:

This is one of the worst decisions I have seen.

How can so many refs look at this and come to the conclusion that it's a red card (second yellow) and how many more times are we going to be saying things like this until the Premier League act and do something about it?

f**king hell Scott, that is outrageous, it's actually beyond belief that anyone could look at that and give a card to the Forest player.

They must feel so aggrieved  and then to lose to a very late goal. Has there been any explanation yet ?

All they are worried about on 5L is the possible hand ball penalty for Liverpool v Arsenal

3 hours ago, Scott Harris said:

This is one of the worst decisions I have seen.

How can so many refs look at this and come to the conclusion that it's a red card (second yellow) and how many more times are we going to be saying things like this until the Premier League act and do something about it?

I don't think VAR can intervene on yellow cards. Which is ridiculous, they can see in the VAR studio that this is a massive mistake but can't do anything?

But they can rule goals out every week on the tiniest of offsides but can't alert the ref to a game changing wrong decision.

If an offence causes a second yellow card, and therefore a red they should be able to intervene, as the red was a direct outcome of that incident.

So Arteta gets away by calling the PGMOL corrupt and then for 3 weeks running gets pivotal decisions in Arsenal’s favour .. 

there is the template right there.. we hardly ever get marginal calls our way .. now we know how to change that.

15 hours ago, Scott Harris said:

This is one of the worst decisions I have seen.

How can so many refs look at this and come to the conclusion that it's a red card (second yellow) and how many more times are we going to be saying things like this until the Premier League act and do something about it?

It's actually a foul on Boly, I honestly have no idea how a ref can look at that and figure it's a foul by him, let alone a card.

2 hours ago, dkw said:

It's actually a foul on Boly, I honestly have no idea how a ref can look at that and figure it's a foul by him, let alone a card.

They view from different angles, from normal  youtube replay looks a miscarriage of justice seem from another angles at speed might look different again.

We're up there for the most penalties awarded to a team this season so far.

Good ol' VAR !

Without VAR Jackson's marginal offside goal is allowed by on the pitch ref and the pen is not given. Either way 2-1.

Genuine question, as I haven't seen much of it online so wonder if its just a gap in my understanding of the rule, but for Jackson's disallowed goal last night, does the defenders touch not make him onside?

My understanding was that deflections don't count, so if it unintentionally touched the defender then Jackson is offside. But if the defender makes a deliberate play on the ball, then the player is onside. I've watched it a few times and the defender definetly throws his head at the ball in an attempt to head it away, but ends up not getting enough contacts to it goes up and through to Jackson.

Anyone able to clear up what i'm missing?

On 28/12/2023 at 11:48, Niall1905 said:

Genuine question, as I haven't seen much of it online so wonder if its just a gap in my understanding of the rule, but for Jackson's disallowed goal last night, does the defenders touch not make him onside?

My understanding was that deflections don't count, so if it unintentionally touched the defender then Jackson is offside. But if the defender makes a deliberate play on the ball, then the player is onside. I've watched it a few times and the defender definetly throws his head at the ball in an attempt to head it away, but ends up not getting enough contacts to it goes up and through to Jackson.

Anyone able to clear up what i'm missing?

That's correct. It boils down to the definition of "deliberate". There have been numerous examples of odd interpretations.

On 28/12/2023 at 10:48, Niall1905 said:

Genuine question, as I haven't seen much of it online so wonder if its just a gap in my understanding of the rule, but for Jackson's disallowed goal last night, does the defenders touch not make him onside?

My understanding was that deflections don't count, so if it unintentionally touched the defender then Jackson is offside. But if the defender makes a deliberate play on the ball, then the player is onside. I've watched it a few times and the defender definetly throws his head at the ball in an attempt to head it away, but ends up not getting enough contacts to it goes up and through to Jackson.

Anyone able to clear up what i'm missing?

Having watched it again, I agree with you The Palace #10 clearly tries to play the ball. VAR did a good job about making that one all about the offside and ignoring the deflection off the Palace player. Commentators all silent about it of course .... 

Unlucky Nico. 

I thought the Jackson offside was a fair call, unless the VAR is trying to legitimate the goal ( like the offside goal United scored against City last year), the 'deliberate' touch from defenders would be ignored anyway. The deliberate handball thing is a different matter, the one went against Everton was correct even it was ball hit hand, the hand on ball by Oddegard against Liverpool was somehow not deliberate. It's really depend on which VAR ref you got on the day.

On 24/12/2023 at 12:02, strider6004 said:

They view from different angles, from normal  youtube replay looks a miscarriage of justice seem from another angles at speed might look different again.

It was only the angle that the ref saw.  VAR  couldn't be used for a yellow. Load of bollocks really

 

 

14 hours ago, icecoolguy22 said:

I thought the Jackson offside was a fair call, unless the VAR is trying to legitimate the goal ( like the offside goal United scored against City last year), the 'deliberate' touch from defenders would be ignored anyway. The deliberate handball thing is a different matter, the one went against Everton was correct even it was ball hit hand, the hand on ball by Oddegard against Liverpool was somehow not deliberate. It's really depend on which VAR ref you got on the day.

The official explanation was that he put his hand down (aiming for the ground) to regain his balance. According to the *cough* handball laws, a player falling, putting a hand out to save himself, contacting the ball, isn't committing an offence. He wasn't falling. They stretched the law. It was handball.

The moaning odegard has been going he should have received 2 yellows by now… it seems these rules only apply to us.

Wrong thread.

Edited January 7, 20242 yr by Scott Harris

On 30/12/2023 at 11:53, dermott said:

The official explanation was that he put his hand down (aiming for the ground) to regain his balance. According to the *cough* handball laws, a player falling, putting a hand out to save himself, contacting the ball, isn't committing an offence. He wasn't falling. They stretched the law. It was handball.

We had that v West ham , their player went down and stopped a shot with his hand , nothing given.

Can't remember if it was this season or last, a sh*t decision.

3 hours ago, The Rising Sun said:

We had that v West ham , their player went down and stopped a shot with his hand , nothing given.

Can't remember if it was this season or last, a sh*t decision.

I recall it as Soucek made a diving save to stop a shot like a GK, and somehow was not deemed as deliberate 🤔 Sometime you just have to laugh at these calls, or there are some serious emotional damage