Premier Lg EPL Matchday 1 - On Optus Sport

[SM]

And almost a second for the shit team.

 

[TY24]

Palace more shots, more shots on target.

Means nothing if you can’t put it in the net.

Palace look good with the ball but extremely vulnerable to the counter attack when they lose it. Should’ve been 2-0 really.

Yes the free kick being disallowed was bogus, but outside of Eze’s 2 free kicks they haven’t got much to show for their possession

 

[SM]

Eze's body language looks so shit. Hogging all the chances and just seems to be strolling around doing his own thing.

 

[Bradesmaen]

Means nothing if you can’t put it in the net.

 

[Bradesmaen]

Once they beat the first 3/5 press, there is huge gaps behind and Hughes isn't doing much to help. Few times Andersen has jumped out of the line and been caught out.

 

[Bradesmaen]

Really wish players would stop abusing the linesman for doing what they're told to do.

 

[And_ROOS]

Really wish players would stop abusing the linesman for doing what they're told to do.

Was that for the clearly offside call at the end?

 

[Bradesmaen]

Was that for the clearly offside call at the end?

Yes, but the rules are the rules. If it's offside it will be given offside.

 

[Bradesmaen]

Means nothing if you can’t put it in the net.

Palace look good with the ball but extremely vulnerable to the counter attack when they lose it. Should’ve been 2-0 really.

Yes the free kick being disallowed was bogus, but outside of Eze’s 2 free kicks they haven’t got much to show for their possession

I don't agree. They said they were going to penalise more teams for blocking at free kicks. While Collins had his hands on Hughes, Hughes had no intention but to block hence why he stuck his leg out. Yeah it had no effect on the free kick in the end but the Ref can't see exactly where the ball is going and paid the foul.

 

[SM]

I don't agree. They said they were going to penalise more teams for blocking at free kicks. While Collins had his hands on Hughes, Hughes had no intention but to block hence why he stuck his leg out. Yeah it had no effect on the free kick in the end but the Ref can't see exactly where the ball is going and paid the foul.

He could always wait? The same thing happened a few times last season where the whistle being blown so quickly ruled out legitimate goals. He can wait for the play to play out and then make a call on if it's impacted the play or not. What's the rush?

 

[Bradesmaen]

He could always wait? The same thing happened a few times last season where the whistle being blown so quickly ruled out legitimate goals. He can wait for the play to play out and then make a call on if it's impacted the play or not. What's the rush?

Yes but would have VAR changed his decision given the new standard of VAR? Unlikely.

 

[SM]

Yes but would have VAR changed his decision given the new standard of VAR? Unlikely.

He doesn't need VAR he can make the call himself once the ball ends up in the back of the net if he thinks the block has impacted it.

 

[Bradesmaen]

He doesn't need VAR he can make the call himself once the ball ends up in the back of the net if he thinks the block has impacted it.

Yes but the whole point is he made it so soon that VAR can't intervene.

 

[SM]

Yes but the whole point is he made it so soon that VAR can't intervene.

Which is my point? He didn't need to make it as soon as he did?

 

[Bradesmaen]

Which is my point? He didn't need to make it as soon as he did?

Ok. You just said he doesn't need VAR which confuses the point you are trying to make. Either way I don't have an issue if he blows it up early. He sees a foul, gives a foul. 99.9% of times no one would care but because the ball went in people care, but how was he to know it would end up there. He was in the motion of blowing as Eze kicked it.

 

[SM]

Ok. You just said he doesn't need VAR which confuses the point you are trying to make. Either way I don't have an issue if he blows it up early. He sees a foul, gives a foul. 99.9% of times no one would care but because the ball went in people care, but how was he to know it would end up there. He was in the motion of blowing as Eze kicked it.

Not sure how I confused anything as I never brought up VAR in the first place. All I was responding to was you saying the ref had no way of knowing the impact of the foul on the goal when he blew the whistle and I suggested he could have waited before blowing the whistle. No mention or need for VAR.

It's like not paying advantage when a team has an open goal after a foul in the box and therefore when they score the open goal not allowing it, only for them to miss the pen.

 

[Bradesmaen]

Not sure how I confused anything as I never brought up VAR in the first place. All I was responding to was you saying the ref had no way of knowing the impact of the foul on the goal when he blew the whistle and I suggested he could have waited before blowing the whistle. No mention or need for VAR.

It's like not paying advantage when a team has an open goal after a foul in the box and therefore when they score the open goal not allowing it, only for them to miss the pen.

Except it's not like that because it was a foul against the attacking team.

 

[SM]

Except it's not like that because it was a foul against the attacking team.

So why are you bringing up VAR?

The implication is that if the foul has no impact on the game it should be ignored, which the ref can determine himself by not blowing so quickly.

Only one confusing things is you. It seems like you're now saying it was a foul so the outcome of the incident was irrelevant, in which case the ref's judgement of its impact on the goal is similarly irrelevant.

 

[Bradesmaen]

So why are you bringing up VAR?

The implication is that if the foul has no impact on the game it should be ignored, which the ref can determine himself by not blowing so quickly.

Only one confusing things is you. It seems like you're now saying it was a foul so the outcome of the incident was irrelevant, in which case the ref's judgement of its impact on the goal is similarly irrelevant.

Because the only implication of blowing it up early is that VAR can't intervene. If VAR doesn't exist why should he wait that split second to see if it goes in if he thinks it's a foul anyway? The outcome of the ball away from the foul is always irrelevant unless VAR can overturn it. You can't just say "well the ball went in so maybe I won't give it a foul". It's a foul, or its not a foul.

 

[SM]

Because the only implication of blowing it up early is that VAR can't intervene. If VAR doesn't exist why should he wait that split second to see if it goes in if he thinks it's a foul anyway?

Because if it doesn't impact play he can make a judgement call on whether to allow the goal. Which is where this discussion started. Not quite sure why we've taken the long way round. It's not about whether it goes in or not, it's whether the player who was bumped into would have gotten to the ball if he hadn't been impeded.

 

[Bradesmaen]

Because if it doesn't impact play he can make a judgement call on whether to allow the goal. Which is where this discussion started. Not quite sure why we've taken the long way round. It's not about whether it goes in or not, it's whether the player who was bumped into would have gotten to the ball if he hadn't been impeded.

But it's a foul, whether it impacts play or not. A foul doesn't have to be around the ball.

 

[SM]

But it's a foul, whether it impacts play or not. A foul doesn't have to be around the ball.

Ok.

 

[And_ROOS]

I love how the commentators have to talk about how warm it is in London because it would be so disrespectful to say this match feels like a praccy match.

 

[Bradesmaen]

I love how the commentators have to talk about how warm it is in London because it would be so disrespectful to say this match feels like a praccy match.

Wish it was warm in Dublin...

 

[And_ROOS]

Wish it was warm in Dublin...

Dublin in summer is great, its my favourite day of the year.