The only issue I really have is how they have come to the conclusion that it wasn’t a push.
Premier Lg EPL Matchday 11 - On Optus Sport
- Thread starter RossFC
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Premier League Football
Yeah, they didn't really articulate a reason, and had moved on by the time they got to the clearest angle, which was when they focussed on the offside.
The other thing is the explanation given on the day, that Gabriel was already in the air propelling himself forward, was never discussed, showing the whole thing is a sham.
I also wonder why it takes them so long to release it. They really could re-record the whole scenario to make it seem better than it was in that time.
SM
Bigfooty Legend
Yeah I just don't see the value in releasing it because it just puts the refs under even more scrutiny, so in the moment they're also then panicking about what they say and how it'd. sound if it were released. And as you say, some won't believe it's legitimate anyway.
I feel they only release it when they feel it puts them in a better light but like you said, it puts the referees under more scrutiny and creates more issues. If we are gonna do that now, we may aswell just leave it up to the on field referees discretion like we used to.
I’m hopeful they don’t amend it but it would be very easy to do especially after two weeks has passed.
- Apr 2, 2000
- 74,867
- 25,052
- AFL Club
- West Coast
- Other Teams
- Liverpool, Chicago Bulls.
How can this be so good and the Diaz v Spurs so bad. Obviously this is after the Diaz goal but you will note the first bit of communication from the VAR team to the on field referee is to confirm what decision has been made on the field. They failed to do this in the Diaz situation.
At least they are learning.
They still effed it up, but at least they sounded organised doing it. Progress, I suppose.
Bradesmaen
TheBrownDog
They effed it up in your opinion*
Incorrect. I consulted an independent panel, bok_party glenferry23 and Cruyff14.
The decision was unanimous.
moomba
TheBrownDog
Reckon if this was available straight away it would have stopped a lot of the drama over the game.
Some would still disagree with the decision but I reckon that's always going to happen during a match.
Some would still disagree with the decision but I reckon that's always going to happen during a match.
- Aug 21, 2016
- 15,743
- 24,919
- AFL Club
- Geelong
- Other Teams
- Oldham
A two handed push in the back doesn't have to cause the opponent to fly forward for it to be a foul. I think they got the decision right but the explanation would have made more sense if they had said there wasn't enough evidence to overturn the on field decision.
How's the decision correct? It's a blatant foul.
"I don't see a specific foul"
Video - bc4d59f8
That's ruled a foul from last weekends game.
Saka literally stands his ground while Koleosho moves back into him. Places hands on his back and its rightly ruled a "shove/push". As it has been for the last 30 years.
Explain to me the rational between it. How is Saka's a foul yet Joelinton's isn't?
You can't cause it's literally clowns making s**t up on the fly.
- Aug 21, 2016
- 15,743
- 24,919
- AFL Club
- Geelong
- Other Teams
- Oldham
My personal opinion is that both were fouls. But I also think in each case there wasn't enough for VAR to overturn the on field decisions. Comparing the two incidents makes it look like there's inconsistency but in both cases they went with the referee's call and I'm ok with that.
Bradesmaen
TheBrownDog
If VAR said they were both not fouls, ok. If VAR said they were both fouls, ok.
One is, one isn't without any justification as to why.
There's 1000% inconsistency, VAR needs to be binned if they can't be bothered to get the basics right.
- Apr 2, 2000
- 74,867
- 25,052
- AFL Club
- West Coast
- Other Teams
- Liverpool, Chicago Bulls.
I'm neutral and I dont think it was a foul. Gabriel has to be stronger rather than fling himself forward in the hope of the ref calling a foul.
lol it would be a free kick every day of the week even the in AFL but Gabriel just has to be stronger.
Ok.
- Aug 21, 2016
- 15,743
- 24,919
- AFL Club
- Geelong
- Other Teams
- Oldham
VAR doesn't rule on every foul. It rules on certain situations being 'clear and obvious errors'.
Art Vandelay_
TheBrownDog
- Oct 28, 2012
- 104,570
- 142,542
- AFL Club
- Geelong
- Other Teams
- Bushrangers - Tottenham
Would argue there was consistency used. Both instances saw the referees call stuck with as not being clear and obvious errors.
To be honest, I’m actually a very logical and impartial person. Like I said, the first and last issues I am fine with them not calling but the hands in the back is a foul 99% of the time. I don’t actually feel Gabriel embellished it at all and like someone said, it was given against Saka last weekend so where’s the consistency.
That’s not what they said. They said they didn’t see one. Not that it’s a clear and obvious error.
What else needs to be there for it to be a foul? It’s a push in the back. All you need is hands in the back and motion/force and that was there.
It just leaves it up to interpretation again so may as well not even have VAR.
- Apr 2, 2000
- 74,867
- 25,052
- AFL Club
- West Coast
- Other Teams
- Liverpool, Chicago Bulls.
It cant be an obvious foul if the referee's in the VAR said they didnt really see a foul and other impartial takes on it like mine didnt really think it was a foul either.
I get it though, cos as an impartial viewer, im like yeah that's probs not a foul really. But if that happened to Liverpool I'd be losing my s**t haha
I get it though, cos as an impartial viewer, im like yeah that's probs not a foul really. But if that happened to Liverpool I'd be losing my s**t haha
Yeah but if it happened to Liverpool you'd be saying the exact opposite.
Topkent
Confirmed ITK Drafting King
This is fact.
