EPL Matchday 3

(Log in to remove this ad.)

SM

Bigfooty Legend
Aug 3, 2008
87,200
48,006
North Shore
AFL Club
Sydney
Other Teams
Hull City, Adelaide United, EH
Haven't seen it.
Got his ankle stepped on because other player was running in but couldn't get to the ball in time - wasn't a stamp but clearly stood on. Silva then threw himself forward to make the contact apparent. VAR assessed that ref's decision wasn't clear and obviously wrong.
 

Sozabarus

Premiership Player
Jun 18, 2014
4,170
11,336
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Not sure you can overturn the Kane decision. Looks like he attempts to make body contact but then the defender falls over which causes Kane to fall over.

Seen them given seen them not.
 

Zidane98

Hall of Famer
Dec 22, 2009
35,700
14,823
South End, AAMI Park
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Socceroos, Liverpool, Victory
Whic was surprising as we were going to get given Zoumas goal by the ref but VAR said no.

Double whammy.
It would have been a travesty if the goal was given with Giroud fouling the keeper after he caught the ball.

Everyone just moved on with the Azpi incident, it was strange. At first it looked like the defender had played it around Azpi to himself. No real appeals by your guys other than by Azpi. On review the defender took out Azpi quite clearly.
 

Zidane98

Hall of Famer
Dec 22, 2009
35,700
14,823
South End, AAMI Park
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Socceroos, Liverpool, Victory
Not sure you can overturn the Kane decision. Looks like he attempts to make body contact but then the defender falls over which causes Kane to fall over.

Seen them given seen them not.
Yep, that's the way the VAR looked at it with the ball going one way and Kane moving in the other direction. Can't overrule that one, by the same token if it was given you couldn't reverse it either.
 

SM

Bigfooty Legend
Aug 3, 2008
87,200
48,006
North Shore
AFL Club
Sydney
Other Teams
Hull City, Adelaide United, EH
It would have been a travesty if the goal was given with Giroud fouling the keeper after he caught the ball.

Everyone just moved on with the Azpi incident, it was strange. At first it looked like the defender had played it around Azpi to himself. No real appeals by your guys other than by Azpi. On review the defender took out Azpi quite clearly.
Yeah after the discussion with Moomba last night, the Azpi one really undermines the point of VAR. Not sure how that's not given.
 

Zidane98

Hall of Famer
Dec 22, 2009
35,700
14,823
South End, AAMI Park
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Socceroos, Liverpool, Victory
Yeah after the discussion with Moomba last night, the Azpi one really undermines the point of VAR. Not sure how that's not given.
VAR didnt review it, that was the issue. IIRC there was a quick counter straight after the incident and it was forgotten about.
 

SM

Bigfooty Legend
Aug 3, 2008
87,200
48,006
North Shore
AFL Club
Sydney
Other Teams
Hull City, Adelaide United, EH
VAR didnt review it, that was the issue. IIRC there was a quick counter straight after the incident and it was forgotten about.
That's the issue then, all footage should be being reviewed when it comes to incidents in the box, much like all AFL goals are - in theory - reviewed before the ball is bounced in the middle.

If there's even a hint of an issue, at the next stoppage the ref should be instructed to hold up play, and then it go from there.
 

Zidane98

Hall of Famer
Dec 22, 2009
35,700
14,823
South End, AAMI Park
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Socceroos, Liverpool, Victory
That's the issue then, all footage should be being reviewed when it comes to incidents in the box, much like all AFL goals are - in theory - reviewed before the ball is bounced in the middle.

If there's even a hint of an issue, at the next stoppage the ref should be instructed to hold up play, and then it go from there.
Yep. It's real strange because VAR was holding up our game vs Arsenal for ages over a possible violent conduct incident vs Salah in the box (there was nothing in it and both sets of players wanted to get on with it). Yet VAR could not pick up the Azpi pen. Can understand how Atkinson missed it, really looked like the defender played the ball on initial viewing.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

RossFC

Moderator
May 23, 2012
47,689
74,360
Alberton Oval
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Liverpool
Considering none of those topics are as prominent in the matchday threads or as controversial as VAR, I’m going to say no.
 

jod23

TheBrownDog
Apr 2, 2000
62,168
18,377
Perth, Australia
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Liverpool, Chicago Bulls.
lol we ain’t nowhere near city and Liverpool. The team plays with zero the intensity and ferocity of those two teams. Plus the players and manager just aren’t as good. We’ve gone backwards over the last 12 months and the CL run masked that. This could be the season when one of the clubs outside the so called big six (it’s really a big two now) finish top four
Really? But you just had an excellent window?!
 

jod23

TheBrownDog
Apr 2, 2000
62,168
18,377
Perth, Australia
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Liverpool, Chicago Bulls.
If Var isn’t awarding Kane a penalty for a defender diving his whole body in front of him and getting nowhere near the ball, then they might as well just not bother reviewing penalties and stick to offsides. If that’s not stonewall, I don’t know what is

Having said that Spurs were dreadful
I didnt think it was stonewall. The defender falls down and then Kane just moves sideways to make sure he falls over the defender. I've seen them given but also seen them waved away.
 

Zidane98

Hall of Famer
Dec 22, 2009
35,700
14,823
South End, AAMI Park
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Socceroos, Liverpool, Victory
Got his ankle stepped on because other player was running in but couldn't get to the ball in time - wasn't a stamp but clearly stood on. Silva then threw himself forward to make the contact apparent. VAR assessed that ref's decision wasn't clear and obviously wrong.
Have only just seen a replay of it. Can see why it wasn't given, Silva's opposite leg to the one that was stepped on gave way and there was exaggeration of the contact. Not a clear and obvious error for me, these sorts of calls should remain as the original call by the referee regardless of if it was in the attackers favour or not.

Azpiculeta the only clearly wrong decision on the weekend for me - and that one wasn't even looked at by VAR. My theory is because the defender ended up with the ball everyone just assumed he won it fairly and play moved on with a quick counter attack.
 

Zidane98

Hall of Famer
Dec 22, 2009
35,700
14,823
South End, AAMI Park
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Socceroos, Liverpool, Victory
Yeah. By the time Spurs get their s**t together you two will be out of reach.
Early season form means nothing. IIRC United were flying in Mou's first season until they were defeated by City at OT and then fell apart. With Spurs being the big spenders this summer I still believe they will be challenging for the title if they can hang on to Eriksen.
 

Blueboys11

Club Legend
Apr 3, 2006
2,444
1,794
Melbourne
AFL Club
Carlton
Other Teams
Tottenham, New York Mets
Early season form means nothing. IIRC United were flying in Mou's first season until they were defeated by City at OT and then fell apart. With Spurs being the big spenders this summer I still believe they will be challenging for the title if they can hang on to Eriksen.
Depends whether we have a normal title race or a repeat of last years sprint to 100 points.

If its a repeat of last year then its a 2 horse race. If 85 points wins it, then Spurs could get there crap together, although not counting my chickens on that. Looked very stale on the weekend
 

Top Bottom