Halsey: Referee standards have dropped to alarming levels

[joe_fishfish]

It honestly felt like Tierney had recently received a brain transplant tonight. Unrecognisable performance from how he usually refs us.

[Carvalho Diablo]

After tonight's performance, I think Paul Tierney needs drug testing.

[Dicko]

They should've had a penalty.

[aws]

I’ve suspected all season that they seem to have called the witch-hunt off.  

[Code]

25 minutes ago, Dicko said:

They should've had a penalty.

They really should not. 

[Lee909]

16 minutes ago, Code said:

They really should not. 

 

If Mo would have been on the end of the second one you would have been going mad and adding a goal to his tally as its was a pen and he would have scored it

[Bobby Hundreds]

If that Spurs game ends up being the difference between us winning the league this year or not, if we lose out by a point or two, I think I'll be done. Weve had two titles stolen from us already.

[Code]

10 hours ago, Lee909 said:

 

If Mo would have been on the end of the second one you would have been going mad and adding a goal to his tally as its was a pen and he would have scored it

Absolutely not. The Chelsea player should have got a card for diving. 

[joe_fishfish]

The second one pissed me off a bit because there was no need for Van Dijk to even make contact, clumsy at best that. I don't think there was enough contact for a pen, but why even give the ref a decision to make?

[Scott_M]

I watched MOTD last night and Shearer & Wright weee just coming out with absolute nonsense regarding VAR.

 

The Gallagher incident which they begrudgingly accepted wasn’t a penalty, VVD didn’t make a challenge on Gallagher, slightest of contact and he then flung himself on the floor despite only being 10 yards from goal. 

 

If it had been given on pitch, I doubt it would have been overturned as there was slight contact, haven’t “experts” moaned and moaned about VAR re-referring game and forensically reviewing incidents to make a decision. If that was to be given as a penalty, it would have been a forensic re-refereeing.
 

Same with the Nkunku / VVD challenge. Again, yes there was contact and it was more of a challenge than the Gallagher incident. IMO, it wasn’t much to it and Nkunku made an incredible meal of it. 
 

Again to give that, IMO, it would have been a forensic re-refereeing. If Tierney had given it, it wouldn’t have been over turned as there was contact, it wasn’t much though and certainly didn’t warrant Nkunku’s reaction. 
 

Then Shearer, the fucking idiot, “We’ll they gave the Jota penalty against Newcastle”. Fucking hell, these “experts” should know the VAR protocols better. The Jota incident was given on the pitch, there was some contact, it’s not a clear mistake, it stands. Nkunku wasn’t given on the pitch, there was some contact, however, it’s not a clear mistake to make a penalty is given. 
 

I do accept referees have backed themselves into this position. Some jobsworth on the weekend might view either of the above incidents as “clear and obvious” and give them, we’ve seen similar decisions given previously. 
 

However, IMO, although not perfect (still too inconsistent and takes too long) and although not really a compliment because of how low the bar was at the start of the season, VAR has been better over the last couple of months. Maybe instead of “experts” complaining about “more VAR drama” they should educate themselves more on what it is and isn’t meant to achieve. 

[VladimirIlyich]

10 minutes ago, Scott_M said:

I watched MOTD last night and Shearer & Wright weee just coming out with absolute nonsense regarding VAR.

 

The Gallagher incident which they begrudgingly accepted wasn’t a penalty, VVD didn’t make a challenge on Gallagher, slightest of contact and he then flung himself on the floor despite only being 10 yards from goal. 

 

If it had been given on pitch, I doubt it would have been overturned as there was slight contact, haven’t “experts” moaned and moaned about VAR re-referring game and forensically reviewing incidents to make a decision. If that was to be given as a penalty, it would have been a forensic re-refereeing.
 

Same with the Nkunku / VVD challenge. Again, yes there was contact and it was more of a challenge than the Gallagher incident. IMO, it wasn’t much to it and Nkunku made an incredible meal of it. 
 

Again to give that, IMO, it would have been a forensic re-refereeing. If Tierney had given it, it wouldn’t have been over turned as there was contact, it wasn’t much though and certainly didn’t warrant Nkunku’s reaction. 
 

Then Shearer, the fucking idiot, “We’ll they gave the Jota penalty against Newcastle”. Fucking hell, these “experts” should know the VAR protocols better. The Jota incident was given on the pitch, there was some contact, it’s not a clear mistake, it stands. Nkunku wasn’t given on the pitch, there was some contact, however, it’s not a clear mistake to make a penalty is given. 
 

I do accept referees have backed themselves into this position. Some jobsworth on the weekend might view either of the above incidents as “clear and obvious” and give them, we’ve seen similar decisions given previously. 
 

However, IMO, although not perfect (still too inconsistent and takes too long) and although not really a compliment because of how low the bar was at the start of the season, VAR has been better over the last couple of months. Maybe instead of “experts” complaining about “more VAR drama” they should educate themselves more on what it is and isn’t meant to achieve. 

VAR is meant to get decisions 'correct' but so much is subjective even in 'law.' Let's just get back to real dynamic football and kill this shit and send it back to the shite,slow sports it's been used in previously where you can take a while without killing the flow of the game.

[Scott_M]

1 hour ago, VladimirIlyich said:

VAR is meant to get decisions 'correct' but so much is subjective even in 'law.' Let's just get back to real dynamic football and kill this shit and send it back to the shite,slow sports it's been used in previously where you can take a while without killing the flow of the game.

As I’ve said quite a few times here, I’ve never been against it and still think there is a place for it.
 

I’m sure there are better examples of it, this is the only one on the top of my head, the penalty we got in the Charity Shield against City at Leicester - Nunez header, clear outstretched arm by (I think) Dias, blatant handball, referee doesn’t give it, VAR refers. Definite penalty, it worked well. 
 

That is where it should be used. The touches on the Chelsea players on Wednesday were slight and although I could see why they could have been given in real time, IMO, for them to be given, VAR would need the forensic re-refereeing that nobody wants. 
 

I fully get that the officials have backed themselves into a corner here though. Some incidents will be forensically analysed, some won’t. It wouldn’t surprise me at there are similar incidents given at the weekend. I know it’s easy to say because the decisions went in our favour (although I think I’ve been clear to caveat that I also think they could have been given) IMO, Wednesday was 2 better examples of VAR being used. 

[AngryOfTuebrook]

Someone posted this on Facebook and it looks like bullshit to me.  Still, it would be interesting to see if there is a statistically significant correlation between the choice of referee and the result of our matches.

 

[Barrington Womble]

13 minutes ago, AngryOfTuebrook said:

Someone posted this on Facebook and it looks like bullshit to me.  Still, it would be interesting to see if there is a statistically significant correlation between the choice of referee and the result of our matches.

 

That has to be bullshit surely? Even the 81 losses seems high, which would suggest all comps. And if it's all comps, that eliminates Taylor from a lot of European defeats. 

[AngryOfTuebrook]

51 minutes ago, Barrington Womble said:

That has to be bullshit surely? Even the 81 losses seems high, which would suggest all comps. And if it's all comps, that eliminates Taylor from a lot of European defeats. 

Yeah. I did reply that I'd need to see source data for a claim like that.

[Supremolad]

4 hours ago, AngryOfTuebrook said:

Someone posted this on Facebook and it looks like bullshit to me.  Still, it would be interesting to see if there is a statistically significant correlation between the choice of referee and the result of our matches.

 

Not only is it bollocks, the math is also fucking wrong.

 

Sorry, triggered nerd over here.

[VladimirIlyich]

3 hours ago, Supremolad said:

Not only is it bollocks, the math is also fucking wrong.

 

Sorry, triggered nerd over here.

'Math?' What??

[No2]

The fact its not instantly dismissed does show how much we associate him with our defeats. The cunt is always at the scene of the crime.

[The wanderer]

On 01/02/2024 at 10:54, Lee909 said:

 

If Mo would have been on the end of the second one you would have been going mad and adding a goal to his tally as its was a pen and he would have scored it

Nah not a pen for me.

[Kevin D]

On 31/01/2024 at 23:36, aws said:

I’ve suspected all season that they seem to have called the witch-hunt off.  

I agree.

 

I think since Spurs, the big calls in games have gone 70/30 in our favour, when before it was 80/20 against. 
 

It also goes to show that raising a big furore was the right call.

[DaveT]

46 minutes ago, Kevin D said:

I agree.

 

I think since Spurs, the big calls in games have gone 70/30 in our favour, when before it was 80/20 against. 
 

It also goes to show that raising a big furore was the right call.

Well, yeah. Apart from Taylor not sending off Gross at Brighton  (managed to give a penalty for the wrong challenge), blatant handball penalty not given vs Arsenal, 2 perfectly good goals disallowed at Burnley, scandalous red card for Ibou a week ago. We got away with the Nkunku one against Chelsea and 2 pens in our favour against Newcastle (both a little soft, but technically correct decisions). I'd say that we were 50/50 at best since Spurs.

Still right to kick up a fuss, and keep raising it until the end of the season.

[Barrington Womble]

20 minutes ago, DaveT said:

Well, yeah. Apart from Taylor not sending off Gross at Brighton  (managed to give a penalty for the wrong challenge), blatant handball penalty not given vs Arsenal, 2 perfectly good goals disallowed at Burnley, scandalous red card for Ibou a week ago. We got away with the Nkunku one against Chelsea and 2 pens in our favour against Newcastle (both a little soft, but technically correct decisions). I'd say that we were 50/50 at best since Spurs.

Still right to kick up a fuss, and keep raising it until the end of the season.

Scandalous red card for ibou? You see them all the time and he got away with one v Everton. I really don't think you can complain about that sending off. You won some you lose some like that (which can sit in the death by 1000 cuts category). It certainly wasn't scandalous though. 

[beejay]

2 hours ago, Barrington Womble said:

Scandalous red card for ibou? You see them all the time and he got away with one v Everton. I really don't think you can complain about that sending off. You won some you lose some like that (which can sit in the death by 1000 cuts category). It certainly wasn't scandalous though. 

What? That was a terrible decision, first yellow wasn't even a foul Havertz backing into him and Konate stronger. Second one was more a case of the forward buying a foul. 

 

Did you see the numbers of times Gabriel went through the back of Bowen yesterday with the ref waving play on? 

[Barrington Womble]

5 minutes ago, beejay said:

What? That was a terrible decision, first yellow wasn't even a foul Havertz backing into him and Konate stronger. Second one was more a case of the forward buying a foul. 

 

Did you see the numbers of times Gabriel went through the back of Bowen yesterday with the ref waving play on? 

The first booking is irrelevant. People get booked for shit things all the time. Barely a game goes by where someone doesn't get a daft yellow. The 2nd one, absolutely the striker bought it. Konate was flat footed and the striker ran at him. Konate put his arms up and the second he does that, it's a foul. And that part of the pitch and in that situation, it is a yellow card. If konate doesn't put his arms up, it's not even a foul, because he's not obliged to get out of his way. But as soon as the hands are up it's a yellow. The moral to that story isn't some whataboutery with other yellow cards, it's when you're on a yellow, be smarter. Konate just wasn't. 

[VladimirIlyich]

14 hours ago, Barrington Womble said:

The first booking is irrelevant. People get booked for shit things all the time. Barely a game goes by where someone doesn't get a daft yellow. The 2nd one, absolutely the striker bought it. Konate was flat footed and the striker ran at him. Konate put his arms up and the second he does that, it's a foul. And that part of the pitch and in that situation, it is a yellow card. If konate doesn't put his arms up, it's not even a foul, because he's not obliged to get out of his way. But as soon as the hands are up it's a yellow. The moral to that story isn't some whataboutery with other yellow cards, it's when you're on a yellow, be smarter. Konate just wasn't. 

Yep. Flat footedness is a big weakness of his. He sometimes tries to win the ball when it's never on at all. Lacks that little bit of decision making nouse in those situations. A great defender in most situations but that's a weakness of his.