Brumstopdogs Posted December 31, 2023 Share Posted December 31, 2023 I thought it was a very soft penalty and Duran made the most of any contact. In our previous home match we had the rough end of the decisions so maybe we got that luck back this time. Either way the consistency in decision making from the refs is poor. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobzy Posted December 31, 2023 Share Posted December 31, 2023 29 minutes ago, villa4europe said: The way the VT mind works is we've seen penalties given for attackers stepping on our defenders, for attackers leaning on or stepping across our defenders, for zero contact, for pikes and twists, for shoulders being touched and knees buckling Now we've seen our attacker get kicked on the bottom of his foot and we should all collectively say nah that's not a penalty? Yes - the same way we did with all the others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillaChris Posted December 31, 2023 Share Posted December 31, 2023 I thought it was a penalty (only because you see so many of those incidents given every week). Bet Arteta was raging though considering Luiz cleaning out Jesus in the box three weeks ago was dismissed even after VAR looked at it. Same as Zat though in that we were very fourtunate Carlos didn't get a red, Foster was about to get in and have a shot centrally and the hand pushed the ball back so it was a bit wider when he finally shot so certainly falls under denial of goalscoring opportunity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinker Posted December 31, 2023 VT Supporter Share Posted December 31, 2023 You can't kick a players foot in the box and expect him not to go down, it's a clear penalty. The biggest point for Burnley is the Carlos hand ball which I still don't understand why they never had a free kick for it and Carlos a card. Same as Sheffields last week, its a mystery tbh. We can't have it both ways, it's one or the other. I would just like some explanation as to why neither was given if VAR took a look. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted December 31, 2023 Share Posted December 31, 2023 The referee really annoyed me yesterday as it took him on multiple occasions about 5 seconds to make up his mind to blow the whistle when no clear advantage was on 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa4europe Posted December 31, 2023 Share Posted December 31, 2023 5 minutes ago, tinker said: You can't kick a players foot in the box and expect him not to go down, it's a clear penalty. The biggest point for Burnley is the Carlos hand ball which I still don't understand why they never had a free kick for it and Carlos a card. Same as Sheffields last week, its a mystery tbh. We can't have it both ways, it's one or the other. I would just like some explanation as to why neither was given if VAR took a look. I think his hand was in a natural position and didn't move towards the ball, it was just part of his stride Saw someone else say it came off his thigh first which used to be the rule but I'm not sure it is anymore Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa4europe Posted December 31, 2023 Share Posted December 31, 2023 And the worst thing the ref did yesterday was give a goal kick when the ball blatantly came off the defender, konsa got booked for moaning If he can't get that right what do you expect with everything else It's mad how PGMOL have stood by Attwell for so long, he's always been dreadful Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinker Posted December 31, 2023 VT Supporter Share Posted December 31, 2023 17 minutes ago, villa4europe said: And the worst thing the ref did yesterday was give a goal kick when the ball blatantly came off the defender, konsa got booked for moaning If he can't get that right what do you expect with everything else It's mad how PGMOL have stood by Attwell for so long, he's always been dreadful His sight was blocked and it was hardly a game changer, Konsa should have just kept his gob shut. Its one weak point of his game and a few of our other players who stop playing when waiting for the whistle from the ref that never comes. Carry on playing , same as offside decisions, keep your arm down until the ref blows or the game stops. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted December 31, 2023 VT Supporter Share Posted December 31, 2023 1 hour ago, villa4europe said: The way the VT mind works is we've seen penalties given for attackers stepping on our defenders, for attackers leaning on or stepping across our defenders, for zero contact, for pikes and twists, for shoulders being touched and knees buckling Now we've seen our attacker get kicked on the bottom of his foot and we should all collectively say nah that's not a penalty? It the PL in 2023 that is a stonewall penalty We shouldn’t say anything. We should be thrilled that it was given. That is not a a stonewall penalty All I’m doing is pointing out the confirmation bias. That is why VT thinks there is a refereeing agenda against villa. Because we ignore blatant VAR howlers when they work in our favour Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa4europe Posted December 31, 2023 Share Posted December 31, 2023 2 minutes ago, Stevo985 said: We shouldn’t say anything. We should be thrilled that it was given. That is not a a stonewall penalty All I’m doing is pointing out the confirmation bias. That is why VT thinks there is a refereeing agenda against villa. Because we ignore blatant VAR howlers when they work in our favour Rightly or wrongly in the modern PL yeah that's stonewall Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted December 31, 2023 VT Supporter Share Posted December 31, 2023 Just now, villa4europe said: Rightly or wrongly in the modern PL yeah that's stonewall We were extremely lucky to get away with the Jesus one then. That was ten times worse than this 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bannedfromHandV Posted December 31, 2023 Share Posted December 31, 2023 (edited) 1 hour ago, VillaChris said: I thought it was a penalty (only because you see so many of those incidents given every week). Bet Arteta was raging though considering Luiz cleaning out Jesus in the box three weeks ago was dismissed even after VAR looked at it. Same as Zat though in that we were very fourtunate Carlos didn't get a red, Foster was about to get in and have a shot centrally and the hand pushed the ball back so it was a bit wider when he finally shot so certainly falls under denial of goalscoring opportunity. The handball probably aided Foster getting on the end of it, which he did and probably should have scored. I don’t know how you could send Carlos off for denial of a goalscoring opportunity when the play became exactly that, a goalscoring opportunity, which Foster missed. Should have been brought back by the on field official for a free kick and a yellow card, no reason for VAR to intervene any further. Our penalty was soft and whilst I agree with Lineker that it’s a dive - it’s what I consider a dive - the fact that the likes of Kane have been doing this for years now and not being called out for it by the same people is somewhat galling to hear. Its the swings and roundabouts theory proved true in my opinion, the soft penalty against Burnley was our cosmic reward for being shafted multiple times against Sheff United. Edited December 31, 2023 by bannedfromHandV Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobzy Posted December 31, 2023 Share Posted December 31, 2023 18 minutes ago, villa4europe said: Rightly or wrongly in the modern PL yeah that's stonewall Interestingly, you’ve commented that Isak dived against Forest but yet this is stonewall. Curious to know the difference - it can’t be “the fall”. Both are slight kicks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa4europe Posted December 31, 2023 Share Posted December 31, 2023 32 minutes ago, bobzy said: Interestingly, you’ve commented that Isak dived against Forest but yet this is stonewall. Curious to know the difference - it can’t be “the fall”. Both are slight kicks. It is the fall, same with the one on jesus The way Duran falls makes sense (but I'll say it again, the rolling around doesn't) The way jesus and isak fall does not make sense Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa4europe Posted December 31, 2023 Share Posted December 31, 2023 54 minutes ago, Stevo985 said: We were extremely lucky to get away with the Jesus one then. That was ten times worse than this Not in the slightest Jesus was kicked on the back of his calf on his raised leg which made his standing leg give way and his body to twist, it makes no sense, his body can't move in that way unless he makes it Duran was kicked on the bottom of his foot as he ran past someone And don't get me wrong here duran sells it and I don't like the way he pretends to be hurt but that's a foul Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted December 31, 2023 VT Supporter Share Posted December 31, 2023 (edited) 2 minutes ago, villa4europe said: Not in the slightest Jesus was kicked on the back of his calf on his raised leg which made his standing leg give way and his body to twist, it makes no sense, his body can't move in that way unless he makes it Duran was kicked on the bottom of his foot as he ran past someone And don't get me wrong here duran sells it and I don't like the way he pretends to be hurt but that's a foul Mate this is absolutely mental. I’m sorry. both incidents are the same. They were both kicked, Duran a lot LOT less hard than Jesus. Both but their feet back on the ground. Both dived and threw themselves to the floor. Except Duran’s was worse. The only way you can’t see that is bias. Sorry Edited December 31, 2023 by Stevo985 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted December 31, 2023 VT Supporter Share Posted December 31, 2023 10 minutes ago, villa4europe said: It is the fall, same with the one on jesus The way Duran falls makes sense (but I'll say it again, the rolling around doesn't) The way jesus and isak fall does not make sense The fall making sense doesn’t make it any better. You’re basically saying Duran dived in a more convincing way. Unless you think that tiny tap was enough to take Duran completely off his feet and roll around even after having both feet back on the ground, then there’s no difference. They both got tapped, they both threw themselves to the ground pretending to be hurt. They are the same 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobzy Posted December 31, 2023 Share Posted December 31, 2023 26 minutes ago, villa4europe said: It is the fall, same with the one on jesus The way Duran falls makes sense (but I'll say it again, the rolling around doesn't) The way jesus and isak fall does not make sense This is what makes no sense Either you think being kicked is a foul irrespective, or you think the level of contact matters. Each of those instances are incredibly similar (although somewhat ironically, the only one not given as a penalty is the only one where I think a player is actually impeded). The fall is a non-factor is determining whether a player is fouled or not. That’s the kind of stuff leading to players just falling over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa4europe Posted December 31, 2023 Share Posted December 31, 2023 2 minutes ago, bobzy said: This is what makes no sense Either you think being kicked is a foul irrespective, or you think the level of contact matters. Each of those instances are incredibly similar (although somewhat ironically, the only one not given as a penalty is the only one where I think a player is actually impeded). The fall is a non-factor is determining whether a player is fouled or not. That’s the kind of stuff leading to players just falling over. Well it is, it's kind of key Being kicked on your left leg doesn't make your right leg crumble You watch the isak foul and see the speed at which he's moving before the kick and after the kick, not only does his body twist after being kicked it also magically speeds up To me jesus is absolutely not a penalty, the contact is on a different leg to the one that bears the impact, the impact is borne on his standing leg, the one that isn't kicked.... Duran is kicked on his left foot, as a result he doesn't plant it... It's therefore a foul Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted December 31, 2023 VT Supporter Share Posted December 31, 2023 (edited) 5 minutes ago, villa4europe said: Well it is, it's kind of key Being kicked on your left leg doesn't make your right leg crumble You watch the isak foul and see the speed at which he's moving before the kick and after the kick, not only does his body twist after being kicked it also magically speeds up To me jesus is absolutely not a penalty, the contact is on a different leg to the one that bears the impact, the impact is borne on his standing leg, the one that isn't kicked.... Duran is kicked on his left foot, as a result he doesn't plant it... It's therefore a foul Except he does plant it. He’s kicked very lightly, puts both feet on the floor and then throws himself to the ground. If it happened like you said then there’s be no debate. But it didn’t. Edited December 31, 2023 by Stevo985 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts