bobzy Posted April 22 Share Posted April 22 6 hours ago, Keyblade said: Only the third is stonewall. That statement is crazy. Like for the second one, what could Young even do at that distance? Unless you have your hands way out from your body those should never be given imo The thing with the handball appeal (as with the one against Grealish on Saturday) is that Young moves his arm toward the ball. For me, that's what makes it a handball. I think the first one is iffy... but then there have been so many worse penalties given this season. The handball probably should be given and the foul on Hudson-Odoi is just a stonewall penalty. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobzy Posted April 22 Share Posted April 22 53 minutes ago, desensitized43 said: Respectfully, I think whether we think the incidents are penalties or not isn't the issue. Or shall we say, it's half the issue. Forest have not accused the refs of 'just' getting the decisions wrong. I think we all agree that the standard of refereeing has been totally unacceptable for a lot of years now. They have accused a ref of being biased and what amounts to match-fixing. The statement also by extension accuses the league and the PGMOL of being complicit in it. It's like our situation in the cup final against Man United in the cup final where we all looked at the ref that day and knew he had history of giving Man United some fairly contentious decisions previously. It's fine for fans to say these things, but for clubs to do it? They need to produce the evidence. If they think the VAR is a Luton fan then they need to produce the evidence of that. If he is, then I think you can definitely argue conflict of interest. The VAR was absolutely a Luton fan - it's widely reported which team each referee supports. That said, I'm not entirely sure they'd be gunning for an Everton win? Who knows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
desensitized43 Posted April 22 Share Posted April 22 2 minutes ago, bobzy said: The VAR was absolutely a Luton fan - it's widely reported which team each referee supports. That said, I'm not entirely sure they'd be gunning for an Everton win? Who knows. Where is it? I'm sure there's an official register of this kind of stuff at the PGMOL but unless you're someone like Mike Dean who has been pictured at Tranmere games and was very open about it then it's all rumour about who supports who. It's important that we know where these people's allegiances are though for us to trust the system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobzy Posted April 22 Share Posted April 22 6 minutes ago, desensitized43 said: Where is it? I'm sure there's an official register of this kind of stuff at the PGMOL but unless you're someone like Mike Dean who has been pictured at Tranmere games and was very open about it then it's all rumour about who supports who. It's important that we know where these people's allegiances are though for us to trust the system. Loads of places report on who referees support; you can just Google it. Here's one such article: "Stuart Attwell Luton Town Currently, the longest-serving referee in England’s top tier, Stuart Attwell has been presiding over Premier League games since 2008. After 183 Premier League appearances and over 200 EFL games, Attwell is a seasoned pro and enters his 16th season as a first-division ref. For the first time in his professional career, his allegiance to Luton Town will directly impact his ability to referee his club’s games following their promotion to the Premier League ahead of the 2023/24 season." (Link: https://www.givemesport.com/football-teams-premier-league-referees-support/) Just a random example 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrBlack Posted April 22 Share Posted April 22 20 minutes ago, bobzy said: That said, I'm not entirely sure they'd be gunning for an Everton win? Who knows. I've heard this a few times. Everton have a game in hand and two very winnable fixtures (3 if you include the Luton game) Forest were a point behind them with a more difficult run in. If I was a Luton fan I'd absolutely be wanting Forest to lose that game. Part of me wonders if it was a self fulfilling prophecy though. By trying to get the VAR changed, they're immediately questioning his integrity. Maybe he wanted to live up to their expectations. Shocking call on the last of the three penalties. The other two are consistent with what we've seen recently. They're borderline judgemental calls that aren't getting over turned. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HKP90 Posted April 22 VT Supporter Share Posted April 22 37 minutes ago, MrBlack said: I've heard this a few times. Everton have a game in hand and two very winnable fixtures (3 if you include the Luton game) Forest were a point behind them with a more difficult run in. If I was a Luton fan I'd absolutely be wanting Forest to lose that game. Part of me wonders if it was a self fulfilling prophecy though. By trying to get the VAR changed, they're immediately questioning his integrity. Maybe he wanted to live up to their expectations. Shocking call on the last of the three penalties. The other two are consistent with what we've seen recently. They're borderline judgemental calls that aren't getting over turned. The Coventry decision got overturned and that was as borderline as it gets. There is no consistency. Like. At all. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrBlack Posted April 22 Share Posted April 22 5 minutes ago, HKP90 said: The Coventry decision got overturned and that was as borderline as it gets. There is no consistency. Like. At all. Fair point. I still don't think they should be claiming they were 100% black and white incorrect decisions or applications of the rules though. They weren't. The foul by Young defintely was. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post HKP90 Posted April 22 VT Supporter Popular Post Share Posted April 22 (edited) 1 hour ago, MrBlack said: Fair point. I still don't think they should be claiming they were 100% black and white incorrect decisions or applications of the rules though. They weren't. The foul by Young defintely was. I think the main issue is that everyone expected that when VAR came in, the results would be empirical, and definitive. When arguments were being made against it's introduction, I heard lots of 'it will take too long', and 'it will take the spontaneity out of the game', 'break the flow' etc. I didn't hear many folks say 'it might still be wrong after review' or 'it's almost if not as subjective as the on-field decision'. The backlash from Notts Forest smacks of frustration with the process to me. The negatives were generally accepted- slow down, inability to properly celebrate etc as long as in the end the decision is right. What we're now realising after some time in practice is that you can get the slow down, break in play and STILL get the answer wrong. What's more, it's made everything even less transparent, because VAR officials are locked away somewhere doling out judgement, but we don't even see them (I know we know who the officials are, but they are invisible to the fans on the pitch). It's less accountable. In spite of the ham fisted way they have gone about this, I actually do still have sympathy with Notts Forest. They are playing a game of fine margins, and are realising that VAR is still missing big decisions. I really really feel for Coventry. What a shambles that was. The media have come out this morning (Phil McNulty on the BBC) saying that questioning the competence of officials is fine, but questioning their integrity is completely unacceptable. In Notts Forest/Coventry's defence, it's very hard to take that at face value when you see VAR decisions, which are meant to be definitive, being wrong, and on the side of the 'bigger club'. Honestly, I think VAR has been a disaster, and while I know we're now down the rabbit hole, probably never to return, I would scrap it all in a heartbeat. We always used to moan about refs being rubbish. It's only more recently that (rightly or wrongly) we're talking about corruption. The opacity of VAR is imo a big part of that. Edited April 22 by HKP90 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonesy7211 Posted April 22 Share Posted April 22 Thinking more about Forest's X/Twitter statement, and it's been universally condemned by pretty much everyone, me included. Just thinking on it further, I thought what else can they do except go over the top? Managers making statements about poorly implemented and reviewed VAR only leads to fines. Sky Sports/the media commenting on it changes nothing. Fans slamming it doesn't seem to bother PGMOL or the FA. What immediate recourse is there? Gary Neville said yesterday that you have to accept things like this because it's the nature of sport. That's utter rubbish. We all have eyes, the decisions do seem to more frequently favour the bigger teams. VAR needs to be immediately removed, or we find ways to remove the human element from it, as that's where the problem is. It's not that it's not fit for purpose, it's that it's demonstrably and repeatably unfair. And nothing changes. The more I think on it the more I'm please Forest said what they did. They may have been incorrect to say the official was biased, but they're bang on to question VAR given what's happened to them time and again. It's the biggest headline off the back of a good weekend of sport. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pinebro Posted April 22 Share Posted April 22 Calling it out in the public I don't have an issue with. It's the "consider it's options" line that ruins it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Albrighton Posted April 22 VT Supporter Share Posted April 22 Whether a Luton Town supporter would want a win, lose or draw for Forest, it would make sense not to have a supporter whose team is impacted by the result helping to officiate the game. That aspect of the criticism is valid, I feel. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarryOnVilla Posted April 22 Share Posted April 22 I understand Forest’s frustrations, yet that twitter statement is a complete embarrassment. Luton must be howling at it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted April 22 Share Posted April 22 I think the statement is more mature than Klopp accusong a ref to be biased in his face or Arteta abusing and sarcastically clapping refs Maybe if English football media and organisations didnt embrace this scumbag behavior then Forest might have not made the tweet. English football has allowed ref abuse for too long 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AshVilla Posted April 22 Share Posted April 22 (edited) The first goal where he kicks Reyna i thought was a pen. We had a similar one where Duran was kicked in the Burnley game for us that was given. There is just no consistency. Edited April 22 by AshVilla Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Honest bunch of lads Posted April 22 Share Posted April 22 Were the penalty decisions that bad? Only one was an obvious penalty I thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted April 22 Share Posted April 22 26 minutes ago, Mark Albrighton said: Whether a Luton Town supporter would want a win, lose or draw for Forest, it would make sense not to have a supporter whose team is impacted by the result helping to officiate the game. That aspect of the criticism is valid, I feel. I don't think it is valid. The plain English reading of their tweet is that Atwell acted corruptly because he supports a rival team. They have no evidence to support the strong implication that acted corruptly, and if he 'considers his options' they could yet be in legal bother. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted April 22 Share Posted April 22 4 minutes ago, Honest bunch of lads said: Were the penalty decisions that bad? Only one was an obvious penalty I thought. They were robbed vs Liverpool recently when the ref didnt know the rules then add in a points deduction then I feel they reached breaking point 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Albrighton Posted April 22 VT Supporter Share Posted April 22 Just now, HanoiVillan said: I don't think it is valid. The plain English reading of their tweet is that Atwell acted corruptly because he supports a rival team. They have no evidence to support the strong implication that acted corruptly, and if he 'considers his options' they could yet be in legal bother. It does read like that. I’m not saying Atwell cheated. I’m saying it is a fair thing to not want him involved in the first place. It seems a reasonable request (whether Forest requested he not be involved in a reasonable manner before the game is anyone’s guess). 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted April 22 Share Posted April 22 4 minutes ago, Mark Albrighton said: It does read like that. I’m not saying Atwell cheated. I’m saying it is a fair thing to not want him involved in the first place. It seems a reasonable request (whether Forest requested he not be involved in a reasonable manner before the game is anyone’s guess). Yes, it would have been a reasonable *request* beforehand. I'm disagreeing with 'that aspect of the criticism is valid', ie the communication after the event. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobzy Posted April 22 Share Posted April 22 25 minutes ago, Zatman said: They were robbed vs Liverpool recently when the ref didnt know the rules then add in a points deduction then I feel they reached breaking point There's loads more. I'd have to message my Forest-supporting mates, but there was a massive list that got reeled off at the pub after the Liverpool incident I'd be happy to oblige if people want to know more! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts