Premier League 2020/21 Season

Joined
Feb 5, 2014
Messages
1,367
Location
Canary Wharf
But ultimately the main point is it’s another Young England player who gets ripped apart when they drop down a level - it’s a regular occurrence with Engerland fans ( mainly from small clubs who have witnessed zero success in their lifetime ) - one minute they are lorded the next minute not good enough - also stemming from the media.
:ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO:

TAA hasn't been good enough, at any point this season. Defensive injuries in the squad have exposed him. Once it's worked out you can be targeted, teams will always try it. Think that's fairly obvious to anyone that's played to a decent level, in any sport.

I'll take your comment at face value, instead of some weird dig. "Small clubs" have players that are overlooked, purely because of where they play. Lets's take little old West Ham (Who are above the current champions 30 games into the season) We had Cresswell playing the football of his life. No selection.(Bertrand was at Chelsea, Danny Rose at Spurs). West ham get into the Europa League, He's in. Even tho he's just come back from a long injury and is playing at 60% of what he was before. Scott Parker was running the show for years, I believe he "needed to go to a big club for international football" Was loyal to us for too long, performances fell away, but as soon as he went to spurs, called up.
 
Thread starter #7,302
Joined
Jan 23, 2012
Messages
35,727
Location
Leighton Buzzard
:ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO:

TAA hasn't been good enough, at any point this season. Defensive injuries in the squad have exposed him. Once it's worked out you can be targeted, teams will always try it. Think that's fairly obvious to anyone that's played to a decent level, in any sport.

I'll take your comment at face value, instead of some weird dig. "Small clubs" have players that are overlooked, purely because of where they play. Lets's take little old West Ham (Who are above the current champions 30 games into the season) We had Cresswell playing the football of his life. No selection.(Bertrand was at Chelsea, Danny Rose at Spurs). West ham get into the Europa League, He's in. Even tho he's just come back from a long injury and is playing at 60% of what he was before. Scott Parker was running the show for years, I believe he "needed to go to a big club for international football" Was loyal to us for too long, performances fell away, but as soon as he went to spurs, called up.
A lot of comes down to the extra level of football the players at the bigger clubs or clubs in Europe are playing - players showing that can play at not just the Premier League teams but also in the CL

Scott Parker for example had the likes of Lampard , Gerrard ahead of him with others like Carrick and Barry in the squad - players playing for teams in Europe etc

Then players like Bertrand and Rose before Creswell both again in the CL for their clubs

So yes at times players from clubs not in Europe at times get ignored - mainly because they don’t get the chance to show they can play against the top players in Europe and why some players move from the clubs not in Europe.
 

pauldj42

Money List Winner
Joined
Nov 13, 2012
Messages
15,027
Location
Seaham
This is why refs get so much stick .
That’s a shocking decision.
It’s a shocking decision with the benefit of 3 Angles and slow mo, try watching it again and take note of the Referee’s position, watch he will see, the speed of play and Ederson’s reaction.

The Referee had a split second to make a decision.

What’s more shocking is fans who apparently played and and understand the game seem so quick to criticise officials.

I watched the City v Dortmund game and the Officials were good, any questionable moments came from the behaviour of the players and their willingness to cheat and trying to influence the Officials.
 
Thread starter #7,304
Joined
Jan 23, 2012
Messages
35,727
Location
Leighton Buzzard
It’s a shocking decision with the benefit of 3 Angles and slow mo, try watching it again and take note of the Referee’s position, watch he will see, the speed of play and Ederson’s reaction.

The Referee had a split second to make a decision.

What’s more shocking is fans who apparently played and and understand the game seem so quick to criticise officials.

I watched the City v Dortmund game and the Officials were good, any questionable moments came from the behaviour of the players and their willingness to cheat and trying to influence the Officials.
Do you mean the slo Mo’s and angles that VAR was brought into to be used 🤷‍♂️

The ref should have let the ball go in the net and then if there are any issues VAR would have picked it up - if it was a clear foul the goal would have be disallowed - instead he blew his whistle and denied Dortmund a goal that could potentially cost them millions and a place in the semi final -

The red didnt have a split second to make the decision - he has the tools at his disposal to allow play to continue and then check after - it took everything out of play and made the decision himself and got it very wrong and the only person to blame for that is the ref and no one else.
 

pauldj42

Money List Winner
Joined
Nov 13, 2012
Messages
15,027
Location
Seaham
Do you mean the slo Mo’s and angles that VAR was brought into to be used 🤷‍♂️

The ref should have let the ball go in the net and then if there are any issues VAR would have picked it up - if it was a clear foul the goal would have be disallowed - instead he blew his whistle and denied Dortmund a goal that could potentially cost them millions and a place in the semi final -

The red didnt have a split second to make the decision - he has the tools at his disposal to allow play to continue and then check after - it took everything out of play and made the decision himself and got it very wrong and the only person to blame for that is the ref and no one else.
Once again you prove you don’t understand the rules, the Ref blew because he believed he saw a foul, that’s it, game stops and therefore VAR could not be used to review the decision. All your points are irrelevant.

Either we play by the rules or we don’t.

The Referee made a bad decision, that has only been proved by TV replays.

We have to try and understand why decisions are made rather than crucifying Officials everytime they make what turns out to be a genuine error.

Funny how when a player from a team we support makes an error we see their fans coming up with all sorts of excuses of why it happened, but lack the same empathy when it comes to Officials.
 
Joined
Jan 23, 2014
Messages
9,197
Location
Liverpool

This also happened - the linesman asking for an autograph from a player 😲

Both referees were shocking last night , some of the decisions were baffling - the one for Bellingham top of the bunch
I think the ref had decided Mane is a diver ( didn’t give him a thing even when fouled,)
I think he got it badly wrong and VAR is a joke .
It’s understandable in 50/50 but that was just shocking.
 
Thread starter #7,307
Joined
Jan 23, 2012
Messages
35,727
Location
Leighton Buzzard
Once again you prove you don’t understand the rules, the Ref blew because he believed he saw a foul, that’s it, game stops and therefore VAR could not be used to review the decision. All your points are irrelevant.

Either we play by the rules or we don’t.

The Referee made a bad decision, that has only been proved by TV replays.

We have to try and understand why decisions are made rather than crucifying Officials everytime they make what turns out to be a genuine error.

Funny how when a player from a team we support we see fans coming up with all sorts of excuses of why it happened, but lack the same empathy when it comes to Officials.
🤦‍♂️

Hence why I said the referee should have allowed play to carry on instead of blowing his whistle 🙄

They brought VAR in to help the referee make the right choice - the ball was rolling into the net , the simple choice was to allow it to continue and if the ref was right and it was a foul the goal would have been disallowed and play would have continued with a free kick

But as was seen it wasn’t a foul and should have been a goal - and if he hasn’t blown his whistle then VAR would have been used as it is for every goal scored

There is no excuse - it was poor from the referee, they brought in VAR to help them and his actions took it out of play and his actions were wrong
 
Joined
Jan 23, 2014
Messages
9,197
Location
Liverpool
It’s a shocking decision with the benefit of 3 Angles and slow mo, try watching it again and take note of the Referee’s position, watch he will see, the speed of play and Ederson’s reaction.

The Referee had a split second to make a decision.

What’s more shocking is fans who apparently played and and understand the game seem so quick to criticise officials.

I watched the City v Dortmund game and the Officials were good, any questionable moments came from the behaviour of the players and their willingness to cheat and trying to influence the Officials.
Once he’s outside the box he’s just another player.
Keepers are protected to much.
Just let the game go on ,he scores and VAR tells the ref it’s not a foul.
I was quoting this decision , if the refs in a bad position that’s what VAR is for.!
 

pauldj42

Money List Winner
Joined
Nov 13, 2012
Messages
15,027
Location
Seaham
🤦‍♂️

Hence why I said the referee should have allowed play to carry on instead of blowing his whistle 🙄

They brought VAR in to help the referee make the right choice - the ball was rolling into the net , the simple choice was to allow it to continue and if the ref was right and it was a foul the goal would have been disallowed and play would have continued with a free kick

But as was seen it wasn’t a foul and should have been a goal - and if he hasn’t blown his whistle then VAR would have been used as it is for every goal scored

There is no excuse - it was poor from the referee, they brought in VAR to help them and his actions took it out of play and his actions were wrong
Use as many emoji’s as you like, on a pitch a Referee will blow his whistle when he sees a foul, they will only try and play the advantage if the advantage is for the team who have been fouled, ie, last night City did not have an advantage.

You really should try and move away from what you think should happen and see it as the Laws of the game intended.
 
Joined
Jan 23, 2014
Messages
9,197
Location
Liverpool
🤦‍♂️

Hence why I said the referee should have allowed play to carry on instead of blowing his whistle 🙄

They brought VAR in to help the referee make the right choice - the ball was rolling into the net , the simple choice was to allow it to continue and if the ref was right and it was a foul the goal would have been disallowed and play would have continued with a free kick

But as was seen it wasn’t a foul and should have been a goal - and if he hasn’t blown his whistle then VAR would have been used as it is for every goal scored

There is no excuse - it was poor from the referee, they brought in VAR to help them and his actions took it out of play and his actions were wrong
Yes that is the exact reason they don’t flag for offside!
 

pauldj42

Money List Winner
Joined
Nov 13, 2012
Messages
15,027
Location
Seaham
Once he’s outside the box he’s just another player.
Keepers are protected to much.
Just let the game go on ,he scores and VAR tells the ref it’s not a foul.
I was quoting this decision , if the refs in a bad position that’s what VAR is for.!
He’s not in a bad position though! He’s up with play and only sees it from one angle, he saw two players challenge for the ball and decides Bellingham kicked the keeper and blows for a foul, once he blows for this offence VAR cannot be used.

Yes from other angles he’s wrong, but he hasn’t purposely made a wrong decision, he’s made the decision he believes is correct at the time.
 
Thread starter #7,313
Joined
Jan 23, 2012
Messages
35,727
Location
Leighton Buzzard
Yes that is the exact reason they don’t flag for offside!
Yep - they want VAR to make the calls most of the time , and players are getting injured because of it

Before VAR it would have been a poor decision but with the tools in place and what was happening the ref just allows play to continue and VAR then checks to see if there is a foul - if there is the goal is disallowed , if there isn’t then Dortmund get the deserved goal - the commentary even said straight away they have no idea what he has seen there. It’s a decision that could cost Dortmund heavily and it’s a reason why VAR was brought in
 

pauldj42

Money List Winner
Joined
Nov 13, 2012
Messages
15,027
Location
Seaham
Yep - they want VAR to make the calls most of the time , and players are getting injured because of it

Before VAR it would have been a poor decision but with the tools in place and what was happening the ref just allows play to continue and VAR then checks to see if there is a foul - if there is the goal is disallowed , if there isn’t then Dortmund get the deserved goal - the commentary even said straight away they have no idea what he has seen there. It’s a decision that could cost Dortmund heavily and it’s a reason why VAR was brought in
Make your mind up, we don’t like Linesman keeping their flags down because someone could get injured in the ensuing seconds etc.

But we want Referee’s to wait blowing their whistle to see what happens!

I take it there’s no chance of a player being injured while we wait for Refs to blow.
 
Joined
Nov 1, 2016
Messages
13,301
Location
Watford
Make your mind up, we don’t like Linesman keeping their flags down because someone could get injured in the ensuing seconds etc.

But we want Referee’s to wait blowing their whistle to see what happens!

I take it there’s no chance of a player being injured while we wait for Refs to blow.
It's the inconsistency though. Why direct the linesmen to wait on decisions so they can be reviewed, but not tell the ref the same thing? In my opinion he's made a double shocker - first shocking decision is to see it as a foul on Ederson, second shocking decision is to blow his whistle when he did, instead of waiting another 2 seconds until the ball had crossed the line, then VAR could simply have reviewed the goal for a potential foul.
 

pauldj42

Money List Winner
Joined
Nov 13, 2012
Messages
15,027
Location
Seaham
It's the inconsistency though. Why direct the linesmen to wait on decisions so they can be reviewed, but not tell the ref the same thing? In my opinion he's made a double shocker - first shocking decision is to see it as a foul on Ederson, second shocking decision is to blow his whistle when he did, instead of waiting another 2 seconds until the ball had crossed the line, then VAR could simply have reviewed the goal for a potential foul.
Two things:

1. The Linesmen are only directed to delay Offside decisions, not delay for fouls.

2. As stated, a Referee will not play an advantage against the Team fouled, so if he’d of thought Bellingham had been fouled he may of chosen to delay the whistle.

Mate, I totally agree it was the wrong decision, but that was only after trial by media, time and time again on here we get the media slated for having an agenda or causing problems in the game, but people are happy to use it when it proves their point.

Sometimes we should stand back and try to understand why some decisions are made.
 
Joined
Nov 1, 2016
Messages
13,301
Location
Watford
Two things:

1. The Linesmen are only directed to delay Offside decisions, not delay for fouls.

2. As stated, a Referee will not play an advantage against the Team fouled, so if he’d of thought Bellingham had been fouled he may of chosen to delay the whistle.

Mate, I totally agree it was the wrong decision, but that was only after trial by media, time and time again on here we get the media slated for having an agenda or causing problems in the game, but people are happy to use it when it proves their point.

Sometimes we should stand back and try to understand why some decisions are made.
It's just exhausting, so many times VAR is used pointlessly or badly, and then here is a situation where it could have been useful, but the ref has blundered it so it couldn't be used. It's annoying, but you're right, VAR was never going to cut out mistakes entirely.
 

pauldj42

Money List Winner
Joined
Nov 13, 2012
Messages
15,027
Location
Seaham
It's just exhausting, so many times VAR is used pointlessly or badly, and then here is a situation where it could have been useful, but the ref has blundered it so it couldn't be used. It's annoying, but you're right, VAR was never going to cut out mistakes entirely.
Totally agree, it should be used for everything or the so many appeals for each time as a few on here have suggested.

Current use is hideously flawed.
 
Joined
Jan 23, 2014
Messages
9,197
Location
Liverpool
He’s not in a bad position though! He’s up with play and only sees it from one angle, he saw two players challenge for the ball and decides Bellingham kicked the keeper and blows for a foul, once he blows for this offence VAR cannot be used.

Yes from other angles he’s wrong, but he hasn’t purposely made a wrong decision, he’s made the decision he believes is correct at the time.
He guessed and got it wrong.
 
Top