Our expert in black takes a look at the refereeing decisions in the Premier League over the weekend, see if you agree with him on the controversial points that happened across the games, starting of course with Saints.

Southampton v Newcastle (Stuart Attwell)
Not too much to discuss regarding the officials or VAR to this game (although there sure has been a lot around other aspects of the game and it’s participants!), with VAR and the officials seeming like they got all the major decisions correct.

Game started off with an unfortunate, but decent, advantage played by the ref for Newcastle’s opener, for the clear foul in the build-up to the goal. Other than that though, an easy and decent performance from the officials with nothing much for VAR to get involved in.

Although one thing I did fail to mention is that I do think that Elynousie should’ve been given a cautioning for unsporting behaviour by somehow missing that open goal in the first half! As it doesn’t matter who we get in to replace Ralph, as unless we start putting away chances like that, we’ll be going down for a fact!

Leeds v Bournemouth (Michael Salisbury)
Well already this weekend had started with more interesting decisions than last, with a penalty within the first ten minutes! But still the pen for Leeds was written in stone and the correct decision from VAR, as you can tell just off if player reactions before seeing the replay that the decision was correct.

But other than that, nothing for VAR to get involved in, with all goals rightfully standing and a decent performance from the officials.

Man City v Fulham (Darren England)
Sure was a few interesting incidents in this game today! With their being quite a few debatable decisions on both ends of the pitch…

But anyway, so with regards to the first thing VAR was needed for, Man City’s goal was rightfully ruled out for a blatant offside, so no debate there.

But now for more the debatable decisions, for Fulham’s penalty and Cancelo’s red card. As I personally see it as the correct decision under the LOTG, although I hear many fans say that it should’ve just been a cautioning, but that just doesn’t work.
As firstly it’s a clear pen as he goes straight through the back of him when he’s no where near the ball and had no intention to play the ball, which is why it’s a pen at the end of the day.
And due to Cancelo not going for the ball and committing a DOGSO (Denying an Obvious Goal Scoring Opportunity) it’s a red card offence.
As I know a few fans seem to think that you don’t get sent off if it’s in the box, but that’s only for when they are intending to go for the ball and have a realistic chance of getting it, which seeing how Cancelo just went clattering into him, had no intent to play the ball whatsoever, so was rightfully sent off. So if you think that’s a pen, then it’s a red card as it had to be that, or simply a play on, but BAR got that right in my opinion

Man City then had another goal ruled out for offside, but as the replays show, Hallandale is clearly offside so the goal was rightfully ruled out.

But anyway with regards to the other big VAR decision of the game, Man City’s penalty, I do think VAR messed up there!
As yes there is contact, but contact doesn’t always mean it’s a foul and the contact is minimal, as it’s got such little force that it’s not enough for a penalty, especially with how much more the refs have been told to let go for the physicality of the game.
As this decision is opinionated, but the fact that De Brune takes an extra step after the contact and it being minimal with soo little force, just isn’t enough for a penalty whatsoever. As this is where VAR should send the ref over to the monitor just to make sure that he’s satisfied that there is enough contact and force for a penalty to be awarded.

Nott'm Forest v Brentford (Andre Marriner)
Another game with quite a few interesting decisions to discuss and talk about, with it having the most controversy of any game in quite some time!

Still to start it off, the first penalty appeal from Forest. As yes there is some slight contact, but soo little force and minimal connection that it shouldn’t be a penalty and was rightfully not given. Although I see this incident being very similar to the Man City penalty, with their being contact, but no where near enough contact or force for it to rightfully be given, hence why nether should have, yet one was and one was not...

The second penalty appeal from Forest, there is an arm sticking out, it’s just does that arm create enough force to warrant a foul and therefore a penalty? As this is where it can be hard for officials, even with VAR, as it’s all down to the levels of force used, but seeing how there doesn’t seem to be anything too excessive and certainly nothing clear or obvious, I do think that a penalty shouldn’t have been given, and VAR was right to not intervene with this decision.

And the supposed 3rd penalty appeal (although after seeing the replays I wouldn’t call it a realistic appeal) for Forest, is a blatant dive and should’ve really been a cautioning for the Forest player for simulation. As the attacker is clearly trying to cause the contact and is going down before any contact is even created, so is blatant simulation and a ball at the yellow that should’ve been given.

The Brentford penalty was certainly an interesting one though, and pretty much single handedly caused all the controversy of the game in itself! As it had just as much contact as the Man City and Forests first penalty shout did (if not less), yet this one was given, like the Man City one, yet Forest‘s first one was not…
As we can quite clearly see from the replay that there’s contact from Henderson’s glove onto the Brentford forward, yet it’s just a slight tap on the leg, and nothing with any power or force behind it, which originally wasn’t given as a penalty but then was overturned by a monitor review requested by VAR, which lead to the original decision being overturned and a penalty being given.

As I personally think all 3 of the debatable decisions, should have been a play on/no penalty, as all 3 had no real force or enough contact to cause an adult football player to fall to the ground and seriously expect a penalty. And if one should’ve been given than all 3 should have, as well as the Man City one, whilst if one wasn’t given then none should’ve been given.
As there is a lot of inconsistency with these decisions to not only the weekends decisions but also that games ones in itself which really shouldn’t be happening with the use of VAR, especially not for just the single game.

So I do think that VAR did mess up for the penalty to Brentford, as well as many acts of simulation from many Forest players that went unpunished. So not such a great game for VAR or the officials at the City Stadium.

Wolves v Brighton (Graham Scott)
Decent play from the ref for the Wolves goal on not blowing too early when the striker was tripped but managed to stay on his feet and score.

With regards to Wolves’s penalty, I’d say VAR got that one right as it’s a fairly clear incident. As the Brighton defender has his arm clearly sticking out and makes clear contact with the ball, so as it’s sticking out in an unnatural position (which goals against the three things a handball can be given for, intent, unnatural position or scoring directly with/after hitting the arm) and makes clear contact a penalty was rightfully given.

This game sure did have a few interesting decisions though! As next up there was a red card shown to Semedo. As like I’ve previously said with the Cancelo incident for the Man City game, as Semedo has no intent to play the ball and commits a DOGSO offence, it’s a straight red card, although as it was outside the box (aka a free kick will be given and not a penalty) the intent is irrelevant as they are always straight reds for DOGSO’s outside the box.
And this is a clear DOGSO offence due to him being through 1 on 1 with the keeper if not being fouled there, with no other defenders being anywhere near play.

Overall though I think there were a few iffy decisions here and there, but all the major and important decisions were rightfully given the correct restart and VAR/Graham did decent throughout the game.

Everton v Leicester (David Coote)
Probably the quietest game for VAR from all of Saturdays games!

As there was an early shout for handball from Leicester for a supposed handball, yet due to the the hands of Everton player being in a natural position by his side, and him having no time to react so clearly not being intentional, a penalty shouldn’t have been given which both VAR and the ref rightfully didn’t give.

But other than that, there was nothing else for VAR or the ref to get involved in, and was a decent game from Coote getting all the major decisions correct and playing some decent advantages and letting the game flow like a decent ref would.

Chelsea v Arsenal (Michael Oliver)
This games score basically sums up the levels of controversy or things for VAR to get involved in. Just a few checks here and there but no real controversy or anything for ether teams to complain about or discuss bar the one scrum up between the players towards the end of the game, with just a few cautioning required and no need for any reds or major action from VAR and the officials.

Just another decent game for Oliver, who, as I’ve previously said, is probably the best referee in the prem right now,

Aston Villa v Man Utd (Anthony Taylor)
A fairly surprising game for results, yet a fairly simple one for VAR and Taylor at Villa park on Sunday.

A decent start to the game for Ant, with a good advantage played for Villa’s opener, and a blatant free kick given against Man U for villas second goal (although not enough for a DOGSO and red for Shaw seeing how there were defenders also back and covering him even if the foul hadn’t been committed).

This game did have some interesting incidents though for VAR to look at with the little clash of Mings and Ronaldo, both clearly grabbing and grappling one another to the ground. But seeing how they’ve both just grabbing and pulling one another, with no proper punches or kicks, for a fairly calm game until then, their was no need for any reds for violent conduct, and both getting a yellow for aggressive attitudes was enough for the incident.

But one unfortunate mistake from Taylor was him getting in the way for a very promising attack for Villa, and having to give a dropped ball due to it hitting him (as a an uncontested dropped ball must always be given when the ball hits the ref and it ether changes possession for teams or the team in possession is on the attack).
Other than that though, a decent game for Taylor.

West Ham v Crystal Palace (Paul Tierney)
This game always looked like it was going to be a close one, and it sure did end up being one. With VAR having a bit to get involved in.

As all 3 of the goals scored in this game were all fair and correct it’s just the question for this game and VAR was should West Ham of had their penalty overturned or kept? As was the supposed pull on Antonio enough for him to go down and a penalty to be awarded? As we’ve had many decisions this week where we’ve discussed the levels of force and what should or shouldn’t be allowed. Yet this one I do think was one of the more blatant ones with their being that little contact that VAR was very much in the rights to get the ref to review the incident on the monitor, and overturn the penalty (although how Antonio managed to get away without a booking I’m quite surprised by!).

But still a decent game for VAR and the officials, getting involved when they should be and concluding with the correct decisions, and no real VAR issues.

Tottenham v Liverpool (Andy Madley)
Well if there’s ever a way to end this weeks action on the officiating side of things, I don’t think there’s a current set of mangers that love to blame VAR or the officials whenever they can, more than this duo who’ll always make the most of any devious that go against them!

But there was some discussions to be had with this game, as Spurs had an early penalty should that Tierney denied and VAR didn’t overrule, which I personally see as the correct decision. As yeah there is a slight nudge, but both players are side to side, and the force behind that push you can quite clearly see as being minimal, and the main thing that sells it for me is that you can see the spurs player is going down before Trent’s arm fully extends out, which shows that he was falling over (aka looking for it) as soon as he felt the contact, showing that it’s not the force of the push that’s making him fall but simply him looking for it, which is certainly not enough for a penalty to be awarded, especially with refs supposedly letting the game be more physical this season.

Other than that though, nothing much more to be discussed, although really the ref should’ve shown Conte a second yellow for dissent when he went over to caution him for hitting the ball outta a Liverpool coaches hand, as you can clearly see him getting aggressive and disrespectful to Madley, yet he gets away with it (but anyone who’s spoken to high level officials will know that they’re told to officiate games differently in certain areas (especially dissent),than what the laws suggest).
But other than that a fairly easy and decent performance from the officials to this game, with no real major controversies from VAR.

Weekly Conclusion
VAR sure did have some ups and downs this weekend, with their being a lot more action than last weeks games, with a lot more to discuss. As it had quite a few good games, but also a few debatable discussions but certainly some inconsistency in certain areas. Which is understandable for different games as refs are like players on how they vary for what they do and don’t allow on the physical side of things, but for the same game, isn’t the best.

Although I will say that I do see many love to criticise officials when making these incorrect decisions (although those decisions can also be correct yet some will still find a way to criticise them!). Yet like these penalty incidents have shown, if players didn’t go down soo easily and dive soo often it would be a lot easier for officials to show consistency with their decisions and less debates over the levels of force.

Hence why I personally think that simulation should be a straight red card offence (with maybe a shorter suspension of maybe just that game), as simulation can lead to opponents being unrightfully sent off and lead to goals being scored and denied which can affect results just like a handball on the like can etc. So why shouldn’t simulation be treated like a foul of that level?
As it’s only though red cards that there will be less simulation, as players won’t wanna risk it as much, and therefore a game that more will enjoy. As it’s not like yellows are given out all the time for simulation, so turning them into reds won’t exactly make every game becomes games of like 9v8 or so.

But still, overall a varied week for VAR, with certainly a few debatable decisions as well as a bit of inconsistency, yet still many correct decisions and games with the officials getting all the major decisions right and doing their job as they should be doing it.

Photo: Action Images

cocklebreath added 09:01 - Nov 7 Fascinating
0

saintsfanbrock added 09:05 - Nov 7 Why is it that player ratings and match reports go up on the day if we win but if we lose they are severely delayed. Not happy to let the people vent?
0

SaintNick added 10:25 - Nov 7 Nothing to do with the results, even if we win I rarely do the report on the same day as i am usually at the game and celebrating with a pint or two win or lose, the people can vent on the player ratings comments which go up automatically on the day
0

Blogs 31 bloggers

Charlton Athletic Polls