... And Then There Were Seven

[Chuck Murray]

Referee admitted he 'got it wrong' with Fulham's first pen - O'Neil

AADAM PATEL AT CRAVEN COTTAGE: Gary O'Neil's side have found themselves on the wrong end of a series of decisions this season and here was another on a controversial night.

www.dailymail.co.uk

Gary O'Neil insisted that Wolves are seven points worse off this season due to incorrect refereeing decisions after they lost to an injury-time Willian penalty at Craven Cottage in another game filled with VAR controversy.

Three penalties were awarded in the second half, with two to Fulham, and O'Neil revealed that in a lengthy post-match meeting in the referee's room referee Michael Salisbury admitted that he had made a mistake for the first Fulham penalty, which was given after Nelson Semedo caught Tom Cairney on the edge of the box.

'He (Salisbury) doesn't think the first one is a penalty because he thinks he should have been sent to the (VAR) screen and he would have overturned it from the images that we watched together in his room,' said O'Neil. 'He regrets the fact that he wasn't sent to the screen to overturn the Nelson penalty.'

O'Neil refused to go after the officials at full-time but admitted that he felt aggrieved as yet more decisions went against his side.

'Behaving respectfully and conducting myself in this manner has probably meant that we're seven points down due to PGMOL reviews,' said O'Neil.

'The difference between 22 points and 15 for the thousands of supporters who follow the team around the country is huge'.

The difference between 22 points and 15 on my reputation when you're trying to build at a big club is irreparable'.

'You can send me flowers. You can ring me tomorrow. You can do what you want but we should be on 22 points instead of 15,' he added.

'We're going to try and conduct myself in the way that I think is right and I will continue to but the players are extremely frustrated. 'The players are like "yeah, should we make some noise about this? Do we need social media posts?" But my advice so far before this evening is to make sure we're good enough to win the game regardless of what the officials do.'

O'Neil added that he felt both Tim Ream and Carlos Vinicius should have been sent off for separate incidents.

Ream was fortunate to survive a second booking when he fouled Hwang Hee-chan in the box while Vinicius wasn't punished for a headbutt minutes before Willian's winner,

'They've sent somebody out since then speak to one of my staff and said that by the letter of the law, Tim Ream should have received a second yellow card,' said O'Neil.

'We discussed the headbutt and he (Salisbury) debated that a little bit with me and said that it was a soft headbutt.

'I just said that's crazy. It's absolutely crazy. So we can headbutt people on a football pitch as long as it's deemed soft or not hard enough? So my son at home watching that or millions of children watching that, we're telling them that you can headbutt people on a football pitch, as long as it's not too hard.

'But they've since come out after that and sent their representatives to speak to one of our staff and said that by the letter of the law, that got that one wrong as well. That should have been a red card.'

============================================

A large 7 needs to be draped from the roof of The Mol for the next home game, and take it on the road to Arsenal next weekend, too.

I'd say we should also send the Under 23's down for the match, and dare them to penalize us more points. "We've already given at the office, sorry mate!!"

One (1) more catastrophic adverse decision gets us to 10 points, which Everton have been docked for violating FFP rules. On what planet is that fair?!?!?!?

 

[The House of Wolves]

Lemina on Instagram

 

[Chuck Murray]

I don't care where they come up with the 7 points. O'Neill is right, this is messing with people's livelihoods. this MUST end.

Also FWIW ... it's interesting that Salisbury apparently basically threw the VAR (Atwell) under the bus, blaming him for not sending him to the VAR screen to review on his own. LOL. Question: what prevented Salisbury from checking the VAR screen for himself? I didn't realize he needed permission ... or does he? Maybe someone should ask him that question? Or even, "Now that Atwell has proven his judgment not to be trustworthy, will you feel obliged to visit the VAR screen for all close calls, regardless of Atwell's VAR feedback?"

And how can you trust the VAR and/or VAR assistant to provide the most accurate views, as opposed to the ones they want you to see?!?

Maybe this slight crack in the solid black wall of unity/covering for each other's mistakes will finally lead to the end of PGMOL only VAR???

We can only hope, and in hoping, we can only hope the club hasn't been decimated as a result in the interim. 7 points down in 13 matches, projected out over a full 38 games, is a whopping twenty (20) point assessment. Twice the Everton penalty. Ponder that, willya.

 

[Dr Wolfenstein]

We can't realistically claim an extra 7 points as if nothing else would have happened in those games subsequent to decisions being reversed or viewed differently-unless we're talking last kick of the match..

 

[The House of Wolves]

We can't realistically claim an extra 7 points as if nothing else would have happened in those games subsequent to decisions being reversed or viewed differently-unless we're talking last kick of the match..

Regardless, these terrible decisions have massively impacted the outcome of the games and I have no doubt we’d be at least 2 or 3 places higher in the table if there was any justice to our misfortunes.

 

[Jd132]

We can't realistically claim an extra 7 points as if nothing else would have happened in those games subsequent to decisions being reversed or viewed differently-unless we're talking last kick of the match..

The Sheff Utd one was actually the last kick of the match!

 

[MikeH68]

We can't realistically claim an extra 7 points as if nothing else would have happened in those games subsequent to decisions being reversed or viewed differently-unless we're talking last kick of the match..

They are massive incorrect & incompetent decisions, that have changed games & results, so yes you can.

 

[Oh When the Wolves]

We can't realistically claim an extra 7 points as if nothing else would have happened in those games subsequent to decisions being reversed or viewed differently-unless we're talking last kick of the match..

Man U - last minute of match

Sheff u - last min of matcg

Fulham - 9 men for 10 mins or so. Come on , even wolves aren’t losing that

Luton - it was the only way they could manage to score against 10 men

 

[tamwolf]

The Sheff Utd one was actually the last kick of the match!

And the United one with Onana.

 

[maws]

4 of the 5 bad decisions away from home

3 of them after the 90th minute

You can’t come back from those easily

 

[Monk]

Like the idea of a Big 7 perhaps on cards around the ground to hold up but who knows it could be at least 8 by the time we play Burnley

 

[WISAW]

Our players need to be smarter. Throw themselves to the ground like every other ****er in this league or we will continue to suffer. The officials are clearly not up to the job so we have a choice to sink by continuing as we are or wise the **** up.

 

[Matt]

A “soft headbutt”. He should be sacked for that comment alone. What a farcical thing to say.

 

[Frank Lincoln]

Referee admitted he 'got it wrong' with Fulham's first pen - O'Neil

AADAM PATEL AT CRAVEN COTTAGE: Gary O'Neil's side have found themselves on the wrong end of a series of decisions this season and here was another on a controversial night.

www.dailymail.co.uk

Gary O'Neil insisted that Wolves are seven points worse off this season due to incorrect refereeing decisions after they lost to an injury-time Willian penalty at Craven Cottage in another game filled with VAR controversy.

Three penalties were awarded in the second half, with two to Fulham, and O'Neil revealed that in a lengthy post-match meeting in the referee's room referee Michael Salisbury admitted that he had made a mistake for the first Fulham penalty, which was given after Nelson Semedo caught Tom Cairney on the edge of the box.

'He (Salisbury) doesn't think the first one is a penalty because he thinks he should have been sent to the (VAR) screen and he would have overturned it from the images that we watched together in his room,' said O'Neil. 'He regrets the fact that he wasn't sent to the screen to overturn the Nelson penalty.'

O'Neil refused to go after the officials at full-time but admitted that he felt aggrieved as yet more decisions went against his side.

'Behaving respectfully and conducting myself in this manner has probably meant that we're seven points down due to PGMOL reviews,' said O'Neil.

'The difference between 22 points and 15 for the thousands of supporters who follow the team around the country is huge'.

The difference between 22 points and 15 on my reputation when you're trying to build at a big club is irreparable'.

'You can send me flowers. You can ring me tomorrow. You can do what you want but we should be on 22 points instead of 15,' he added.

'We're going to try and conduct myself in the way that I think is right and I will continue to but the players are extremely frustrated. 'The players are like "yeah, should we make some noise about this? Do we need social media posts?" But my advice so far before this evening is to make sure we're good enough to win the game regardless of what the officials do.'

O'Neil added that he felt both Tim Ream and Carlos Vinicius should have been sent off for separate incidents.

Ream was fortunate to survive a second booking when he fouled Hwang Hee-chan in the box while Vinicius wasn't punished for a headbutt minutes before Willian's winner,

'They've sent somebody out since then speak to one of my staff and said that by the letter of the law, Tim Ream should have received a second yellow card,' said O'Neil.

'We discussed the headbutt and he (Salisbury) debated that a little bit with me and said that it was a soft headbutt.

'I just said that's crazy. It's absolutely crazy. So we can headbutt people on a football pitch as long as it's deemed soft or not hard enough? So my son at home watching that or millions of children watching that, we're telling them that you can headbutt people on a football pitch, as long as it's not too hard.

'But they've since come out after that and sent their representatives to speak to one of our staff and said that by the letter of the law, that got that one wrong as well. That should have been a red card.'

============================================

A large 7 needs to be draped from the roof of The Mol for the next home game, and take it on the road to Arsenal next weekend, too.

I'd say we should also send the Under 23's down for the match, and dare them to penalize us more points. "We've already given at the office, sorry mate!!"

One (1) more catastrophic adverse decision gets us to 10 points, which Everton have been docked for violating FFP rules. On what planet is that fair?!?!?!?

I might be naive or stupid, possibly both, but I always thought a headbutt would result in a red card. I didn’t know the degree of force came into the equation.

 

[Finch3d]

It makes me feel worse that they've admitted they were wrong....

 

[Adrian_Monk]

We can't realistically claim an extra 7 points as if nothing else would have happened in those games subsequent to decisions being reversed or viewed differently-unless we're talking last kick of the match..

I agree you can't quantify it with any certainty. I'm more comfortable with the use of 'could' and 'up to'

 

[old wittonian]

A “soft headbutt”. He should be sacked for that comment alone. What a farcical thing to say.

They continue to make it up as they go along and to suit themselves.

 

[Oh When the Wolves]

How can that be soft and bellegerade at Luton be enough for a red

Game has gone

 

[wolfslair]

I might be naive or stupid, possibly both, but I always thought a headbutt would result in a red card. I didn’t know the degree of force came into the equation.

They keep saying about amount of force on things to cover up for not making a decision they should have made. It is a joke, a very lazy get out.

Especially when using that logic:

Onana has to be a pen and a card
Newcastle - barely touched him, so wouldn’t be a foul as not enough contact
Shef United- barely touched him, so wouldn’t be a foul
Semedo - barely touched him, so wouldn’t be a foul
Gomes - yet again, barely touched him so not a foul

So they aren’t even consistent with their crap justification!!! That is what makes it worse, as if your going to be ****, be consistent so at least everyone knows the line and the bar for decisions.

Who are they to say “not enough contact” or “bit soft” are they able to get force exertion measurements?

As sometimes at speed even a small knock or even flick can have you over. Exposing them as actually even thicker than they are as they don’t understand the basics of movement or laws of physics!

 

[Flea]

There is simply no way this evens out over a season.
We are constantly on the recieving end of horrendous refereeing and we have been for two seasons that potentially has cost us a bag of points.
I have absolutely zero confidence in any ref in the Premier League.
They all suck bigtime.

 

[Oh When the Wolves]

O Neil should show a video of every single bad decision, every single pre match conference

 

[Mel Eves on a bike]

O Neil should show a video of every single bad decision, every single pre match conference

I’d feel that there was no point going out and playing if that was the team talk!

 

[Mel Eves on a bike]

It’s the actual rules or interpretation of them that are the main issue. Most games seem to be decided by good cheating as opposed to a great goal. With slight contact resulting in a penalty or players looking for a leg to run over. At one point they were talking about yellows for simulation but we seem to have gone right the other way.

 

[TheConcourse]

They keep saying about amount of force on things to cover up for not making a decision they should have made. It is a joke, a very lazy get out.

Especially when using that logic:

Onana has to be a pen and a card
Newcastle - barely touched him, so wouldn’t be a foul as not enough contact
Shef United- barely touched him, so wouldn’t be a foul
Semedo - barely touched him, so wouldn’t be a foul
Gomes - yet again, barely touched him so not a foul

So they aren’t even consistent with their crap justification!!! That is what makes it worse, as if your going to be ****, be consistent so at least everyone knows the line and the bar for decisions.

Who are they to say “not enough contact” or “bit soft” are they able to get force exertion measurements?

As sometimes at speed even a small knock or even flick can have you over. Exposing them as actually even thicker than they are as they don’t understand the basics of movement or laws of physics!

The more they talk the more they’re saying that VAR isn’t fit for purpose. Subjective city.

The answer is simple: give referees the space to referee a game with no interference from peers. It’s simply adding too much pressure and bias.

Ref the game, check big decisions on the screen at their own request with no input from Stockley Park - offsides aside.

 

[Andywolf74]

If they’re giving Fulham that second penalty, how on earth wasn’t Onana taking our player out a penalty in the game at Man Utd?
One thing I would say about Gomes and a lot of players do it. If there’s contact in the box don’t put your hands up in innocence which only draws attention to it. Play on as per normal, as putting your hands up won’t stop a review.

 

[Streathamwolf]

We can't realistically claim an extra 7 points as if nothing else would have happened in those games subsequent to decisions being reversed or viewed differently-unless we're talking last kick of the match..

The 3 non penalties were virtually the last kick in their matches!!!!!

 

[wolfslair]

O Neil should show a video of every single bad decision, every single pre match conference

I said exactly this on the fulham thread….. let’s see how they justify a ban or fine when using video, followed by what Howard said on his PR puff piece show or in the media on how it was wrong.

The idiot is such a narcissist he doesn’t see that he is actually making his job untenable as he says they got it wrong, they had a review meeting and agreed that this situation won’t happen again…. The soft no contact pen has happened THREE times since to just us!!!

Was brought in promising an improved standard and level of accuracy, yet without debate it is accepted things are the worst they have ever been in the stands and by coaches and staff at prem clubs!

So he has actually shown he has no power, gravitas or ability to impart change.

So really he needs to be sacked or walk, but in reality this decision doesn’t matter what choice is made, he shouldn’t be in a job past lunch time today.

 

[woop woop barmy army]

Think we need to be smarter any touch in the box... go down

Kilman next time roll around when someone pushes there face in you

Even the commentator said Kilman saved him from getting a red.

If we can not beat them join them.... or do we stay honest??

 

[Dubwolf71]

I might be naive or stupid, possibly both, but I always thought a headbutt would result in a red card. I didn’t know the degree of force came into the equation.

The big frustration. for me is that it now appears that the refs go by the player reaction rather than the offence. Kilman drops to the ground holding his face and Vinicius is off. Some people were critical of Hwangs reaction a few weeks ago in a similar situation.

 

[Sussex Wolf]

We can't realistically claim an extra 7 points as if nothing else would have happened in those games subsequent to decisions being reversed or viewed differently-unless we're talking last kick of the match..

Many of these decisions have been in the last gasp of extra time, and the one against United, literally the last action of the game. So yes, you can.

 

[Sussex Wolf]

 

[WolvTown]

They keep saying about amount of force on things to cover up for not making a decision they should have made. It is a joke, a very lazy get out.

Especially when using that logic:

Onana has to be a pen and a card
Newcastle - barely touched him, so wouldn’t be a foul as not enough contact
Shef United- barely touched him, so wouldn’t be a foul
Semedo - barely touched him, so wouldn’t be a foul
Gomes - yet again, barely touched him so not a foul

So they aren’t even consistent with their crap justification!!! That is what makes it worse, as if your going to be ****, be consistent so at least everyone knows the line and the bar for decisions.

Who are they to say “not enough contact” or “bit soft” are they able to get force exertion measurements?

As sometimes at speed even a small knock or even flick can have you over. Exposing them as actually even thicker than they are as they don’t understand the basics of movement or laws of physics!

imo, Gomes's was the first one, where I felt we'd given away a stonewall penalty there.

 

[Frank Lincoln]

Think we need to be smarter any touch in the box... go down

Kilman next time roll around when someone pushes there face in you

Even the commentator said Kilman saved him from getting a red.

If we can not beat them join them.... or do we stay honest??

Stay honest.

 

[WolvTown]

****s getting so bad, we're getting Ref Watch on a Tuesday!!

 

[WolvTown]

Think we need to be smarter any touch in the box... go down

Kilman next time roll around when someone pushes there face in you

Even the commentator said Kilman saved him from getting a red.

If we can not beat them join them.... or do we stay honest??

I was going crazy at Kilman in the pub last night. "the grave yards full of hero's", someone once said.
We need to play the same game the other teams are playing, **** the hero ******s. Someone sticks their head in your face, you've got to go down.
Being applauded for staying on your feet means jack **** when the points are added up at the end of the season.

 

[wolfslair]

imo, Gomes's was the first one, where I felt we'd given away a stonewall penalty there.

Stonewall when Howard webb said incidents where a defender pulls out (he does) and the attacker comes from the blind spot to initiate contact isn’t a pen…. Come on now….

Howard webb said this exact thing wasn’t a pen only 3 weeks ago on national telly

 

[wolfslair]

Stay honest.

And get nothing…..

Professional sport has always had an element of “he who cheats best wins” that is a fact and lessons drummed into me from academy days

 

[WW1963]

Referee admitted he 'got it wrong' with Fulham's first pen - O'Neil

AADAM PATEL AT CRAVEN COTTAGE: Gary O'Neil's side have found themselves on the wrong end of a series of decisions this season and here was another on a controversial night.

www.dailymail.co.uk

Gary O'Neil insisted that Wolves are seven points worse off this season due to incorrect refereeing decisions after they lost to an injury-time Willian penalty at Craven Cottage in another game filled with VAR controversy.

Three penalties were awarded in the second half, with two to Fulham, and O'Neil revealed that in a lengthy post-match meeting in the referee's room referee Michael Salisbury admitted that he had made a mistake for the first Fulham penalty, which was given after Nelson Semedo caught Tom Cairney on the edge of the box.

'He (Salisbury) doesn't think the first one is a penalty because he thinks he should have been sent to the (VAR) screen and he would have overturned it from the images that we watched together in his room,' said O'Neil. 'He regrets the fact that he wasn't sent to the screen to overturn the Nelson penalty.'

O'Neil refused to go after the officials at full-time but admitted that he felt aggrieved as yet more decisions went against his side.

'Behaving respectfully and conducting myself in this manner has probably meant that we're seven points down due to PGMOL reviews,' said O'Neil.

'The difference between 22 points and 15 for the thousands of supporters who follow the team around the country is huge'.

The difference between 22 points and 15 on my reputation when you're trying to build at a big club is irreparable'.

'You can send me flowers. You can ring me tomorrow. You can do what you want but we should be on 22 points instead of 15,' he added.

'We're going to try and conduct myself in the way that I think is right and I will continue to but the players are extremely frustrated. 'The players are like "yeah, should we make some noise about this? Do we need social media posts?" But my advice so far before this evening is to make sure we're good enough to win the game regardless of what the officials do.'

O'Neil added that he felt both Tim Ream and Carlos Vinicius should have been sent off for separate incidents.

Ream was fortunate to survive a second booking when he fouled Hwang Hee-chan in the box while Vinicius wasn't punished for a headbutt minutes before Willian's winner,

'They've sent somebody out since then speak to one of my staff and said that by the letter of the law, Tim Ream should have received a second yellow card,' said O'Neil.

'We discussed the headbutt and he (Salisbury) debated that a little bit with me and said that it was a soft headbutt.

'I just said that's crazy. It's absolutely crazy. So we can headbutt people on a football pitch as long as it's deemed soft or not hard enough? So my son at home watching that or millions of children watching that, we're telling them that you can headbutt people on a football pitch, as long as it's not too hard.

'But they've since come out after that and sent their representatives to speak to one of our staff and said that by the letter of the law, that got that one wrong as well. That should have been a red card.'

============================================

A large 7 needs to be draped from the roof of The Mol for the next home game, and take it on the road to Arsenal next weekend, too.

I'd say we should also send the Under 23's down for the match, and dare them to penalize us more points. "We've already given at the office, sorry mate!!"

One (1) more catastrophic adverse decision gets us to 10 points, which Everton have been docked for violating FFP rules. On what planet is that fair?!?!?!?

It is perfectly fair on planet Earth because planet Earth is corrupt and subject to decay.

Everything is becoming exponentially corrupt.

 

[goldeneyed]

The club need to form a group with others to shift the ground on VAR and either remove it altogether or train up a new group of officials.
The ref imv should ALWAYS be obliged go the screen where there is a significant controversy and the VAR officials should just be removed altogether.

 

[WolvTown]

Stonewall when Howard webb said incidents where a defender pulls out (he does) and the attacker comes from the blind spot to initiate contact isn’t a pen…. Come on now….

Howard webb said this exact thing wasn’t a pen only 3 weeks ago on national telly

it felt, to me, like the first stonewall penalty we'd given away this season. As soon as I saw the first replay, I looked around the pub and most were nodding too. Over 50% of penalties are just poorly timed tackles. A poorly timed tackle, in the box, is still a stonewall penalty.. imo.