Forest- possible points deduction

[Watfordfc]

I don't think its corruption, if you look across the league every team has suffered at the hands of these morons to some degree. With so many decisions being subjective (this being the whole issue with VAR) its easy to have an unconscious bias towards the big clubs in these moments when the pressure is on, or the home team when the crowd is up. The main problem is none of them want to upset their mate and aren't prepared to step in and say have a look mate it think you are wrong, so we end up going around in circles with referees naturally making mistakes as you'd expect with the pace of the game but the technology that is there to help them is just compounding the issue by agreeing with them.
There is no problem for me with Forest coming out and condemning VAR and the officials , as I think every club should and more like Moyes and Antonio calling them out after being on the right side of one would be ideal. But its totally unprofessional to be calling the VAR a Luton fan, it comes across as childish and bitter. Takes away from the valid point they had about poor officiating.

Apparently they didn’t ask Atwell to be taken off but just pointed the potential issue out.

Well obviously no one cared or took it on board.

 

[Bill S Preston Esq.]

We can't stand with Forest because they're pathetic and a disgrace with how they behave.

They are completely unreasonable and it stems from the owner. If you even briefly follow Greek football, you will see what Marinakis is like. Just look at some of the things levelled at him in the past.

More importantly, the claim about Luton is ridiculous. Luton wanted a draw. So their claim is incredible considering they were playing a relegation rival. It would make no sense for Luton to want Everton to win. Now, they're going to struggle to catch them. With goal difference, Luton are going to need six points from four games just to make Everton play again. For a side that's picked up 25 points in 34 games, that's not likely to happen. So now, instead of having two teams they could catch, they realistically only have one.

Obviously an Everton win was preferable to a Forest win for Luton, but they without doubt wanted a draw, so Attwell denying Forest a penalty didn't help Luton at all.

Then we have the hypocrisy of Forest.

This is a club who were promoted by poor decisions and they mocked Huddersfield for complaining as they sung 'we love VAR'.

Does that mean they should suffer forever? Absolutely not. And, whilst not to our level (let's not forget they scored a goal against us last week that was inexplicably not disallowed), they have been on the receiving end of poor calls this season.

However, the fact they benefited from awful decisions in the biggest game in their modern history should give them a bit of understanding and a level-head when assessing these things.

If I were a Luton fan I'd have been wanting an Everton win. Look at the remaining fixtures and tell me Forest are more likely to win more points than Everton, and I'll call you a liar.

 

[CelebrityWolf]

I agree totally. Some of the responses on this thread to Forest's predicament have been disappointing, given where we were week-in week-out with officials not so long ago. The collective hatchet job against us only stopped because it reached national media attention. If you criticise the refereeing in England, they double down and screw you harder - we know this better than most. Forest have been complaining for weeks just like we did, and their reward is to be denied two stonewall penalties in the biggest game of their season so far. Yet, some are laughing and calling them an excrement stain of a club.

This sort of tribalism, where we complain when referees shaft us but celebrate when it happens to clubs we don't like, is precisely why VAR will remain in place. Only with a united front of fanbases, players and coaches causing overwhelming pressure, can it be challenged. Given the VAR official drew the offside line over Wan-Bissaka's foot and not at the point of it, I would seriously consider legal action were I the Coventry chairman. That moment of 'incompetence' has cost Coventry millions of pounds, as well as a glorious final.

Yep, some spineless folks on here today. Been nauseating all season but has peaked today. We should be joining forces to rid ourselves of VAR not celebrating another club being shafted.

 

[SingYourHeartsOut]

You and I have chewed much cud on the limits of free speech of course, but libel is no easy thing to prove from a legal standpoint. The league does have referees step down if there is a potential conflict of interest because the referee supports a particular club. Last season, a League One referee was set to officiate an Ipswich game but was replaced when it turned out he was a Sheffield Wednesday fan (Ipswich's rival for promotion). A Luton fan officiating a Premier League relegation six-pointer is exactly the same principle, so I think there is a strong argument that Atwell should not have been involved.

However, it is now being reported that Forest did not officially request Atwell be replaced. Forest say they warned the Premier League of Atwell's allegiance to Luton, so who knows who is telling the truth? I am not inclined to believe anything that emanates from the Premier League after their hoodwinking the EFL over cup replays, but it could also be sour grapes from Forest.

I think the handball and the foul from behind were easy enough to miss in real time from the referee's respective positions, which is precisely why they should be considered, "clear and obvious" errors.

Yes, it is tricky as they set their own precedent by at least acknowledging that refs won't seen to be impartial if reffing a team they support, once you start going to rivals it can spiral out of control. I mean from day one of the season you could never have a Liverpool supporting ref looking after City for example (or vice versa) equally as this week, can you have them reffing a game before where they might get someone suspended, it becomes endless.

I agree about libel, but once you know that once the impartiality of officials is questioned the clubs will get charged with bringing the game into disrepute. We've sailed (not unreasonably) close to the wind, but calling for more consistency, competence or understanding of the game is different to implying deliberate bias.

On the actual decisions as I said yesterday, the handball probably should have been given, but I hate it because there's no intent to make his body bigger, I have a vague memory of Kilman getting away with a similar one. The kick again is a typical 'modern game' penalty. Some contact massively exaggerated, given these days, but shouldn't be. The third one is the really bad call for me, Young is coming in from behind, Taylor says he got the ball, but he definitely doesn't (even after the player). So two tightish calls where I can see why he hasn't intervened, one definite error for me.

 

[Jefe]

Apparently they didn’t ask Atwell to be taken off but just pointed the potential issue out. Well obviously no one cared or took it on board.

The more I read about this, the more troublesome it becomes. Apparently, officials have to fill out "allegiance forms" at the start of the season in which they announce which team(s) they support, or have other personal connection to. This information is then used to stand down referees believed by Howard Webb to have a conflict of interest. So, a Baggies fan could never officiate a Wolves match, and as I've already exemplified, a Sheffield Wednesday fan could not officiate an Ipswich game for the reason they were rivals for promotion last season.

So, it seems to me the onus is not really on Forest to make an official request - it should come out in the wash ahead of time as part of the PGMOL process. That leaves one of three possibilities to me:

1) Forest has falsely claimed Atwell is a Luton fan.
2) Atwell is a Luton fan, but deliberately withheld that information when filling out his "allegiance form".
3) Atwell disclosed he is a Luton fan, but PGMOL didn't care, leading to multiple suspect VAR calls made by Atwell in a game involving two of Luton's main rivals.

The first possibility reflects badly on Forest. The last two reflect abysmally on Atwell and / or PGMOL.

 

[WV10Wolf]

My take on this is, officials in this country are not corrupt. They are, at times, incompetent, but not bent. Professional Football has been played in this country for around 150 years. During that time there have been match fixing scandals, none of which (to the best of my knowledge) have included referees.

The FA needs a to take action against Forest, in my opinion they have brought the game into disrepute and should be charged and punished (just a pity that punishment would only be financial). If it can be proven that the statement came from the chairman, maybe it should be checked again to see if he is a fit and proper person to be in charge of a club with the standing that Forest have in the domestic game.

I also think the Premier League should be investigating if it brings the league into disrepute. It looks bad on them when a member club starts inferring that the men and women officiating in their competition are corrupt or bias.

Every club has decisions go against them, we’ve had more than our fair share, what clubs don’t do if cry corruption.

 

[Jefe]

Yes, it is tricky as they set their own precedent by at least acknowledging that refs won't seen to be impartial if reffing a team they support, once you start going to rivals it can spiral out of control. I mean from day one of the season you could never have a Liverpool supporting ref looking after City for example (or vice versa) equally as this week, can you have them reffing a game before where they might get someone suspended, it becomes endless.

I agree about libel, but once you know that once the impartiality of officials is questioned the clubs will get charged with bringing the game into disrepute. We've sailed (not unreasonably) close to the wind, but calling for more consistency, competence or understanding of the game is different to implying deliberate bias.

On the actual decisions as I said yesterday, the handball probably should have been given, but I hate it because there's no intent to make his body bigger, I have a vague memory of Kilman getting away with a similar one. The kick again is a typical 'modern game' penalty. Some contact massively exaggerated, given these days, but shouldn't be. The third one is the really bad call for me, Young is coming in from behind, Taylor says he got the ball, but he definitely doesn't (even after the player). So two tightish calls where I can see why he hasn't intervened, one definite error for me.

The difficulty is that bias does not imply corruption, if you believe in the idea of subconscious biases. Forest's little man syndrome tweet is amusing, but they have a point. If Atwell is a Luton fan, they can confidently argue he should have been stood down owing to his in-built biases. That's not to say they think Atwell was deliberately corrupt. It also appears the referees are expected to declare their allegiances to clubs at the start of a season, which makes things even murkier. If it's true Atwell is a Luton fan, PGMOL should already have known.

 

[Mutchy]

Clubs shouldn't be able to decide who they don't want refereeing their games, so the PGMOL was right to not bow to any such request. Would open a whole can of worms.

Not per se, no, but common sense should prevail. It would also protect the refs involved.

 

[WeAreTheWolvesII]

The difficulty is that bias does not imply corruption, if you believe in the idea of subconscious biases. Forest's little man syndrome tweet is amusing, but they have a point. If Atwell is a Luton fan, they can confidently argue he should have been stood down owing to his in-built biases. That's not to say they think Atwell was deliberately corrupt. It also appears the referees are expected to declare their allegiances to clubs at the start of a season, which makes things even murkier. If it's true Atwell is a Luton fan, PGMOL should already have known.

But where do we draw the line?

A few weeks ago you could have argued that Brentford and Palace were in the mix as well. So then you've got seven clubs that Attwell can't be involved with? Or any other ref who supports those seven clubs? Are there enough qualified refs to even make this possible?

Or do we allow him to ref Sheffield United because they need a miracle to stay up?

I completely agree with the rule in general, more so because it stops this accusation as opposed to the referee would cheat.

But, in this situation, PGMOL could rightly argue that Luton are irrelevant as every week they would want both of these clubs to lose, which obviously can't happen here. And the result Luton would've wanted, didn't happen.

It would be a bit like a Wolves fan reffing Blues vs Villa!

 

[YouGottaRaulWithIt]

Yep
Its ok for us fans to throw around the bias and corrupt comments but for a club to officially do so is treading on a slippery slope
I wouldnt be surprised if they get hit with a fine for bringing the game into disrepute

It's VAR that is bringing the game into disrepute.

 

[Perton Wolf]

Not per se, no, but common sense should prevail. It would also protect the refs involved.

I think it already does with refs not being able to referee the games of their team's closest rivals.

 

[SingYourHeartsOut]

The difficulty is that bias does not imply corruption, if you believe in the idea of subconscious biases. Forest's little man syndrome tweet is amusing, but they have a point. If Atwell is a Luton fan, they can confidently argue he should have been stood down owing to his in-built biases. That's not to say they think Atwell was deliberately corrupt. It also appears the referees are expected to declare their allegiances to clubs at the start of a season, which makes things even murkier. If it's true Atwell is a Luton fan, PGMOL should already have known.

Yes, think it's right that Atwell is a Luton fan, amazing how many elite refs happen not to support PL clubs!

Which football teams do Premier League referees support? | Goal.com UK

Premier League referees are allowed to nail their colours to a particular mast, but there are rules in place regarding which games they officiate

www.goal.com

Maybe it looks bad, but as I said there have to be limits, is Michael Oliver never going to ref a top 8 team again in case he shafts then to help Newcastle? Forest were only slightly worse off than Everton before yesterday. Unconscious bias is certainly a worry though and as this shows, being seen to be unbiased is also a vital part of the integrity of the game.

 

[Watfordfc]

Forest are asking for the audio but that won’t change anything .

We’d all heard them before and really aren’t the decisions subjective (even if “wrong”)?

 

[WeAreTheWolvesII]

Forest are asking for the audio but that won’t change anything .

We’d all heard them before and really aren’t the decisions subjective (even if “wrong”)?

Yeah exactly.

The first they will say is minimal contact. The second, the hand is too close. In fact, Sky told us this at the time.

The third would be interesting, but you get the feeling that Forest think they will find Atwell laughing and saying 'no chance, it's Forest'

In fairness to Forest, we should normalise releasing the audio. It's good to hear the reasoning and it can help fans get more understanding, so they should always be accessible to fans IMO.

 

[Jefe]

But where do we draw the line? A few weeks ago you could have argued that Brentford and Palace were in the mix as well. So then you've got seven clubs that Attwell can't be involved with? Or any other ref who supports those seven clubs? Are there enough qualified refs to even make this possible?

Maybe it looks bad, but as I said there have to be limits, is Michael Oliver never going to ref a top 8 team again in case he shafts then to help Newcastle? Forest were only slightly worse off than Everton before yesterday. Unconscious bias is certainly a worry though and as this shows, being seen to be unbiased is also a vital part of the integrity of the game.

As I highlighted in the case of the Wednesday fan who was stood down prior to the game involving Ipswich, there must be some sort of internal guidelines within PGMOL. Maybe based on points / places differentials? Or at certain times in the season? I couldn't say what the extents of the rule are, but they must exist because of the precedent already set.

In this case, you had a game between the 16th and 17th placed teams, with a fan of the team in 18th place in the booth, and only 2 points separating the three teams at the start of play - it's about as clear a case of conflict of interest as you're going to get in a league season. It would be like if City were playing Liverpool next week, and there was an Arsenal fan in charge of VAR. It simply would not be allowed to happen, but down with the dead men, it doesn't seem to be of any concern...

 

[WeAreTheWolvesII]

As I highlighted in the case of the Wednesday fan who was stood down prior to the game involving Ipswich, there must be some sort of internal guidelines within PGMOL. Maybe based on points / places differentials? Or at certain times in the season? I couldn't say what the extents of the rule are, but they must exist because of the precedent already set.

In this case, you had a game between the 16th and 17th placed teams, with a fan of the team in 18th place in the booth, and only 2 points separating the three teams at the start of play - it's about as clear a case of conflict of interest as you're going to get in a league season. It would be like if City were playing Liverpool next week, and there was an Arsenal fan in charge of VAR. It simply would not be allowed to happen, but down with the dead men, it doesn't seem to be an issue...

I really wouldn't see that as a problem as the result can be beneficial either way.

There's also so much that needs to happen for the VAR to actually have an influence. Are we suggesting Anthony Taylor is in on it as he didn't award the penalties in the first place? Or the AVAR?

Howard Webb's show with Michael Owen has shown that the AVAR do have more of an influence than I thought anyway - but this is why the audio should be shared, as Forest requested.

With Forest specifically, they've claimed an agenda against them all season. But now it's down to Attwell/Luton?

 

[JohnB]

Just remember O’Neill has an FA Charge for his comments and Jeff Shi had a go about VAR after West Ham.

Jeff Shi reacts to Hammers defeat and controversial decision

Chairman Jeff Shi has commended head coach Gary O’Neil and his players for their achievements this season, despite a narrow defeat to West Ham United.

www.wolves.co.uk

We’ve had some shockers this season - could be 9-10 points better off. There are times we’ve benefited (although we tend to forget them like all football fans).

Personal view - not corrupt, very inconsistent, protect their own, possibly some unconscious bias and inability of junior VAR to correct more senior refs.

No different to 20 years ago where you’d never get a penalty at Old Trafford or Anfield even if the defender missed the ball and gave you a broken leg!

In my view this is what Forest are trying to achieve - Fergie/Mourinho style - pressure on ref/VAR to know Forest will bleat if a close call goes against them.” and therefore increase likelihood of receiving marginal call.

 

[Watfordfc]

Next they will be asking to appoint refs who haven’t gone against them .

If there are any left !

For what It’s worth I think the 3rd one was a penalty.

Handball is always a lottery for all teams and the first not so clear cut ,

So they still lost 2-1 or maybe drew 2-2 in my eyes .

 

[brianm]

There's going to be a subconscious bias against any club who decry the ethics of the referees as vehemently as Forest do. Hiring on Clattenburg sealed that up.

Atwell decided not to get involved unless it was utterly flagrant. Surely Everton could have made complaints had he been involved in anything half-questionable. They were just as vulnerable to the pro-Luton "bias."

Besides, people don't want VAR anyway, right? Takes the emotion out of the game. Who cares if it's correct so long as it's fairly close and people can celebrate goals. Especially non-penalty goals, which any team worth a damn should probably be able to get vs Everton.

 

[Poztin]

Just remember O’Neill has an FA Charge for his comments and Jeff Shi had a go about VAR after West Ham.

Jeff Shi reacts to Hammers defeat and controversial decision

Chairman Jeff Shi has commended head coach Gary O’Neil and his players for their achievements this season, despite a narrow defeat to West Ham United.

www.wolves.co.uk

We’ve had some shockers this season - could be 9-10 points better off. There are times we’ve benefited (although we tend to forget them like all football fans).

Personal view - not corrupt, very inconsistent, protect their own, possibly some unconscious bias and inability of junior VAR to correct more senior refs.

No different to 20 years ago where you’d never get a penalty at Old Trafford or Anfield even if the defender missed the ball and gave you a broken leg!

In my view this is what Forest are trying to achieve - Fergie/Mourinho style - pressure on ref/VAR to know Forest will bleat if a close call goes against them.” and therefore increase likelihood of receiving marginal call.

Didn’t work for us, they just kept piling them on the tally…

 

[Jefe]

I really wouldn't see that as a problem as the result can be beneficial either way. There's also so much that needs to happen for the VAR to actually have an influence. Are we suggesting Anthony Taylor is in on it as he didn't award the penalties in the first place? Or the AVAR?

Howard Webb's show with Michael Owen has shown that the AVAR do have more of an influence than I thought anyway - but this is why the audio should be shared, as Forest requested. With Forest specifically, they've claimed an agenda against them all season. But now it's down to Attwell/Luton?

I would have a huge issue, because even the suspicion that a match official might consciously or unconsciously manipulate a preferable outcome for his team, is enough to undermine the integrity of the sport. For instance, it just so happens that yesterday's defeat for Forest is the single best outcome for Luton. Everton were already 2 points clear with a game in hand. Luton only need to catch one of them, so it might as well be the one nearest to them in the table.

Both the handball and foul from behind are nailed-on penalties, and both at 1-0. Young's arm is away from his body and blocks a cross that otherwise would have played in Chris Wood for a chance. Immediately on the replay, Young got none of the ball and a lot of Hudson-Adoi. Atwell's failure to ask Taylor to go to the monitor does raises an alarming amount of suspicion, given Atwell's Luton stand to benefit the most from an Everton win. Forest were arguably the better team going off the other statistics.

Agree that all audio should be available as a matter of course. Forest are basically in the position we were in earlier in the season. They are criticising calls against them, and their reward is to be shafted again and again, which proves their point. PGMOL believe that might makes right it seems. I haven't seen a compilation of the worst calls, but the Boly red card a few weeks ago was scandalous, off the top of my head.

 

[Frank Lincoln]

Next they will be asking to appoint refs who haven’t gone against them .

If there are any left !

For what It’s worth I think the 3rd one was a penalty.

Handball is always a lottery for all teams and the first not so clear cut ,

So they still lost 2-1 or maybe drew 2-2 in my eyes .

I do not know what the difference is between the penalty Coventry City got yesterday and the incident when Nottingham Forest didn’t get a penalty at Everton. Both were for handball and looked very similar to me.

 

[WeAreTheWolvesII]

I would have a huge issue, because even the suspicion that a match official might consciously or unconsciously manipulate a preferable outcome for his team, is enough to undermine the integrity of the sport. For instance, it just so happens that yesterday's defeat for Forest is the single best outcome for Luton. Everton were already 2 points clear with a game in hand. Luton only need to catch one of them, so it might as well be the one nearest to them in the table.

Both the handball and foul from behind are nailed-on penalties, and both at 1-0. Young's arm is away from his body and blocks a cross that otherwise would have played in Chris Wood for a chance. Immediately on the replay, Young got none of the ball and a lot of Hudson-Adoi. Atwell's failure to ask Taylor to go to the monitor does raises an alarming amount of suspicion, given Atwell's Luton stand to benefit the most from an Everton win. Forest were arguably the better team going off the other statistics.

Agree that all audio should be available as a matter of course. Forest are basically in the position we were in earlier in the season. They are criticising calls against them, and their reward is to be shafted again and again, which proves their point. PGMOL believe that might makes right it seems. I haven't seen a compilation of the worst calls, but the Boly red card a few weeks ago was scandalous, off the top of my head.

I disagree entirely on the first bit. A draw was clearly the best result for Luton IMO, and Attwell twice denied Forest the chance to equalise, and that seems key to your point.

But you're not taking into account that Attwell's role is limited in all of this. You're (kind of, to me anyway) implying there would be a bias, but for that to happen it needs Taylor to be the main one behind it. So, if you're accusing Attwell, Taylor has to be in on it anyway, at the very minimum, probably others as well. It was Taylor got all the decisions wrong on the pitch.

I completely agree on the decisions, all three are penalties I feel. I also accept that Forest have been on the end of some very poor calls this season.

Forest are also right to be aggrieved. The issue I have is claiming there is corruption against them from a Luton fan. When you go down that road it's a dangerous one.

 

[DJLWolf]

We should use this opportunity and back Forest here.

Well, not back them in their suggestion that Atwell cheated, but back them in terms of a supportive statement that we too find the standard of officiating and operation of VAR completely unacceptable and we want it withdrawn.

If football clubs and fans want VAR gone until the PGMOL can prove they are capable of using is efficiently, now is the opportunity to really put the pressure on them.

 

[Leominster_Wolf]

Neither us or Bournemouth are in a relegation battle but let’s say he decides to send one or two of our players off on Wednesday so they couldn’t play on Saturday against Luton? You can stretch the principle as far as you want

Exactly this. Of Atwells last 6 games hes reffed in the PL, 5 have involved Burnley (1), Sheff U (3) and Everton (1) - can’t be ***** to try and check VAR appointments

Why have Forest (or anyone else) not kicked up a fuss about these appointments? Because out of all the games only one had a result which potentially affected Forest (Sheff U beating Brentford)

Stuart Attwell - Stats

Diese Seite liefert eine Übersicht über alle Einsätze des Schiedsrichters Stuart Attwell in der Saison 23/24 inklusive der gezeigten Karten und der gegebenen Elfmeter.

www.transfermarkt.co.uk

Whilst I agree the standard of decisions are poor and completely inconsistent, I think Forest are going down a massive rabbit hole with this. Incidentally IMO the only real shocker was the 3rd one, which was a stonewall penalty and should have been reviewed. If VAR doesn’t get involved in that one, what is the point of it.

 

[Oh When the Wolves]

Yeah exactly.

The first they will say is minimal contact. The second, the hand is too close. In fact, Sky told us this at the time.

The third would be interesting, but you get the feeling that Forest think they will find Atwell laughing and saying 'no chance, it's Forest'

In fairness to Forest, we should normalise releasing the audio. It's good to hear the reasoning and it can help fans get more understanding, so they should always be accessible to fans IMO.

Hoopers “we don’t give those” and constantly going on about booking o neill when VAR were checking a last minute penalty shows why they don’t release the Audio

The refs are rude, incompetent, and it shows it up as being the total mess it is

There’s a reason they are selective over the ones they release

 

[wwbug]

With technology and the vast financial importance of decisions could we not have VAR remote ?
In Italy or Germany with officials from that country. Its been mooted for referees so why not PGMOL
Independent and hopefully more professional.

 

[Watfordfc]

I do not know what the difference is between the penalty Coventry City got yesterday and the incident when Nottingham Forest didn’t get a penalty at Everton. Both were for handball and looked very similar to me.

Yes handball is a real lottery .

The guys on MOTD didn’t think either were handballs .

Unfortunately seems to be so subjective and inconsistent made worse by VAR.

Not sure how we can change that though ?

 

[Watfordfc]

Hoopers “we don’t give those” and constantly going on about booking o neill when VAR were checking a last minute penalty shows why they don’t release the Audio

The refs are rude, incompetent, and it shows it up as being the total mess it is

There’s a reason they are selective over the ones they release

And they seemed to shout over each other not really discussing it .

 

[Watfordfc]

We should use this opportunity and back Forest here.

Well, not back them in their suggestion that Atwell cheated, but back them in terms of a supportive statement that we too find the standard of officiating and operation of VAR completely unacceptable and we want it withdrawn.

If football clubs and fans want VAR gone until the PGMOL can prove they are capable of using is efficiently, now is the opportunity to really put the pressure on them.

If all the clubs hate VAR that much they should all come out together and decry it.

Not just when it goes against them like Arsenal also did a few months ago.'

It's been poor for everyone but some act like they have been the only ones affected,

 

[jackdusty]

HW - "Hello Mark, Howard here"
MC - " Hello Howard, wonder what this call is about"
HW- " How about if you could have a word with the owner and Nuno that if you drop any action against my lot, i can get the Premier League to give you your 4 points back and we call it quits"
MC - " Sounds decent, let me get back to you"

 

[Topcat]

So, the question is should VAR be sacked off and revert back to the officiating on the day?

It’s not too long ago that we as fans grumbled that the ref or linesman made a mistake!

Now it opens another “can of worms” that through VAR that they are now corrupt?

Funny how the lower league sides don’t complain to this level without VAR, mistakes I was always told generally even themselves out over the length of a season?!

 

[SakosRightFoot]

I disagree entirely on the first bit. A draw was clearly the best result for Luton IMO, and Attwell twice denied Forest the chance to equalise, and that seems key to your point.

But you're not taking into account that Attwell's role is limited in all of this. You're (kind of, to me anyway) implying there would be a bias, but for that to happen it needs Taylor to be the main one behind it. So, if you're accusing Attwell, Taylor has to be in on it anyway, at the very minimum, probably others as well. It was Taylor got all the decisions wrong on the pitch.

I completely agree on the decisions, all three are penalties I feel. I also accept that Forest have been on the end of some very poor calls this season.

Forest are also right to be aggrieved. The issue I have is claiming there is corruption against them from a Luton fan. When you go down that road it's a dangerous one.

Agree with the main jist of this, the on field ref seems to be getting away very lightly. Surely if the ref says he saw the incidents and he doesn't think theyre pens theres not much var can do as it's not clear and obvious.

Personally think Forest's behaviour is scandalous and there needs to be serious repercussions, if we're going to start ruling out referees based on "contextual rivalries" or whatever they called it we won't have any officials left.

 

[SakosRightFoot]

So, the question is should VAR be sacked off and revert back to the officiating on the day?

It’s not too long ago that we as fans grumbled that the ref or linesman made a mistake!

Now it opens another “can of worms” that through VAR that they are now corrupt?

Funny how the lower league sides don’t complain to this level without VAR, mistakes I was always told generally even themselves out over the length of a season?!

Lower league sides complain just as much as the rest about rubbish officials, just no one cares because it's not the prem.

VAR isn't the problem, it's just rubbish refs either on the pitch or in a video booth.

Problem is trying to make subjective decisions definitive. Personally thought only the last one was a stonewall pen, the others we've seen given but could go either way.

 

[Golden_Wolf]

Nobody says a word when decisions go for you, but are up in arms when they are against you. Every club is the same.

Fully aware, more said in jest to be honest.

The way they've gone about it is ridiculous, especially with Clattenburg involved.

Should have just requested the audio like they have done & taken it from there.

 

[old wittonian]

Fully aware, more said in jest to be honest.

The way they've gone about it is ridiculous, especially with Clattenburg involved.

Should have just requested the audio like they have done & taken it from there.

Howard Webb would like it all done behind closed doors. He needs to acknowledge we have a terrible problem with the standard of refereeing. What happens? He's interviewed by the pussy cat that is Michael Owen.

 

[old wittonian]

Lower league sides complain just as much as the rest about rubbish officials, just no one cares because it's not the prem.

VAR isn't the problem, it's just rubbish refs either on the pitch or in a video booth.

Problem is trying to make subjective decisions definitive. Personally thought only the last one was a stonewall pen, the others we've seen given but could go either way.

To me, Young moves his hand/wrist towards the ball to deflect it. Defo a penalty.

 

[SakosRightFoot]

To me, Young moves his hand/wrist towards the ball to deflect it. Defo a penalty.

Don’t think he’s trying to deflect it, it’s all too quick for that. His arm is out as he’s moving and he’s trying to bring it down, seen them given but don’t think it’s stonewall. One of those if it’s given on the pitch it’s not getting overturned.

 

[WeAreTheWolvesII]

Read on ESPN that only six handballs have been overturned this season.

So they basically just go with what the referee gives for handballs. Arguably the right approach given how subjective it is, although still convinced they should've overturned Gomes at Luton.

 

[Scallywolf]

To me, Young moves his hand/wrist towards the ball to deflect it. Defo a penalty.

It was miles more of a penalty than that given against Wan-Bissaka yesterday, that’s for sure.

Yes, a definite penalty imo.