Do you think he made the right decision? I think I’m too emotional to be rational right now.It's down to interpretation whether the ref thinks the GK has had his vision impeded, unlike when they draw the lines for an offside.
Do you think he made the right decision? I think I’m too emotional to be rational right now.It's down to interpretation whether the ref thinks the GK has had his vision impeded, unlike when they draw the lines for an offside.
We wouldn't have noticed because they wouldn't have VARd a non-clear and obvious errorIf that had been the other way, I bet you would have wanted that disallowed?
That was not a clear and obvious error which VAR is supposed to be used for
Not the issue for me the issue is the ref gave the goal on the field of play the linesman did not flag and var have come in and re reffed the situation which is not what var is forVAR didn’t cost us anything today.
He was offside and directly infront of the keeper and his eye line.
Harsh as he wasn’t getting there, but it wasn’t the wrong decision in the eyes of the law…..
If that had been the other way, I bet you would have wanted that disallowed?
Also how soft was the “foul” that disallowed their header?
On this one, sorry, VAR while harsh wasn’t wrong
Yes, unfortunately. It's frustrating but hard to argue our lad hasn't interfered as per the laws of the game.Do you think he made the right decision? I think I’m too emotional to be rational right now.
ExactlyNot the issue for me the issue is the ref gave the goal on the field of play the linesman did not flag and var have come in and re reffed the situation which is not what var is for
Not the issue for me the issue is the ref gave the goal on the field of play the linesman did not flag and var have come in and re reffed the situation which is not what var is for
What are you hoping to achieve here?It is there for clear and obvious mistakes
And sadly he was clearly offside and in the line of the keeper.
So the ref and linesman missed a clear and obvious offside
What are you hoping to achieve here?
How can it be clear and obvious, when not one West Ham player complained and the West Ham fans had accepted it?But it was clear and obvious……
He was clearly and obviously offside and standing in the line of sight for the keeper to the header.
By letter of the law he was offside.
Harsh lines, but it was
The anger stems from the feeling that had it been at the other end the goal probably would have been given.VAR didn’t cost us anything today.
He was offside and directly infront of the keeper and his eye line.
Harsh as he wasn’t getting there, but it wasn’t the wrong decision in the eyes of the law…..
If that had been the other way, I bet you would have wanted that disallowed?
Also how soft was the “foul” that disallowed their header?
On this one, sorry, VAR while harsh wasn’t wrong
The anger stems from the feeling that had it been at the other end the goal probably would have been given.
Whether or not the decision was fundamentally correct according to the laws is moot as it was a subjective call as to whether the kid was interfering. The linesman didn't flag at the time and the goal was given on the field.
If it's a subjective VAR decision we've generally been on the wrong end of it. We've either had positive decisions harshly overturned or soft decisions harshly awarded against with very few in our favour except cast iron ones.
The ref blew up at the time. Like they did pre VAR.So what are your thoughts on the soft one we got away with for their disallowed goal??
Head wind didn’t make us **** around with it at the back, misplace passed on the deck and have zero shape. Unless it blew our formation apart.Sounds pathetic but the head wind explains WHam's poor first half and our poor second. It was whipping around loads today, not easy to defend in
But every team has a player in front of the keeper at a corner. When was a goal last disallowed without contact on the keeper? There is no way I'd expect that disallowed against us.But it was clear and obvious……
He was clearly and obviously offside and standing in the line of sight for the keeper to the header.
By letter of the law he was offside.
Harsh lines, but it was
The ref blew up at the time. Like they did pre VAR.
Sorry, but yeah I reckon it could have been a factor.Head wind didn’t make us oiss around with it at the back, misplace passed on the deck and have zero shape. Unless it blew our formation apart.
It’s not exactly good to be disallowing goals like that for offside. It was letter of the law offside but completely against the spirit of the game.
But every team has a player in front of the keeper at a corner. When was a goal last disallowed without contact on the keeper? There is no way I'd expect that disallowed against us.
See the city example which was given as a goal, by the same refereeBut are those players always stationed offside?
Chiwome was offside is the key difference in probably many of those cases.
The goal was disallowed on the field, VAR checked, it wasn't a clear and obvious error so wasn't overturned.So what are your thoughts on the soft one we got away with for their disallowed goal??
Have you seen the replay of it? It's absolute *******sIt is there for clear and obvious mistakes
And sadly he was clearly offside and in the line of the keeper.
So the ref and linesman missed a clear and obvious offside
See the city example which was given as a goal, by the same referee
Thanks - appreciate the back and forth and free therapy!Yes, unfortunately. It's frustrating but hard to argue our lad hasn't interfered as per the laws of the game.
Have you seen the replay of it? It's absolute *******s
Not according to the same ref, a few weeks agoOk, fine. But we all know that the refs don’t apply the same clear laws equally game to game….. hence why Howard Webb gets to have his self serving TV show…..
But the point still stands he was offside and infront of the keeper.
I am disappointed it wasn’t given like everyone else, but in the laws of the game he is offside…… so it is what it is
The bar for clear and obvious is supposed to be set high. The VAR have decided that standing still and not attempting to play at the ball was an offsideIt is there for clear and obvious mistakes
And sadly he was clearly offside and in the line of the keeper.
So the ref and linesman missed a clear and obvious offside
The bar for clear and obvious is supposed to be set high. The VAR have decided that standing still and not attempting to play at the ball was an offside
If it was so clear and obvious why did they not just rule it offside instead of sending the ref to look at the screen
As an after thought if they had looked at it in real time speed instead of the still the ref got to look at then maybe he would have stood by his original decision as the goalkeeper was nowhere near getting to that ball even if there was only him and max in the penalty area. The goal keeper was not impaired in trying to come for the cross and he was not impaired in trying to save it wither
We don't want VAR to exist at all.Isn’t that how we want VAR to work?
Is still think the keeper saw Max was about to have a totally free header and wrongly guessed which way the header was going. In real time it seems to show Chirewa had zero impact, but slowed down and paused for VAR purposes, I can see why the ref changed his mind. Disappointed but shouldn’t be giving VAR opportunity to rule against us - we needed to have played better second half. Hey ho, onto the next game.Convince me that this is offside, because if it is, football's finished, look at the West Ham's player reactions. Not one of them, including the goalkeeper complain.
He could see the ball and wrongly guessed where it was heading…I see for the JWP goal that a player was even closer to Sa than ours way for our disallowed goal.
Can anyone explain why that stood?
Chiwome wasn’t offside for the corner but was as soon as Kilman heads it. However, the only thing that Chiwome stops is Fabianski possibly getting to the ball at the same time as Kilman from the corner, if the latter was so minded but he wasn’t. Players stand in the keepers way all the time at free kicks in offside positions.We did nothing in the second half apart from the goal that was disallowed. Traore gave us more energy when he came on and should have come on earlier. Did Chiwome or Chiware even touch the ball? Chiwome seemed to be marking their defenders instead of trying to find space.
As for the disallowed goal, no way it would have happened to one of the "top 6". But what was Chiwome doing standing where he did? If he'd scored he'd have been off-side.
Because that player wasn’t in an offside position.I see for the JWP goal that a player was even closer to Sa than ours way for our disallowed goal.
Can anyone explain why that stood?
Wasnt he? Ok.Because that player wasn’t in an offside position.
We don't want VAR to exist at all.