Post Match Leicester 2 Fleetwood 0

Log in to stop seeing adverts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Volpone said:
I don't see why. Iborra didn't.
Click to expand...

If you were to look back to the match and post-match threads for his first few games, I am sure that you would find a lot of doubt being expressed about Iborra and his performances.
 
bocadillo said:
If you were to look back to the match and post-match threads for his first few games, I am sure that you would find a lot of doubt being expressed about Iborra and his performances.
Click to expand...

Iborra was poor in his first two games. He played well in his third and fourth games. So he didn't need long at all. Silva has already played in three games.
 
Jeff said:
Iborra was poor in his first two games. He played well in his third and fourth games. So he didn't need long at all. Silva has already played in three games.
Click to expand...


Three competitive games after a four and a half month lay off.
 
Silva looked much tidier in the second half. A few examples of some lack of control here or there (because of which he showed signs of frustration, which I like) but he certainly looked a better player for the second 45 and hopefully he will grow into that position. I think Iborra, although a calming influence in the midfield, may struggle against teams that play with high intensity so rotation is going to be key.
 
Just watching Chelsea Vs Norwich. Another penalty turned down by VAR which was farcical. It was as clear as day and a blatant penalty. Not only did VAR not work in awarding it but the referee booked Willian for diving! Have a look at it if you haven't seen it and get the chance, it's a disgrace.

It worked for the offside yesterday but I think it has now failed for 2 penalty appeals and a possible line call.
 
popillius said:
Just watching Chelsea Vs Norwich. Another penalty turned down by VAR which was farcical. It was as clear as day and a blatant penalty. Not only did VAR not work in awarding it but the referee booked Willian for diving! Have a look at it if you haven't seen it and get the chance, it's a disgrace.

It worked for the offside yesterday but I think it has now failed for 2 penalty appeals and a possible line call.
Click to expand...
Can't agree. They've shown three angles, from in front of William it looks like a penalty, from the side it looks 50/50, from behind (the ref's view too) it looks a blatant dive.
He seems to have lost control a bit with the second red though
 
Funny as ****
 
popillius said:
Just watching Chelsea Vs Norwich. Another penalty turned down by VAR which was farcical. It was as clear as day and a blatant penalty. Not only did VAR not work in awarding it but the referee booked Willian for diving! Have a look at it if you haven't seen it and get the chance, it's a disgrace.

It worked for the offside yesterday but I think it has now failed for 2 penalty appeals and a possible line call.
Click to expand...

Due to it being a ref who makes the calls using VAR it looks like the decisions are going to be just as controversial as they were without.
 
jb5000 said:
Can't agree. They've shown three angles, from in front of William it looks like a penalty, from the side it looks 50/50, from behind (the ref's view too) it looks a blatant dive.
He seems to have lost control a bit with the second red though
Click to expand...
The commentators and all four pundits were unanimous in calling it a stone wall penalty whilst branding the VAR system as 'useless' if it isn't going to change decisions such as that. It is as clear as day that Willian is tripped. There is no justification for that not to be given.

I'm not blaming the ref - his view may well have been obscured. I'm blaming the idiot at the VAR screen who doesn't make the right call.
 
popillius said:
The commentators and all four pundits were unanimous in calling it a stone wall penalty whilst branding the VAR system as 'useless' if it isn't going to change decisions such as that. It is as clear as day that Willian is tripped. There is no justification for that not to be given.

I'm not blaming the ref - his view may well have been obscured. I'm blaming the idiot at the VAR screen who doesn't make the right call.
Click to expand...
Haven’t seen the situation, but what is the big problem of the VAR «idiot» getting it wrong? There will always be situations that will be controversial and difficult to give an excact and correct verdict on without looking over the situation a thousand times from multiple angles and in slo-mo. Of course the VAR won’t be able to do that unless the games are going to last for hours. Our VAR goal and the other situations in our game where VAR was used are good examples of how VAR can be used in a good manner. If it can be used that way it’s a step in the right directon. We will have to live with that there still will be controversial situations where the VAR gets it wrong. The upside of that is that we can still argue about those in the pub or be angry on footy forums.
 
It's a new system (for us) so I'd expect it to take some time to adjust, bed in and be accepted. There could well be a misunderstanding (in all quarters) of how it's supposed to work. There might be false expectations.

We've seen how it can and does work for the better. Sounds like we're seeing areas where people aren't happy with it. That oughtn't be surprising. Anything new will inevitably evoke differing opinion.

I want to do a bit of reading on when it's supposed to be used, how and when it's called upon, whether the ref can ignore/override it (or has to 'rubber stamp' it). I think if I understand better how it's supposed to work then I'll be able to form an opinion on whether I think it's working or not.

I suspect though that, as I said, nobody's really 100% sure how it's supposed to work and it'll take time for that to be ironed out.
 
Didn't look to me that he was tripped, looked to me that he tried to jump over his leg and caught his foot on the way over. Maybe that's how the VAR saw it, so therefore wasn't a clear and obvious error.
 
I think the purpose of the VAR in those instances is to reveal things that the Referee and assistants didn't see. If the referee saw that there was contact but decided not to give a penalty then the VAR gave him no new information for him to change his decision.

I'm not saying the referee made the correct call, but the VAR is a tool to be used by the referee not to overrule him, so we will still get controversial decisions.

Also since the officials will usually have a made a decision before consulting the VAR, naturally it is going to be less likely to change their minds than if they consulted it before deciding.
 
bloo said:
It's a new system (for us) so I'd expect it to take some time to adjust, bed in and be accepted. There could well be a misunderstanding (in all quarters) of how it's supposed to work. There might be false expectations.

We've seen how it can and does work for the better. Sounds like we're seeing areas where people aren't happy with it. That oughtn't be surprising. Anything new will inevitably evoke differing opinion.

I want to do a bit of reading on when it's supposed to be used, how and when it's called upon, whether the ref can ignore/override it (or has to 'rubber stamp' it). I think if I understand better how it's supposed to work then I'll be able to form an opinion on whether I think it's working or not.

I suspect though that, as I said, nobody's really 100% sure how it's supposed to work and it'll take time for that to be ironed out.
Click to expand...

Have a look here , it gives an idea of how it works ...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/42604127
 
SJN-Fox said:
Didn't look to me that he was tripped, looked to me that he tried to jump over his leg and caught his foot on the way over. Maybe that's how the VAR saw it, so therefore wasn't a clear and obvious error.
Click to expand...

It's a good point. Maybe VAR only disagrees with the ref where they can show categorically that the ref has made the wrong decision. It doesn't matter what the VAR ref thinks, or what decision they personally might have made, unless they can show conclusively, without it being a matter of judgement, that the ref made the wrong call then the ref's decision, no matter how many people might disagree with it, will stand. Fun this innit?
 
popillius said:
The commentators and all four pundits were unanimous in calling it a stone wall penalty whilst branding the VAR system as 'useless' if it isn't going to change decisions such as that. It is as clear as day that Willian is tripped. There is no justification for that not to be given.

I'm not blaming the ref - his view may well have been obscured. I'm blaming the idiot at the VAR screen who doesn't make the right call.
Click to expand...

So is it just one guy in a studio looking at the VAR who decides? Surely they should have 3 looking at it so you get a unanimous decision one way or the other. I understand that's how they use it in Rugby Union and it seems to work very well.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Log in to stop seeing adverts

P Pld Pts
1Liverpool1128
2Manchester C  1123
3Chelsea1119
4Arsenal1119
5Nottm F1119
6Brighton1119
7Fulham1118
8Newcastle1118
9Aston Villa1118
10Tottenham 1116
11Brentford1116
12Bournemouth1115
13Manchester U1115
14West Ham1112
15Leicester1110
16Everton1110
17Ipswich118
18Palace117
19Wolves116
20Southampton114

Latest posts

Back
Top