Ref watch on Sky

[THEWELLERNUT70]

Referees don't understand football.

Exactly this, they've probably never played the game consistently to any meaningful standard and were probably the types who were 'last pick' in the playground because nobody wanted to be lumbered with them. Their revenge being to become an official as a mean gain any meaningful access to the sport they wanted to partake in

[CrosspoolClarets]

I've given up on this season. I'll shout for a win at the home games, but I don't want to stay up. Seriously. If we were properly competitive, I could probably look past the VAR shambles, but as we're both uncompetitive AND subject to VAR, I just want out.

Out of interest, and I know it is off topic, but what games since Bournemouth in late October have we been uncompetitive in, apart from Everton? We even gave Liverpool and Arsenal a game.

[dsr]

Out of interest, and I know it is off topic, but what games since Bournemouth in late October have we been uncompetitive in, apart from Everton? We even gave Liverpool and Arsenal a game.

Not so much uncompetitive game-by-game, but over the season as a whole. I can't see any way we can get enough points from now on in to get above two more teams, because there's aren't going to be 3 others on say 30 points or less.

Worst case scenario would be if Forest and Everton get huge penalties and we stay up with 20-25 points. Please no!

[claretandy]

New episode on this week I'd be amazed if it wasn't covered. All he has to do is describe what he saw but say he doesn't believe it's a foul

What he described didn't happen, he said Trafford barge's adebayo.

[clarets1978]

We need to take this injustice and use it like Coyle did after the League Cup semi exit, to motivate everyone at the Club to stay up.

If that theory worked today, we'd have done that after being robbed of 2pts at Forest

[Down_Rover]

I don’t understand the criticism of Trafford for throwing himself to the floor

It works every time for Bruno Fernandez

[ChorltonCharlie]

I despise VAR and think it’s ruining the game. But as much as I hate it, I can see how they’re changing it to try make it work. I read people like Dale Johnson who’s an apparent expert on refereeing and VAR and the directives they’re given. His review each week gives a neutral view on where VAR has got it spectacularly wrong, where it’s backed the ref because it’s subjective and where it’s everyone in agreement. A lot fall into the middle ground of subjective decisions. They have created a high bar for this because the feedback from fans is we don’t want games re-refereeing. If we are to have VAR, I’d much rather we kept to that high bar and mitigated against the disruption VAR is already having. In this case we lose out, but as a football fan in general I think it’s a small price to pay. The opposite was the case with Foster’s goal at Forest earlier in the season. Again it was a grey area and the VAR should not have got involved and that’s why we got an apology.

In terms of the goal the other night. What Webb said goes hand in hand with the neutral review Dale Johnson did on Monday. There’s a suggestion that most on field refs disallow the goal, but some wouldn’t. And this is the key point, because some wouldn’t it puts it into the grey area. Once there’s a grey area the on screen refereeing decision stands. There is nothing in the VAR protocol that says if the VAR and AVAR don’t agree that you send the ref back to the screen. If you think they should, then welcome to much longer games of football. I think what doesn’t help the other night, is the first view they see backs up the refs decision. It’s from a wide angle and it does look like Trafford jumping into a crowd of bodies. It’s only other angles that start throwing in doubt, but even then they seem to be trying to work out how deliberate the contact is which takes us back to the subjective argument and how they use directives just as much as rules. VAR sometimes does get things wrong, but in this case it has done what it’s meant to do. The main frustration for me is that the ref didn’t spot the foul in the first place, especially as it came only 5 minutes after Foster was penalised for a similar style challenge on the half way line.

[CrosspoolClarets]

Not so much uncompetitive game-by-game, but over the season as a whole. I can't see any way we can get enough points from now on in to get above two more teams, because there's aren't going to be 3 others on say 30 points or less.

Worst case scenario would be if Forest and Everton get huge penalties and we stay up with 20-25 points. Please no!

Well, yes, down probably I agree, but we are on 17 points in my mind if VAR had done a correct job. With our improvement trend “par” for the season would then be about 36 points. Which may or may not end up being enough. Now I agree that those missing 5 points plus a 20 point half season are likely too big a hurdle.

But my point is, if we genuinely deserve 36 points by the end (and we will see) it is easy to picture next season being 50 points with these growing players. Not really something I wish relegation to avoid. Too many people (not you) are saying things like “it isn’t Burnley, these aren’t Burnley players”, and I think that talk is self limiting.

[Hibsclaret]

I’ve just watched the clip.

Why do they insist on watching from all angles in slow motion? This particular decision needed full speed videos from all angles. The slow motion examples make it seem less of a foul (although still looks a foul to me). The game is played at full speed and assessment of that decision should be full speed. When you do that at a most angles it is a clear foul.

That is before you consider the nonsense spouted in terms of a keepers ability to jump and use his hands.

I’ve said this before and haven’t changed my opinion that VAR will not work until they stop obsessing about what is a clear and obvious error. The VAR should base decisions on whether they think it is a foul or not. People will say this is re-refereeing a game but we want correct decisions and not incorrect ones being upheld all the time.

We are basically in the relegation spots because of VAR incorrect decisions and that can’t be right.

[Rick_Muller]

I’ve just watched the clip.

Why do they insist on watching from all angles in slow motion? This particular decision needed full speed videos from all angles. The slow motion examples make it seem less of a foul (although still looks a foul to me). The game is played at full speed and assessment of that decision should be full speed. When you do that at a most angles it is a clear foul.

That is before you consider the nonsense spouted in terms of a keepers ability to jump and use his hands.

I’ve said this before and haven’t changed my opinion that VAR will not work until they stop obsessing about what is a clear and obvious error. The VAR should base decisions on whether they think it is a foul or not. People will say this is re-refereeing a game but we want correct decisions and not incorrect ones being upheld all the time.

We are basically in the relegation spots because of VAR incorrect decisions and that can’t be right.

I agree with this. When they state "clear and obvious" they are applying a subjective opinion (clear and obvious) onto an already subjective opinion (the incident) which can ultimately lead to chaos for the decision making process. If the VAR officials are to be taken seriously they need to be advising the ref that the subjective incident requires an application of the laws of the game, which is not subjective, but clear. In the recent incident there is a foul on Trafford, and they could see that - that should override any discussion relating to "clear and obvious" IMO.

[quoonbeatz]

That Dale johnson guy is absolutely clueless, another one who doesn't understand football.

[Kilson810]

I don’t understand the criticism of Trafford for throwing himself to the floor

It works every time for Bruno Fernandez

Like Fernandez, if Trafford is in a United shirt then it gets given.

[Roosterbooster]

I'm not sure how anyone watches that and thinks it's not a foul. It's not even debatable. Just the basic application of the laws of the game is required. Somehow, the ref, VAR and Webb have all ignored them, and created a law that doesn't even exist to allow the goal

The AVAR spells out exactly why it's a foul. And they just ignore him

I'm fuming

[Goody1975]

I'm not sure how anyone watches that and thinks it's not a foul. It's not even debatable. Just the basic application of the laws of the game is required. Somehow, the ref, VAR and Webb have all ignored them, and created a law that doesn't even exist to allow the goal

The AVAR spells out exactly why it's a foul. And they just ignore him

I'm fuming

The flannel that Webb came out with, angered me as much as anything else.

[jsclaret]

I totally agree with the comments above about "clear and obvious". Just scrap it. If VAR thinks the on-field decision is wrong just overrule it.
Also whilst they are at it scrap the referee going to the monitor.

[burnleymik]

The comments about Trafford "throwing himself to the floor seem a bit silly.

He was running to the ball about to try and jump, when he his hit by a solid object from the other direction. What else was he supposed to do?

As for the officiating, it was woeful. Adebayo never had any intention of playing the ball, only the man and it was 100% attacker making a move towards the keeper. Keeper never took his eyes off the ball and Adebayo never had his eyes on the ball.

More awful officiating costing us dearly.

[NL Claret]

Watched that Owen / Webb clip on Sky. Utter rubbish, Owen has played the game and knows it was a file.

What did one of refs say? The keeper still had the ability to jump.

Webb never answered the question. The problem with VAR in this country is the operators are useless and the PGMOL close ranks and cannot admit they are wrong.

[ChorltonCharlie]

There's a cracking Premier League table done by some football data scientists. They've taken the current points per team and then added/deducted how many points the fans of each team think they've been wronged/benefitted through referees/VAR based on on social media comments. It's work of genius. They don't bother with points as there's a bit of anomaly with Liverpool having more than points than have been available. Here it is in all its glory...

1: Liverpool
2: Manchester City
3: Aston Villa
4: Arsenal
5: Tottenham Hotspur
6: West Ham United
7: Manchester United
8: Brighton & Hove Albion
9: Chelsea
10: Newcastle United
11: Wolverhampton Wanderers
12: Bournemouth
13: Fulham
14: Crystal Palace
15: Nottingham Forest
16: Brentford
17: Everton
18: Luton Town
19: Burnley
20: Sheffield United

[xxmunkyennuixx]

Just watched that clip and the AVAR goes quiet. He disagrees I think. Also, the focus on the jumping (or not) of Trafford is a misnomer because if he jumps when they suggest it would have been too early. His next stride had he not been barged would have been the opportune moment to jump. VAR has focused on the wrong thing completely. It is a really bad decision.

[Westleigh]

Bankes has never publicly disclosed which team he supports, as is his right, but he has to disclose loyalty to the PGMOL and he has never reffed a Liverpool or Everton game. I suspect because scousers do have great loyalty to their city and he has rightly declared he wouldn’t be impartial with those teams. The trouble is, direct relegation rivals have just as much scope to be affected.

Contrast to Anthony Taylor who lives near Old Trafford, is an Altrincham fan, and refs Man Utd regularly.

As I said, I do not doubt there is conscious fair play, but subconscious is another matter and hard to prevent - the guilty parties then are PGMOL for not bearing this in mind when allocating crucial fixtures at top or bottom. Not as though there ain’t enough of the refs to choose from.

I posted the other week about refs and who they supported and got slated ,and I’m sorry but I can’t remember who reffed what ,but Attwell is a Luton fan,Pawson is a Sheffield Utd fan ,and Attwell reffed the Villa match a few weeks ago,when he gave them a last minute pen.

[bumba]

What he described didn't happen, he said Trafford barge's adebayo.

That's how they saw it and VAR agreed. The more I see it tho the more I realise what a mess Trafford made of it

[claretandy]

That's how they saw it and VAR agreed. The more I see it tho the more I realise what a mess Trafford made of it

The var didn't agree, the Avar thought it was a foul and so did the var, they should have overturned it.

[Stalbansclaret]

That's how they saw it and VAR agreed. The more I see it tho the more I realise what a mess Trafford made of it

You really must be trying incredibly hard to interpret it that way

[bumba]

The var didn't agree, the Avar thought it was a foul and so did the var, they should have overturned it.

AVAR mentioned a foul but the VAR was saying Trafford can use his hands he never said it was a foul

[bumba]

You really must be trying incredibly hard to interpret it that way

Not really, a lot don't think it's a foul.
I still 100% believe that if the roles are reversed and our goal got disallowed we'd be in uproar saying the striker did nothing wrong

[Jakubclaret]

I'm not sure how anyone watches that and thinks it's not a foul. It's not even debatable. Just the basic application of the laws of the game is required. Somehow, the ref, VAR and Webb have all ignored them, and created a law that doesn't even exist to allow the goal

The AVAR spells out exactly why it's a foul. And they just ignore him

I'm fuming

It's clear some people are seeing differently to what you have seen & interpreting such differently & arriving at a different opinion that's all there is to it. For what's it worth more people think it was a foul than the people that don't, but to just outrightly say it was a foul isn't as clear cut as some people are making out, because it's clear that's in doubt by significant sizeable minority.

[Superjohnnyfrancis]

Not really, a lot don't think it's a foul.
I still 100% believe that if the roles are reversed and our goal got disallowed we'd be in uproar saying the striker did nothing wrong

Agreed Trafford just fell to the ground the moment he touched the attacker . If he had jumped anywhere near the ball he would have got a foul. Also he was nowhere near the ball as it was still in the air high above him at that point.

Decision was very easy not to give as he was nowhere near the ball.

I agree with another poster just seriously limit var to two checks per team per game, it’s killing the spectacle.

Goal line technology should be used obviously.

[Jakubclaret]

Agreed Trafford just fell to the ground the moment he touched the attacker . If he had jumped anywhere near the ball he would have got a foul. Also he was nowhere near the ball as it was still in the air high above him at that point.

Decision was very easy not to give as he was nowhere near the ball.

I agree with another poster just seriously limit var to two checks per team per game, it’s killing the spectacle.

Goal line technology should be used obviously.

It must rank somewhere close to the greatest mismatch in physicality I've ever seen between trafford & that adebayor chap. Only 1 winner in that contest.

[Superjohnnyfrancis]

It must rank somewhere close to the greatest mismatch in physicality I've ever seen between trafford & that adebayor chap. Only 1 winner in that contest.

True but if he would have actually left the floor in a jump the foul would have been obvious for var to rule out the goal. As it was they probably thought he was looking for the foul on him so play on was given.

[Jakubclaret]

True but if he would have actually left the floor in a jump the foul would have been obvious for var to rule out the goal. As it was they probably thought he was looking for the foul on him so play on was given.

Without a shadow he didn't do himself (or us) any favours he just crumpled to the floor.

[Superjohnnyfrancis]

Without a shadow he didn't do himself (or us) any favours he just crumpled to the floor.

Should have done what Tim Krul did to Vydra, lesson learned

Even if you foul the attacker it goes the other way if you’re jumping in the air. Some weird rule they have got going on.

[bumba]

Agreed Trafford just fell to the ground the moment he touched the attacker . If he had jumped anywhere near the ball he would have got a foul. Also he was nowhere near the ball as it was still in the air high above him at that point.

Decision was very easy not to give as he was nowhere near the ball.

I agree with another poster just seriously limit var to two checks per team per game, it’s killing the spectacle.

Goal line technology should be used obviously.

He went down easily because he'd misjudged the flight of the ball, it was so obvious he was no where near it.
If he made a genuine attempt to get the ball and the player fouled him VAR would have stepped in.

[claretandy]

He went down easily because he'd misjudged the flight of the ball, it was so obvious he was no where near it.
If he made a genuine attempt to get the ball and the player fouled him VAR would have stepped in.

If it wasn't a foul, then why the muted celebrations from the Luton players?

[Jakubclaret]

If it wasn't a foul, then why the muted celebrations from the Luton players?

In fairness ever since VARs been introduced people aren't sure even when it turns out to be non controversial. It's automatic default for doubts to kick in if you are using them sort of expressions as a guide if a goal is good or not you could safely say every goal is a foul or a lead up to one.

[claretspice]

This version of events which has Trafford as being weak and looking for the free kick is really odd to me - and I say that as someone who has been critical of Trafford's command of his area at times.

Trafford was in the process of flexing his legs to spring into his jump when the striker forced his hip in the small of Trafford's back. In those situations, I think it is impossible to get off the ground to any extent. Watch any rugby game where a blocker is deployed to prevent an opponent competing for a high ball - if they do it, then even rugby players do not actually get off the ground. It might be that there is a technical change to how Trafford jumps that can make him less vulnerable to this, but I don't think there's a lot that can be done frankly. Whether you think it's a foul or not, I don't think the idea that the contact is marginal is remotely credible.

I also don't buy the idea that the muted Luton celebration was a standard reaction to VAR. They'd just put the ball in the net for what could give them a vital point away to a relegation rival. There's no way they'd be that concerned about VAR unless they had reason to be concerned about VAR.

[Jakubclaret]

This version of events which has Trafford as being weak and looking for the free kick is really odd to me - and I say that as someone who has been critical of Trafford's command of his area at times.

Trafford was in the process of flexing his legs to spring into his jump when the striker forced his hip in the small of Trafford's back. In those situations, I think it is impossible to get off the ground to any extent. Watch any rugby game where a blocker is deployed to prevent an opponent competing for a high ball - if they do it, then even rugby players do not actually get off the ground. It might be that there is a technical change to how Trafford jumps that can make him less vulnerable to this, but I don't think there's a lot that can be done frankly. Whether you think it's a foul or not, I don't think the idea that the contact is marginal is remotely credible.

I also don't buy the idea that the muted Luton celebration was a standard reaction to VAR. They'd just put the ball in the net for what could give them a vital point away to a relegation rival. There's no way they'd be that concerned about VAR unless they had reason to be concerned about VAR.

"I also don't buy the idea that the muted Luton celebration was a standard reaction to VAR"
Nobody is asking you to, I see good goals scored all the time & the first thing they do is celebrate turn around & look at the linesmen & ref hesitatently & then they celebrate properly. I think a lot people underestimate the amount of uncertainty VAR brings in crucial decisive points of a match. Of course they had reason to be concerned about VAR it was a controversial goal & just as easy as it was allowed it could have been denied it was a very close call which could have gone either way.

[Goody1975]

When referees stop using the laws of the game to make decisions and instead revert to gut instinct then we have a big issue.

The VAR guys have to breakdown the situation using the law book to arrive at the correct decision, not at any stage did they follow this procedure.

The AVAR started to try to lead the conversation that way but gave way to a bloke waffling utter nonsense.

[ClaretTony]

I always think Keepers are too protected, not this time.

Always remember Akinbiyi scored a goal at the CFS end, he blew a number of players away and the keeper to score the most fantastic goal you will ever see. shear power
Of course the ref blew...........argh

Are you thinking of the goal against Leicester?
I think we lost 0-1 in the end to a John McGreal OG, but I might be conflating memories.

It was Leicester but we won 1-0 with a John Spicer goal. We had two perfectly good goals disallowed, the stunner from Ade and one from Keith Lowe.

It was the match after Ade’s hat trick at Luton and we had Lee Grant in goal after he came in on loan.

[distortiondave]

It was Leicester but we won 1-0 with a John Spicer goal. We had two perfectly good goals disallowed, the stunner from Ade and one from Keith Lowe.

It was the match after Ade’s hat trick at Luton and we had Lee Grant in goal after he came in on loan.

Did we ever lose 0-1 at home to Leicester via a John McGreal own goal - and if not, did John McGreal ever score an own goal on the turf?
I'm sure I remember a John McGreal OG to Leicester!

[RammyClaret61]

He went down easily because he'd misjudged the flight of the ball, it was so obvious he was no where near it.
If he made a genuine attempt to get the ball and the player fouled him VAR would have stepped in.

Trafford had not misjudged the flight of the ball. His eyes were on it the whole way. He had one more step to make before jumping. He never got that chance because he was knocked off balance by a player with only one intention, to block the goalkeeper. So he was making a genuine attempt to get the ball.

[Devils_Advocate]

I thought it was a clear foul and was shocked that VAR didn't rule it out but reading this thread has made me realise that maybe it wasn't such a clear cut decision as I thought and once the ref has allowed the goal its probably the right decision for VAR to not overrule.

Still think the ref was wrong but at the end of the day you win some (the two decisions in our favour against Liverpool) and you lose some (Villa and Luton) but over the course of the season it will even itself out

[THEWELLERNUT70]

The last thing I'll say on this is.......

If that's a Burnley player scoring a goal after "that incident" and it was ruled out because the opposing goalkeeper acts like a wet blanket in a tumble dryer the amount of tears being shed on here would fill the river Thames to bursting point. Cries of get up you soft tw@t would be heard on the moon . As I maintain it was a 50/50 call as there isn't enough in it either way for me to overrule the decision either way unfortunately

Now the Villa penalty and the Forest handball and to an extent ( because nobody actually saw it in real time) the handball at the end at Bournemouth are three very very different kettles of fish and people felt rightly felt aggrieved

[bumba]

Trafford had not misjudged the flight of the ball. His eyes were on it the whole way. He had one more step to make before jumping. He never got that chance because he was knocked off balance by a player with only one intention, to block the goalkeeper. So he was making a genuine attempt to get the ball.

You really need to watch it closely if you think he's getting anywhere near that ball, even pundits have said he misjudged it he's miles off. He couldn't take one more step because there was a group of players one step away. He realises his mistake and thinks he'll get a foul if he bounces off Adebayo.
Usually there given but keepers are over protected, hopefully this carries on at all games in the future.
Blocks take part on every set piece now and very rarely get pulled up.
If we got a goal like that disallowed it'd be how anti Burnley the premier league is

[Goliath]

You really need to watch it closely if you think he's getting anywhere near that ball, even pundits have said he misjudged it he's miles off. He couldn't take one more step because there was a group of players one step away. He realises his mistake and thinks he'll get a foul if he bounces off Adebayo.
Usually there given but keepers are over protected, hopefully this carries on at all games in the future.
Blocks take part on every set piece now and very rarely get pulled up.
If we got a goal like that disallowed it'd be how anti Burnley the premier league is

Whether he is getting to the ball or not is irrelevant. Its an absolutely blatant foul and it would have been a foul 30 years ago as well. The striker makes no attempt to play the ball.

[Jakubclaret]

Whether he is getting to the ball or not is irrelevant. Its an absolutely blatant foul and it would have been a foul 30 years ago as well. The striker makes no attempt to play the ball.

The thing is he doesn't have to, it's a tactical block he doesn't have to move out of the way it's his space as much as it is Trafford's.

[Grimsdale]

Not sure what you mean by a tactical block, we used to call that obstruction when I was a kid.

I don't have an issue if a player stands his ground and keeper runs into him or if both players collide in the air whilst both are going for the ball, but in this case as the ball is delivered, Adebayo is stood around the penalty spot and by the time they collide he is just outside the 6 yard area, so he has moved about 5 yards towards the keeper with no intention of playing the ball, only to block the keeper, which is a clear foul.

It's like if a nippy winger was running down the wing and the lumbering full back moves directly in front of him and stops still with no intention of going for the ball so that the winger runs into him, it's a foul all day long, regardless of whether it's the full back's space as much as the winger's.

[RammyClaret61]

The thing is he doesn't have to, it's a tactical block he doesn't have to move out of the way it's his space as much as it is Trafford's.

But he makes a deliberate move into that space with one intention only. Tho block Trafford from getting to the ball. No other reason.

[bumba]

Whether he is getting to the ball or not is irrelevant. Its an absolutely blatant foul and it would have been a foul 30 years ago as well. The striker makes no attempt to play the ball.

He doesn't have too, look at every set piece there's blocks going on everywhere.
He is always moving in that direction, 30 years ago the striker would have been flattened and going off wishing he didn't stand there, Trafford played for a foul a keeper should take everything there.

[bumba]

But he makes a deliberate move into that space with one intention only. Tho block Trafford from getting to the ball. No other reason.

Exactly what you'd expect any striker to do, Trafford was naive. He should have taken everything to claim that ball including his own players if necessary.

[Robbie_painter]

Who knew you were allowed to do tactical blocks in football??maybe we should start lining up from kick offs like we are in the NFL then and “tactically block” the opposition till we get the ball.Never heard as much ******** in my life.