Ref watch on Sky

[Leisure]

also crystal clear from that freeze frame that Adebayo's ar5e is clearly backing into Trafford - which is the exact moment that he fouled him, and when watching in real time Adebayo is not looking at the ball, but looking at where Trafford is moving so he can block him - the freeze frame shown displays that clearly.

I honestly have no idea where people who think it isn't a foul are getting their opinion from - Can they demonstrate with a clear video or freeze frame that is isn't a foul? of course not, because that doesn't exist - all we have is a clear video and freeze frame showing and actual foul.

They can't/won't because they just want to blame Trafford!

[Rick_Muller]

People think we’d would be halfway up the league without VAR ,on Jan 4th we would have had 13 points without it.IMG_1453.png

+2 at Forest and +1 (Possibly +3 depending on how the game turns on a penalty, but granted only +1) at Villa, and some argue another +1 at Bournemouth because of a handball (that I admit I cannot recollect) and now this where its another +2 - where has the +2 come from?

We could be +6 more than we currently have!

[aggi]

People think we’d would be halfway up the league without VAR ,on Jan 4th we would have had 13 points without it.IMG_1453.png

This is just decisions that VAR has overturned though. So ignores things like the Villa penalty, Bournemouth handball and the Luton goal. It's probably just the Forest goal for the +2.

[Rileybobs]

People think we’d would be halfway up the league without VAR ,on Jan 4th we would have had 13 points without it.IMG_1453.png

I don't think this table is illustrating what you think it is. That looks like a table showing what points difference teams would be on had there been no VAR whatsoever. Obviously that doesn't account for incidents where the VAR goes with the on-field decision such as Luton's equaliser. It also obviously doesn't take into account points that may have been gained/lost with sending offs which were incorrectly given or missed, and presumably can't account for penalty decisions given/missed.

[NewClaret]

Whether he new where the other player was or not is irrelevant.

I view it as an accidental collision so play on.

How can it be an accidental collision when he looks at Trafford and then deliberately moves towards him?

It’s the clearest and most obvious attempt to block the keeper as he runs out… evidenced by him not celebrating after the goal has been scored and looking straight at the ref to see if he’d got away with it.

[dsr]

Whether he new where the other player was or not is irrelevant.

That's not true. If you take an action on a football field that impedes an opponent, then whethhr it's a foul or not does not depend on the intention of the player. For example, if you trip someone up while trying to clear the ball, even if you didn't know the man was there, it's a foul.

If you are randomly running around the penalty area with no idea where any other player is, and in running about you foul someone, then it's a foul.

[NewClaret]

Trafford is only about 2 yds away from where Morris heads it before he makes contact with Adebayo. At this point, the ball isn't even in the shot. And Morris hasnt even jumped. It's also irrelevant according to the rules, but even so. Based on this, its extremely unlikely Trafford wouldn't be in the vicinity of the ball by the time it arrives. Or you could say, he timed his movement perfectly

Good image to post.

I initially thought he had made a error in his positioning (irrelevant as to whether the a foul is committed as the rules - as posted - say every player is entitled to the position they want to take on the field) - but when I watched it back a few times it became clear he likely would have been able to get to the cross/at least challenge had he not been impeded.

It would have been a foul anyway, but the whole argument that he wouldn’t have reached the ball is also a poor one when watching it back - and that image is decent proof.

[dsr]

It’s a simple fact that if your looking at where the ball is you can’t be looking at another player at the same time.

I think you're underestimating the power of players to see the whole field. For example, when Odobert goes down the wing and beats three men, he is both looking at the ball and looking at the three men he is taking it past. And possibly with a bit of time to spare to see if there is anyone to cross to.

When a goalkeeper is set to save a shot, he looks at both ball and man. It's not an either/or.

[Dark Cloud]

How can it be an accidental collision when he looks at Trafford and then deliberately moves towards him?

It’s the clearest and most obvious attempt to block the keeper as he runs out… evidenced by him not celebrating after the goal has been scored and looking straight at the ref to see if he’d got away with it.

Plus the fact that he actually backs into Trafford and isn't looking at the ball. If Adebayo had been looking at the ball like he was making a genuine attempt to win it then I could maybe see where the "coming together" bit comes in, but he isn't trying to win the ball in any way. He simply does his best to obstruct Trafford without making it too obvious. He succeeds with the obstruction, but fails with the second part because it really is obvious (imo).

[NewClaret]

Here are the rules, just for clarity. Seems most people don't know them

Direct free kick

A direct free kick is awarded if a player commits any of the following offences against an opponent in a manner considered by the referee to be careless, reckless or using excessive force:
•charges
•jumps at
•kicks or attempts to kick
•pushes
•strikes or attempts to strike (including head-butt)
•tackles or challenges
•trips or attempts to trip
•If an offence involves contact it is penalised by a direct free kick or penalty kick.
•Careless is when a player shows a lack of attention or consideration when making a challenge or acts without precaution. No disciplinary sanction is needed
•Reckless is when a player acts with disregard to the danger to, or consequences for, an opponent and must be cautioned
•Using excessive force is when a player exceeds the necessary use of force and endangers the safety of an opponent and must be sent off

A direct free kick is awarded if a player commits any of the following offences:
•a handball offence (except for the goalkeeper within their penalty area)
•holds an opponent
•impedes an opponent with contact
•bites or spits at someone on the team lists or a match official
throws an object at the ball, opponent or match official, or makes contact with the ball with a held object



IMPEDING THE PROGRESS OF AN OPPONENT WITHOUT CONTACT

Impeding the progress of an opponent means moving into the opponent’s path to obstruct, block, slow down or force a change of direction when the ball is not within playing distance of either player.

All players have a right to their position on the field of play; being in the way of an opponent is not the same as moving into the way of an opponent.

A player may shield the ball by taking a position between an opponent and the ball if the ball is within playing distance and the opponent is not held off with the arms or body. If the ball is within playing distance, the player may be fairly charged by an opponent.

Well done for posting these, because some posters on here just seem to be making up their own rules or commenting without understanding them.

A bit like Bankes talking about whether Trafford had his hands in the air, which also isn’t a rule.

If any can read the paragraph I have boldened and explain to me how Adebayo’s action in moving in to Trafford with the ball nowhere near him does not classify impeding a player then I’d be willing to listen, but so far nobody has.

If I were the club I’d raise a formal complaint on how this was handled and a public statement saying as much to up the ante on PGMOL.

[Westleigh]

+2 at Forest and +1 (Possibly +3 depending on how the game turns on a penalty, but granted only +1) at Villa, and some argue another +1 at Bournemouth because of a handball (that I admit I cannot recollect) and now this where its another +2 - where has the +2 come from?

We could be +6 more than we currently have!

Everton had 2 turned down against us,but if you think we should have a pen and it doesn’t go to VAR it won’t show in the stats.

[Westleigh]

Everton had 2 turned down against us,but if you think we should have a pen and it doesn’t go to VAR it won’t show in the stats.

Probably slightly wrong there ,obviously we didn’t get any points against Everton anyway,but the Luton match doesnt show on that table.

[claretandy]

I must be the anomaly, I think it's 100% a foul, but I would have preferred muric for his distribution. I accept that Trafford has been playing well recently though.

[bumba]

Its not just a block. He changes direction and rams Trafford who was focussed on the ball so wasnt expecting it from an absolute unit if a player, of course it knocked him over. If thats nkt a foul then every set piece would be an absolute free for all

He's always running in to the box towards goal then just turns his back that isn't a foul.
It's split opinion so this VAR didn't give it because it's Burnley nonsense is rubbish, it isn't a clear and obvious error simple as that.
You'd 100% be crying if it was the other way round

[bumba]

Why is anybody surprised an anti Burnley poster thinks it wasn’t a foul?

Ben Foster said it’s one of the worst VAR decisions he’s seen btw

You crack me up anybody with an opinion against yours is anti Burnley, you was the most anti Burnley person I'd ever known 18 months ago.
Shay Given said no foul to even it out

[bumba]

Adebayo was not looking at the ball though,it’s a simple fact that you can’t just make things up to suit your agenda.

But all the Burnley fans claiming a foul are seeing things to suit their own agenda's

[DingleDangle]

It's a clear foul on Trafford. Trafford's is watching the flight of the ball in order to position himself to make the jump to catch the ball. However, Adebayo clearly stops Trafford from setting himself to jump, by making a move to block his path. This knocks Trafford out of his stride and off balance as he's not expecting it (hence why some people say it looks like a dive because of his arms flailing, but it isn't) and stops him from making a jump.

That clearly shows the lack of football or goalkeeping knowledge on VAR's part when he states "is it enough for a foul on the keeper who can use his hands? Becasue the keeper never jumps to try and play the ball"........errrrr yes, it is enough to call it a foul, as Traffords path is blocked from being able to jump for the ball, because as a goalkeeper it's about watching the flight of the ball, to then be able to set yourself to make the jump and catch,. Adebayo clearly stops him from doing just that and IMO, the slow motion shows all that.

Sadly, the AVAR doesn't have the guts to back himself in the conversation.

[KRBFC]

You crack me up anybody with an opinion against yours is anti Burnley, you was the most anti Burnley person I'd ever known 18 months ago.
Shay Given said no foul to even it out

You are anti Burnley and have been since the day you signed up here. I was anti the style of play under Dyche at times, anti the finance behind the ALK takeover, anti some of the signings or lack of.

You are anti Burnley everything and always have been

[bumba]

You are anti Burnley and have been since the day you signed up here. I was anti the style of play under Dyche at times, anti the finance behind the ALK takeover, anti some of the signings or lack of.

You are anti Burnley everything and always have been

Couldn't be further from the truth, when something isn't right I'll point it out and don't view everything with claret tinted specs

[kentonclaret]

You crack me up anybody with an opinion against yours is anti Burnley, you was the most anti Burnley person I'd ever known 18 months ago.
Shay Given said no foul to even it out

Many posters on here were lauding Shay Given just a couple of weeks ago, for his analytical piece on Match Of The Day on James Trafford, and his starting position of jumping off from just one leg limiting the height that he can reach to come and take crosses. Sadly, in deciding no foul Shay Given has demonstrated he clearly knows nothing about goal keeping and the laws of the game.

[Roosterbooster]

He's always running in to the box towards goal then just turns his back that isn't a foul.

The rules must be wrong then

"Impeding the progress of an opponent means moving into the opponent’s path to obstruct, block, slow down or force a change of direction when the ball is not within playing distance of either player."

[Goliath]

He's always running in to the box towards goal then just turns his back that isn't a foul.
It's split opinion so this VAR didn't give it because it's Burnley nonsense is rubbish, it isn't a clear and obvious error simple as that.
You'd 100% be crying if it was the other way round

Thats quite an assumption you've made there. I actually dont really get too worked up about refs decisions, happy to give a non-biased opinion. That one however is just a rank bad decision, regardless of the team. Its just a completely different rule to whats been used in every game for the last 30 years or so which seem quite unfair.

[DingleDangle]

Shay Given said no foul to even it out

Except, a former striker in Michael Owen thought it was a foul on Trafford.

The bottom line is though, that if it had been Given in Trafford's situation, you can put money on that he would be calling a foul on him.

Likewise, if Owen had been in Adebayo's situation, he possibly would be saying no foul.

This suggests that they are seeing it through the eyes of being pundits, with the different camera views to look at and not from the position of former players.

VAR needs scrapping.

[Westleigh]

I don't think this table is illustrating what you think it is. That looks like a table showing what points difference teams would be on had there been no VAR whatsoever. Obviously that doesn't account for incidents where the VAR goes with the on-field decision such as Luton's equaliser. It also obviously doesn't take into account points that may have been gained/lost with sending offs which were incorrectly given or missed, and presumably can't account for penalty decisions given/missed.

I get what your saying,but it’s how far you go with it ,it’s like saying if VAR had picked up on a goal kick instead of a corner there may not of been a goal I think this table is just a simplistic way of showing who had goals given or disallowed because of VAR.

[bumba]

Except, a former striker in Michael Owen thought it was a foul on Trafford.

The bottom line is though, that if it had been Given in Trafford's situation, you can put money on that he would be calling a foul on him.

Likewise, if Owen had been in Adebayo's situation, he possibly would be saying no foul.

This suggests that they are seeing it through the eyes of being pundits, with the different camera views to look at and not from the position of former players.

VAR needs scrapping.

VAR does need scrapping.
Bottom line is it's split opinion so crying about it is pointless, VAR is for clear and obvious so a decision that splits opinion clearly isn't clear and obvious.
If the referee blows for a foul I don't think VAR would get involved and say it's an error he hasn't fouled him.
It's subjective so they go with the referees decision and how he's seen it

[Rileybobs]

I get what your saying,but it’s how far you go with it ,it’s like saying if VAR had picked up on a goal kick instead of a corner there may not of been a goal I think this table is just a simplistic way of showing who had goals given or disallowed because of VAR.

Yes sure. But my point is I don’t think Burnley fans are saying we would have significantly more points if there wasn’t VAR, just that we would have had we not been on the end of incorrect decisions. Two points lost to Forest and two lost to Luton to blatantly incorrect decisions. I can’t think of any bad decisions that have contributed to us winning points although I may be forgetting.

[Westleigh]

Yes sure. But my point is I don’t think Burnley fans are saying we would have significantly more points if there wasn’t VAR, just that we would have had we not been on the end of incorrect decisions. Two points lost to Forest and two lost to Luton to blatantly incorrect decisions. I can’t think of any bad decisions that have contributed to us winning points although I may be forgetting.

I’ll give you that.

[Jakubclaret]

It is quite phenomenal just how many people skew the context, manipulate the events, and actually describe a different scenario, just to try and justify an opinion, rather than observe and assess, before then formulating an opinion

And no logic, rationale, or even presentation of fact will change their minds. There is no point arguing with these people

"There is no point arguing with these people" 6 posts later you aren't doing a bad job of it

[CrosspoolClarets]

That VAR table is just removing those decisions, it says that in the article, so for us it just has Forest as a 3 point swing vs them. It doesn’t consider the times VAR should have stepped in, i.e. Villa, Luton, Bournemouth which arguably cost us another 4 points and would leave us ahead of Everton and only 2 behind Forest. I’m charitably calling Villa a draw because the incorrect sending off was nothing to do with VAR, it was that Luton fan Atwell not applying the laws of the game by not yellow carding after an advantage, it was just the penalty where VAR should have stepped in, using Webb’s own guidance about minimal contact, the same guy who should have stepped in last Friday who overruled his Assistant.

I don’t anyone says we should be mid table but even on relatively poor season performance we should be up there on merit with Everton, Brentford, Luton and Forest. Given our improvement trend, we would then have stayed up, but for the 2nd season on the trot we could be relegated by official’s wrong decisions (Krul on Vydra, Lowton sent off by Tierney, dodgy pen at Spurs etc).

So much for having a superstar in charge and playing fancy football changing our reffing fortunes compared to the Dyche years. Maybe nobody does like us?

[Jakubclaret]

It's beginning to turn into a cry me a river thread with a thousand violins playing.

[KRBFC]

Couldn't be further from the truth, when something isn't right I'll point it out and don't view everything with claret tinted specs

You haven’t had a positive thing to say in years under different managers, different owners, different players.

So you only see and point out the negative in absolutely everything? But you’re a fan/supporter? That’s interesting

[Spindles]

Or Trafford moved 7/8 yards in to Adebayo?
He was moving in the direction of goal anticipating a cross, Trafford comes in to the attackers space

Stop being a troll - ok you don't think it was a foul but your interpretation of the events are so far from the reality of what actually happened you can't be serious

[bumba]

You haven’t had a positive thing to say in years under different managers, different owners, different players.

So you only see and point out the negative in absolutely everything? But you’re a fan/supporter? That’s interesting

Think you'll find I've been positive about what the new owners have done apart from the legends boards. Positive about VK apart from his summer recruitment, positive about a lot of the players but the ones not good enough or not performing I'll have a discussion about....I'm pretty sure that's how a fans forum works?
Stop acting like your the number 1 fan all of a sudden

[THEWELLERNUT70]

Arsenal's second goal see's and Arsenal player backing into to Henderson the Palace keeper and impeding him on the line, VAR check, goal given

[CrosspoolClarets]

Totally different that Arsenal goal.

The keeper couldn’t get past the attacker’s starting position, he was poorly protected. A chance he could have got the foul for easing Henderson into the net, but on balance on foul.

Very different from Luton player watching Trafford and deliberately charging into him. As all ex pros who have never played for Blackburn have concurred with (i.e. not Given, Shearer, Savage).

[THEWELLERNUT70]

Totally different that Arsenal goal.

The keeper couldn’t get past the attacker’s starting position, he was poorly protected. A chance he could have got the foul for easing Henderson into the net, but on balance on foul.

Very different from Luton player watching Trafford and deliberately charging into him. As all ex pros who have never played for Blackburn have concurred with (i.e. not Given, Shearer, Savage).

Thought it might be

[CrosspoolClarets]

We have just had VAR atrocities twice on the trot, costing us potentially 5 points, by Peter Bankes, who is either an Everton fan or a local because he has never reffed a Merseyside game. I know he is from Merseyside. Rob Jones, who was in charge of the atrocity at Forest, is also a Merseysider who has never reffed Everton.

We then had Stuart Atwell, the Luton fan, who did not apply the rules correctly when sending off Berge, then got the penalty wrong too. Atwell who also reffed us at home vs Palace when we didn’t get penalty shouts. This is Atwell who gave the “ghost goal” for Reading against Luton’s hated rivals Watford.

We have David Coote, from Nottingham, who was VAR at Bournemouth when they took 5 minutes to find Jay offside then denied us that penalty at the death.

Pawson is a Sheff Utd fan. I can’t recall any problems with him as it was VAR Oliver who sent off Zaroury.

I’m not suggesting corruption because there is no evidence, but there is a trend, and subconscious bias will come into play, the stats all point in that direction with most of our bad decisions coming from refs who are loyal to our relegation rivals. Especially with the VAR official who is unseen and unheard, most of our problems have come from him (e.g. vs Luton I can just about forgive Harrington missing the reversing backside, but not VAR).

Our club should be much more forceful in demanding certain refs do not take charge of games against us, as other clubs do (Liverpool and Tierney). Webb should also go further to ensure fair play - including publishing audio of all big decisions. I bet ours is NOT shown on his show on Sky.

Just to correct my earlier sweep of all the subconsciously biased refs serving as VAR against us.

I mistakenly wrote that we have had no problems with Pawson, the Sheff Utd fan.

He was the VAR for our game against West Ham when Koleosho got fouled by Coufal in the box which most people and pundits thought a definite penalty. 2-0 up, we win that game. So I’m up to 8-9 points lost due to VAR. All by officials from Liverpool, Nottingham, Sheffield or Luton. Apart from Darren England, he is just incompetent.

We don’t mention these things, they get forgotten. Hope the club make a fuss over it too.

[Westleigh]

Just to correct my earlier sweep of all the subconsciously biased refs serving as VAR against us.

I mistakenly wrote that we have had no problems with Pawson, the Sheff Utd fan.

He was the VAR for our game against West Ham when Koleosho got fouled by Coufal in the box which most people and pundits thought a definite penalty. 2-0 up, we win that game. So I’m up to 8-9 points lost due to VAR. All by officials from Liverpool, Nottingham, Sheffield or Luton. Apart from Darren England, he is just incompetent.
Mentioned this months ago and got slagged off because the refs would never favour one side ,imagine if you were a Burnley fan and you were reffing Rovers in the last game of the season,and if they won we would get relegated
We don’t mention these things, they get forgotten. Hope the club make a fuss over it too.

[Westleigh]

Sorry to mess your post up I don’t know what happened.

[Jakubclaret]

It really matters not a jot how weak or strong one of our players was in that moment, just like it doesn't matter if Luton were better than us, or deserved a draw, or we deserved to lose, or we got what we deserved because we signed Mike Tresor in August, or because we have American owners or or or or....you'd have to be a person in utter contempt of either BFC, Kompany, Pace or Trafford to see that as anything other than a foul in modern day, top flight football.

You seriously think somewhere around 36% of the people that participated in that poll harbour some sort of grudge against BFC, Kompany, Pace or Trafford that's hell of a lot of people & you would have to assume Blackburn fans nobody else would really be that bothered. It's a minority but it's a significant amount of people that thought it wasn't a foul.

[Roosterbooster]

I'd wager a similar proportion (at least) of the football watching public don't actually know the rules of the game.

But ignorance doesn't stop you from having an opinion. Just from having a valid opinion

[Jakubclaret]

I'd wager a similar proportion (at least) of the football watching public don't actually know the rules of the game.

But ignorance doesn't stop you from having an opinion. Just from having a valid opinion

But surely you could say the same about the 64% or do 64% have a valid opinion & the 36% don't because you don't agree with it. Within the 100% you'll have people with varied knowledge of the rules.

[Roosterbooster]

Indeed. It's a fair proposition

But none of those who disagree with me have managed to frame any of their argument within the rules. I'll happily change my opinion. But to do so without any reasonable argument would be nonsensical. And so far, the only arguments against have definitively ignored any rules whatsoever.

Frame an opinion with objective assessment, aligned with the actual rules of football, and I'll engage

[Jakubclaret]

https://youtu.be/LTHyq94y14Y?si=UzjpiSBFUty59fl-

3 mins onwards might answer that.

[Rick_Muller]

https://youtu.be/LTHyq94y14Y?si=UzjpiSBFUty59fl-

3 mins onwards might answer that.

There’s only 1 genuine football person on that video and not surprisingly Martin O’Neill is spot on.

[Big Vinny K]

For someone who often likes to use big words Simon Jordan should maybe look up what simultaneously means. The rules he is quoting provide zero evidence as to why the goal was allowed - if anything they do the exact opposite.

[timshorts]

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.

Only you can't do that. It's outside the 5 yard zone, so that deliberate block would be offensive pass interference.

[Robbie_painter]

Only you can't do that. It's outside the 5 yard zone, so that deliberate block would be offensive pass interference.

So it’s even a foul in American football.

[South West Claret.]

So we’re all agreed then it wasn’t a fowl on Trafford

[beddie]

Arsenal's second goal see's and Arsenal player backing into to Henderson the Palace keeper and impeding him on the line, VAR check, goal given

Yes it was clear he was trying to stop Henderson, I too was surprised it wasn’t given as a free kick to Palace.