Evidently VAR was used to check whether Grealish
dived and after checking the decision to book him was upheld and not to award a penalty

Surely a panel of qualified referees with video evidence couldn’t get it
wrong

Palace popularity is poor and I thought Match of the Day was shocking! Not a word about the game or how Palace dominated for most just all about the penalty claim.

I also feel that the boy Grealish will make a rod for his own back. Although a talented player he is petulant and spends a large majority of the game on his arse! This in itself makes it very difficult for referees to decide if it’s a genuine foul or if he’s throwing himself to the floor.
In my opinion they got it spot on re the penalty, minimal contact if any just Grealish throwing himself to the floor whilst running at pace.

Maybe all this comment regarding , the goal that wasn’t proves . Is that no matter the technology, the experience of various officials involved. Gary and the lads know better. Which can only mean . No matter how hard anyone try’s to satisfy every punter. It won’t ever happen. Because you can’t allow for bias.

Maybe it’s a case of they can’t be sure it’s a penalty. The ref made the error of blowing his whistle, although he thought he’d dived because Grealish kept going to ground everywhere.

COYP

Maybe a sign of the times though as usually do appeal for anything now!

They also said he played on so wasn't expecting a foul.

Would he have done if Lansbury wasn't free on goal ?

There’s another point here though - how is the impartiality of the referee affected if he’s making decisions based on a players reputation?

Well it is what was said because I said it. Refs also knew they’d be surrounded by a mob of angry Man U players over any decision. Didn’t mean they did anything about it though.

MOTD were pretty clueless really. Their's was the "howler".

It ought to be obvious why once the referee blows his whistle play has stopped - VAR hasn't changed that. Since the ball went in the net after play had stopped whatever else it was, it was NOT A GOAL. This is basic stuff!

Lineker & Co were certain the referee was mistaken in thinking Grealish dived - but gave no proper reason why. Jermaine Jenas said he couldn't have dived because he passed the ball - bizarre logic! If anything it shows it was a dive since Grealish was stable enough to pass the ball but apparently not to stay on his feet.

There was no contact on Grealish in the box - no one touched him until he dived at Gary Cahill. There was possible contact from Zaha outside the box. But a free kick decision is NOT within the scope of VAR - so VAR could not have overturned the referee's decision not to give a free kick.

It's possible that Villa should have got a free kick. But no one in the studio consider this and we didn't see any close ups to check if there was actually contact from Zaha. Most games have several controversial free kick decisions with barely a mention from the MOTD studio - these hysterics were so OTT.

Tim Cahill said that the referee should have allowed play to continue. Is that a new rule that Tim C has invented? The infringement was by Villa player and there was clearly no advantage to Palace from allowing play to continue so why wouldn't a referee stop play? Apparently so that VAR can reverse his decision. That's not a rule that I am aware of - have I missed something ?

So Villa may have cause to feel aggrieved that they didn't get a free kick in a very dangerous position - but nothing more than that. 1-0

I wholehearted concur, in fact I posted comments to this effect but just not quite so eloquently.
Some pundits make fools of themselves with their hogwash and lack of knowledge of the laws.

Perhaps our players having heard a whistle never made strenuous efforts to keep out the shot.Just a thought, I don't know for certain if this was the case.

At the end of the day, it would have been an injustice if A.Villa got a draw.I expected more of them.