Darren England
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In | RSS Feed
 dreamwaverider  London 04 Oct 23 2.24pm |
  |
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Phil’s Barber
That was just a ridiculous penalty award, which is also what VAR thought and why they advised Darren England to go to the monitor to review his decision. How he could look at it again and decide it was still a penalty is a mystery and a concern. The fact that he can make such a huge mistake regarding the Liverpool goal speaks volumes for his actual competency and explains a lot. Edited by Phil’s Barber (02 Oct 2023 7.55am) All I can assume is that he felt Richards only slightly touched the ball before Watkins tripped over him. Obviously in his over busy schedule touching the ball does not count. Richards definitely tripped Watkins, so he felt -penalty.
|
|
 Alert a moderator to this post |
  |
| Phil’s Barber Crowborough 04 Oct 23 3.08pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by dreamwaverider
All I can assume is that he felt Richards only slightly touched the ball before Watkins tripped over him. Obviously in his over busy schedule touching the ball does not count. Richards definitely tripped Watkins, so he felt -penalty. Yep, he also thought the original on-field decision was to award the Liverpool goal. Total and utter incompetence!
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Goal Machine  The Cronx 04 Oct 23 3.25pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Phil’s Barber
That was just a ridiculous penalty award, which is also what VAR thought and why they advised Darren England to go to the monitor to review his decision. How he could look at it again and decide it was still a penalty is a mystery and a concern. The fact that he can make such a huge mistake regarding the Liverpool goal speaks volumes for his actual competency and explains a lot. Edited by Phil’s Barber (02 Oct 2023 7.55am) Rose tinted specs. In my view the Watkins Villa pen was 50:50. Was right to stick with the original decision as it wasn't a clear and obvious error. Equally, would have been right to stick with it if no pen was given. If we want VAR to work effectively it can't be used to challenge every decision made. No one wants that. Benefit of doubt has to go in favour of the referees original decision. Many fouls are subjective with pundits and fans often split. Offside's are more black and white and decisions based on clear rules. The Liverpool offside was a clear major cock up. I don't understand why they couldn't just stop the game immediately once they realised their mistake.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Davepalace707 Northumberland 04 Oct 23 3.40pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by ASCPFC
Did you honestly look that up? No a Liverpool supporting mate sent it. As you can imagine they have several similar bits of info circulating
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Spiderman Horsham 04 Oct 23 3.42pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Goal Machine
Rose tinted specs. In my view the Watkins Villa pen was 50:50. Was right to stick with the original decision as it wasn't a clear and obvious error. Equally, would have been right to stick with it if no pen was given. If we want VAR to work effectively it can't be used to challenge every decision made. No one wants that. Benefit of doubt has to go in favour of the referees original decision. Many fouls are subjective with pundits and fans often split. Offside's are more black and white and decisions based on clear rules. The Liverpool offside was a clear major cock up. I don't understand why they couldn't just stop the game immediately once they realised their mistake. Took him 5 minutes to justify his original decision though. Obviously VAR thought it was wrong, would love to hear the audio
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
monkey  Sittingbourne,Kent 04 Oct 23 3.51pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Bexley Eagle
I cannot believe the bollox around they thought the goal was given on the pitch? Are they not watching the game? I reckon he was taking a leak or something. They’ve got one job basically, watch the game!! You would think that would be their main remit, to at the very least actually be watching the game. Now you get the impression it’s like Paul Merson in the Soccer Saturday studio
Made in Bromley |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
tshepp897  Dublin - Cabra 04 Oct 23 4.27pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Goal Machine
Rose tinted specs. In my view the Watkins Villa pen was 50:50. Was right to stick with the original decision as it wasn't a clear and obvious error. Equally, would have been right to stick with it if no pen was given. If we want VAR to work effectively it can't be used to challenge every decision made. No one wants that. Benefit of doubt has to go in favour of the referees original decision. Many fouls are subjective with pundits and fans often split. Offside's are more black and white and decisions based on clear rules. The Liverpool offside was a clear major cock up. I don't understand why they couldn't just stop the game immediately once they realised their mistake. The PGMOL issued an apology. So they obviously thought the decision was wrong in hindsight. Also there was a directive, yes another one, at the beginning of this season (or last I can't remember) that said that referees were to stop giving soft penalties/fouls - there is no doubt that the penalty was soft even if it does come under the "seen them given" category.
The cellophane illusion of a starry sky / Stretched over an open sore. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Phil’s Barber Crowborough 04 Oct 23 5.53pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Goal Machine
Rose tinted specs. In my view the Watkins Villa pen was 50:50. Was right to stick with the original decision as it wasn't a clear and obvious error. Equally, would have been right to stick with it if no pen was given. I respect your opinion and you may well have seen different footage of the incident to me. But the 3 or 4 angles of it and replays of it that I have seen, show Richards played the ball twice and won it cleanly. Presumably that is what VAR also saw and is why they sent Darren England to the monitor…and tried for 5 minutes to get him to see sense.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
eagleman13  On The Road To Hell & Alicante 04 Oct 23 5.57pm |
 |
|---|---|
|
Oh dear . . . Talk about "assassination" by social media & HOL. YES, he/they made a error(I'm being polite). How many of all of you could referee a game? C'mon, put up, OR shut up!
I'm a blind man, i'm a blind man, now my room is cold, |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| ASCPFC Online Pro-Cathedral/caravan park 04 Oct 23 6.08pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by eagleman13
Oh dear . . . Talk about "assassination" by social media & HOL. YES, he/they made a error(I'm being polite). How many of all of you could referee a game? C'mon, put up, OR shut up! I wouldn't advise the Liverpool forums.
Red and Blue Army! |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| A1969Eagle Redhill 04 Oct 23 6.18pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Slightly off track but what comes around, goes around. Jota was given that diabolical penalty a couple of years ago at Selhurst where he ran into our keeper and the ref said penalty.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| ASCPFC Online Pro-Cathedral/caravan park 04 Oct 23 6.27pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Davepalace707
No a Liverpool supporting mate sent it. As you can imagine they have several similar bits of info circulating I can well imagine.
Red and Blue Army! |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Login / Register
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2023 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.