Red Dogs deducted 4 points

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andy_Faber

The best of it is, and I’ll defer to our resident expert MA if I’m wrong, but I’d have given all three as pens. Oh how we lolled

---

Not as clear as Huddersfields though

They might have a point, BUT, acting in this manner will hardly endear them to the authorities, whereas a combined protest from all clubs or at least a significant number might change things.

I see VAR chalked off a Coventry winner today and they supposedly brought it in to improve the game FFS!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by swaledale

They might have a point, BUT, acting in this manner will hardly endear them to the authorities, whereas a combined protest from all clubs or at least a significant number might change things.

I see VAR chalked off a Coventry winner today and they supposedly brought it in to improve the game FFS!!

---

I agree on VAR , I'd be happy to see the back of it.

But you cant just go around accusing officials of bias and cheating. It's just pressure tactics. l think Gary Neville was right that Clattenburg should have resigned , as a former referee to be complicit with such language is as bad, but he has gone further and openly supported the comments in the media afterwards.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andy_Faber

The best of it is, and I’ll defer to our resident expert MA if I’m wrong, but I’d have given all three as pens. Oh how we lolled

---

Not seen any of the Tw@twell bombs but I would remind posters that not every contact between ball and hand/arm is a foul and not every contact in a duel is a foul. If I stumble across them I'll have a look.

It's perfectly possible that he remembered a few years back helping the Dogs out by, wrongly, disallowing 2 Rams goals and decided it was payback time ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SithHappens

I agree on VAR , I'd be happy to see the back of it.

But you cant just go around accusing officials of bias and cheating. It's just pressure tactics. l think Gary Neville was right that Clattenburg should have resigned , as a former referee to be complicit with such language is as bad, but he has gone further and openly supported the comments in the media afterwards.

---

To backtrack a little…agreeing with your comments about Clattenburg, but not VAR.

I think we have to ask why VAR, or its equivalent, is used so successfully in other sports - horse racing, athletics, cricket, tennis, both rugby codes - but causes such acrimony in football?

Ultimately it has to be down to interpretation and human failings…but in defence of VAR…yesterday in both the Liverpool match and the semi final I believe VAR reached the correct decision for both Liverpool’s third and the disallowed - however much I wish it had been given - Coventry goal in a way which wouldn’t have been possible to the naked eye alone.
As regards the Forest match…two of those penalty decisions would have remained contentious, imo, regardless of VAR’s involvement. The third could, and should, have been given by the proverbial ‘blind man on a galloping horse’ and yet the fact that, even with all the available technology, it wasn’t remains inexplicable. That though isn’t the fault of VAR…it is, yet again, the fault of the deployment and interpretation of VAR.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ramAnag

To backtrack a little…agreeing with your comments about Clattenburg, but not VAR.

I think we have to ask why VAR, or its equivalent, is used so successfully in other sports - horse racing, athletics, cricket, tennis, both rugby codes - but causes such acrimony in football?

Ultimately it has to be down to interpretation and human failings…but in defence of VAR…yesterday in both the Liverpool match and the semi final I believe VAR reached the correct decision for both Liverpool’s third and the disallowed - however much I wish it had been given - Coventry goal in a way which wouldn’t have been possible to the naked eye alone.
As regards the Forest match…two of those penalty decisions would have remained contentious, imo, regardless of VAR’s involvement. The third could, and should, have been given by the proverbial ‘blind man on a galloping horse’ and yet the fact that, even with all the available technology, it wasn’t remains inexplicable. That though isn’t the fault of VAR…it is, yet again, the fault of the deployment and interpretation of VAR.

---

IMO the issue isn't about VAR its about Forest's statement. I actually think they set a strategy, by employing Clattenburg, to 'play the system' and its failed, and they are sore about that. As for who wrote the tweet, what were they smoking?

Note also, across social media last nigh, that Forest as a club and their fans weren't coming out of this well, despite, as I pointed out, all three decisions being questionable

Note also I didn't watch the game just the incidents

Agree, it's not about the decisions made, it's about the response. The PGMOL have told talksport that Forest never raised concerns before the game about Attwell.

Seen some highlights but none of the (lack of) penalty decisions. I'd appreciate a link if anybody has one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SithHappens

Agree, it's not about the decisions made, it's about the response. The PGMOL have told talksport that Forest never raised concerns before the game about Attwell.

---

Concerns about Attwell should always be raised…he is, imo, the most incompetent and clueless official I’ve ever seen in 63 or so years of watching live sport. Not ‘crooked’…just dreadful.

This properly made me laugh out loud

https://twitter.com/NOT_MOTD/status/1782414542720426154