Serious question - did Dirty Weeds sabotage VAR?

[The Bedlington Terrier]

There really can be no other explanation for today's performance from the referee.

[1959_60]

I'm scratching my head about VAR too.

If a defender had made the tackle that Pope did, they would be saying it was a brilliant challenge.

And why was VAR not asked to look at Ashley's goal?

Numerous other decisions that went Leeds way all through the game.

Hopefully, the lads will be pumped up for Tuesdays game now, but Sheff Utd have an extra days rest and we are down to the bare bones again....

[Altobelli]

Only the refs 4th PL game, which is no excuse, if the one's coming through are like him it will get worse for us all than what it is now BT, VAR should have played its part in the weeds penaltiy but did phuck all (what is it there for ? ), I said on the commentary if Pope had got a full boot on the ball and sent it to the half way line would it have still been given as a penalty ? I'm not sure it would, in reality the keeper came for a 50 50 ball, both players touched the ball before coliding with each other, with no intent to foul from anyone, the ball spun away from both players and was safe, in the centre circle with 2 midfield players doing exactly the same it would have been "play on". . . . . . . . . unless one of them screamed like a child having their eyeball gouged out with a blunt knife.

[Altobelli]

And why was VAR not asked to look at Ashley's goal?.

The Twitchy new ref blew too soon 59, therefor stopping the game and players.

[alfinyalcabo]

The Twitchy new ref blew too soon 59, therefor stopping the game and players.

Okay,but why wasn't it used to check the challenge on Mee ?

[Altobelli]

Okay,but why wasn't it used to check the challenge on Mee ?

Goalkeepers are protected too much, Referees are also protected too much by their superiors, VAR, if it was used properly would be a good thing for the game, but the people in charge of it have not got a clue and as each game goes on they are shown up and embarrassed more and more, but will they admit its being used wrongly ? Not a chance in hell Alf.

It is like I have said on another thread, you must be seen to speak your mind (freedom of speech) yet Managers and Players are not allowed to speak out about the game/games because the establishment say it brings the game into disrepute, which makes those in charge completely faultless, just like MOTD and the rest, they don't tell it as it is because they earn big money and would not risk losing easy money and so tow the line.

[Supersub6]

Looking at it logically, the more that new referees are introduced in to the game at all levels, the more they will be indoctrinated with the FIFA directives that physical challenges should be penalised, one way or another.
Heading is dangerous and should be stopped and this will also stop players jumping to head a ball with their arms flailing---so less chance of injury there.

They will then be instructing coaches at Academies to adhere to these sort of things and the players coming through will be instructed not to tackle, not to jump, not to head etc. and within a few years FIFA will have achieved their objective and lots of fans will not realise just what has happened. Sterility through the back door.

[Norder]

.

If the Leeds keeper had done the same...was it a pen..... (names replaced) Mesler could have leaned back and flattened out, but instead...went to go for the ball, which he had no chance of getting, staying upright with his arms in front of Barnes caused enough contact to make for the tumble. As for the disallowed goal, the only way that could be seen as a foul by the ref....is from his angle...if he saw some super excessive bendy contortion from Mee that caused an obstruction on Mesler...but nah...can't see much there - jumping with his back to him, keeper makes it to the ball...but wrong decision..Punch it away...good finish from Barnes, the goal stands.
What Is sad....where's the making of good clean goals these days, all this squirreling around - offering up the game to the officals, suspect decisions, and players taking adantage of it....play the game ffs, stop complicating it - anyway, there's no team in the PL that have conceded more goals than Leeds....so what were Burnley doing, it's that inability to Score that promotes the controversy, brings it into focus, it's scrappy, scrappy football, thats why we spend most of out time talking about it's screw ups... .

[sinkov]

When even ex-referees are on his case, you know you've got a 'live' one. From the Daily Telegraph....

"Robert Jones' howler makes me wonder - is he fit to referee at the top level?
Jones was guilty of two major errors in his handling of Burnley's 'equaliser' against Leeds"
KEITH HACKETT
27 December 2020 • 4:20pm

Referee Robert Jones was guilty of two major errors in his handling of Burnley's 'equaliser' against Leeds.

The first was being far too quick in blowing his whistle for what he thought was a foul by Burnley defender Ben Mee on Leeds goalkeeper Illan Meslier, a decision which rendered Ashley Barnes' goal moments later irrelevant. He should have delayed blowing the whistle until Barnes had completed his shot: then, the decision could have been checked by the Video Assistant Referee and the correct verdict reached.

If it had gone to the VAR, the goal would have been allowed to stand: there was no foul on Meslier, who simply failed to deal with a high ball. Mee was not looking at the goalkeeper - he was just jumping to compete in the normal way. Football is a contact sport and there was nothing untoward in it.

Actually, that is not quite right: if Jones thought there had been a foul, there was a case that it could have been a penalty to Burnley given how Mee was flattened.

This was a worrying performance. Yes, Jones is new to the PGMOL - this was only his fourth game in the Premier League, and third this season - but he has had several years of experience at Football League and Championship level, and should not be making an error such as this.

It points to a general lack of succession planning at PGMOL, which has not spent enough time preparing the next generation of officials to come in and operate at the required standard, and it also makes me question how these referees are being coached and assessed.

Jones clearly needs some operational advice: his movement is pedestrian and at no time did he apply any dynamic sprinting to get into good viewing positions and appropriate viewing angles.

There were occasions when he lost contact with the game and in this particular instance, this shortfall in pace exposed him to the error of blowing too quickly and ruling out a good goal.

Referees have to be able to keep pace with the match they are officiating. Everyone knows that Leeds, in particular, play a fast brand of football where the ball travels quickly from one end of the pitch to another. Jones did not seem to be able to keep up with the game, which is a failure not only of his officiating, but of the appointment process."

[oldcolner]

When even ex-referees are on his case, you know you've got a 'live' one. From the Daily Telegraph....

"Robert Jones' howler makes me wonder - is he fit to referee at the top level?
Jones was guilty of two major errors in his handling of Burnley's 'equaliser' against Leeds"
KEITH HACKETT
27 December 2020 • 4:20pm

Referee Robert Jones was guilty of two major errors in his handling of Burnley's 'equaliser' against Leeds.

The first was being far too quick in blowing his whistle for what he thought was a foul by Burnley defender Ben Mee on Leeds goalkeeper Illan Meslier, a decision which rendered Ashley Barnes' goal moments later irrelevant. He should have delayed blowing the whistle until Barnes had completed his shot: then, the decision could have been checked by the Video Assistant Referee and the correct verdict reached.

If it had gone to the VAR, the goal would have been allowed to stand: there was no foul on Meslier, who simply failed to deal with a high ball. Mee was not looking at the goalkeeper - he was just jumping to compete in the normal way. Football is a contact sport and there was nothing untoward in it.

Actually, that is not quite right: if Jones thought there had been a foul, there was a case that it could have been a penalty to Burnley given how Mee was flattened.

This was a worrying performance. Yes, Jones is new to the PGMOL - this was only his fourth game in the Premier League, and third this season - but he has had several years of experience at Football League and Championship level, and should not be making an error such as this.

It points to a general lack of succession planning at PGMOL, which has not spent enough time preparing the next generation of officials to come in and operate at the required standard, and it also makes me question how these referees are being coached and assessed.

Jones clearly needs some operational advice: his movement is pedestrian and at no time did he apply any dynamic sprinting to get into good viewing positions and appropriate viewing angles.

There were occasions when he lost contact with the game and in this particular instance, this shortfall in pace exposed him to the error of blowing too quickly and ruling out a good goal.

Referees have to be able to keep pace with the match they are officiating. Everyone knows that Leeds, in particular, play a fast brand of football where the ball travels quickly from one end of the pitch to another. Jones did not seem to be able to keep up with the game, which is a failure not only of his officiating, but of the appointment process."

Ouch! He thought he’d had a good game. He awarded a free kick against Ben too.
No comment on that or their pen? At least both on MOTD2 said it wasn’t.
Is Hackett up to it?