Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

General Premier League Thread 2023-24 Mod Note in op 27/6/23 And 21/05/24

11213151718410

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 36,889 ✭✭✭✭SlickRic


    I don't know how you see that and could objectively see it that way. you don't know how i see what I see.

    So we'll leave it there.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,667 ✭✭✭doc_17


    So Arsenal sign Raya for about £30m and Chelsea sign Sanchez for £25m but word is that they still are in the market for a first choice keeper. Why didn’t Chelsea just get Raya? Unless Raya has been told he’ll be first choice at Arsenal?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 220 ✭✭Responder XY


    I've just watched it again. I still don't see what you think you see. Two players moving towards the ball bump into each other. Do you dispute that?

    do you think that the wolves player wasn't competing for that ball? (and if you do happen to think that - is he not then guilty of obstruction in that he is impeding the GK from getting to the ball?)

    If you accept that he is competing for the ball, how then is it anything other than a 50/50? why does the attacking player get some type of additional protection in this scenario? Is it something got to do with the relative distance that they came from? height jumped? that a different wolves player got the ball (does his team mate get protection as a result?)

    Also, which part of this is then clear and obvious enough to overturn the onfield decision?

    I'm genuinely interested - I don't understand the consensus that it was a penalty here so I want to break it down movement by movement to understand it.

    I'm not disputing that consensus - clearly if the ref and VAR are being stood down, they were wrong. I just want to understand why properly.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 36,452 ✭✭✭✭NIMAN


    It just shows how difficult a job a ref has in football .

    Half the replies here are "definitely a pen", the other half are "not a pen for me".

    So even with slo mo, and 10 different camera angles, and 24hrs to review it, we still have different opinions.

    So even with VAR, it still can come down to a matter of opinion.



  • Posts: 19,923 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    When I first seen it I thought it was a nailed on penalty. When I seen that the Wolves player who was hit wasn't the one that headed the ball I started to have doubts and can see why it wasn't given.

    If I was an impartial judge of it (which I'm not and doubt many here are) I'd probably give the penalty but without an explanation we have nothing to go on for what the ref's perspective was. There is a case to be made that it's not but it was a bit wild from Onana. Given the team who profited from it you are going to have a group looking for ways to defend and a group saying it's a joke. Never grey, always black and white. It could have been a penalty and nobody could complain really.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 36,889 ✭✭✭✭SlickRic


    in my opinion, Onana is clearly the aggressor in what you describe as the '50/50'.

    the incident, for me, akin to a pass from a player into the middle of the pitch, two Wolves players are waiting for the pass, moving onto the ball slow-ish. then Casemiro comes in much faster and more aggressively, misses the ball, runs into the first player (who didn't touch the ball, and the Wolves player wasn't necessarily going to get it), but the second Wolves player does get a touch on the ball, but nothing comes of it, and there is no advantage. that's a foul.

    i promise you, i don't care enough about this to argue too vehemently. that's just how I see it. i say again, Wolves shouldn't have needed the penalty, and not getting something from the game is primarily their fault.

    and I agree with NIMAN, it probably does show how difficult it is for referees. but it shows how difficult it is to discuss decisions around, in particular, Utd and Liverpool. anyone who says it's a penalty is automatically labeled a bandwagoner or bitter (I know you didn't call me that yourself), and anyone who says it's 100% not a penalty, 'they're just United fans - of course they'd say that'. the same thing happened with the Jackson handball shout in Chelsea/Liverpool.

    there comes a point where you just leave people to how they see it.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 17,662 ✭✭✭✭cj maxx


    It’s like when Shumacher ? the German goalkeeper took the French player out in WC’82 . He got away with it too



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,865 ✭✭✭✭Fitz*


    To be fair to the ref, there was an earlier penalty decision he had to make in the one where Rashford (I think?) headed the ball towards goal and the defender blocked it with his hand. The defender was deemed too close to the attacker to move out of the way in time, while having his hands tucked in neatly. Whether this is a rule change, or an increase in consistency etc, whatever, the referee made the same decision as a similar incident on Sunday and said no penalty. Consistency there.

    Late on in the game, Dawson went down very easily in the Man Utd penalty box. He wanted a penalty. I won't say he dived, as there was some contact, but there was not enough contact to warrant a foul. I think the referee was right here in both not awarding a penalty, and not giving a yellow card as it was not a blatant dive IMO. A coming together. So again, credit where it is due.

    I think he got the last one wrong though, and naturally that is where all the attention will go. Especially given that it had the most chance of affecting a game result given the timing of it. If the referees came out and gave their reasoning behind the decisions, it would be more understanding but they don't. They can't use the 'I didn't see it' line now as that puts the pressure on VAR who are now hiding behind the 'using the on field referee's decision' line in a constant cycle. PMGOL obviously thing he was completely wrong as they have stood down the referee & VAR team.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 48,902 ✭✭✭✭Mitch Connor


    Onana collides with a wolves player after the ball is gone - outrage a penalty wasn't given, refs stood down specifically because of it.

    Jose Sa collides with Antony after Antony gets to the ball first, no comment at all.

    Spurs keeper (sorry) collides with brentford player (sorry) after the ball is gone, no outrage, refs still in the mix for the next match day.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,567 ✭✭✭✭martyos121


    De Bruyne ruled out for three or four months, just to give other teams a sliver of a chance.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,166 ✭✭✭✭nullzero
    °°°°°


    United can look forward to every marginal penalty call being given against them for the rest of the season now.



  • Posts: 1,045 ✭✭✭ Van Tall Cemetery


    Doesn't warrant getting stood down for. We'll see how often it happens this season



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 35,108 ✭✭✭✭~Rebel~


    The Vicario and Onana incidents are fairly different aesthetically - the Vicario one is more like the other infuriating thing that always happens when a defender comes in late on a player who's shooting, making contact after the attacker gets the shot away. Simply getting a shot away before the foul seems to negate the foul, which makes no sense to me at all - since coming in late after they've played the ball is what makes it a foul!

    How someone coming in late after a shot is treated differently to someone coming in late after a pass is just bizarre. IMO, those should all be pens - for me, common sense would say the Vicario one should be a pen, and the Onana one should be a pen.

    Subscribe to save Boards.ie from closing down: The Bad News

    https://subscriptions.boards.ie/



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,235 ✭✭✭golfball37


    Can you stop equating the Spurs incident.

    The Brentford player got his shot away and collided with an on rushing keeper as is natural. The utd keeper ran ten yards and left one on a player



  • Posts: 12,836 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    They are two different incidents, both that should be penalties and both that football has a major blindspot for. Goalkeepers are currently the most dangerous players on the pitch due to the leeway they've been given.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,363 ✭✭✭Jinglejangle69


    I think they showed a replay on MNF and commented that Onana took his eye off the ball mid air and was looking at the wolves player when he took him out, so that’s why they think it should have been a penalty.

    If he only had his eye on the ball the whole time you could argue it was accidental.



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 18,758 Mod ✭✭✭✭DM_7


    Re Onana, if the ref gave a penalty I would not have complained as a United fan and I don't think VAR would overturn it. I can also see why the ref did not think it was a penalty as the contact was not of major consequence so can see why VAR would not intervene.

    In terms of others VAR decisions last season this was not a pen either, that time it was the Wolves keeper:




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 35,108 ✭✭✭✭~Rebel~


    Most fouls and penalties are accidental. If something isn't accidental then it's violent conduct and a straight red and 3 match ban or more.

    Subscribe to save Boards.ie from closing down: The Bad News

    https://subscriptions.boards.ie/



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 48,902 ✭✭✭✭Mitch Connor


    The spurs keeper ran 15 yards abd left one on a player.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,902 ✭✭✭Robson99


    You would swear it was as bad a challenge as that with way some are throwing the toys out of the pram over no pen. Probably helps to deflect away from there own clubs problems



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 17,662 ✭✭✭✭cj maxx




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,667 ✭✭✭doc_17


    The campaign to show more respect to referees took a bad hit today….referees make a mistake and they stood down….Probably was a penalty.

    Harry Maguire looking for £7m to leave Utd. He’s dead right too.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 5,840 ✭✭✭Widdensushi


    How can you respect them if they are getting things so wrong, surely there has to be penalties for **** ups and rewards for good performances ?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 862 ✭✭✭bingobango12


    Stop on. Do your job correctly and you will get respect.

    Referees are barely blowing for a penalty at all anymore. Simply waiting for VAR to do it and the less said about VAR the better. The referee in Brighton Luton made two penalty decisions himself so fair play to him but referees having the balls to make the call themselves now are few and far between.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,235 ✭✭✭golfball37


    Yes but he never took his eyes off ball unlike Onana. The collision was natural unlike the Onana one imo



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 35,108 ✭✭✭✭~Rebel~


    This isn't a collision like two lads going for a 50/50. If one player has the ball, and the other comes out specifically trying to get the ball - but fails, and cleans out the man, it's a foul. The fact the ball was already gone is one of the things that makes it a foul. If you commit to contact - as the keeper did - then you better make sure you get the ball.

    The "eyes on the ball" thing is moot - 90+% of fouls are committed by players with their eyes on the ball.

    Subscribe to save Boards.ie from closing down: The Bad News

    https://subscriptions.boards.ie/



  • Moderators, Education Moderators, Sports Moderators, Paid Member Posts: 11,854 Mod ✭✭✭✭artanevilla


    I just watched it and it's 100% a penalty. Don't understand how anyone can argue against. "Well x wasn't given a penalty against y" is not an argument either. Put Onana in an outfield players shirt and have him clatter into a lad without getting anywhere near the ball, do you think it's not a pen then?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 48,902 ✭✭✭✭Mitch Connor


    I agree it should be a penalty.

    But you are ignoring the fact keepers get away with clattering into opponents without getting the ball ALL THE TIME, in a way no outfield player would. So the argument of 'put an outfied players shirt on' is just as moronic a stance as 'X wasn't given'.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,303 ✭✭✭davemckenna25


    And would you leave the Man Utd jersey on him... Or let's say put him in a Spurs or Brighton jersey... That might also make a difference on how outraged people are at the incident.



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Education Moderators, Sports Moderators, Paid Member Posts: 11,854 Mod ✭✭✭✭artanevilla


    Just because they get away with it doesn't mean it's not a foul. Just because they refs don't have consistency doesn't mean a fan can't be consistent in their view on what the rules are.

    For me it's irrelevant, all teams should be held to the same standard. There is probably less Spurs or Brighton fans on here so of course an incident involving those teams would get less coverage here.



This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement