VAR needed!

For all things Wealdstone FC

VAR needed!

Postby timfparks » Mon Sep 30, 2019 9:38 am

highlights from Saturday now online at
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=5RUHUVO4r ... e=youtu.be
... and it’s worth scrutinising Okimo’s early goal, ruled out for offside. The defender is unarguably goalside of Jerome when Ross flicks the ball on to him. What was the asst ref looking at?
And although it’s less conclusive as you can’t see Efete in the shot when the pass is played, presumably he is playing onside Havant’s Alfie Rutherford who runs on to score. But when Michee comes into shot Rutherford is four yards offside. Looks highly questionable. And was Phillips challenge really a penalty?
This sounds like sour grapes (and it is) but how did we not get something out of that game? DB and SM will be looking hard at the way our defence was bypassed on more than one occasion but on another day, as Paul Doswell conceded, the scoreline might have been reversed. Yes, let’s get angry and focused on the next game!
timfparks
 
Posts: 1958
Joined: Mon Apr 18, 2011 9:51 am

Re: VAR needed!

Postby timfparks » Mon Sep 30, 2019 10:14 am

The better video is the Havant one
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=boKKyIW9KsQ
Which includes the Okimo disallowed goal
timfparks
 
Posts: 1958
Joined: Mon Apr 18, 2011 9:51 am

Re: VAR needed!

Postby GingerGuy » Mon Sep 30, 2019 3:50 pm

I know you're only joking. VAR is a horrible intrusion and the Prem League are welcome to it. How can you celebrate properly if you're not quite sure someone's scored or not?
Anyway, VAR might have spotted Lafayette's push on the defender that allowed him to head the first goal.
I though the ref wasn't going to give it for a moment, and was mildly surprised when he let it stand.


.
GingerGuy
 
Posts: 285
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2009 4:26 pm

Re: VAR needed!

Postby Ronnie » Mon Sep 30, 2019 6:49 pm

GingerGuy wrote:I know you're only joking. VAR is a horrible intrusion and the Prem League are welcome to it. How can you celebrate properly if you're not quite sure someone's scored or not?
Anyway, VAR might have spotted Lafayette's push on the defender that allowed him to head the first goal.
I though the ref wasn't going to give it for a moment, and was mildly surprised when he let it stand.


.


Absolutely, clear foul. Tim's rose tinted specs only work 1 way.
User avatar
Ronnie
 
Posts: 2395
Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2009 6:38 am

Re: VAR needed!

Postby worruz » Mon Sep 30, 2019 6:54 pm

Ronnie wrote:
GingerGuy wrote:I know you're only joking. VAR is a horrible intrusion and the Prem League are welcome to it. How can you celebrate properly if you're not quite sure someone's scored or not?
Anyway, VAR might have spotted Lafayette's push on the defender that allowed him to head the first goal.
I though the ref wasn't going to give it for a moment, and was mildly surprised when he let it stand.


.


Absolutely, clear foul. Tim's rose tinted specs only work 1 way.

This is why VAR is bollocks on issues of opinion.

I thought he poked the ball away so I’m with Tim. Chelmsford fan on twitter saying it was a good tackle as well.

I’m sure there are many who thought it was a foul and many who don’t.
'I only want to help you Ro-land'.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZdUoZJvdipA
worruz
 
Posts: 2085
Joined: Wed May 10, 2017 12:49 pm

Re: VAR needed!

Postby Ronnie » Mon Sep 30, 2019 7:05 pm

worruz wrote:I thought he poked the ball away so I’m with Tim. Chelmsford fan on twitter saying it was a good tackle as well.

I’m sure there are many who thought it was a foul and many who don’t.


I was referring to Lafayette's push for our goal
User avatar
Ronnie
 
Posts: 2395
Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2009 6:38 am

Re: VAR needed!

Postby Stoney Ground » Mon Sep 30, 2019 9:01 pm

worruz wrote:
Ronnie wrote:
GingerGuy wrote:I know you're only joking. VAR is a horrible intrusion and the Prem League are welcome to it. How can you celebrate properly if you're not quite sure someone's scored or not?
Anyway, VAR might have spotted Lafayette's push on the defender that allowed him to head the first goal.
I though the ref wasn't going to give it for a moment, and was mildly surprised when he let it stand.


.


Absolutely, clear foul. Tim's rose tinted specs only work 1 way.

This is why VAR is bollocks on issues of opinion.

I thought he poked the ball away so I’m with Tim. Chelmsford fan on twitter saying it was a good tackle as well.

I’m sure there are many who thought it was a foul and many who don’t.


I thought the players reaction to the challenge was simulation, you’d of thought he’d had his ankle broken.
Stoney Ground
 
Posts: 2450
Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2009 8:01 am

Re: VAR needed!

Postby worruz » Mon Sep 30, 2019 9:28 pm

Ronnie wrote:
worruz wrote:I thought he poked the ball away so I’m with Tim. Chelmsford fan on twitter saying it was a good tackle as well.

I’m sure there are many who thought it was a foul and many who don’t.


I was referring to Lafayette's push for our goal

Ah i see. I thought that was a push at the time.

The ref wasn’t great. There was a pretty blatant foul on a H&W player near the end that he didn’t seem to see as well.
'I only want to help you Ro-land'.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZdUoZJvdipA
worruz
 
Posts: 2085
Joined: Wed May 10, 2017 12:49 pm

Re: VAR needed!

Postby timfparks » Tue Oct 01, 2019 10:12 am

My specs aren’t so rose-tinted that I can’t appreciate when we’ve been lucky too. Yes, that was a push by Ross and we were fortunate to win at Welling when not playing well. But overall we’ve bossed all our games and deserved to win. That disallowed goal for Jerome was clearly wrong. And the players were adamant Rutherford was offside for the Havant third goal. Not to mention the pen. It was one of those days when things went against us and it’ll happen again.
But keep playing as we are and we’ll be right up there. UTS
timfparks
 
Posts: 1958
Joined: Mon Apr 18, 2011 9:51 am

Re: VAR needed!

Postby Wobs » Tue Oct 01, 2019 12:16 pm

Well, I'm not so convinced that it was a push by Ross. If you look at the video, the tall bean pole doesn't even look aggrieved or appeal for a foul. I reckon a good header.

Like Tim, I think it's entirely feasible that linesman made a mistake to flag Jerome offside. Obviously, difficult to tell as the camera angle we have isn't in line. Definitely close though.

Same with Rutherford's goal - that looks offside to me but half way line camera angle doesn't help.

At the time I didn't think it was a penalty and having viewed the video a few times I'm still far from convinced.

So, their 1st goal was freakish and a keeper error. I thought The Ox was a little slow to come off his line for the 2nd - had he come quicker then he would probably have dived on the ball before the forward had first shot. 3rd goal offside and 4th wasn't a penalty,

I think we were unlucky not to have scored more goals - we could easily have had 3 or 4. That said we were well beat and I lost count of the number of times we were carved open and The Ox was faced with one on ones.

And a terrible challenge on McLennan that I saw from pretty close up and resulted in me having a verbal exchange with Ian Baird who took exception to the suggestion that it was a nasty/awful/dreadful foul.
Wobs
 
Posts: 848
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 8:04 am

Next

Return to stonesnet forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 27 guests