25/26 - Non Saints Games

[aintforever]

That’s just bollocks, that was a goal. 

[Turkish]

1 minute ago, James said:

Think VAR got it right there.

Yep it was to be fair massive decision though for both clubs 

[Saint NL]

Its probably the right decision, but damn I'd be annoyed with the last ten mins if I was a hammer

[Saint Pete]

1 minute ago, James said:

Think VAR got it right there.

I think they probably did but personally I would prefer a world where VAR did not exist and decide key moments like that, it doesn't feel right. 

[James]

1 minute ago, aintforever said:

That’s just bollocks, that was a goal. 

There were two fouls IMO - one defender had hold of his shirt, another had an arm round his neck. Unfortunate that it came to it but was correct. 

[ChrisPY]

1 minute ago, aintforever said:

That’s just bollocks, that was a goal. 

The West Ham player had his left hand around the goalkeeper’s forearm and was pulling it down which stopped him being able to catch the ball. It was a clear foul.

[aintforever]

Just now, James said:

There were two fouls IMO - one defender had hold of his shirt, another had an arm round his neck. Unfortunate that it came to it but was correct. 

There were at least two Arsenal players committing fouls.

[Lord Duckhunter]

😂😂 How anybody can think that wasn’t a foul…

[pingpong]

First foul was by the keeper and clear.

Put those bubbles back in the machine.

[Osvaldorama]

They’d never have disallowed that the other way

[saintant]

31 minutes ago, Saint NL said:

Oh Fernandes 

Just lift it over the keeper and it's a goal. Terrible effort.

[Lord Duckhunter]

Of course it’s all a conspiracy 😂😂

[Lord Duckhunter]

Just now, saintant said:

Just lift it over the keeper and it's a goal. Terrible effort.

Yep, he cost them, not the VAR. Delayed it too long, I presume he thought the keeper would commit earlier. By the time he shot, the keeper was closer. 

[stknowle]

I guarantee if the roles were reversed on that goal we’d be hearing ‘And the VAR check is over, nothing to see here’. I detest VAR more than words can express. 

[stknowle]

4 minutes ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

Of course it’s all a conspiracy 😂😂

Did you think it was a foul worthy of having the goal disallowed then? Clear and obvious mistake by the ref? 

[aintforever]

It was just a complete melee, if you analyse it in forensic detail there would be a whole bunch of fouls committed by both sides. What was committed against the keeper was no worse than what the Arsenal players were doing.

[benjii]

It's definitely a foul, but lots of those go unpunished. Not sure what the solution is. 

[stknowle]

FFS I go back to the Henry handball against ROI. The same by Watford matey against us in 2-2 draw a few years ago. CLEAR AND OBVIOUS cheating/fouls. That’s what it is supposed to be for. No way on earth does what happened today fall into that category. 

[S-Clarke]

Raya was being grabbed on the shirt by Todibo, and had Pablo's arm stretched across his neck - Raya had two hands on the ball and would have claimed it, but couldn't get full control because he was having his shirt pulled and someone else pinning their arm across his neck. I thought it was fairly clear to me.

Goalkeepers are always afforded protection to a degree, and you can't really say that he hasn't been impeded from having a clean claim of that ball. Big call, the right call and some positive press for VAR for a change - impossible for the ref to have spotted that in real time, so VAR showed it's worth there.

If I was a WHU fan I'd just take that on the chin really, no conspiracy, no bribes - just accept that Fernandes blew your biggest chance.

[stknowle]

1 minute ago, S-Clarke said:

Raya was being grabbed on the shirt by Todibo, and had Pablo's arm stretched across his neck - Raya had two hands on the ball and would have claimed it, but couldn't get full control because he was having his shirt pulled and someone else pinning their arm across his neck. I thought it was fairly clear to me.

Goalkeepers are always afforded protection to a degree, and you can't really say that he hasn't been impeded from having a clean claim of that ball. Big call, the right call and some positive press for VAR for a change - impossible for the ref to have spotted that in real time, so VAR showed it's worth there.

If I was a WHU fan I'd just take that on the chin really, no conspiracy, no bribes - just accept that Fernandes blew your biggest chance.

Just rewatched on slow motion replay several times and TBF I agree. It’s technically a foul. Just like Rice embracing Mavrapanos just behind them is technically a foul. 

[Saint Pete]

16 minutes ago, benjii said:

It's definitely a foul, but lots of those go unpunished. Not sure what the solution is. 

There isn't a solution which is why I disagree with VAR so much. It seeks perfection in a game where you will never find perfection in refereeing decisions. As a few others said, you could probably analyse what went on at that corner and find another 3 or 4 fouls either way. Which ones came first, where do you draw the line? When a goal is scored, VAR is obviously geared to look for fouls that would disallow the goal, so that is mainly what they are focusing on. 

It's preferable to have no VAR and accept the decisions of the on field officials as in the Championship and below in my view. 

[Football Special]

That's West Ham relegated isn't it 

[Saint NL]

KWP and Fernandes' agents 

[Sheaf Saint]

6 minutes ago, Football Special said:

That's West Ham relegated isn't it 

If Spurs manage to beat Leeds tomorrow then yes, it's probably all over. 

After that, WH have Newcastle away and Leeds at home. Spurs then have Chelsea away and Everton at home. 

Can't see either team picking up many more points TBH. 

Leeds are guaranteed to stay up now as WH can't catch them, so it will be interesting to see how both those games play out. 

[SNSUN]

So basically, for West Ham to survive they need to win both their next two games against Newcastle and Leeds, and for Spurs to get 4 points or fewer from their fixtures against Leeds, Chelsea and Everton. 

Sadly, lucky Spurs will probably have avoided relegation. I can't see them be this bad again next season, which is a shame.

[Lord Duckhunter]

1 hour ago, stknowle said:

I guarantee if the roles were reversed on that goal we’d be hearing ‘And the VAR check is over, nothing to see here’. 

Do you actually believe this pony. 

[stknowle]

11 minutes ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

Do you actually believe this pony. 

Possibly a bit OTT with the guarantee thing but yeah I think it would be far less likely to be chalked off if it had been Arsenal that had scored it. 👋

[Turkish]

1 hour ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

😂😂 How anybody can think that wasn’t a foul…

Let’s remember one of them people who didnt think it was a foul thought our first half performance yesterday was because spygate had upset the players 😂😂😂

[skintsaint]

1 hour ago, Saint NL said:

KWP and Fernandes' agents 

Nah, think of the commision of pushing another move..

 

[The Kraken]

I was in the car after the game (I watched it on the telly) and there was a (rare) interesting conversation about the disallowed goal. It’s was pretty unequivocal that it was a foul on the keeper. But it also raised the issue that there were various other misdemeanours going on too. Most notably Declan Rice basically rugby tackling a West Ham player who had got the wrong side of him. The question was, if VAR is going to interfere, does it look at all of these fouls? And if so, how does it make the decision on what to do. Surely, once the ball is in play, it’s the first foul that should get given. But I don’t think the VAR even looked at it.

[Turkish]

57 minutes ago, The Kraken said:

I was in the car after the game (I watched it on the telly) and there was a (rare) interesting conversation about the disallowed goal. It’s was pretty unequivocal that it was a foul on the keeper. But it also raised the issue that there were various other misdemeanours going on too. Most notably Declan Rice basically rugby tackling a West Ham player who had got the wrong side of him. The question was, if VAR is going to interfere, does it look at all of these fouls? And if so, how does it make the decision on what to do. Surely, once the ball is in play, it’s the first foul that should get given. But I don’t think the VAR even looked at it.

That’s the general rule as I understand it. The first foul is analysed if it effected the outcome followed by any further fouls. Rice committed a foul but it was irrelevant as if Reya hadn’t been fouled then Reya would have caught or cleared it, had Reya not been fouled then Rices rugby tackle could well have been penalised. It’s fairly simple to work out and does need the “forensic analysis” Some claim. It was a foul on the keeper much as most people don’t want it to be right for once VAR intervention made sense 

[pingpong]

1 hour ago, The Kraken said:

I was in the car after the game (I watched it on the telly) and there was a (rare) interesting conversation about the disallowed goal. It’s was pretty unequivocal that it was a foul on the keeper. But it also raised the issue that there were various other misdemeanours going on too. Most notably Declan Rice basically rugby tackling a West Ham player who had got the wrong side of him. The question was, if VAR is going to interfere, does it look at all of these fouls? And if so, how does it make the decision on what to do. Surely, once the ball is in play, it’s the first foul that should get given. But I don’t think the VAR even looked at it.

First foul, but the result of the play was a west ham goal - so they're not going to pull it back and give a penalty instead of a goal. If they had decided it was a foul by rice but was not a foul on the keeper  they'd have just given the goal.

[The Kraken]

3 minutes ago, Turkish said:

That’s the general rule as I understand it. The first foul is analysed if it effected the outcome followed by any further fouls. Rice committed a foul but it was irrelevant as if Reya hadn’t been fouled then Reya would have caught or cleared it, had Reya not been fouled then Rices rugby tackle could well have been penalised. It’s fairly simple to work out and does need the “forensic analysis” Some claim. It was a foul on the keeper much as most people don’t want it to be right for once VAR intervention made sense 

Today I completely agree. If we’re going to have VAR then it should be to outline clear and obvious errors. I think today was a success for that. But we’ve seen many times before where VAR also goes and looks at offsides and other misdemeanours in the lead up to the goal. Often leading to many minutes of evaluation before a decision is made. That’s where I think VAR veers well off course; but once you invite video evidence into the equation it will begin looking at everything.

For enjoyment terms the championship has been wonderful for not having to put up with the video replay shit.

[Cumbria Saint]

Presume we are cheering for Hull tonight?

[skintsaint]

13 minutes ago, Cumbria Saint said:

Presume we are cheering for Hull tonight?

Don't care really, think we would beat either at Wembley. Just need to get there ourselves!

[SNSUN]

53 minutes ago, skintsaint said:

Don't care really, think we would beat either at Wembley. Just need to get there ourselves!

[Willo of Whiteley]

3 hours ago, skintsaint said:

Don't care really, think we would beat either at Wembley. Just need to get there ourselves!

I’m in agreement, I think we’d beat any of them at Wembley, nervous about tomorrows game.

[Zorba]

1st 20 minutes, Millwall looking dangerous! Come on Hull!

[Saint NL]

Hoping Leeds win is a really strange feeling

[Lee On Solent Saint]

4 hours ago, skintsaint said:

Don't care really, think we would beat either at Wembley. Just need to get there ourselves!

Least we forget that we've not beaten Millwall, Hull or Middlesborough this season!

[Saint NL]

Hull unlucky, this game could go either way 

[sfc4prem]

8 minutes ago, Lee On Solent Saint said:

Least we forget that we've not beaten Millwall, Hull or Middlesborough this season!

Ah, we're fucked then.

[Saint NL]

What's with the empty stand behind the goal at Millwall? 

Seems odd for a big game like this

[Turkish]

3 minutes ago, Saint NL said:

What's with the empty stand behind the goal at Millwall? 

Seems odd for a big game like this

Bottom tier of the Away end it’s usually empty for segregation reasons I believe 

[trousers]

Millwall 0 Hull 0 HT

 

[trousers]

Spurs 0 Leeds 0 HT

[ChrisPY]

Feel like a core of Patterson, Cooper, Azeez and Coburn would prove more of a challenge to our players than what Hull would.

[Sheaf Saint]

3 minutes ago, trousers said:

Spurs 0 Leeds 0 HT

Good old Beeb still maintaining their immaculate standards I see 🤦

Or are Spurs so shit that they can't even beat relegation threatened Spurs? 🤣

Edited 3 hours ago by Sheaf Saint

[Harry_SFC]

Millwall the better side as the final league table suggested. Hull have had a couple of good chances though. 

If we were to progress I'd rather play Hull for sure. 

[Gloucester Saint]

13 minutes ago, trousers said:

Spurs 0 Leeds 0 HT

They’ll want to win but a point would be alright. Can’t see West Ham winning at Newcastle.