URI:
   DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       RateTheRef
  HTML https://ratetheref.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: General Discussion
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 62440--------------------------------------------------
       Brentford v Newcastle - Chris Kavanagh VAR Darren England
   DIR By: magpie1892
       Date: April 9, 2023, 2:53 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Not sure if the high foot was a clear and obvious error
       Kavanagh had a good view and didnt give it, apparently look
       Michael Salisbury Darren England over 3 minutes to send Kavanagh
       to the monitor.
       Not sure how the high bar, clear and obvious applies here or
       whether Salisbury is looking too hard for an infringement.
       #Post#: 62441--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Brentford v Newcastle - Chris Kavanagh VAR Michael Salisbury
   DIR By: Hertsref123
       Date: April 9, 2023, 2:57 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Wasn’t Darren England the var?
       #Post#: 62447--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Brentford v Newcastle - Chris Kavanagh VAR Michael Salisbury
   DIR By: MCPridz
       Date: April 9, 2023, 3:48 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: Hertsref123 link ---
       >
       > Wasn’t Darren England the var?
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       Yes he was Salisbury was on Spurs vs Brighton as VAR so that’s
       where maybe the mix up occurred as there was dodgy decisions on
       both games
       #Post#: 62457--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Brentford v Newcastle - Chris Kavanagh VAR Michael Salisbury
   DIR By: ajb95
       Date: April 9, 2023, 4:21 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Despite the awful punditry again from the MOTD hosts for me it’s
       a clear penalty so absolutely correct to do OFR, not sure why it
       took 3 minutes, I only needed 2 replays
       #Post#: 62466--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Brentford v Newcastle - Chris Kavanagh VAR Michael Salisbury
   DIR By: takethejag
       Date: April 9, 2023, 5:23 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       After seeing furious posts on Twitter from Newcastle fans about
       Kavanagh/Englands' performances, I made a point of watching the
       highlights on MoTD. From the highlights, I couldn't really see
       what they were so upset about. The only point of contention was
       the penalty given after a VAR review. Personally from a point of
       law, I don't think the original decision warranted a clear and
       obvious error, so perhaps the review was invalid but it didn't
       affect the overall result.
       #Post#: 62469--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Brentford v Newcastle - Chris Kavanagh VAR Michael Salisbury
   DIR By: Boggle
       Date: April 9, 2023, 5:57 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       From the fan perspective on that one, I think it’s hard to
       justify that being a clear and obvious error that warranted
       review. Then for the review to take as long as it did makes it
       feel like they’re looking for something (not in a sinister way I
       hasten to add) but surely if it’s clear and obvious, one or two
       views by the VAR should be enough. If it takes that long to
       decide and scrutinise in minute detail then it surely can’t be
       clearly and obviously wrong and we’re getting back to
       re-refereeing games from afar.
       A lot of the fan comment online drew comparison to Schar being
       kicked in the head by Fernandes in the penalty area last week
       and no review being carried out. Various still images of the
       incidents placed side by side on twitter posts showing the
       relative height of boots and bemoaning the different outcomes.
       From my perspective, neither the incident last week nor the one
       yesterday warranted penalties, but the stuff circulating on
       twitter shows how one still image can lead people to different
       conclusions. There is perhaps a legitimate complaint in that one
       was reviewed and a penalty awarded whilst the other wasn’t even
       reviewed at all but fortunately neither impacted on the
       respective results.
       *****************************************************
       Page 1 of 1