DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
RateTheRef
HTML https://ratetheref.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: General Discussion
*****************************************************
#Post#: 97323--------------------------------------------------
Brentford v Newcastle - Stuart Attwell (VAR Paul Tierney)
DIR By: magpie1892
Date: November 9, 2025, 9:41 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Standard rubbish from Attwell as usual
Brentford 1st penalty shout, Attwell gives a YC for simulation
when was probably a penalty
Brentford 2nd penalty shout don't think there was much contact
at all, ATtwell gives it and VAR confirms, Burn had to go once
penalty was given as was already on a yellow so that was correct
Shocking decision from Howe not to Sub Burn after the first pen
shout like as he's had a mare and was on a yellow
#Post#: 97324--------------------------------------------------
Re: Brentford v Newcastle - Stuart Attwell (VAR Paul Tierney)
DIR By: TA_Ref
Date: November 9, 2025, 9:51 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: magpie1892 link ---
>
> Standard rubbish from Attwell as usual
>
> Brentford 1st penalty shout, Attwell gives a YC for simulation
when was probably a penalty
>
> Brentford 2nd penalty shout don't think there was much contact
at all, ATtwell gives it and VAR confirms, Burn had to go once
penalty was given as was already on a yellow so that was correct
>
>
> Shocking decision from Howe not to Sub Burn after the first
pen shout like as he's had a mare and was on a yellow
>
--- End Quote ---
Agree, not been a good performance by any stretch of the
imagination.
The problem with the 1st penalty shout is that he gave a yellow
card for simulation meaning Attwell thought Ouattara dived. That
was not the case, which means that that was a clear and obvious
error so I’m surprised no VAR review. I can support no
intervention if Attwell just waved it away because it was
minimal contact. But since he gave simulation, something that
was very clearly wrong then for me VAR should’ve intervened.
The second penalty, again very minimal contact. Didn’t think
Attwell had a good view of it anyway so I’m surprised he gave
that one. It felt more of a ‘I didn’t give the first one so I’ll
give the second one’. I can support no intervention since there
was some contact but again very very minimal.
These types of incidents are what confuses fans about when VAR
should intervene but it all stems from poor onfield decision
making.
#Post#: 97328--------------------------------------------------
Re: Brentford v Newcastle - Stuart Attwell (VAR Paul Tierney)
DIR By: Tonydent
Date: November 9, 2025, 10:15 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Seems like the ‘dive’ decision was wrong, but I’d say the
penalty given was correct. Just look at Burn’s reaction when he
realises he’s committed the foul. He was also expecting to go
off as well I’d say.
#Post#: 97348--------------------------------------------------
Re: Brentford v Newcastle - Stuart Attwell (VAR Paul Tierney)
DIR By: Leggy
Date: November 9, 2025, 12:52 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
"The problem with the 1st penalty shout is that he gave a yellow
card for simulation meaning Attwell thought Ouattara dived. That
was not the case, which means that that was a clear and obvious
error so I’m surprised no VAR review. I can support no
intervention if Attwell just waved it away because it was
minimal contact. But since he gave simulation, something that
was very clearly wrong then for me VAR should’ve intervened."
If the decision not to award a penalty kick was correct (or at
least not a clear error) then VAR would not choose to intervene.
If the decision to caution for simulation was incorrect VAR
cannot intervene (cautions not being within VAR's remit). It is
quite possible that the correct decision should have been: No
penalty, but no caution for simulation. If that were the case
VAR cannot help out as the decision WITHIN its remit was correct
but the decision NOT WITHIN its remit was not.
--- Quote from: TA_Ref link ---
>
> [quote author=magpie1892 link=topic=7394.msg97323#msg97323
date=1762702916]
> Standard rubbish from Attwell as usual
>
> Brentford 1st penalty shout, Attwell gives a YC for simulation
when was probably a penalty
>
> Brentford 2nd penalty shout don't think there was much contact
at all, ATtwell gives it and VAR confirms, Burn had to go once
penalty was given as was already on a yellow so that was correct
>
>
> Shocking decision from Howe not to Sub Burn after the first
pen shout like as he's had a mare and was on a yellow
>
--- End Quote ---
Agree, not been a good performance by any stretch of the
imagination.
The problem with the 1st penalty shout is that he gave a yellow
card for simulation meaning Attwell thought Ouattara dived. That
was not the case, which means that that was a clear and obvious
error so I’m surprised no VAR review. I can support no
intervention if Attwell just waved it away because it was
minimal contact. But since he gave simulation, something that
was very clearly wrong then for me VAR should’ve intervened.
The second penalty, again very minimal contact. Didn’t think
Attwell had a good view of it anyway so I’m surprised he gave
that one. It felt more of a ‘I didn’t give the first one so I’ll
give the second one’. I can support no intervention since there
was some contact but again very very minimal.
These types of incidents are what confuses fans about when VAR
should intervene but it all stems from poor onfield decision
making.
[/quote]
#Post#: 97350--------------------------------------------------
Re: Brentford v Newcastle - Stuart Attwell (VAR Paul Tierney)
DIR By: TA_Ref
Date: November 9, 2025, 1:06 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Leggy link ---
>
> "The problem with the 1st penalty shout is that he gave a
yellow card for simulation meaning Attwell thought Ouattara
dived. That was not the case, which means that that was a clear
and obvious error so I’m surprised no VAR review. I can support
no intervention if Attwell just waved it away because it was
minimal contact. But since he gave simulation, something that
was very clearly wrong then for me VAR should’ve intervened."
>
> If the decision not to award a penalty kick was correct (or at
least not a clear error) then VAR would not choose to intervene.
If the decision to caution for simulation was incorrect VAR
cannot intervene (cautions not being within VAR's remit). It is
quite possible that the correct decision should have been: No
penalty, but no caution for simulation. If that were the case
VAR cannot help out as the decision WITHIN its remit was correct
but the decision NOT WITHIN its remit was not.
>
>
--- End Quote ---
I’m not really disputing what you say but you may not have
understood my point and I’m probably saying this more from a
fans perspective.
We are told that VAR should intervene for clear and obvious
errors. The decision from Stuart Attwell was a yellow card to
the attacker for simulation. There is clear evidence from the
replays and camera angles that this decision is clearly and
obviously wrong because the referee has seen something different
as to what the cameras show. Burn has stepped on the attacker’s
foot despite minimal contact and it is probably a foul.
So I was expecting an OFR because what Attwell saw and gave was
clearly different to what the cameras showed.
I’m not disputing what is and isn’t in the remit of what VAR can
intervene on. We’ve already had a similar incident this season
when Josh King was booked for simulation against Aston Villa. I
believed that that incident wasn’t a yellow card for simulation
but it definitely wasn’t a penalty because there was contact but
that was initiated by the forward.
It is instances such as this that confuse fans to the extreme.
If you said to any football fan on the penalty incident at
Brentford today, do you think the referee has made a clear and
obvious error? Then I think the majority would say yes because
it certainly was not a dive.
Like I said if Attwell waved it away without cautioning for
simulation I’d have no issues because it wouldn’t have warranted
an OFR in my opinion.
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 1