Gomes handed three-match ban

Floppy not come out to defend him yet, or defend the flare incident injuring a Child, No didn't think so, neither has the Shite programme the Echo Not one single word mentioning it

All football fans want is Fairness, but while we have Sky, BBC and the press having Orgasms waiting for them to win the league, that ain't going to happen...
COYB...

But hey, he plays for Everton, doesn't he? So let's not be quick to condemn him. If only him and the rest of the cowards playing on Saturday had showed any sort of fight from the first minute... we might not have been beat by an already relegated side who had just lost 9 on the spin!

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=0DE78t79DQ8

They will simply choose to ignore it but double check for the slightest eye of a shoe lace looking the wrong way in favour of you know who.

Gomes being suspended gives someone a chance to prove they are good enough and against an attacking in form Man U will be up against it.

I hope its Davies. If not Siggy dropping deep, Bernard Central and Lookman left. Unfortunately I think Schnitzel gets another chance to do nothing.

But I'm sure some fans will say he played well because he didn't mess up or give the ball away to often. Not hard when you don't try a forward pass!

Gomes was embarrassing at Fulham so it's unlikely we will be missing him anyway but a shambolic end to a very frustrating season.

Personlaly I feel its all a waste of time supporting any club other tgan the sky backhanded crook teams...

If the spineless FA want to show their teeth on any point of order, they leave the Sky six alone and come after the next in line.. Everton to be precise. If its a manager, if its a player, it doesn't seem to matter. I only hope that next time someone wants to make an example of an incident, its defended vigorously by the club.

There are countless examples every week of players breaking the rules or deceiving referees but nothing ever happens..When exactly was any Sky club player made an example of ?? Can anyone remember?

The sad thing is, we are in the wrong, (well our player was) and yes he deserves what he gets, just give us a level playing field, some honesty, sadly lacking from the FA.

I agree with most on here. Gomes got what he deserved. No issue. Terrible tackle. Worse, is it was at the end of a game already gone and he now misses bigger games.

The inconsistency is terrible however.

Premier League referees are poor which is why they did not feature at the World Cup. There is clearly a bias towards the more fanciable sides. The Chelsea v Cardiff offside the obvious. Would the goal have stood at the other end? How about against Liverpool who seem to get all the decisions at the moment?

For so long we have been the victims of newly introduced refereeing decisions - Ferguson for jumping with arms v Arsenal, the Cahill red at City for shirt off celebration, the Rodwell "over the top" Derby tackle.

This season, Jags at Wolves never a red. Recent examples now get a yellow eg Mustafi when DCL in on goal.

Richarlison saw red v Bournemouth and now most games have handbags and little gets done - North London derby an example.

Zouma saw red for approaching the referee. Nearly every match sees players doing this.

Now we have to contend with retrospective suspensions. What about the big 6?

It is not just us. Leicester got charged with failing to control their players. What happened to Klopp when he ran on the pitch? Didly squat.

8 red cards out of 40 this season are for the so called big 6. 32 reds for the other 12 teams. Are the lower teams more dirty, more competitive, more likely to cheat? Of course not. The ref finds it easier to give a red when the game is not on Super Sunday.

No consistency and a clear bias towards the big 6.

They're all Sky clubs. We get our share of televised games like any other club in and around us. Yes, of course, the top 6 get favoured but invariably they throw up the best entertainment.

It absolutely pains me to say it but who would the viewing public rather watch? Liverpool v Chelsea or Burnley v Bournemouth? The big games draw in the biggest audiences. So I just wish posters would stop seeing some conspiracy against Everton — there isn't one.

I happen to rate Gomes highly and, given a pre-season and if we buy him, he'll become a big player for us. That doesn't excuse the naughtiness of that cowardly tackle but he should be punished.

A stupid foul, reminds me a bit of Felliani type of behaviour, in my opinion you need a bit of this to be respected in the prem, Keane done it, Gerrard done it, Vierra done it and Scholes done it, they kick on !

Let's get Gomes signed up and draw a line under this season as it's been a shambles if we're honest.

For me Davies has to play these 3 games to show what he's learned throughout the season.

I couldn't agree more.

It's time for Tom Davies to step up.

I love the kid, I believe in his ability, and I think if we afford him some patience we'll have one hell of a player.

The only positive from this - and I use that word loosely - is that we'll have a loan player unavailable, and a young talent and prospect has been given the opportunity to show his worth.

I know this kid can make the grade. I hope Marco gives him three straight games to get out there and get 'er done.

That's the biggest load of ‘codswallop' I've ever heard. What on earth drove you to figure out the drivers behind ‘being a referee' and you came up with that lot?

A deep seated bias sits there! A touch ironic based on subject of the post.

The rest of this rant is not aimed directly at you, the post was just trigger for me! 😃

Referees get more decisions right in a game than most of the players put together. If you treat the officials like a third wheel then you get what you deserve. Football in general looks upon officials as a barrier to success, something to lean upon when things go awry, someone to carry the can for a players weakness, an unequal partner.

I'd argue the strength of character to do that job far outweighs any vanity, it's certainly not for money and the integrity they have puts players who goad, cheat and feign their way through the game to shame.

The culture of football and the laws within it are outmoded and have created room for players to do and treat others and officials with absolute distain, the officials have only a limited gamut of sanctions. So commonplace is the dissent and cheating in the game, it's become accepted, because if you penalized it to the letter then we'd have 5-a-side, the players know it and exploit it. The root of the problem is not with the referees.

With VAR looming there has been a hugely disproportionate scrutiny on English officials this year. Totally out of whack with reality. Lots of ‘this would or wouldn't have happened with VAR', rather interpreting than the current rules. I'm just as guilty to be fair.

Poor decisions are just that, put them into context and move on. Do we keep bleating on about the errors players make six months on?

The level of preparation that goes into refereeing a game is mind boggling. The temperament not smack the idiots who prance around the field and bawl at you to contest a throw-in knowing full well it came off them. They dig away at every little decision, in order to ‘win' a bigger one when it counts. It's laudable anyone would want to do it.

The goal of an official is to not make a key mistake. Can you imagine that? They have no time to even think about previous games, and ‘favoring' of the bigger teams.

It's this simple; the bigger teams get more decisions because they attack more, have the ball more, spend more time in the opposition penalty area, and have to tackle less. It is just a numbers game!!!, not some weird conspiracy.

Well that feels better!! Thanks Andy!!

Referees undoubtedly favour some of the bigger teams, you only have to look at the disproportionately low number of penalties given at Old Trafford during the Ferguson era. However this is likely to be more down to peer pressure than vanity.

A penalty given at Old Trafford is scrutinised by 70,000 fans and all media outlets for days.

A penalty given at Cardiff is scrutinised by 20,000 fans and hardly a mention in the media.

You have to be 100% sure to give a penalty (or big decision) against the bigger teams, you only have to be fairly certain against the rest of the teams (that's not a slight on refs, nearly all decisions will have an element of doubt involved).

Refereeing is a ridiculously difficult job and the refs do not get the credit they deserve.

The root of the problems though, lie at the FA. If all diving, dangerous play and other forms of cheating were dealt with retrospectively and consistently, then it would make their jobs easier.

Davies, Schneiderlin or McCarthy can't do that but these three are all likely to be playing for their Everton futures.

If things don't start happening soon for Davies then I believe like many other players we've had at a similar age, he will realise he has to move on.

Schneiderlin probably has no long term future and McCarthy has already been told as much.

As for Gomes, I suspect we won't see him at Goodison again, which is a real shame.

Andy Crooks is bang on the money mate. The standard of refereeing and assistant refereeing in the EPL today is absolutely abject and it favors the top clubs far too often to be coincidence.
Like or loathe The Cardiff manager, his team were recently robbed blind against Chelsea. Only a proper pinball wizzard could have missed that offside. Poor, poor decisions like that regularly cost teams their premier league status. Sure they have to be poor sides to be down there in the first place, but that doesnt make them any less entitled to fair decisions.

Reading your post John, I suspect you have done a bit of refereeing yourself. Fair play, if that is the case, you will have a greater insight than most of us as to what inspires people to go and pick up the whistle. . but I still agree with Andy.
I can accept that those in on the ground floor do it for the purest of reasons, but the higher up the ladder these guys go, the higher their profiles become. There are several referee's out there who seem hellbent on making the game all about them - attention seeking fuckers. There are also a number of them who seem desperate to ingratiate themselves with the "superstars".

You say they make less mistakes than the players (a dead giveaway that you are a ref) but they don't have eleven opponents trying to force them into errors, in fact they don't have opposition. . and there are four of them these days. . why should they make so many glaring errors ? Stevie wonder would do a bettter job than most of these Lino`s.

Why are some players sent of for innocuous challenges, while others regularly get away with leg breakers ?.. . how come Salah is always deemed JUST onside when he is clearly a yard off ? How on this earth did that gormless twat miss FIVE players offside when we went to St James a few weeks ago ?

This is a multi Billion pound industry. unless a guy has played professional football himself, he should not even be considered to referee a top game. Former players will not be immune from mistakes, but at least they will understand the difference between a clumsy challenge and a nasty one.

I understand these guys are asked to make calls under intense pressure, but 95% of them clearly cant stand the heat. . they should`nt be allowed anywhere near the kitchen.

United in a slump but how will Everton react and which team will show up?

I hope that Salah gets a ban as well as surely he must if UEFA is about fair play? His foul was as bad as Gomes so there must be parity in the punishment.

We have too many players who cannot react to adversity, I have seen it too many times this season when we go a goal down. We never seem to have the mentality to continue with our game plan or confident play.

More often than not when a goal is scored against us we have no reaction or lose the plot. It is something, and another thing, Marco has to address.

Your post would indicate that you may have or still do referee games. Without doubt the hardest job, and the most criticized position on the field. I used to run a couple of teams and know the flack that refs get especially at grass roots level. I recently watched a game between a group of 9 year olds in Manchester, and they have a respect area where parents and others can watch from. All the boys shook hands with the referee and their opponents after the game, and the respect area seemed to work or it did for this particular game.

Having said all that at the very top level I think our refs are often found wanting, and maybe no coincidence that FIFA chose not to take any refs from this Country to the last World Cup. If you are or have been a ref I would be interested to know how come all the refs who operate in the Premier league before it became a full time job were people from professions or self employed people. Yet at grass roots level I only see working class guys refereeing. Now I know having the ability to travel and get time off work makes it harder for refs in normal jobs to progress, is this the reason.

I think until the FA introduce a system which fast tracks ex players who would not only understand the rules but more importantly would understand the game. Seems to me most modern refs lack the understanding of the game.

Two things here, if we want to become one of the Sky Darlings then we need to become a snide of a club. That means changing our mentality and, more importantly, the culture of the club. Get away from being sentimental and doing things quietly, make it known that you are Everton and you want people to recognise you as a big club, not one of these shy and passive clubs that sits in the corner like a mouse without a peep.

Secondly, get yourself known out there, get players who are going to ruffle feathers and get stuck into referees and linesman, get a manager who is a lot more animated and vocal on the touchline. You need a little arrogance about you and that will only come with confidence and having relative success.

If Everton feel small and feel hard-done-by, then perhaps the outlook of the club needs to change and they need to start putting in strategies in place as to where they want to be in the next three to five years. Think big and people respect you; if you're immune to change and remain silent, you will be walked all over. I'm afraid that's been happening to Everton for at least three decades.

Brian (39), the last line of your post was spot on.

Most fans recognise that referees have a very hard job to do, not helped by cheating players at every turn of the game,andhonest mistakes are made by them some of the time, but too often guesswork and poor judgement are made as well, doubt if any fans can say that biased
towards the top clubs doesn't happen, and these poor decisions can effect,not only the result of one game, but promotion and relegation as well.

John27 does this ring true with you?

I still can't decide whether he is worth the reputed £30m. Some sublime moments and yet too many ineffectual games. I wonder if he just looks good because we've had such a paucity of flair and creativity in the middle for the last year or two? The reality is that he has 1 assist and 1 goal in 24 matches. Superb against Chelsea, West Ham and Arsenal; woeful against Fulham and Newcastle.

If we do get him, and I think we will, I feel he could go either way next year.

I think when he has an off day, it is not just him. It is a combination of that and other players around him being bullied and less aggressive. Especially our wide men in tight away grounds. They seem to be affected by the away supporters down the lines.

For 20-30m I think he would be a good buy, but as you say, he still has work to do to find top level consistency.

On the question of referees, only the truly gormless could fail to recognize it is an extremely challenging task, be it at grassroots level (where physical and verbal abuse is extremely commonplace), or in the professional leagues.

I have huge respect for park referees as they are out there all alone against a potentially very hostile crowd.

I consistently see great refereeing across all the major leagues and competitions, even the English PL. However, in the main, I personally feel the standard of refereeing in the PL week on week is as low as I can recall it.

The 40-odd cameras catching every possible angle, replayed in super-slow-mo, leaves them no hiding place. But what concerns me more is their live in-game calls. And the linos must be included in any evaluation. There have been some truly shocking offside calls this season, not only in our own games, but other teams also.

I understand a game situation, whilst judged by the rules of the game, may be differently interpreted by different referees in the split second they have to make a call. For that reason, it is difficult to expect universal consistency across all games.

However, it is the inconsistencies of individual referees in their management and application of the rules which so riles supporters.

I get the argument that better quality teams who attack and are on the front foot more are likely to be rewarded more free kicks and penalties as an overrun lesser side look to hold them at bay.

But if you take just one statistic - the awarding of penalties to the opposition playing away in the Mersey Derby - since the 2nd World War, Liverpool have been given 11 penalties at Goodison. Everton at Anfield...a miserly TWO!

Given the 1000s of minutes played in those 70-odd years, it is IMPLAUSIBLE to believe that in that time that in the white heat intensity of the Merseyside derby, Liverpool has committed just two fouls in their own area against Everton worthy of awarding a penalty. So, what influences are at work here..?

As for the question of encouraging or fast-tracking ex-players to be refs, that's a non-starter for me.

1) what's the incentive to them, having earnt big bucks as a player?

2) given how late many players retire now, together with the compulsory retirement age of referees, they would have very few years to prove their mettle and work their ways up through the leagues

3) many players are not familiar with even the most basic of rules!

I remember back in the 1970s my one and only all-time hero Alan Ball missed a penalty at Goodison. I'm pretty sure it was in a 2-2 draw with Ipswich. His penalty rebounded back to him off the post without any opposition player touching it. Bally stuck the rebound home, but the referee correctly disallowed it because he played the ball twice. I knew that as an 11-12-year-old spectator at the ground.

On the way home, listening to the tranny, they interviewed Bally post-match and asked about the penalty miss.

His reply? "I hit it well enough, but of course when the ball came back to me I was offside."

I was left dumbfounded that my hero, the great man himself, was so ignorant of such a basic law.

Darren my post didn't say that the premier league standard was the best or couldn't be better, absolutely it can. I can agree with that without denigrating what does into being an official. Most posts on here go beyond criticism of a ‘decision' to a hatchet job on the individuals.
That really was my key point. Fans and coaches take no interest in what preparations take place to let them have a game of football. There is no empathy there.
It's interesting you think referees have no opposition. I'd argue they do! The attitude prevails that both teams, plus the coaches act grinding at every decision to wear down the officials. Why? Because they is zero respect for them, none. They very much are the third team and have to stand firm whilst grown men act like children, testing the boundaries. The oppose a referee no cooperate with them.

Until players, fans and coaches treat officials as equals in any sport, not just football, then you won't see the improvement you want. There are excellent referees out there, but the toxic atmosphere that top level players have created which filters down to grass roots has completely stopped the production line of officials.

In all sports the pool of those available to ‘do a game or two' has shrunk, so there no way you will generate a pyramid big enough to get potential to emerge.

It's a situation that's being prevalent since the 90s, we've done nothing about it and is now clear, 25years what the result is.

The quality of referees is down the to culture we've allowed to fester, we all need to recognize we play a part in stopping someone participating in a game because we couldn't control ourselves as a player fan or coach.

1) He has no preseason with Everton so couldn't really build up much rapport or blend with how things worked.

2) His first appearance for Everton was October 21st.

3) He has games where's he's anonymous and looks like a £5 million player and you can perhaps see the mental fragility that saw Barca want rid, they prefer strong minded winners.

4) Equally and against very point number three above, when Gomes is good he's bloody very good and looks like a £30 mill bargain, he's the only central midfielder we have that can carry the ball and I think we will appreciate him more in a bizarre way when we miss his presence on Sunday.

Who knows if we'll sign him or not but I think the Andre Gomes that turns up is a very good player and offers something that none of our other current midfielders have.

So am I. And I have an entirely different theory about why the big teams get the calls over the smaller fish (and they definitely do). It's not intentional bias, or trying to be pals with the superstars. It's intimidation, much of it unconscious. The big clubs have the massive fan bases, the huge media coverage, the world-class players, and the "big club" aura. The also have world-renowned managers with media platforms and certain sway over what games you get in the future.

And officials are unconsciously swayed by all that, just as they are in other sports and other venues. Debatable calls in the final minutes of NBA and college basketball games almost always seem to go the way of the top teams. We all feel it. Good officials are aware of it and acknowledge it.

I'm right with you.

Jesus we might even get to see Lord Lucan, James McCarthy, somehow I doubt it though!

By the way, why did Will Hughes of Watford only get a yellow for deliberately putting his studs right down his opponents calf in the last 5 minutes of their game. Absolute awful refereeing and not actioned further by the stupid F.A.

Mike Gaynes' point about subliminal intimidation is interesting. My take is that subconsciously, referees give 'better' players the benefit of the doubt. Certainly in the 80s we got away with a lot more when we were a successful side. That's why Richarlison and Barnes get sent off for innocuous stuff and 'better' players from 'bigger' teams don't. That's one reason why, with strong reservations, I'm in favour of VAR.

Regarding Gomes, I'd be in favour of us buying him, but there's one thing him and Bernard have in common; they don't score goals. And we need them badly.

Am I the only one wondering what Lukaku would have been like with these players around him? I'll be thinking about that till we buy someone who knows where the net is!

Not that i'm his biggest fan but I think Loftus-Cheek who may possibly be looking for a club who'll give him starts this Summer would bring the same ball carrying threat and elegance but with more end product, he has 8 goals and 5 assists this season despite only starting about 10 games. Also keep an eye on Ibrahim Sangare who has been awesome in France this year, more of a defensive player than Gomes and one of the few players in Europe to almost match Gueye's tackle stats and yet also has more dribbles per match than Gomes.

Gomes? We mustn't pay too much for him, he has weaknesses in his game and obviously nasty character flaws. If he is keeping Davies on the bench then I'd prefer that we passed on him and played our youngsters.

For me the answer is a simple one. The football governing bodies have to stop paying amateur wages to amateurs. Half of these guys have never kicked a ball yet they are controlling (sometimes dictating) games being played by people at the very top of their profession.
There are hundreds of ex pro's who still need to earn a living and I do mean hundreds. They need to be enticed back into the game and the way to do that is to pay a rate befitting of what would be a high profile profession.

Your are right when you say referees don't get respect, but so many of them do very little to earn it. . simply turning up isn't enough. Most people who play the game (at any level) look at referee's with suspicion. They wonder why they do it ? why would anybody put themselves up for such abuse ?. . for little or no reward ?. . what sort of person would want to do that ?. . You see I'm an arl cynic. I don't believe they volunteer to suffer all that abuse just so everyone else can enjoy themselves.

I knew most of the local referees by name and sight when I played and managed, but I have only ever known three properly. . and all three had a touch of the doctors receptionist about them.

I don't believe a pyramid cannot be created. The EPL should start the ball rolling by offering big money for the best. anyone found wanting could and should find himself sliding down the order.
I think most fans and players would have far more respect for a guy who has actually seen the game from the other side

You overlook some other reasons that we referees enjoy it. In my case, I liked being involved in games of a far higher level than I could ever have played in. It's a much more fun way of staying in shape then jogging on a treadmill. And most of all I'm a self-important old fart who likes to be in charge.

But I don't think your idea of hiring ex-footballers as referees can work. You can't pick up a whistle for the first time at age 30 and be ready for the Prem at 35.

They are both just so strong, fast, athletic and basically fuckin hard to beat,

How good is this Spurs/City game ?

Otherwise our worst nightmare of the Shite winning the two big ones are becoming more and more real as each day passes.

VAR worked very well tonight, didn't it?

Without it, City not Spurs would be in the semi-final tonight.

👏👏👏

City will murder them at the weekend.

PT Barca/Ajax ?. . please let it happen

The offside is judged the moment the ball deflected off the City player. It doesn't matter if it was unintentional or a mere deflection.

The talk after the game is about var not about how good both teams were. We had Peter Walton revelling in the attention whilst talking about the ball hitting llorente's knee.

The instinct, reaction, euphoria and celebration of a goal is now dampened by a minute or so whilst the TV ref makes the decision.

I can just see in a couple of years time when a goal goes in at Goodison and the already tepid atmosphere is strangled until a flash on the scoreboard confirms VAR has awarded a goal and half arsed celebrations commence.

I am just not a fan of the system and think it detracts from the spectacle. I am a neutral watching a fantastic game but feel VAR has stolen the spot light away from the game.

I agree with Rob. I was all for VAR, but it just doesn't feel right. In time the initial reaction to a goal will be muted until you're sure it's going to be given. Everyone has always had a quick glance at the lino during celebrations of a goal that looked tight, but VAR may well take the fun out of the greatest part of the game. The sheer euphoria and joy that every fan feels when his/her team scores will now be hesitant and held back while we wait for confirmation.

I don't think I want the correct decision from VAR. I want it from the officials while it happens. If they miss it or get it wrong, it's part of the game. Nobody's perfect. VAR certainly isn't.

at the Etihad semi when the cross from behind the by line led to their goal.
at Wembley in 1984. Handsen.
at Villa Park semi in 1980 when Kidd was sent off for fighting with an opponent who was already booked and stayed on the pitch
at Maine Road in 1977

I'm not bitter.

In trying to obtain refereeing perfection within a fast paced, reactive and tactical game with overly complicated rules. The game is in danger of becoming too sterile.

We will undoubtedly lose the immediate joy of celebrating a goal knowing that it could be cancelled for an infringement that may or may not have happened in the previous phase of play.

One man's meat is another man's poison. VAR just isn't for me.

Whilst I agree in some games I've watched VAR decision-making has been too tardy and taken too long, I can't agree with your post in reference to tonight's game.

Yes, VAR was naturally discussed given how central it was to awarding Spurs the deciding goal and denying City a late winner. But overwhelming the talk WAS about the drama and high quality of an outstanding game of football that both teams and all the players (and officials) contributed to.

I can't agree with you that "the instinct, reaction, euphoria and celebration of a goal is now dampened by a minute or so whilst the TV ref makes the decision."

It very much ADDED to the drama, especially the call to rule out City's 'winning' goal. You had the Spurs players on their knees, heart-broken. Their fans with their heads in their hands. The City player and manager going ape-shit. The blue half of Manchester being even more ape-shitier.

And then...the drama. Everyone on tenterhooks, both in the stadium and the global watching audience. Everyone of the refereeing team got it right and a HUGE, result-changing call was made.

In an instant, the Spurs players and their fans are disbelieving and estatic. The City players and their followers desolate and forlorn.

This is what VAR can add to the game.

I also liked how the ref 'humanised' the whole process when, after seeing nothing to rule out Spurs' third goal, he spread his arms out, gave a down-turned mouth expression to effectively say, "Phtt! How can I rule out the goal on that evidence?"

Great theatre!

(Clue; a & b, probably won't be right.)

First up, feck right off with your condescending labelling of me as 'an armchair fan'.

Secondly, you evidently weren't paying attention to the game tonight (presumably from your own armchair) if you believe "football will be dead if VAR results in the diminishing of the intensity in the emotions resulting from a goal being scored."

It ELEVATED 'the intensity in the emotions', not diminished it.

And the correct decision was arrived at both times VAR was used tonight. What's not to like?

People such as yourself seem predisposed to oppose VAR on presumptions.

I acknowledged already I have watched games when VAR decision making was too tardy and slow. That included last summer's WC, but by the end of the tournament it was working very slickly. It was/is inevitable there will be teething problems as all involved become familiar with it.

Those still complaining about VAR's implementation, I wonder if you have considered this: yes, the game is paused whilst the referee reviews the call. But so was the game 'paused' in mob protests under the 'traditional' way of doing things.

As much time - even more! - was lost with players from both sides surrounding the harassed referee, trying to influence his decision, leading to bookings, expulsions and bad feelings for the remainder of the game, oft times ruining it as a spectacle with the referee struggling to keep a lid on heightened emotions.

Whilst VAR is being reviewed, do you see mobs of players surrounding the referee? No.

Do you see mass bookings as can result from said mob protests under the 'traditional' way of 'doing things'? No. There is acceptance. The immediate heat has been taken out of a possible mob protest because the ref goes off the field to consult the replay.

I note a few posters opposed to VAR lean towards favoured conspiracy theories, that it will only further benefit the 'Big Six'. As already evidenced, the main issue with VAR is that the decision still comes down to personal opinion and one man's (the referee) interpretation of a play.

But I take a more optimistic view, that the all-seeing eye of VAR has the potential to make it a much more level playing field for all.

As Paul Tran writes @ 108, I certainly would have liked VAR to have been implemented in the Everton games he lists.

If the people in the ground could see what we can on TV then it would solve these problems.

That's the biggest issue, all anyone in the ground can see is nothing while it is being reviewed. Stick it on a big screen like rugby, keep the supporters who have paid a fortune to attend the game in the loop, and VAR should work.

Think you have highlighted that VAR is taking the emotion out of the players in heated situations with your comments.

Take the emotion out of the players you reduce the emotion from the crowd and reduce the experience.

It will get to the point we're a player will score and not celebrate until the goal is ratified by a panel of refs in a room analysing 6 screens.

I must have seen 20 replays of Llorente's goal last night and still the decision was inconclusive. In this case did VAR 100% prove no arm was involved. No it didn't.

VAR is here whether I like it or not.
It has been used in Rugby and Cricket for years. Hopefully it will improve the experience and engage better with fans. I just won't hold my breath.

The introduction of it could have been really useful but not the way they are currently going about it I'm afraid.

You just can't stop the game for 60 seconds or sometimes longer after a huge goal has been scored, it's basically taking away the excitement and everything that makes football special for match going fans.

Imagine scoring what we think is the winning goal at the Gwladys Street End in the Merseyside Derby and before actually celebrating when the ball hits the net, we have to wait over a minute while the referee trots over to the touchline and starts watching the telly and canoodling with his officials knowing that he's going he disallow it anyway and cancel all of our celebrations?

It's simply another nail in footballs coffin in my opinion, if it's not bad enough that the game has been jacked off by the money clubs dominating the top six, it's just gonna get worse with the introduction of this slow motion video doctor.

The difference with Hawk Eye in tennis is that's actually working and seems to fit in with the fast motion of the game as it doesn't require officials running across the pitch and discussing it, it's just up on the screen end of.

all that rolling over clutching their faces is pure shite

So basically instead of the referee making the decision on his own, it's just now a groupee fuck up.

Does anyone seriously think Don Hutchison's goal against Liverpool would have counted even if VAR was used back then?

Like hell it would, four or five corrupt officials would still have sided with Westerveld that night even after a long discussion.

It's shite.

The only hope might be that the lawmakers decide to scrap the current offside law. It was surely never intended by the game's forefathers to measure an advantage or disadvantage by a stray appendage.

Mike @ 118. Your post is simply wrong.

Rob @ 120. Your post affirms what I said earlier. Some folk are predisposed to see ill in VAR and so find any means they can to oppose it.

You contrive a way to argue that taking negative, aggressive emotions out of the game and decision making as a case against VAR. That is completely different from dampening down the positive joyous emotions of players and fans alike you originally complained about. And last night's VAR decisions did no such thing for the latter, anyway. It added to, and elevated, the emotions.

You then let your imagination run away with you and predict some dystopian world when players will no longer celebrate goals and the live audience will be numbed blank-faced emotionless cattle.

I really don't know what you are arguing for in your offering of the VAR call on Llorente's goal last night. If you insist every VAR call must be 100% conclusive, then be prepared to be disappointed. It is intended to overturn clear and obvious errors. The (excellent) referee's reaction (as I pointed out earlier) on making his decision said everything: he didn't see enough to not allow the goal to stand. Correct call.

Jim @ 121 and 127.

Billious nonsense, Jim. Another one given to imagining a future form of 'dystopian football' due to VAR.

Martin @ 126. Seriously..?

Stan @ 129. The good ole 'systemic corruption' distractor to a debate, implying (I can only presume) there are dark forces eternally at work favouring certain clubs.

The transparency of VAR will make it harder to sustain such 'systemic corruption,' surely?

Is VAR and its implementation perfect and working efficiently? Not yet. But with time, experience and tweaking it will improve. I for one am willing to give it time, rather than be predisposed to opposing it with fabricated fantasies predicting its dire consequences for our future viewing pleasure.

You 'don't know' but you 'suspect' etc.

Taking your view to its ridiculous conclusion, there is no point in inventing or introducing new technologies, evolving society or combatting crime and corruption 'cos the crooked beneficiaries of 'the system' will only find ways around it.

Thankfully, the history of the world doesn't tally with such a passive submissive view.

We all have differing opinions on VAR. I do respect your views even if I don't agree with them.

Being a natural cynic, I can't ever remember being accused of letting my imagination run away with itself.

Think I will go and watch the replay of the llorente goal again for another 20 times that should heighten emotions or maybe listen to the new found star of bt sport Peter Walton talking about how the ball hit his knee before going in.

Wonder what the city and spurs fans were doing whilst Mr Walton got back into the spotlight for a couple of minutes.

Are you an anti-conspiracy theorist by any chance?

It was offside, and Spurs (the underdogs of the tie) won, deservedly so.

I have in general been a sceptic, but yesterday proved VAR can become a valuable part of the game - many creases to be ironed out.

But imagine if we had VAR when McCallister chose to walk the ball 30 yards forward for a last minute free kick, or if we had VAR when Carragher rugby tackled Lescott.

There is potential, and of course gratuitous over use will need to be clamped down upon.

And at the end of the day, VAR is here and is here to stay. It is part of the game nowadays. So how we adopt it ia what needs to be discussed.

Rob @ 135. And I respect your views but don't agree with them. I'm not denying your right to hold such an opinion - never have, on TW. I'm contesting your views with my own.

And you do yourself a disservice. In this thread you've imagined a number of future scenarios that you believe will result from VAR.

Stan @ 136. Nice editing of your own words, Stan.

In your original post @ 129, YOU were the first in this thread to imply linkage between VAR and 'systemic corruption in the game.'

Your use of the conditional 'if' there is systemic corruption in the game was immediately followed by these words in brackets: (and there does appear to be).

It's not unreasonable to conclude from your own words that you believe there is systemic corruption in the game.

Your further comment 'expecting VAR to have a significant benefit seems like expecting the Titanic not to sink by rearranging the deck chairs' reinforces the impression you believe that new innovations are futile because (as you offer in your post @131) 'If the corruption is systemic, any new systems introduced can be administered in a way that makes no improvement materially.'

All very vague assumptions which you yourself acknowledge in your own words 'I don't know' and 'I suspect.' To me, you are presuming a causal link and consequence based on little or no evidence.

Reverse angle(not used by VAR) of the Llorente goal clearly shows it hitting his arm. City should feel hard done by, and I'm saying this as a neutral.

It also kill the game for me if after every goal/major decision the game is stopped. Not against VAR, but it isn't working for me as yet.

So the issue is not VAR, but rules of the game.

It seems as of next season it will be considered hand ball, but this season it is a valid goal.

Are you an anti-conspiracy theorist?

As for being pro or anti-conspiracy theorist, I'm neither.

I'll consider, evaluate and reach my own conclusions on matters and information that interest me, rather than hold fast to a starting position that tends to dictate what a final assessment will be.

I'm also open to changing my opinion if and when compelling new information or evidence comes to light.

What about you, Stan..?

Also I understand next season the handball rule changes, next season if the ball hits your arm or hand in the box it is automatically a penalty. Doesnt matter if your hands were down by your side and you didnt make any movement to the ball, if it hits your arm or hand its a penalty. So I am sure clever attackers once inside the box will look to flick the ball onto the defenders arm knowing a penalty will be given.

I think the only rule changers that have improved the game over the last 20 years has been the back pass to the goalkeeper.

PS - I don't post to raise a laugh so please stop asking if I'm serious. I have different opinions to you but they are every bit as valid.

The game is very simple, or it was, it's getting more complicated by the fools who introduce these new laws or rules, who are these fools? do they have names?

Would love to meet up with you guys on Sunday but I have my 10-year-old grandson with me so that and it being Easter Sunday (family commitments) make it impossible. I'll be there in spirit - have a great time! COYB

As for the lack of consistency (and Everton always being on the receiving end) I have no time for that either. It serves no purpose for us to whinge and whine about what punishments other teams' players receive.

If we truly believe that the big boys get away with murder than our goal should be to become one of the big boys.

If the spontaneity and immediacy of the game are to be set aside routinely, if the moment of ecstasy is to be stifled in the throat, then (with acknowledgement to Jane Austen) it may be much more rational but it will not be near so much like football, or at least the sort of football most of us have learned to love and to love moaning about.

Further technology will still rely on human interpretation.
I say lets do without it and at least retain our sanity and ability to be moved emotionally by a continuous landscape.

What say you ??

There appear to have been more alterations in the last few years than there had been since 1888, when League Football was first played. I am firmly in the ANTI VAR CAMP, we have all witnessed goals conceded by Everton that should have been disallowed, and goals scored by Everton that also should have been disallowed, but we tend to forget the latter.

Like you Martin, I believe that the match going supporter appears anti VAR, while the TV supporter appears to be in favour of it. I have stated on this site many times, that I embraced the introduction of goal line technology because the decision is instant.

I live in the Scottish Highlands, so I don't get to many games. My humble apologies to one and all.

That issue is irrelevant to me. There are numerous cases of us being hard done by over the years, most of which would have been sorted by VAR. I'd have happily waited a minute or two for the right decision to be confirmed and seen us get to cup finals, take the lead in cup finals, etc.

Or has my mind been corrupted by a few years of watching most games on the telly?

I remember when you gave as good as you got not necessarily fairly, but stamping is out of order.

You surely can't defend Gomes for that stamp, the ball was nowhere near.

Nobody else seems to share your view.

Let's clear some things up, Martin. I gave a one-word response to your original post (@125) in this thread. You took two posts to respond you were being serious about your fanciful claim (and that's being kind) in your original post.

I give you full marks for imagination that you dreamt up the highly speculative scenario you predict for grassroots junior football as a direct consequence of VAR. I don't score you very highly on logic, reason and rational on implying it is inevitable your imagined scenario WILL come to pass.

Nor do I score you highly on a number of presumptions you make, about others and yourself.

I have coached junior sides, both in the UK and Portugal, so false presumption #1 you make is that I'm not aware of parents' antics at junior games in the UK. I am. Furthermore, the implication in your words is that poor parental conduct is rife and apparent at the majority of junior games. That is far, FAR from the case.

False presumption #2 (and I will extend this to John Mc @ 157).

You and John are making a HUGE claim that you simply cannot validate. Namely, that match-going fans are against VAR whilst TV supporters are for it.

In making the claim you do, you know nothing (taking myself as an example) of my own match-going history. I've done my time following Everton up and down the country and abroad, attending 100s of matches in my day.

I continued (and continue) to be a live match attending supporter on pretty much every continent on the planet. I've been in a stadium at a fierce local derby where the supporters of the losing side started ripping up the terracing and stoning their rivals. I've been at matches where I thought ‘bugger me, those fireworks are loud!' only to realise scores of supporters were shooting hand-held pistols into the air.

To quote Paul Tran @ 160 (who labels the match-going v armchair fan comparison you make as "bollocks!"), "Or...has my mind been corrupted by a few years of watching most games on the telly?

That leads me on to false presumption #3 you make about yourself. I don't care for your sleight of hand by which you (and John) attempt to elevate your opinion on VAR as superior to non-match goers simply because you are fortunate enough to attend live games at Goodison Park.

As is evident every week on TW there is rarely, if ever, a consensus on any issue related to Everton. Opinion is diametrically opposed regardless of whether you are a match goer or not.

In closing, in answer to your PS addressed to me @ 148, namely: “I don't post to raise a laugh so please stop asking if I'm serious. I have different opinions to you but they are every bit as valid.”

A couple of things Martin. Have I denied you the right to post, or claimed your opinion is invalid? No. I raised an eyebrow at your original post. Nothing more.

You, on the other, are trying to be prescriptive and instructing me on how and when to post and who I am ‘allowed' to post to.

Ain't gonna happen, Martin. I will continue to exercise my right to post how, when and to whoever I care to. A right that quite correctly extends to everyone contributing to TW.

Note referees are given interpretation outside the laws for each competition, each season. This season UEFA asked referees not to allowed a goal ‘scored' accidentally with a hand. I believe that's the more the issue with this particular goal.

From next season handball will effectively be just that. It's likely any contact other that from a defenders body onto their hand will be given. It's quite likely the skillful players will just shoot at defenders arms. Pretty much they want a subjective law to become binary. That's one very slippery slope. ☹️

I still think they will fudge it in some way or have a re-think or the number of ‘expected' penalties will dramatically rise. However that's what the TV guys want, and the game becomes ever more anodyne. That's it pure and simple.

I'm all for VAR where the issue is binary. Beyond that the project has over reached, too many marginal decisions being classed as clear and obvious errors.

I cannot wait for VAR to stoke the TW pages

Paul #160, great post, great laugh. Love ya mate.

While I'm within my ten lines rule, I'd like to add my vote to those who say match-goers are less likely to be in favour of VAR than those watching it on TV.

You appear to me Jay, to be someone who relishes a verbal contest, but I have no intention of being involved in a war of words.

Having said that, no doubt if we had scored that goal then it would have been disallowed!! 😕😕

"Rugby, cricket, tennis, baseball, American football, and basketball all have many more natural breaks in the action. All of these sports use VAR without appearing to disrupt the natural flow of the game."

Um, no. You are mistaken.

I can't speak to rugby or cricket, but of the other sports you cite, only tennis deploys VAR without disrupting the "natural flow of the game." In American football, baseball and basketball, VAR is not used within the natural breaks in the action. Almost all reviews must be called for, and all require the officials to either come to the sidelines to look at a monitor or wait for someone else to do so (and in baseball that "someone else" is in New York). The delays can often stretch into several minutes. A recent NCAA basketball tournament game required nearly 19 minutes to play the last minute of the game because of two lengthy video reviews. This remains the most controversial aspect of replay here.

And as for "points are sometimes barely applauded", no again. Only when a game is already long decided. Trust me, college football fans celebrate touchdowns just as long and loud as Prem supporters celebrate goals.

As you point out, VAR will definitely change footy, especially in those early seasons of "trial and error", but I cannot see how the impact will be greater than in other sports.

Mike(#169); No problems with your sinuses then?

Each has its merrits and its fasaniting that no matter what the subject is... there is always a counter argument of some kind...
David Ike maybe right in as much as we create our own elusion were living in our own reality like a movie that has already been writen and were just playing it out...

Well I would like to do a editors alternitive ending and see the red shite relegated to none leauge an the blues become the biggest name in football history...

Any "goal" scored off the hand / arm will be disallowed though - whether accidental or not - that bit I am sure of.

I'm very much in two minds about this one. I may have to request VAR to make a decision.

Happy Easter TW and have toffee this Easter instead of Chocolate - you know it makes sense.

VAR is here for one reason only -- football is now big business and a bad decision can now cost a club a small fortune. But I for one would rather the complaint 'we wuz robbed' remained only as a reference to an emotional cost.

Football is a bit different because the decisions are more subjective (other than did the ball cross the line, which is different technology); was the offside player interfering with play? Was the player in control when he tackled? Was the handball deliberate or not? The body position "natural" or not? That is why I am not really in favour.

By the way I agree with Michael @ 170 ; I tend not to bother reading long posts. If you can't make a point in ten lines, use fewer words.

Hoping to see a few of these lads get a chance sometime soon in our first team... they deserve it.

Kudos to Rhino and his backroom team too.

COYBB... Champions!!!

As for signing Zouma also... no thanks; it seems Leicester are looking to off-load Schmichel and Morgan... worth a shot to me, both got plenty of experience and are both WINNERS! Captain material too.

I still believe our team needs major surgery, sorting out our back line would be a good start, then add some skill with a little bit of nastiness and will to win.

Then again, all I ask of any Everton team is to win six (ideally all seven) League Cup matches... our road back to glory begins there... AT WEMBLEY!

There's a catalogue whereby we've been done, and the same offences committed by Arsenal, Spurs and RS players, don't get mentioned.

What's the point in having an event selective radar system in football?

I still hope that the RS get a late ban applied against Salah, for his blatant shin break in the first leg v Porto.

That stunk the place out, so did Harry Kanes, attempted Kirkby Kiss, but neither got a slap on the wrist.

Footballs integrity and future is at stake, money talks, but fans and supporters, make the atmosphere, in the stadiums.