Everton 1 - 1 Manchester United
This was one of those where the injustice will sting for a while, particularly if Everton miss out on Europe by a couple of points this season. If stoppage time in this one was the moment where the Blues could make up somewhat for not getting anything for their efforts at the Emirates last weekend, then it was doubly painful to have it ripped away by the officials… even if the celebrations were tempered immediately by the knowledge that the Video Assistant Referee was going to have the final say and that, deep down, you knew it wouldn’t go our way.
When the offside law was changed all those years ago so that players could be in line with the last defender, it was with favouring the attacker and boosting the chances of more goals being scored in mind. You know — goals, the be-all and end-all of this beautiful game we love but which is slowly being killed by VAR, that much-reviled introduction to the Premier League that appears designed to take goals away rather than protect them.
Retired referees are split on the incident involving Gylfi Sigurdsson and the deflected winner that was taken away from Everton this afternoon; even Carlo Ancelotti admitted that it was a difficult decision. But it’s depressing that the reflex is to disallow the goal rather than let the on-field decision stand. By the letter of the FA’s law, Sigurdsson was “obstructing the opponent’s line of vision” (in this case, goalkeeper David de Gea) but any common sense appraisal of the situation or application of the spirit of the law -- hah! That’s long since gone — would have led the VAR official to deduce that De Gea could see over Sigurdsson as he was sitting on the ground in the six-yard box and that, wrong-footed, he was never getting to the ball once it had irretrievably changed direction off Maguire and skidded over the line at his near post.
But then the VAR was Jon Moss, as despised a referee among Everton fans as any in memory for his consistent incompetence and that penalty decision at Brighton (*correction below), again in the booth at Stockley Park, that the Premier League was later forced to admit had been had erroneously gone against the Toffees on the day. Not only was it nailed on that Moss would rule out the goal against Manchester United, it was no surprise that if he even gave the reason why Sigurdsson was on his arse in front of the goal in the first place more than a cursory glance (it's doubtful he did – the review period was too short) , Everton weren’t going to get a penalty out of it either.
Because that’s the other aspect of the controversy that has largely been overlooked by the pundits — Sigurdsson was taken out by Aaron Wan-Bissaka’s desperate but late lunge after he had stabbed the ball goal-wards and should, by rights, have been awarded a penalty. The official line? Moss deemed it not to have been a “clear and obvious error” from Kavanagh, which is just a cop-out.
VAR nonsense aside, had Everton been awarded the goal, they might only have marginally deserved the three points because this was not a great performance, particularly in the first half. Dominic Calvert-Lewin had given them another perfect start, this time closing De Gea down and blocking his attempted kick downfield into the net with an outstretched boot with less than three minutes gone, but after the Spaniard had denied the striker a second with a fingertip save a minute later, United came roaring back.
In stark contrast to their performance in this game last season when they were thumped 4-0 and, to a lesser degree, their largely impotent display in the reverse fixture at Old Trafford in December, Ole Gunnar Solskjaer’s men moved the ball sharply and with penetration and they almost equalised in the seventh minute then Nemnja Matic rattled Jordan Pickford’s crossbar with a speculative drive.
With Ancelotti having fielded a somewhat curious midfield that strung Sigurdsson, Tom Davies and the returning André Gomes across the middle, Everton struggled at times to contain United in that area of the field and Anthony Martial dragged an effort wide, Matic would strike another from distance that narrowly cleared the bar, and Fred out-stripped Leighton Baines down the visitors’ right before crossing for Mason Greenwood but his header also flew over.
United’s leveller in the 31st minute came, however, from Everton’s own failings at trying to play out from the back. Djibril Sidibé, a replacement for the injured Seamus Coleman just a few minutes earlier, played a loose ball aimed for Theo Walcott that was easily cut out and worked to Bruno Fernandes who advanced a couple of paces before rapping a bouncing shot past Pickford from 25 yards out. It was another moment to forget for the goalkeeper who really should have got both hands on it to push it away to safety.
Richarlison would have the only chance of note before half-time when Baines whipped an excellent ball in from the left that the Brazilian threw himself at but couldn’t get enough on it to do more than just glance it past the far post with his head.
From a footballing perspective, United had been the better side on balance. Walcott looked rusty on his return to action following a brief lay-off with a knee injury, Davies was workmanlike but short on inspiration and the same went for Sigurdsson who again looked ill-suited to a wider on the left. Gomes, meanwhile, was combative but a little subdued as the nominal holding midfielder when you felt that he could just easily provide the kind of cohesion and attacking impetus that his compatriot, Fernandes, was giving to the visitors.
Nevertheless, supported by a terrific centre-forward’s performance from Calvert-Lewin who led the line superbly and almost without fault all afternoon despite being starved of service in the box, Everton gradually began to impose themselves as the second half wore on.
Sigurdsson planted a direct free-kick off the post from 20 yards after Calvert-Lewin had prompted Victor Lindelof to trip him on the edge of the box and Richarlison couldn’t react quickly enough to turn the rebound home.
That was followed by another free-kick opportunity that the former Swansea man fired off the defensive wall and then a steady stream of corners that usually found the head of Maguire rather than presenting the hosts with any clear scoring chances.
Having soaked up that pressure from dead-ball situations, United almost won it themselves in the 90th minute and probably would have done had it not been for another redemptive moment for the mercurial Pickford. Pawing Fernandes’s side-foot effort out of the air but only as far as substitute Odeon Ighalo, the keeper somehow made an instinctive save with his foot to divert the Nigerian’s goal-bound shot into the Park End from point-blank range.
Then came the elation of an injury-time winner and the agony following refereeing shenanigans as it was disallowed. The chance that led to the “goal” came about from one of Everton’s best moments of the game. Bernard lofted a superb pass into the penalty area to find Richarlison who had the presence of mind to control it and lay it into Sigurdsson’s path in a central position in front of goal.
The Icelander really should have scored before he was flatted by Wan-Bissaka; instead, his prodded shot was too close to the keeper and De Gea kicked off the line. Calvert-Lewin picked up the rebound, engineered space for a shot, Maguire stuck a foot out and deflected it heavily towards the other side of the goal than the one to which his keeper was moving and Sigurdsson, still sitting on the turf, simply pulled his legs out the way to allow the ball to roll into the net. You know the rest…
The takeaway, as has been the case for most of the past few weeks, is that Everton under Ancelotti continue to provide plenty of optimism for the future as the Italian’s methods take hold and for when he and Marcel Brands can add a few quality names to the squad. They continue to go head-to-head with the teams around them with confidence and purpose — that despite still being weak in midfield — and while they haven’t got the results they would have liked, progress is clearly being made.
That should be the focus even if it’s frustrating having the top five or six places in the Premier League and a chance to unexpectedly qualifying for Europe this season remain tantalising out of reach. It’s still not beyond the realms of possibility but with points likely to be very hard to come by in the next two games, it’s a dream that will probably have to wait until next season.
Correction: Lee Mason was the VAR for the Brighton game, not Jon Moss
Reader Comments (93)
Note: the following content is not moderated or vetted by the site owners at the time of submission. Comments are the responsibility of the poster. Disclaimer
1 Posted 02/03/2020 at 07:20:37
However, to allow Moss to make such a decision when Everton is playing is a total abdication of responsibility by the Premier League. That was a disgraceful decision on that goal. He should be shot at dawn.
VAR is not the problem. It is the fact that they have one (dysfunctional) referee making that decision and it should be more than one and probably 3. Otherwise, just use the match referee.
What a fucking disgrace by the Premier League. IMO, Moss should be banned for life as he is far too biased!
2 Posted 02/03/2020 at 07:58:52
3 Posted 02/03/2020 at 07:59:41
4 Posted 02/03/2020 at 08:10:33
As you so succinctly said at the end of the season I fear there will be a case in retrospect of so many points 'lost' through incorrect decisions. Of course I am slightly biased, but when you hear it from 'neutrals or supporters of another team' it starts to register that something is definitely amiss.
We need the points as it is if we are to seriously think in terms of European qualification, but decisions like this plus our own inability to close games from a winning position (Newcastle/injury time) will surely come back to haunt us.
However all not doom and gloom, I can see with optimistic eyes that we are slowly improving under the leadership of Carlo. I truly believe with a few additions in the Summer (FFP permitting) we will be a different side next season.
5 Posted 02/03/2020 at 08:22:36
On another note, I like the passion of Ancellotti - he really seems to have taken to this club, making those many pundits who told us that he is coming to Everton for his last big payday look a bit silly. The guy is pure class, and I believe Everton and Carlo are made for each other, in a similar way that David Moyes and Everton were during the initial years of Moyes' spell.
In the context of the race for the European places, it is too early to write off our chances. There are 10 games (30 points) to play for, and this has been a crazy season. I expect that there will be many more twists and turns in the race for Europe, but Carlo is experienced enough to know that there is no point looking too far ahead - take it 1 game at a time.
6 Posted 02/03/2020 at 08:56:23
7 Posted 02/03/2020 at 09:02:52
In the World Cup in 2018, VAR worked. It was applied quickly and accurately. In particular, it cut out the cynical grabbing of attackers in the penalty area. In other European leagues, I am told, it works well.
In the Premier League, its a farce. I am rapidly coming to the conclusion that it has been implemented not to ensure correct decisions, but to give employment to more officials and pundits and to ensure that Sky's darlings get the results the TV company and other media wish for.
Can you imagine if THAT goal had been at Old Trafford and the home side had 'scored' in the final minute? Do you think for one nano-second that it would have been overturned? Of course it wouldn't. A player laying prone on the floor could hardly be impeding the vision of a 6-foot tall goalkeeper who was standing up.
Don't get me wrong. I have long been in favour of some form of VAR. I like the rugby union method of a 3rd official quickly looking at an incident and reporting if the ref has missed something. I know that in a more flowing game there are issue with this. But, if the league officials haven't got the wit even to apply this by their OWN rules, they should scrap it. Or find some people who can run it properly. Fifa had no trouble with it.
8 Posted 02/03/2020 at 09:13:49
Then, at a later date, all decisions should be assessed with a view to improving those making the decisions.
9 Posted 02/03/2020 at 09:18:04
I'd prefer Delph to Sigurdsson but the latter takes better free kicks and corners, which are the only reason I think he is selected, he hasn't had a good game for a long time.
Next season I hope Walcott, Sigurdsson and Iwobi are gone, but that will take some doing.
As for VAR, the way it is applied stinks, like the poor quality and biased referees who apply it.
10 Posted 02/03/2020 at 09:22:09
Sigurdsson was flattened by Wan Basaka, he is on the deck. De Gea can see the shot and it is deflected in off Maguire giving him no chance of saving it.
An absolute joke of a decision, what was Jon Moss thinking?? All the arguments for disallowing it – and none of the arguments for staying with the on-field decision.
The fact that it is completely debatable and dubious is in itself absolute proof that this was no CLEAR AND OBVIOUS mistake. The goal should have stood. VAR decisions such as these are bringing the game into disrepute.
It was a decision Jon Moss would not have given against Man Utd, in the last minute at Old Trafford.
11 Posted 02/03/2020 at 09:33:24
1) He's not obstructing De Gea's vision at the time of the shot, which by the letter of the law is what is required to be offside.
2) VAR is meant to overturn things only when clear and obvious.
3) De Gea is never saving that once it takes a deflection that puts it into the corner!
4) If not a goal then undoubtedly a penalty for AWB's tackle of Sigurdsson!!
However, I don't think it is VAR that is the problem so much as the officials that are using it. There seems to be no consistency in terms of applying it. Do they know their own rules?! I have seen video replays used in other countries and indeed in other sports to good effect; it just requires better officiating.
12 Posted 02/03/2020 at 09:35:24
13 Posted 02/03/2020 at 09:37:34
I would only use Stockley Park as an advisary tool, if they see a goal which may be lets say is dubious then they contact the match official and say he might want to check this on the monitor. Then the on field ref checks the monitor and makes the decision, not somebody miles away in Stockley Park.
Obviously the reason Riley didnt want the on field ref to take the decisions was to take any pressure off the on-field ref, as its the official at Stockley Park and not the on-field ref.
Going back to yesterdays decision, from where I sit in the Upper Bullens, my first reaction was “This will be disallowed” as Sigurdsson was clearly offside. What I cant understand was why Sigurdsson just decided to sit there and not move and, by his reaction when the goal went in, he sprinted off so he wasn't injured. Had he got up and tried to get back onside, the goal would have been given. So I put more blame on Sigurdsson for our goal being disallowed than the VAR decision.
14 Posted 02/03/2020 at 09:55:54
It reminded me of the goal Lucas Digne scored against United last season, when his shot fizzed in past De Gea when it looked like three of our players were stood in an "offside position" and clearly in the eye line of De Gea, yet the goal stood. Though, of course there was no VAR then, otherwise that goal might have been disallowed as well.
15 Posted 02/03/2020 at 10:05:39
In saying that Gylfi should have fucking moved instead of sitting there feeling sorry for himself. Robbed of three points there and gave away three against the Gunners. Jesus its frustrating.
All in all after a poor first half we were great to fight back and control the game. I loved Carlo walking out to the ref and the big brave lad he is hands Carlo Ancelotti a red card, claim to fame for the ref wonder.
I also loved Carlo saying it does not matter if he is in the stands against Chelsea and the team will be well prepared as if to say I have complete faith in my number 2. Great manager we have here ladies and gents.
16 Posted 02/03/2020 at 10:09:59
I would go further, and give nanagers/ captain should get a set number of reviews for each match, like tennis or cricket. Bring an element of entertainment in to it.
17 Posted 02/03/2020 at 10:11:07
18 Posted 02/03/2020 at 10:36:49
19 Posted 02/03/2020 at 10:43:30
People will point to the superb save he made right at the end but to me, this does not exonerate his earlier mistake.
He should be making these great saves IN ADDITION to the easy ones.
As it is, hes costing us almost a goal a game.
20 Posted 02/03/2020 at 11:00:48
But of course there are other problems with how VAR is being used and the only way the criticism can be reduced is to limit its intervention. In this context I would like to see deciding on offsides limited to the last pass. It's amazing that the system has been introduced in the absence of any clear definition of what constitutes a phase of play, with the resultant inconsistency in how far back in a move ending in the goal a review should go.
21 Posted 02/03/2020 at 11:02:13
22 Posted 02/03/2020 at 11:03:51
Corrupt? Come on.
Deeply frustrating but as Lyndon says, following the letter of the law there are grounds to disallow the goal. There are of course those of us who have a counter argument and interpret the event differently, but it isn't bent.
Plenty of other teams are aggrieved this season, we seem to be on the harsh end of it, but had the goal stood Utd fans and pundits would be arguing the opposite.
Now, now even looking at the penalty? Thats shocking. When they looked again for red card conduct in the Shaw and DCL bookings, when nothing seemed on, then to not even address a blatant foul with anything more than saying it wasnt an obvious error by the on pitch ref?
23 Posted 02/03/2020 at 11:05:24
24 Posted 02/03/2020 at 11:26:59
Did you know you can bet on VAR decisions now?
I wouldnt be in the slightest bit suprised to hear about gambling syndicates being involved.
Admittedly I do enjoy a good conspiracy theory.
Could also be Jon Moss is an incompetent buffoon of the highest order.
25 Posted 02/03/2020 at 12:44:54
Jim, being “corrupt “ doesnt necessarily mean Moss or whoever are taking money. You say yourself that the fact that the obvious penalty when Siggy was wiped out seconds before the disallowed goal wasnt even considered. Moss. Moss himself decided that it wasnt a clear and obvious error when all the world can see that the incompetent referee had missed it. By not calling it a penalty or not going back a few seconds Moss has shown a clear bias just like he did at Brighton over the Keane incident. That bias is also a form of corruption.
The reason given for not allowing the goal was Siggy was in De Geas “ line of sight” and preventing him from seeing the ball. De Gea COULD see the ball but was going the wrong way. Moss must have been able to see it because I could see it, so could you.
Moss should never be allowed anywhere near an Everton match again and I would like the club to make the authorities aware of that.
Remember Moyes threatening to take a QC to his hearing over the Clattenburg affair? The FA quietly allowed the case to disappear and Clattenburg didnt referee us again for years. If clubs stood up to the FA theyd crap themselves.
26 Posted 02/03/2020 at 12:56:55
27 Posted 02/03/2020 at 13:06:17
28 Posted 02/03/2020 at 13:18:13
If that was Liverpool again Utd at home yesterday the goal would have stood I have no doubt. To not even get the penalty is more evidence that corrupt.
29 Posted 02/03/2020 at 13:18:49
The fun, the drama and euphoria of football has gone from the game, how dare they be so picky to rule that injury time goal, a perfectly deflected goal out, yesterday stating that a player that never even touched the ball was the reason.
Decisions like that have completely spoiled the game for the match going paying supporter now.
Its no use saying they need to use VAR correctly, they will NOT!
They are corrupt and will only use VAR to protect and enhance the media darlings league positions.
Prime example yesterday, Kavanagh books Sidibe for having the gall to come back on the pitch rather than go over to him and explain the misunderstanding, he books him yet allows the odious little moaning bitching rats Fred and Maguire to basically do anything apart from throw stones at him.
Every referee we have in the British game is a prize pencil.
30 Posted 02/03/2020 at 13:32:41
31 Posted 02/03/2020 at 13:35:24
The fact that Moss chose to interpret the clear penalty as not ‘clear and obvious but then not see the goal incident as the same, highlights the subjective abuse.
Is it any surprise that Liverpool have benefited massively from its introduction?
The on field referee should be advised of a potential clear and obvious event by the VAR ref but must then check the screen and make his own decision. Hes refereeing the match and has the temperature of whats going on, he shouldnt be allowed to hide behind decisions taken at a distance.
32 Posted 02/03/2020 at 13:42:12
No one on the planet could reasonably argue that De Gea was going to save the deflected shot. He was already wrong-footed and the ball spun into the very corner of the goal away from him. Sigurdsson had no influence on that outcome whatsoever.
You have it right Jim, how dare they be so picky to disallow the goal. The ref and linesman had given it - what gives that bastard Moss the right to decide it's not a goal, based solely on his
opinion? The fact he was so quick to decide says it all - he wanted to disallow the goal. A fucking disgrace and ruining the game.
It was particularly galling to have the bellends on MOTD2 shit out of saying how it really was by blaming Sigurdsson for not leaping to his feet and sprinting off within 2 seconds of being flattened by the tackle. I'm so sick of this shit.
33 Posted 02/03/2020 at 13:47:30
35 Posted 02/03/2020 at 15:04:43
Sam #11, agree fully. If you boil it down a little further. If De Gea was obstructed by Siggy on the ground, he wouldn't have moved to his right and would have been far better positioned to save the defection.
I watch someone like Nigel Owens in the Rugby. He is informed of an issue by or requests information from a non-malignant Moss type TMO official. He looks at the big screen. Everyone sees what the ref sees or as is often the case in rugby, can see that the ref cannot see. Nigel will consult with an assistant and IMHO, has as near as 100% perfection as anyone could have. The refusal of the FA to show any contentious footage on the big screen for fear of mass civil disobedience is at the root of the problem. Best to apply the mushroom theory, rather than deal with any fallout that might occur. If the incident yesterday was replayed in full, the ref could give the offside, but rule that foul play had occurred previously and award the penalty. Happens all the time in Rugby.
We've had a high share of legitimate VAR grievances, but so have other clubs this season. It's like my long lost grandmother is looking at the footage and making the decisions. The Dele Alli handball against us is rarely quoted but until De Bruyne last week, was the most blatant application of 'accidental' hand ball, which went out with the ark. Compare with the Bournemouth player Billing's shoulder ball which was decreed deliberate hand ball. The Lo Celso tackle. The Maguire attempt to prevent Batshuayi falling on him. The list is endless for 'some' clubs.
Carlo seems to be giving everyone in his squad plenty of playing time to properly assess his best formation and players. Lots of changes each game to help him. I would assume he knows at this stage that Sigurdsson is not an option as a left sided midfielder in a 4-4-2.
36 Posted 02/03/2020 at 15:05:47
Let's be honest, if it was at the other end we'd be all be crying out for offside. That's just the way it goes with us fans.
And why didn't Siggy get the fuck up? From where I was I thought it must have been Richarlison as he's always on his arse. Don't give me he was injured in the tackle because he sprung up like Lazarus when the ball went in.
37 Posted 02/03/2020 at 16:14:32
Let's go down a dark road and say we lost to Chelsea and those other fellas. We will most likely be 8 to 10 points back of 5th place.
Our run in is not terrible. The last 8 games, especially under Ancelotti for me, we can go on a literal tear and climb the table rapidly if we remain focused and see out the entire season.
Comments like, "its a dream that will probably have to wait until next season." just drive me nuts. I'm not prepared to give up until the bitter end. I'd argue we can't let that mindset creep into our Club until we're mathematically eliminated.
This isn't having a pop at Lyndon. On the contrary, it's (again, of course) a superb article, and his guess that we may have to wait until next season to qualify for Europe might be correct. The odds certainly tilt in that direction the further we go along.
I just see it a lot on TW - this assumption it's all over before it actually is. And I simply don't like it. It's not over until it's over.
Fight 'till you're dead.
38 Posted 02/03/2020 at 16:14:48
First. In today's Mirror, there is a photograph of De Gea and Sigurdsson from the side. There is something like 3-5 metres between them and Siggy is sitting down. How this can in any sense be "interference" is beyond me.
Second. There is some suggestion that the dialogue between Stockley Park and the match officials would be broadcast. I suspect something like the following:
Ref: "Goal scored at Old Trafford / Anfield. "
Stockley Park: "Who for?"
R: "Everton, City, Leicester, Wolves, Bournemouth. "
SP: " How was it scored"
R "Player got it rolled to him by his goalkeeper, ran the length of the pitch, ran round the goalkeeper and walked it in"
SP: "Difficult... Let me look... Wait, is that Duncan Ferguson [fill in for other clubs] in the technical area in the Manu / Liverpool half?"
SP:"No goal. Offside. He was interfering with play."
R: "But he wasn't on the pitch and he isn't a player"
SP: "Doesn't matter. There is no rule which says that a former player off the pitch cannot be interfering with play, so we'll say he was. We can use the usual (double secret probation) Rule S6 which prevents any goals against Sky6 teams if we can ever find any justification, however stupid."
39 Posted 02/03/2020 at 16:16:43
40 Posted 02/03/2020 at 16:36:16
I usually go berserk when Everton score at any stage of the game, but for both goals yesterday I waited for confirmation of both goals and the delay doesn't give you that joyous outpouring of emotion you let go with and have been doing since I was a very young boy when Everton get the nod that the goals okay.
I've even started leaving my rattle in the house.
41 Posted 02/03/2020 at 16:50:36
No doubt this was a completely bullshit call against Everton today but, despite being wiped out, I would have expected Sigurdsson to at least jump up in protest and possibly not end up in that ridiculous position.
Yeah I know I'm being unfairly harsh on him as it happened extremely quickly. But I was annoyed because he again was off-pace all day today and everything he did seem to be done either too late or too imprecise in the final third. A couple of his corners were very good but not the majority of them.
42 Posted 02/03/2020 at 16:52:55
Great article with an even better title; the only debate being malignant or just incompetent. Because in a sea of refereeing horse manure, and this is the worst group of refs ever in the history of the game. Moss's incompetence is almost awe-inspiring. After watching a match reffed by that fat fraud, you look at Lee Mason & Rowan Atkinson (oh sorry he's a different comedian), and say, "They're not too bad really".
All that aside, lot's of positives to take away. I thought Davies had a great 2nd half, and perhaps, just like Calvert-Lewin, who TWebbers used to refer to as a championship player, if he's given an extended run in his preferred position, just may surprise us.
Secondly, even with glaring deficiencies, we've been a match, and I would argue more than a match for the chasing pack. Okay, we're nowhere near Liverpool or Man City, but we're now playing with an identity, and hopefully with some smart additions in the summer, who knows?
44 Posted 02/03/2020 at 17:12:03
45 Posted 02/03/2020 at 17:14:52
I wonder what will happen. Fans everywhere are very unhappy with it, but big business and the dreadful referees all are fine with it. Something has to give, I think in the medium term the disapproval of it is just going to grow and they will eventually go back to the man in black.
46 Posted 02/03/2020 at 17:20:26
47 Posted 02/03/2020 at 17:39:36
Similar issue with handball versus ball to hand or diving versus being clever. There are things that are clear cut like the ball crossing the line. But VAR is asking video refs to make absolute decisions on things that are written in law as interpretive.
At best, it's an oxymoron; at worst, it's open to corruption.
48 Posted 02/03/2020 at 17:46:46
Given your literary ability, couldn't you draw up a petition to send to the FA endorsed by ToffeeWebbers and fellow Blues?
We can all write individually but you then get the standard response: "All decisions are reviewed by Mike Riley and discussed with the referees".
I am sure a petition with a few thousand endorsements would rattle their cages a little.
49 Posted 02/03/2020 at 17:54:56
50 Posted 02/03/2020 at 18:43:00
A player can be offside if they are "preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponents line of vision"
You could argue Sigurdsson blocked De Gea's line of vision but that didn't prevent him from playing or being able to play the ball. The fact he was half way across his goal saw to that. If Sigurdsson isn't there then De Gea is still going to be a couple of feet away with his weight on his other foot and he would therefore still not be able to play the ball.
If those reviewing the game know the laws of the game as well as they ought to, this goal should have stood IMO.
51 Posted 02/03/2020 at 18:59:33
This debate could go on for weeks until the Premier League come out and say "Yeah, Jon Moss got it wrong and the goal should have stood". Imagine the uproar from us all then. Basically, VAR and Jon Moss should be fucked right off! Can't wait for VAR to totally piss us all off in our next home game.
52 Posted 02/03/2020 at 19:24:53
I have to say, I'm very sorry VAR is ruining your experience and the atmosphere at the games. You're certainly not the only one to say so on these pages.
It's maddening to me. Myself and a few other Seppos and Ex-Pats over here have seen VAR (or Video Review if you like) used to great affect over here in just about every single sport. And I'd include in that our own MLS, as well as the NHL, NFL, MLB, NBA, NCAA Football, NCAA Basketball, etc.
I keep saying over and over that the English have completely screwed up VAR. And that, in an honest moment, is just a nasty, snide thing to say. The powers that be in the English Premier League have screwed it up, certainly not the English.
The saddest thing for me is seeing people like your good self, down on the game and the experience of the game. It truly is the sole reason I "got into" soccer in the first place. The passion. It's infectious, it's genuine, and frankly it's absolutely beautiful. The human soul roars with a goal unlike anything I've ever seen before in my time on earth. A thing of human beauty unquestionably for me.
The English Premier League must, absolutely must, strictly define the use of VAR, make it standard operating procedure (and follow the excellent NFL example) that only "clear and obvious" calls should be overturned, and have the on-field ref do the reviews or a panel of three in a booth.
The current system is terrible. VAR should be a tool to make your game better, and what's heartbreaking isn't the shit-the-bed application of VAR, it's people like you who see it as ruining the game they love.
it may not be popular here, but I'd still back the implementation of VAR. It's just been horrifically used, and needs to be massively overhauled. But what I hope would be met with resounding approval, is my sentiment that I'm genuinely sorry you feel it's ruining your match day experience.
53 Posted 02/03/2020 at 19:33:28
'I will speak with him about what he has to do when he has the ball. The build up from the back, in my opinion that has to be better. After that the goalkeeper has to save'
What Ancelotti is saying that when Pickford received the ball in the penalty area prior to the goal, he wrongly made the decision. to pass the ball across the back, which subsequently put three different defenders under pressure and resulted in the loss of possession. Once possession was lost he then failed to save the shot on goal, which was savable.
In the case of the offside he did not say anything about Sigurdsson , but I guess it would go something like this, when he does;
' It is not good to sit on your ass in the penalty area, don't F. . . ing do it again'.
( eyebrow arched)
54 Posted 02/03/2020 at 19:33:32
I saw a very spirited Everton team fight for everything in the second half yesterday, but I havent really thought about the game, except for the realisation that this very important aspect, is one of the main things that really makes the crowd respond.
Most football supporters feel that Everton were cheated, but the professionals in the media, give a different slant on proceedings, which really makes me feel sick about the sport I love, but which Im going off quite rapidly.
55 Posted 02/03/2020 at 19:52:27
-thank God - the English journalist;
But seeing what the man will do
Unbribed, there's no occasion to"
I doubt there is any corruption as such, just an ingrained tendency for referees to favour the big clubs, because they are politically more important at the FA and the EPL. How many points has VAR cost us this season? I think it was about seven before yesterday.
As well as biased, they are also not very competent; Jon Moss doesn't even know that VAR is to overturn "clear and obvious errors". We import the best players from abroad - why can't we import the best referees?
BTW, good article but I thought Tom Davies might have got a shout for his second half performance - I thought he did really well.
56 Posted 02/03/2020 at 19:55:47
So many people are feeding voraciously from the trough, and those of us paying to attend matches are of no consequence.
The beauty of Association Football lies largely in the seconds when a goal is scored. Those moments are rare, such scarcity of critical moments is what defines the sport. We have been used to seeing the goal go in, take a quick glance at the ref and linesman, and then be consumed by elation or despair. It is high drama. To have interfered with that drama is utter folly.
57 Posted 02/03/2020 at 20:01:05
58 Posted 02/03/2020 at 20:15:47
59 Posted 02/03/2020 at 20:16:13
60 Posted 02/03/2020 at 20:35:11
61 Posted 02/03/2020 at 20:48:24
62 Posted 02/03/2020 at 20:54:00
64 Posted 02/03/2020 at 21:26:53
65 Posted 02/03/2020 at 21:26:53
66 Posted 02/03/2020 at 22:43:28
67 Posted 02/03/2020 at 22:58:45
Whether he genuinely is biased against us I'm not sure, think it's more likely that he is just crap; he seems to have upset pretty much every other team at one point or other.
As mentioned above, the introduction of VAR has been a disaster; I was all for it, but on the basis there was enough lessons/experience to be gained from other countries and other sports. Oh well. No doubt the Premier League will congratulate themselves on a job well done.
68 Posted 03/03/2020 at 01:36:31
Different sport, different culture mate.
We want our game back!
69 Posted 03/03/2020 at 02:21:02
Oh, and Roy Keane can just go do one!
70 Posted 03/03/2020 at 03:52:13
You never know, it might catch on across the country.
71 Posted 03/03/2020 at 07:15:36
On top of that wasn't Wan Bissaka interfering with play when he flew into Sigurdsson as he was taking his shot. He nearly took the Sigurdsson's legs off from the knee downwards. At any other time, in any other area of the pitch this desperate ,late and aggressive lunge by Wan Bissaka would have been a yellow card, at least. Why wasn't this investigated by Moss for a penalty ? Wan Bissaka made no contact with the ball whatsoever.
With these subjective decisions, it's just passing the buck. The ref needs advice , that's all, to look at the monitor and make the decision. It's got to be better than what we've got at the moment, which is worse than before.
What I would like to know is why Moss's appraisal was totally about reasons to be able to disallow the goal . No thought whatsoever was given for the reasons to allow it .It didn't reach the threshold of Clear and Obvious it was a subjective 50/50 situation at best.
Why wasn't the build up appraised and a penalty given for the clear and obvious foul on Siggurdson as he was shooting?
72 Posted 03/03/2020 at 09:49:55
73 Posted 03/03/2020 at 10:34:34
Thanks for the "double secret probation" reference.
National Lampoon's Animal House if I'm not mistaken?
#32 James Lauwerine
I also jumped from my sofa and said exactly the same thing (to my mrs rather than father) - that'll be disallowed
I'm still amazed our equalizer earlier this season at OT was allowed (another OG) after Dom barged into De Gea. Clearly not malignant Moss on VAR that day - class headline that.
Nothing wrong with VAR in itself - just the numpties in this country using it.
74 Posted 03/03/2020 at 11:37:58
75 Posted 03/03/2020 at 12:08:14
76 Posted 03/03/2020 at 12:21:24
77 Posted 03/03/2020 at 12:48:49
What I don't accept is refereeing decisions being sub-contracted to a long-winded process that manages to slowly get decisions wrong and spoils the experience of the matchgoers. My other suspicion still stands; that this has been introduced to create some artificial 'excitement' for those with little attention span and feel for the game.
Give us our game back!
78 Posted 03/03/2020 at 12:49:28
But now, VAR gives batsmen out LBW, by giving a computerised prediction of what the ball "would have done" if it hadn't hit the batsman's pad [which for non-cricketers, can be 7 or 8 feet in front of the stumps].
Hawkeye was not invented to give correct decisions, but to eliminate howlers. No cricket fan on the planet, thought Rhodes was out.
Was the referee's decision to award a goal on Sunday correct - possibly not. Was that decision a 'howler' - absolutely not!!
79 Posted 03/03/2020 at 13:01:55
In other sports it works because the decisions are binary - did the tennis ball hit the line, was the rugby ball grounded properly, would the ball have hit the stumps and was it a no-ball, and so on.
80 Posted 03/03/2020 at 13:10:10
No-one is complaining about technology to check if the ball has crossed the line. That's been a great improvement.
Offside is a binary call in the sense that the attacker is either beyond the defender or not. I think there should be a margin of error to factor in the margin of error for when the ball is struck but I can live with VAR calling those too.
Where they have come unstuck is looking for clear and obvious errors. Even the nature of what is clear and obvious is subjective. Ditch that bit.
And if they can't face that, then ditch the lot. It's baby out with the bathwater but so be it - they're ruining the game.
81 Posted 03/03/2020 at 13:27:23
If it remains for subjective incidents, the weight must be with the call on the field, unless you can definitively say otherwise. Any overturning of a decision must be 100% clear.
Using Sunday as the example, having given the goal on the field, Sigurdsson would have touched the ball to overturn the call. If the goal hadnt been given on the field, there would be no concrete evidence to give it so wed have to suck it up.
How to process that? A challenge system to limit the amount of time taken out of the game. Players would eventually learn to use it sparingly. (understanding that the call on the field has to be absolutely clear and contrary to what theyve seen)
Sure, occasionally it will be used as a fishing trip like in cricket (Id actually take the referral down to one in cricket too) but that, to me, is an acceptable cost of progress. Its not fundamentally changing the game, it keeps the authority of the official but we have a mechanism which would stop a clear miscarriage within a game.
We cannot persist with checking almost every marginal call on the field. Its intrusive, time consuming, and ultimately not within the spirit of the game.
82 Posted 03/03/2020 at 13:36:55
Was surprised when I came in here and found out the English media lined up in favor of the decision. Martino and Mustoe had it a bad call all the way.
83 Posted 03/03/2020 at 13:47:39
''Was the referee's decision to award a goal on Sunday correct - possibly not. Was that decision a 'howler' - absolutely not!!''
So, the obvious penalty, missed by the on field referee and then perused over by the idiot Moss,who said it was not a 'clear and obvious error' was not a 'howler'?
The fact that De Gea COULD see the ball but was wrong footed, yet Moss, again, called it wrong by claiming that Siggy was in De Gea's 'line of sight' was not a 'howler'? (he quite clearly was not preventing De Gea from seeing the ball)
That Siggy was not 'interfering with play' yet Moss states that he was. Siggy was sat on the floor and made no attempt to play the ball.Is that not another 'howler'
I would lie to hear your interpretation of a 'howler'.
Please don't say a 'monkey native to South and Central American forests.' The only monkey I saw on Sunday was the referee, and yes, he had a howler.
84 Posted 03/03/2020 at 14:40:40
85 Posted 03/03/2020 at 14:56:21
How are ya? It's astounding the way one set of people see the event on the other side of the Atlantic, and how our pundits here see it. How two sets of people interpret two completely different interpretations of the rules shows how shitty the Laws of the Game are written. Far too obscure and vague!
Sir John has the way forward with VAR for me, coupled with a great definition of what should be reviewed and what shouldn't by Roger @79.
I wish the powers-that-be read TW.
86 Posted 03/03/2020 at 14:57:57
Edit button? It's gone away. I miss it dearly.
87 Posted 03/03/2020 at 15:18:26
In defence of Sigurdsson, I wonder if he stayed down hoping for a VAR check on Wan-Bissaka's challenge? He might have thought our chance was gone, so stay down to draw attention to the challenge.
He would have done better to stay prone and still, as if badly injured and get the medic on to emphasise the foul play. Instead, he came to life and tucked-in his feet, showing he was fine and active.
If he hadn't had to withdraw his tootsies, he would have had a better claim to being inactive. Also sitting up was a mistake, he should have stayed flat. Any way one looks at it, he made the wrong decision. Just like Moss, who should wake-up to a horse's head in his bed.
88 Posted 03/03/2020 at 16:18:08
89 Posted 03/03/2020 at 16:31:14
Cracker (but the RSPCA have been informed).
90 Posted 03/03/2020 at 17:39:22
91 Posted 03/03/2020 at 17:57:32
92 Posted 03/03/2020 at 18:25:48
The whole VAR system has become a pantomime and the ugly sisters are now in charge.
93 Posted 03/03/2020 at 19:10:54
94 Posted 03/03/2020 at 19:13:37
Therefore, on Sunday, I would have expected VAR to say: 'that [awarding the goal] decision might not be correct, but it's not so shockingly awful, that it needs to be overturned.'
95 Posted 03/03/2020 at 19:37:06
96 Posted 05/03/2020 at 04:45:36
Add Your Comments
In order to post a comment, you need to be logged in as a registered user of the site.
Or Sign up as a ToffeeWeb Member — it's free, takes just a few minutes and will allow you to post your comments on articles and Talking Points submissions across the site.