West Ham v Chelsea - VAR again

[TheBoroBuzzard]

How on earth was that not a penna? Soucek dived to his left and literally saved Gallagher’s shot from going in

 

[WindyNook]

Good save...... if he was a goalie

 

[Centralscrutinizer]

Shocking decision.

 

[NormanbyRed77]

VAR in shocker again. Even the player was worried and had a little look, he knew what he was doing

 

[sherlock]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1624414461384597504

Shocking decision.

 

[TheOccasionalSpectator]

Normally i'd say pen+red card, but as it's Chelsea then ref got it spot on.

 

[boroboy6872]

Came off his knee and not his hand?

 

[TheOccasionalSpectator]

You might be correct, I can't be sure but convinced ref. got it right either way!

 

[goalscrounger]

Can't believe Soucek......he should've held that one

 

[Zoophonic]

Came off his knee and not his hand?

It looked like his knee for me.

 

[Billy Horner]

Referee didn’t award penalty. VAR reviewed and the evidence is inconclusive (as demonstrated by the comments above) so not a ‘clear and obvious’ error. On field decision remains.

Not the fault of VAR, just yet another example of people who don’t understand it.

 

[Scrote]

Not the fault of VAR, just yet another example of people who don’t understand it.

What about the Brentford goal against Arsenal?

 

[The Card Cheat]

Referee didn’t award penalty. VAR reviewed and the evidence is inconclusive (as demonstrated by the comments above) so not a ‘clear and obvious’ error. On field decision remains.

Not the fault of VAR, just yet another example of people who don’t understand it.

Anyone who thinks that was inconclusive has worse vision than Stevie Wonder. The ref didn't not give a penalty because he wasn't sure if it hit his hand, it very very very obviously hit his hand. The issue was whether his hand was in that position naturally to brace himself as he fell over, which he has done deliberately to block the shot.
I'd suggest that it's not other people who don't understand what's going on.
Var was wrong in the Arsenal game, wrong in the Palace game and wrong in the West Ham game. It's just wrong in general, and has done more damage to football as a spectator sport than anything else in it's 150 year history.

 

[Chris_Boro]

The ref didn't not give a penalty because he wasn't sure if it hit his hand

Where is this stated please?

 

[boroboy6872]

Seen it from another angle now and it definitely hits his hand

from 20 seconds on this video -

Handball

 

[Chutney]

Apologies for the slight detour from the original post, but related to another VAR decision on the same game.

I've never quite understood why free kicks can't be treated the same as a throw in in so far as you can't be given offside from one. What's the huge flaw in this logic I'm missing?

 

[Chris_Boro]

Apologies for the slight detour from the original post, but related to another VAR decision on the same game.

I've never quite understood why free kicks can't be treated the same as a throw in in so far as you can't be given offside from one. What's the huge flaw in this logic I'm missing?

A throw in is a restart from when the ball leaves the field of play, same as a goal kick and a corner. Secondly it would be ridiculous if you couldn't be offside from a free kick.

 

[Chutney]

A throw in is a restart from when the ball leaves the field of play, same as a goal kick and a corner. Secondly it would be ridiculous if you couldn't be offside from a free kick.

Erm, well that clears it up then.

 

[Chris_Boro]

Erm, well that clears it up then.

The logic is they are different things entirely, not sure that bit required explaining.

One is a restart on the field of play due to an offence, the other isn't. If you couldn't be offside from a free kick then offsides might as well be removed entirely.

 

[The Card Cheat]

Where is this stated please?

It doesn't need to be stated. It's like asking where is it stated that the Chelsea player having the shot kicked it with his foot. It's extremely obvious it hits his hand, that wasn't the issue.