Watford FC 0-0 Crystal Palace - 07/12/2019

Discussion in 'Match Day' started by GoingDown, Dec 6, 2019.

  1. CleyHorn

    CleyHorn Reservist

    Five as said.
     
  2. CleyHorn

    CleyHorn Reservist

    Because it's based on what the TV pundits think. Not on what I think. Which is irrelevant. Anyway, 5-1.
     
  3. Davidmsawyer

    Davidmsawyer Statto Statto Statto

    In that case I’m pretty sure you could only count the non-penalty against spurs as that was the only one that was I think 100% backed up by TV pundits. Others have all disagreed.
     
  4. Hornpete

    Hornpete Squad Player

    Someone disagreed with the handballs at Newcastle and Southampton? Dont think theres anything to argue about at all, maybe the rule is pants but its 100% in the list.
     
    folkestone orn likes this.
  5. Davidmsawyer

    Davidmsawyer Statto Statto Statto

    Yes I did hear some pundits do that!
     
  6. GoingDown

    GoingDown "The Stability"

    Yeah and they are right and no one else is. End of.
     
  7. hornetboy1

    hornetboy1 First Team Captain

    Pretty grim viewing watching Watford these days.
    [​IMG]
     
  8. hornetboy1

    hornetboy1 First Team Captain

    Just seen Ref Watch and Dermott Gallagher, true to form, backs the referee as he always does, making his opinion pretty worthless.

    What I tend to go on is what the two pundits that flank him say. Stephen Warnock and Sue Smith both said it was a penalty.

    Gallagher said they were both grappling with each other, but that's totally untrue. Deeney did nothing to Cahill. It was Cahill all over Deeney. It's baffling even in a video replay a referee still cannot tell the truth about the incident. It's a systematic problem and is part of their DNA I'm afraid.
     
  9. Davidmsawyer

    Davidmsawyer Statto Statto Statto

    The blonde lady at the back seems happy... although she wasn't actually watching the game...
     
    wfcmoog likes this.
  10. CleyHorn

    CleyHorn Reservist

    Well at least you're agreeing that the role of objective pundits is important. As long as you don't simply pick your pundits to suit a pre-conceived view. They need to be picked in advance of having given their view.

    All I really want to know in all of this is, is some sort of bias against WFC a 'real thing' or not. Either unintentional or by design. I agree that we're 1-5 down on wrong VAR decisions and 5 points down this season as a minimum.

    My criticism is that you seem to want to max. out the problem as some sort of project. You might similarly criticise me for trying to minimise it via an over-compensation in trying to be objective from a yellow starting point. Maybe the 'truth' lies somewhere in-between.

    Everyone knows that the big-six had an advantage regarding decisions in the past. That's well documented. So has it continued under VAR? I don't think so. Plenty of decisions have gone against them too. But we specifically do seem to have suffered more than any other team. So what would it take for that discrepancy to become statistically valid beyond margins of error rather than just bad luck? To point to the conclusion that there is indeed something 'sinister' going on. Is 1-5 down as a minimum after 16 matches enough?

    I have no idea as to the answer to that question.
     
    Davidmsawyer likes this.
  11. hornetboy1

    hornetboy1 First Team Captain

    I've not maximised the list at all. I'm just highlighting things which were highly contentious and were constantly spoken about after the match. These are not small insignificant events. There is no agenda from me, apart from listing things after the match and to highlight them, as things can disappear quickly from memory.

    It's not just this season this has happened. It's pretty much every season, but at least this season there is no excuse as all key incidents can be viewed a multitude of times, yet we are still on the receiving end. For me that takes away any element of doubt that could be given to the referee having missed it in real time.

    I'm at a loss why we are so victimised, apart from maybe we're just not important enough. We're not a high profile club. No one really cares if we get a bad call. It's never spoken about in the media, and if it is, it's instantly dismissed and forgotten about. There's no joined up thinking by someone in the media saying. "Hang on a minute, has this gone against Watford again?" It's like the slate is wiped clean and nothing is carried over in people's memory.

    Had Liverpool or United had three handball goals given against them, you'd never hear the end of it. There would be calls to scrap VAR altogether. It would be talked to death in the media.

    I'm saying the score is 8-2, you are saying 5-1. Either way it's clear there is a big difference between what goes our way and what doesn't. By your own admission there has been at least 6 mistakes with VAR of which 5 have gone against us. I'm saying there has been 10 of which 8 have gone against us. FFS, this is VAR we're talking about. There should be ZERO incidents….not 6 or 10. This is what VAR is here for, to clear up the issues, not to totally ignore them when they are advantageous to Watford but apply them when it's not. This is what appears to be happening, but why that is, I have no idea....but one thing for sure, it's not a new thing.
     
    Davidmsawyer and CleyHorn like this.
  12. rochdale away

    rochdale away Reservist

    Your final sentence sums the whole mess up.....there should be zero post match discussion.

    For what it's worth, I live in Norwich and the locals feel as hard done by as us
     
  13. CleyHorn

    CleyHorn Reservist

    Very interesting. We've hardly been looking too closely at what's been going on with Norwich and VAR of course. Could you put a rough figure on how 'hard done by' they feel. 1-5, 2-8?

    If their perception is also correct then one thing's for sure. If you get shafted by VAR you'll be bottom of the league.
     
  14. hornetboy1

    hornetboy1 First Team Captain

    It's clear when decisions go against you in tight games, you will end up losing or drawing games, unless you're an exceptional side who can overcome such injustices.

    When you're a middle of the table side, a bad call has a huge impact. We're winning at Newcastle, Spurs and Southampton. Huge decisions go against us (incorrectly), and we end up losing the lead because of it. The Leicester match was finely balanced. Not a lot to choose between the sides, then another big contentious decision goes against us which hands Leicester the lead. Same against Palace. Had the penalty been awarded, we most probably would have won the match. You can withstand one or two games like that, but when you talking about 7 games out of 16 with incidents that have gone against us, it's too much to withstand, hence a large contributor as to why we're bottom of the league with a pathetic 9 points. The games where we've had the bad calls have all been tight ones which intensifies the effect.

    Are we the worst team in terms of squad? Nowhere near, but we're fighting an uphill battle, just in getting fair decisions. They just do not happen for us, and certainly not in some sort of balanced way. I can accept the odd bad call, as long as we get them the other way also, but we don't. This is why it has had such a huge impact on our season to date.
     
    CleyHorn likes this.
  15. CleyHorn

    CleyHorn Reservist

    Not too much for me to disagree with in your last two posts hb1. I'm glad 'peace has broken out'.

    Your point regarding our lack of profile and that the cumulative tally and effect consequently gets lost because the media ignore it is well made. Lucky we're both keeping a record then. The same could easily apply to Norwich as well though. Have you also been keeping a tally on their behalf? No? Thought not. Me neither. But if their perception's also correct then we're not unique sufferers.

    This lack of media profile reasoning is very different from the previous arguments around on-field refs being intimidated by big, hostile home crowds. But consistent with it.

    I agree with most of what you say around accuracy but surely you wouldn't expect there to be zero contentious decisions. There will always be those 'too close to call' which will divide opinion. I'd suggest that since Matchday 9 when VAR officials abandoned the 'defend the onfield ref's decision at all costs' policy then accuracy has definitely improved. Unfortunately for us 4 of our 5 against in my tally occured on that weekend or prior to it. And there is no excuse whatever to have missed two of the three handballs.

    VAR has been entirely accurate on offside decisions since its inception here though. Most say 'too accurate'. Personally I'd prefer a 'clear daylight' change in the Law. There would still be hair-line decisions but the attacker would have the advantage. And ffs sort out the handball Law so it's the same for both attackers and defenders.

    Apologies that we've strayed into VAR territory on yet another thread guys. But hb1 and I do have a thing about it!
     
    Last edited: Dec 9, 2019
  16. folkestone orn

    folkestone orn Squad Player

    Still a significant amount then, surely.
     
  17. CleyHorn

    CleyHorn Reservist

    Indeed.
     
  18. hornetboy1

    hornetboy1 First Team Captain

    What should happen is for factual events VAR should overrule, but when it's subjective the VAR official has to be tell the referee to review the incident again. It has to be the on-field referee's call. The referee has to make use of the pitch-side monitor. If after he has reviewed it again he still sticks to his guns, then so be it.

    What's occurring now, is a VAR review, but the VAR official does not want to undermine his colleague so he passes it as ok, even if it should clearly be overruled. They need to try something different and use the monitor. If it gets too time consuming, then you can go back to stop using it, but for now, the time has come to start using the monitor. For it to NEVER have been referred to in any Premier League game this season, is just ridiculous.

    Maybe they can make use of a tablet or iPhone sized monitor that the referee can have on him. He can just quickly take it out of his pocket and take another look at the event, which will stop all the drama of walking over to a booth.
     
    wfc4ever likes this.
  19. folkestone orn

    folkestone orn Squad Player

    End off m8.
     
  20. wfc4ever

    wfc4ever Administrator Staff Member

    Don't they have a tablet thing in the NFL?
     
  21. hornetboy1

    hornetboy1 First Team Captain

    No idea, I just thought of it, but if they do that's great. Shows it can work.
     
  22. hornetgags

    hornetgags McMuff's lovechild

    I've watched games on tablets, it's not that great, the ratio is too small, glare off the screen.

    Do as they do in rugby, play it on the big screen.
     
  23. GoingDown

    GoingDown "The Stability"

    Don't think so. It's refer to a room like in football. Was a pretty chaotic day yesterday for video referrals in the NFL. They use the 'clear and obvious' position as well.
     
  24. Chumlax

    Chumlax Squad Player

    Unless I'm much mistaken, there have been at least two occasions for us where the referees council themselves have come out after games and admitted that they made a mistake/the wrong decision when it came to a contentious and idiotic VAR call that went against us.

    If, come the end of the season, we are indeed relegated (particularly if it's whilst being within touching distance of the survivors) it will be very interesting to see the club's response.

    It's the first year the league has implemented it (something I will freely admit I was completely in favour of) and it's been administered with rank incompetence and breathtaking disregard for the fairness it is supposed to serve.

    When Sheffield United went down in 2006 because West Ham were allowed to sign two players illegally to save them, they sued. It seems to me like this would be an even more attractive case, especially since we all know for a fact that the now plentiful professional stattos will have worked out every permutation by such time for all to see, including what the respective points tallies would have been had those decisions been made correctly.
     
    wfc4ever likes this.
  25. CleyHorn

    CleyHorn Reservist

    Somewhat belatedly I can agree with your pitch-side monitor point. It is used extensively elsewhere after all. I've been reluctant so far given that if VAR should be more accurate, as you've suggested, then surely the most accurate decision could be deliverable from the VAR studio. But that leaves us lot in the dark in the stadium most of the time. I've still absolutely no idea whether our pen. shout on Saturday was properly reviewed or not.

    I don't see any need for a a 'smartphone in the sky-rocket'. And surely a tablet would be a bit cumbersome! Why not make it the default that after any goal or pen. shout the ref. walks purposefully (doesn't run) to the pitch-side monitor? Dramatic yes. But fine. A football match is meant to be drama/unscripted theatre. So add to it.

    How long would that take? 15 secs? If there's 'nothing to see here' then he could turn back. If there is he'd be in position at his monitor in time for 'deliberations'. Which I'm sure there would be. He won't just be looking at his monitor without ongoing input from the VAR studio.

    As said previously, 'not undermining colleagues' for the sake of it has improved markedly since Week 9.
     
    Last edited: Dec 9, 2019
  26. CleyHorn

    CleyHorn Reservist

    Maybe. Don't they just love their toys in the good old US of A? To monitor their daft game?
     
  27. CleyHorn

    CleyHorn Reservist

    Quite. Why use a small screen when a big one will do?
     
    hornetgags likes this.
  28. CleyHorn

    CleyHorn Reservist

    One thing I think both hb1 and I have been agreed on for some time previously is to 'get your retaliation in early' here.

    Sure the Blades did legally challenge their relegation on the grounds you suggest. Posthumously. And they did get a few million £ out of it. But they didn't retain their PL status on the strength of it. Didn't swap places with Wet Spam.

    Complaining legally after the event because we lost out by a point or so won't really cut it. 'Sour grapes' will be called. Why didn't we have the 'bottle' to complain earlier? So have the 'bottle' now. Cause a justified ruction. Set a tom-cat amongst their pigeons.

    U 'Orns!
     
  29. WillisWasTheWorst

    WillisWasTheWorst Its making less grammar mistake's thats important

    You often hear: VAR is here to stay and we just have to wait for it to improve. I remember video replays being abandoned in American Football, so I looked it up.
    In the US, video replays were introduced in 1986 despite people worrying it would slow the game down (!) and fans would not be able to celebrate. Teams voted to abandon it in 1992 after some controversial decisions and it wasn’t reintroduced until 1999 under a new system where coaches could call for the replay. https://bleacherreport.com/articles/1666250-the-history-of-instant-replay-in-the-nfl
    Nothing new under the sun.
     
  30. Davidmsawyer

    Davidmsawyer Statto Statto Statto

    My heart agrees. But there is no point arguing with referees, even after the game. They are a closed shop and will not countenance they could possible make a mistake. This why the ref-union often backs up bad VAR decisions on the sky VAR review (not just Watford). They have only admitted to the most absolute blatant mistakes on VAR, anything less than a 90% wrong VAR decision they back up.

    The potential benefit of complaining is that we may get some better decisions in the future. But I doubt that - they have nothing to lose if they call it wrong with us (or the other teams in the bottom third). It is either ignored or laughed off as one of those things.
     
  31. UEA_Hornet

    UEA_Hornet First Team Captain

    luke_golden likes this.

Share This Page