Brentford vs Crystal Palace match thread

[Paul Salvage]

If you are going to go down with a shirt pull it might help your cause if you go over backwards not forwards. All that aside it was a penalty, I can not understand how VAR says no penalty.

To compound the lack of a penalty, Brentford go down the other end and score very soon after. To the point where sky missed their bloody goal showing a quick replay of the foul. We go 3-1 up and the game is done.
Var needs to fcuk off and go back to refs making a decision and live with the mistakes as the system is currently not fit for purpose. Decisions are still subjective and I would rather a ref make it live, than some t*** in a room miles away looking at slow motion videos and 10 different angles to still get the decision wrong!
I suspect if all fans were asked if they wanted to keep var or get rid, then nearly all would get rid. (Even the supposed big clubs)

 

[manoftaste]

If you are going to go down with a shirt pull it might help your cause if you go over backwards not forwards. All that aside it was a penalty, I can not understand how VAR says no penalty.

Sky was reshowing the Johnson shirt pull when Brentford scored. Presumably VAR was looking at it at that moment too. But if you are VAR, you think maybe you should tell the ref to review a foul in the penalty area and then the other side score, what are you going to do? Rule out Brentford's perfectly good goal and award Palace a penalty? There would be a riot!
I've often thought this about VAR. They take ages to alert the ref, and meanwhile the game is going on. Has VAR ever called play back after the other side has scored? Of course not. It's pure cowardice. I agre with others on here who say we'd be better doing away with it.

 

[NEILLO]

And what has been the main reason for this:

Lack of depth to the squad?

Poor game management by OG?

Lack of opportunity for fringe and younger players due to OG’s obstinacy? Why is Hughes currently sidelined?

I could also criticise the inability to score from open play and, aside from Sarr, our forwards have been poor.

I think yesterday highlighted the main reason.

The failure to finish teams off when comfortably on top.

 

[Willo]

I think yesterday highlighted the main reason.

The failure to finish teams off when comfortably on top.

Our January signings Strand Larsen and Johnson, costing up to £83 Mill, have played in 46 games between them and the sum total of goals scored (All by JSL) is 4.

 

[elgin eeagle]

To compound the lack of a penalty, Brentford go down the other end and score very soon after. To the point where sky missed their bloody goal showing a quick replay of the foul. We go 3-1 up and the game is done.
Var needs to fcuk off and go back to refs making a decision and live with the mistakes as the system is currently not fit for purpose. Decisions are still subjective and I would rather a ref make it live, than some t*** in a room miles away looking at slow motion videos and 10 different angles to still get the decision wrong!
I suspect if all fans were asked if they wanted to keep var or get rid, then nearly all would get rid. (Even the supposed big clubs)

I thought the whole point of VAR was to help the referee come to the correct decision and in a speedy way. But neither of these things seem to happen in the British version of it, and instead of eliminating controversy, it actually makes it worse and stops the game for endless periods.

 

[Xong Kudu]

Regarding the Johnson penalty decision, I have no doubt refs and VAR think “ they’ve already had one today and are ahead so we won’t give it this time…”

 

[Stirlingsays]

The question is not VAR should be expected to be perfect. There will aways be edge situations and any new system means situations and delays.......but the question is are obviously bad decisions reduced significantly, which they are. The human element hasn't been taken away as it still requires interpretation and that means mistakes are made because decisions are time limited.

If VAR wasn't there then people would be moaning a lot more about overtly bad decisions. The people who got rid of VAR would be getting a lot of heat.
TV replays would show obviously bad decisions and everyone would be saying....'why are we letting this stand?'

Football fans will always moan, different day, same outcome.

The decisions that are mostly moaned about are subjective and would have gone either way anyway.

The expectation should be that VAR isn't and can't be perfect but that it can reduce significantly the obviously bad decisions that happened in the past. It can't give you perfect decisions on 50/50 or even 60/40 decisions....because interpretation under pressure means that mistakes will still be made.

 

[Painter]

And what has been the main reason for this:

Lack of depth to the squad?

Poor game management by OG?

Lack of opportunity for fringe and younger players due to OG’s obstinacy? Why is Hughes currently sidelined?

I could also criticise the inability to score from open play and, aside from Sarr, our forwards have been poor.

One of the more bizarre comments, that not playing Hughes more is a reason, why we have dropped 21 points from winning positions. Hughes is no longer good enough, gets constantly booked and has zero creativity.

 

[BromleyMonkey]

The decisions that are mostly moaned about are subjective and would have gone either way anyway.

Exactly, you’ve still got humans looking at screens sending another human, who is under pressure from thousands in the ground and millions watching on TV. VAR equipment is fine, it’s the way it’s used that is causing the problems

 

[park the bus]

I thought the whole point of VAR was to help the referee come to the correct decision and in a speedy way. But neither of these things seem to happen in the British version of it, and instead of eliminating controversy, it actually makes it worse and stops the game for endless periods.

What VAR has illustrated on numerous occasions is that it is a tool used by the authorities to favour certain outcomes. Making the correct decision in light of the regulations of the game appears secondary.

 

[JHB]

The question is not VAR should be expected to be perfect. There will aways be edge situation and any new system means situations and delays.......but the question is are obviously bad decisions reduced significantly, which they are. The human element hasn't been taken away as it still requires interpretation and that means mistakes are made because decisions are time limited.

If VAR wasn't there then people would be moaning a lot more about overtly bad decisions. The people who got rid of VAR would be getting a lot of heat.
TV replays would show obviously bad decisions and everyone would be saying....'why are we letting this stand?'

Football fans will always moan, different day, same outcome.

The decisions that are mostly moaned about are subjective and would have gone either way anyway.

The expectation should be that VAR isn't and can't be perfect but that it can reduce significantly the obviously bad decisions that happened in the past. It can't give you perfect decisions on 50/50 or even 60/40 decisions....because interpretation under pressure means that mistakes will still be made.

The issue is the inconsistency in the decisions VAR gives and the lack of clarity on the process. Take cricket as an example. They have a decision review system with a very clear and consistent set of protocols so it works. You also don’t get different interpretations from one game to the next because again the interpretations are codified.

What infuriates people is the complete lack of consistency that VAR should be there to solve. Yesterday was a good example. Is pulling a shirt a foul yes or no? If it is then a penalty should have been given for the foul on Johnson.

Like it or not in Europe it is actually much clearer with hand ball for example where any handball is a pen or offence. Might not like it but everyone knows where they stand.

 

[Willo]

The issue is the inconsistency in the decisions VAR gives and the lack of clarity on the process. Take cricket as an example. They have a decision review system with a very clear and consistent set of protocols so it works. You also don’t get different interpretations from one game to the next because again the interpretations are codified.

What infuriates people is the complete lack of consistency that VAR should be there to solve. Yesterday was a good example. Is pulling a shirt a foul yes or no? If it is then a penalty should have been given for the foul on Johnson.

Like it or not in Europe it is actually much clearer with hand ball for example where any handball is a pen or offence. Might not like it but everyone knows where they stand.

A totally different dynamic as there is not the subjectivity that exists in the VAR decision system.
The DRS in cricket rules on bowlers leg over the line, 'Hawkeye' ruling on whether the ball would hit the stumps, 'Snickometer' ruling on whether the ball made contact with bat or glove,all decisions of fact as there are with VAR in respect of offsides and the Goal-Line technology.

 

[palace99]

That is exactly my thoughts. Ffs Brennan get up, then actually no it should have been a penalty.
We have had some absolute sh!t decisions this whole season. 🤬

yes Johnson is so bad he can't even fall to the ground without making it look like a dive. A penalty all day long which i think he's reaction prevented it being given. Look at how Lerma 'highlighted' the obvious shirt pull v Newcastle a few weeks ago. However, VAR is just a joke. How can they not see that

 

[ASCPFC]

I think yesterday highlighted the main reason.

The failure to finish teams off when comfortably on top.

That is backed up by having the worst goals to expected goals ratio in the league. I worked it out that it takes around 9-11 total shots for us to score a goal. It should be maybe 3-5. Poor finishing.

 

[OneStevePerrin]

One of the more bizarre comments, that not playing Hughes more is a reason, why we have dropped 21 points from winning positions. Hughes is no longer good enough, gets constantly booked and has zero creativity.

Hughes certainly isn’t the player he was and Wharton and Kamada are our only central midfielders that are good enough to start. However, yesterday after 65/70 minutes both of them as in previous matches are knackered which allows other teams to then hurt us. It’s possible that Hughes getting 20 minutes may just have strengthened that central midfield? We should have wrapped it up in the first half but ended up nearly losing because our central midfielders had practically disappeared. It also didn’t help of course with injuries to our defenders but they needed help and just perhaps a cameo by Hughes in front of them might of held onto the lead? I would have taken A draw before the match so I suppose we came out of it okay?

 

[palace99]

A totally different dynamic as there is not the subjectivity that exists in the VAR decision system.
The DRS in cricket rules on bowlers leg over the line, 'Hawkeye' ruling on whether the ball would hit the stumps, 'Snickometer' ruling on whether the ball made contact with bat or glove,all decisions of fact as there are with VAR in respect of offsides and the Goal-Line technology.

Not quite accurate.
LBW has an umpires choice option when the ball is deemed to just hitting the wicket by less than half a ball's width.
So cricket quickly realised that some decisions are so marginal that they let the on field decision stand, even if it is slightly 'wrong'.
VAR, which is meant to be for clear and obvious errors could do similar - have thicker off side lines and/or a 60 second rule. If a goal cannot be considered incorrect within this time period it is clearly not a clear and obvious error.

 

[Willo]

Not quite accurate.
LBW has an umpires choice option when the ball is deemed to just hitting the wicket by less than half a ball's width.
So cricket quickly realised that some decisions are so marginal that they let the on field decision stand, even if it is slightly 'wrong'.
VAR, which is meant to be for clear and obvious errors could do similar - have thicker off side lines and/or a 60 second rule. If a goal cannot be considered incorrect within this time period it is clearly not a clear and obvious error.

I accept this but the technology determines whether the ball is hitting the wicket within the parameters agreed. There is no subjectivity in this instance.

 

[Putitout]

yes Johnson is so bad he can't even fall to the ground without making it look like a dive. A penalty all day long which i think he's reaction prevented it being given. Look at how Lerma 'highlighted' the obvious shirt pull v Newcastle a few weeks ago. However, VAR is just a joke. How can they not see that

That is the inconsistency . Regardless of what the ref did or didn’t see, VAR see,s a clear shirt pull in both situations. And yet two different outcomes. How Johnson fell should not matter, his shirt was pulled enough to prevent him controlling the ball.

 

[palace99]

That is the inconsistency . Regardless of what the ref did or didn’t see, VAR see,s a clear shirt pull in both situations. And yet two different outcomes. How Johnson fell should not matter, his shirt was pulled enough to prevent him controlling the ball.

Agree it shouldn't matter, but due to the subjective nature it does. His pathetic little fall to his knees didn't help. Some players are smart in those situations and make sure the contact is 'seen'.
The shirt pull is so strong and for more than a split second, it is clearly impeding the player.

How VAR is not telling the ref to go to the screen is beyond me.

Outside the area that would have been a yellow card foul all day long.

 

[JessieJ]

Just watched it through. Very good until 65 minutes. I would have taken the point before kick-off under the circumstances. Injuries to three CB'S is very concerning. I'll say it now, our once very reliable defensive structure is not filling me confidence 9 days out from the final.