Chelsea vs. Crystal Palace match thread

Quiz question for Parish. Which is the only PL team that plays in the week but nevertheless used the fewest subs this weekend?
 
Willo said:
The rule had been in situ since the 2019-20 season and certainly Oliver Glasner and 'Yours Truly' had been aware of its existence.
Thee is no 'Crack down' this season.
I have already articulated why I believe it was enforced this afternoon. In the final analysis the law was applied correctly in relation to today's incident.
Correct decision, I have nothing more to add.
Click to expand...
But the referee gave the goal, it was VAR who advised him. VAR cannot get involved in such situations so, I’m afraid, yet again the Officials f***ed up….fact
 
sprites said:
Anyone got any insight on the Glasner/Guehi moment at the end of the game?
Click to expand...
I wouldn't read much into it. I was there, Marc was one of the first of the team to come over and clap the fans with Richards and then walked off to the tunnel so he was probably just knackered after an intense game. It's just media trying to whip up a storm.
 
Painter said:
VAR checks every Premier goal for infringments. Why is this different?
Click to expand...
Clattenberg explained it. It’s not something within VARs remit to interfere with.

What may have happened is that VAR asked the referee to look at the possible foul and in doing so the ref noticed that whilst there was no foul, there was an infringement. If VAR didn’t ask the ref to look at the foul then they have acted outside their powers and yet again we have been done by poor officiating.
 
For what it's worth I thought at the time Guehi was going to be penalised for moving Caisedo out of the way.

First time that I can recall seeing this rule implemented and I'll watch with interest any similar future situations. Because I have doubts it will be consistently applied.

The players deserve huge credit for their performance and the result. Those saying that Guehi and Eze were disrespecting the club were proven wrong. Whatever happens from now, they gave 100% yesterday.

I was only really worried when Delap was introduced. His fresh legs and physical style against a defence that could have started to tire on a warm opening day. Their only real chances came in the closing minutes.

Worth bearing in mind that Chelsea are able to introduce a player off of the bench that cost a similar amount to our record signing.

And I've been to Stamford Bridge so many times down the years - yesterday their support - or should i say lack of - was embarrassing
 
silvertop said:
I have not read this thread but do think Guehi's shove would have been penalised by most refs.

Inciting that rule is pure nerdy bollox. It was a foul off the ball.
Click to expand...

well VAR looked in order at the offside (clearly none), then the Guehi movement - this was deemed not a foul as he was just being stronger, after all it is a contact sport.
Then finally at the 3rd attempt the 1 yard law was mentioned, to the surprise of almost everyone. That is why VAR took so long.

I do remember the 1 yard law being introduced, however, this seemed to be more about the attacking team standing in front of the wall (so a wall in front of the wall).

As has been said i don't think this 1 yard 'law' has ever been applied before. That for me is the disappointment, players and supporters just want consistency.

Then later with the MG header (very similar to the Newcastle penalty last season) VAR seemed to dismiss it within seconds.

As Mica Richard said at half time VAR seems to be anti goals.
 
Willo said:
In the final analysis, Law 13 was applied correctly in today's match.
What focussed attention was the fact that the ball was thwacked in the space Guehi vacated,he was less than 1 metre from an opponent before the ball was in play, and the ball entered the goal.
Click to expand...
Not strictly correct my friend. He was, at the point the ball was kicked, less than the proscribed 1m distance to the defending teams 'wall', not, him being less than 1m from an opponent, they are different in application of Law 13.
 
NMPalace said:
well VAR looked in order at the offside (clearly none), then the Guehi movement - this was deemed not a foul as he was just being stronger, after all it is a contact sport.
Then finally at the 3rd attempt the 1 yard law was mentioned, to the surprise of almost everyone. That is why VAR took so long.

I do remember the 1 yard law being introduced, however, this seemed to be more about the attacking team standing in front of the wall (so a wall in front of the wall).

As has been said i don't think this 1 yard 'law' has ever been applied before. That for me is the disappointment, players and supporters just want consistency.

Then later with the MG header (very similar to the Newcastle penalty last season) VAR seemed to dismiss it within seconds.

As Mica Richard said at half time VAR seems to be anti goals.
Click to expand...
VAR intervened when it was not their job to do so (not within their remit) and then when Guehi gets punched in the head they ignore it.

It is little wonder that people scream big team bias.

If there was no VAR we would have been 1-0 up, no argument and if VAR did its job properly then there is a good chance we’d have got the goal and had a penalty and possibly be 2-0 up. There is no denying we got shafted again although in terms of how we played, a draw was probably a fair result and I’ll never knock that result away at the Bridge.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Holmesdale Online Shop

Back
Top