Manchester United vs. Crystal Palace match thread

[wilelliott88]

1. Will we appeal against the red card?

2. Does anyone else feel we've been on the incorrect decisions of a hell of a lot of games this season? The goal against chelsea (1st game), the Neto stamp & the pen (2nd game), fouls that should have been given but weren't, yesterday's Penalty...the list goes on (it could be me tbf)!

 

[NEILLO]

At the risk of upsetting all the Glasner lovers, i do not think a decent manager would have made the subs he did after the red card, i know he wont change, but the correct change should have been switch to 4-4-1, with Larsen up top, and Sarr and Johnson going wide, and Muñoz, Richards, Canvot and Mitchell as a back four, the subs that he did was like flying the white flag.

Larsen was injured and therefore subbed.

And you KNOW he's not going to a back 4 !

 

[pete58]

1. Will we appeal against the red card?

2. Does anyone else feel we've been on the incorrect decisions of a hell of a lot of games this season? The goal against chelsea (1st game), the Neto stamp & the pen (2nd game), fouls that should have been given but weren't, yesterday's Penalty...the list goes on (it could be me tbf)!

I should certainly hope so after Howard Webb!s comments :-

HOWARD WEBB EXPLANATIONS OF LACROIX RED CARD VS MANCHESTER UNITED IS GOING VIRAL AS MAKES RARE ADMISSION LEAVING THE OFFICIAL WITH STRICT PENALTY – Sportivity360

 

[fitzy]

Not a fan of VAR with its painful delays and removal of spontaneous enjoyment when we score etc ,but it levelled the playing field initially- moody offside goals being a major benefit, this and the successful recruitment of players/managers for the lesser lights has closed the gap to an extent albeit heavily funded by the double edged sword that is sky, but yesterday seemed like the crap old days of the Old Trafford rule book.
VAR is purposely becoming more convoluted and open to interpretation so the clowns in the VAR box can reach whatever conclusion they desire, we have had it twice against Chelsea already this season and defending the indefensible seems absolutely fine to the media and t*** pundits alike.
Two identical fouls/situations on a pitch will be described completely differently by pr***s like Alan Smith to suit the narrative of the big boys -part of the sky t&cs i guess.
We do get the benefit of bad decisions of course but very rarely when it has much riding on it or more accurately it affects the big boys.
Deanos handball at Wembley went in our favour but the reason for it was explained yet the media try to piss on our chips at every opportunity
with that one, radio silence when its the other way.

 

[NMPalace]

Even Glasner said it was a foul and probably a red card, but he also said the foul was outside the box, which he called "The old Trafford bonus" IMO that is the correct summing up

being at the match it looked in the box in real time - and whilst replays show the first contact was outside it did continue inside. I think the pen decision was on balance appropriate although the swan dive by Cunha was ridiculous.

Whilst he came back from an offside position therefore making it difficult to mark him i think Max defended poorly and was turned too easily.

Was it a sending off? He was slightly wide so i think maybe that would have saved Max. Unfortunately not.

 

[Eaglecoops]

At the risk of upsetting all the Glasner lovers, i do not think a decent manager would have made the subs he did after the red card, i know he wont change, but the correct change should have been switch to 4-4-1, with Larsen up top, and Sarr and Johnson going wide, and Muñoz, Richards, Canvot and Mitchell as a back four, the subs that he did was like flying the white flag.

They won’t have practiced it because clearly they only practice one way of playing.

 

[NMPalace]

Larsen was injured and therefore subbed.

And you KNOW he's not going to a back 4 !

We were down to 10 men so the situation changed. To bring an extra central defender on was a strange decision and even more so when we went one down soon after (can Canvot not head the ball - looks very suspect at defending crosses).

Even with 10 minutes to go he made an 'attacking' sub but retained the 3 CBs.

Despite Man U sitting back a bit and happy to take the points we failed to create a decent chance in the last 20 minutes and even the set pieces were slow and poorly executed.
OG made Man U's job a lot easier with the formation when we went down to 10.

I notice Chelsea put on an extra striker for the last 10 minutes yesterday and gave Arse some problems.

 

[doombear]

1. Will we appeal against the red card?

2. Does anyone else feel we've been on the incorrect decisions of a hell of a lot of games this season? The goal against chelsea (1st game), the Neto stamp & the pen (2nd game), fouls that should have been given but weren't, yesterday's Penalty...the list goes on (it could be me tbf)!

Given Howard Webb's comments, we may well do. However, if it's decided that Lacroix was guilty of a DOGSO offence outside the box, then Lacroix's red might still stand as he made no attempt to play the ball. A DOGSO offence doesn't have to be inside the box for a red card to be given (remember Wilf v Citeh).

 

[Eagleman13]

Howard Webb's 'Mic'd up remarks . . .

VAR 2-1 Crystal Palace:-
*Match Officials Mic’d Up*, Howard Webb revealed the VAR audio, which captured the officials’ deliberations. In the transcript, Kavanagh is heard saying, “Contact starts outside, but he’s still holding him in the box. That’s a pen and red.” VAR Bankes concurs: “Agreed, it’s sustained contact, denying the opportunity.” However, Webb argued that the decision was flawed. “This wasn’t worth a red card,” Webb stated. “The foul began outside the area, and the continuation wasn’t sufficient to warrant a penalty. It should have been a free-kick and perhaps a yellow at most. Chris Kavanagh misjudged the severity on-field, and VAR failed to correct it properly. We’re frustrated because this altered the game’s outcome unfairly.”
Webb emphasized that while denying a goal-scoring chance typically merits a red, the context here—minimal force and Cunha’s potential to stay on his feet—did not meet the threshold. He blamed Kavanagh for not reassessing via the pitchside monitor, calling it a “clear oversight” that disadvantaged Palace, who played over 30 minutes with 10 men.

 

[Phil’s Barber]

being at the match it looked in the box in real time - and whilst replays show the first contact was outside it did continue inside. I think the pen decision was on balance appropriate although the swan dive by Cunha was ridiculous.

Whilst he came back from an offside position therefore making it difficult to mark him i think Max defended poorly and was turned too easily.

Was it a sending off? He was slightly wide so i think maybe that would have saved Max. Unfortunately not.

About the best summing up of it that I’ve seen on here.

My only further contribution would be that the first VAR image shown to the referee on the monitor was a freeze frame of Cunha’s foot being on the line (therefore inside the box) and Max’s hand on his shoulder, thus confirming that contact had continued inside the box. Rather than examine the whole thing, they looked to have made their mind up about the ‘foul’ and then just wanted to show Kavanagh that Cunha’s foot was in the box. My beef is that at that point the amount of contact was insufficient to bring Cunha down (it was a dive) but by then he had already held him back slightly and they did not seem to fully examine the type and amount of contact that was still being applied.

As we have seen with other recent examples of penalties NOT given, presented for comparison with yesterday’s, it is the appalling inconsistency of VAR decisions that are infuriating.

 

[OneStevePerrin]

We were down to 10 men so the situation changed. To bring an extra central defender on was a strange decision and even more so when we went one down soon after (can Canvot not head the ball - looks very suspect at defending crosses).

Even with 10 minutes to go he made an 'attacking' sub but retained the 3 CBs.

Despite Man U sitting back a bit and happy to take the points we failed to create a decent chance in the last 20 minutes and even the set pieces were slow and poorly executed.
OG made Man U's job a lot easier with the formation when we went down to 10.

I notice Chelsea put on an extra striker for the last 10 minutes yesterday and gave Arse some problems.

I haven’t got a problem with our substitutions. Yet again though we made some attacks for which the passes were given away when players were in good positions. I could probably name 6 players as culprits so it’s not worth just blaming Pino ;-)

 

[crvenaeagle]

It's time to issue retrospective yellows after the match for cheating and if the offender already has a yellow from the game then it becomes a red. This way the authorities can pick up all the dives that were missed together with the fake injuries etc. There could also be a points system for repeat offenders which could lead to red cards and increasing match bans.

But why don't commentators call this s*** out during the game?
I am not a conspiracy theorist but I can totally understand those who are because things like this happen and everybody "at the top" (the FA, the Premier League, other referees, pundits, commentators etc) just pretend that it didn't happen.
Are they just so high up an ivory tower that they can't see how absurd it's become?

 

[Talvlad]

For some reason VAR decided to be especially crap last weekend. It's not just us, look at the Burnley game. Also, the first Fulham goal vs Spuds included a push which was more of a foul than Lacroix's hand on the shoulder and they let that go.

It's so bad I'm wondering if there's some sort of bonus structure for absurd decisions within the VAR team, I'm at a bit of loss to come up with any other reason why VAR is making the officiating worse.

If no VAR, then it's a really soft pen if the ref gives it, more likely not a pen, and whatever the decision never a red card.

It's the way the game is being reffed these days. If a player is ahead of you, you just have to let them go.

The only time VAR has made me smile was the Old Trafford v CPFC game a few seasons back - watch from 5 mins in.

 

[NMPalace]

I haven’t got a problem with our substitutions. Yet again though we made some attacks for which the passes were given away when players were in good positions. I could probably name 6 players as culprits so it’s not worth just blaming Pino ;-)

I don't think anyone is blaming Pino - he was only on for 10 minutes and took 1 free kick during that period, i think.

The main point is you can't play 3 CBs when you are down to 10 and chasing the game. That's school kid tactics and is a concern that OG couldn't adjust to the situation.

 

[Spiderman]

It's time to issue retrospective yellows after the match for cheating and if the offender already has a yellow from the game then it becomes a red. This way the authorities can pick up all the dives that were missed together with the fake injuries etc. There could also be a points system for repeat offenders which could lead to red cards and increasing match bans.

Trying to get SL booked is a disgrace and retrospective action should be taken

 

[Spiderman]

I should certainly hope so after Howard Webb!s comments :-

HOWARD WEBB EXPLANATIONS OF LACROIX RED CARD VS MANCHESTER UNITED IS GOING VIRAL AS MAKES RARE ADMISSION LEAVING THE OFFICIAL WITH STRICT PENALTY – Sportivity360

Not sure that article is genuine

 

[Davepalace707]

Howard Webb has been honest enough to air his opinion on the decisions by the referee and VAR.
I have nothing more to add, I am rather busy this week leading up to the Conservative Spring Conference in Harrogate where I shall be in attendance, hence my time on HOL will be somewhat limited.

Old Bell Tavern or the Harrogate Tap. Best beer in Harrogate see you in there

 

[CrazyBadger]

Was it a Foul? yes probably.
Was it Denying an Obvjous Goal Scoring Opportunity? hard to tell, not really any covering defenders, but it was wide(ish)
Was it in the area, No. Started outside, 95% of contact was outside the area. (and he went down incredibly easily)

Once the foul was given, then objectively if the ref thought it was it was DOGSO then it has be a red. It's highly subjective, and one of the worst parts of the Officiating rulebook. but it was never a pen.

To add to that - I see Maguire was immediately in the Refs face to talk about it - and I saw no Armband on him... When did that become allowed again?!

 

[peterg]

Was it a Foul? yes probably.
Was it Denying an Obvjous Goal Scoring Opportunity? hard to tell, not really any covering defenders, but it was wide(ish)
Was it in the area, No. Started outside, 95% of contact was outside the area. (and he went down incredibly easily)

Once the foul was given, then objectively if the ref thought it was it was DOGSO then it has be a red. It's highly subjective, and one of the worst parts of the Officiating rulebook. but it was never a pen.

To add to that - I see Maguire was immediately in the Refs face to talk about it - and I saw no Armband on him... When did that become allowed again?!

Maguire = cheat. Pretended he had been kicked in the face when ref gave foul against SL for a dangerous high kick, which went nowhere near Maguire's face. Plus it was more of a foul against SL than by SL in the first place.

 

[Eaglecoops]

Old Bell Tavern or the Harrogate Tap. Best beer in Harrogate see you in there

I’ll be at the Reform free beer rave just down the road. Maybe see you both