-
The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...
Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports
Jesus Perez is such a dork to be fair
I think it's a foul but ref was looking right at it and didn't call it - so not "clear and obvious" for VAR to impose themselves on the game.
I'm Norfolk, so profoundly Norwich in the East Anglian derby argument, but even so, I'd like to see Ipswich back in the top flight. They've suffered enough, and long and hard, but they're still a historic team, I'll be glad to see them back, their fans deserve it.
Excellent point.
The fact it's "soft" is EXACTLY why VAR shouldn't be getting involved. They just re-reffed the game.
It's soft in terms of the action from the player but it's quite a clear foul. The only reason Chelsea won that ball was because they shoved the Villa player in the back.
Yeah clear foul but why can't the ref make the right call...
. 9pts even with 3 games in hand would have been a bit too much to get100% correct. Referees not allowed to referee now. I wonder if referees are told before games that if they get sent to the monitor they have to go with VAR?
The referees should grow a set of balls and go against them if they think they were right in the first place. The ref there saw that clearly but never thought it was a foul but somehow changes his mind when VAR get involved. Fucking pea hearts. I have a horrible feeling that disallowed goal could have a massive impact on us come the end of the season.
Yes but soft subjective calls are made all the time in football games. VAR is supposed to be there to prevent "Clear and Obvious" errors. The fact there's a debate in this thread shows it's not "clear and obvious".
VAR had no right to intervene then when Pawson had a clear view of the incident and made a subjective call on it.
It's not a penalty incident where VAR is drawing attention to contact the ref may have missed. It's a subjective decision made by a ref with a prefect view that has been RE-REFFED by the bloke in an office.
Foul or not (and there's clearly dispute on that in this thread) - that is NOT what VAR is supposed to do.
I also think it’s the difference to how VaR and refs operate. There was just a few seconds before the main clip the Villa player fouled the Chelsea player by holding him then he let him go and that’s when he jumped for the ball and the Chav player pushed him. From a refs perspective it was probably soft foul against the Chav player then soft foul against the Villa player. From a VAR perspective they are just looking at anything that would rule the goal out.
Personally, I don't think its soft, but even if it was it was still an action directly leading to a goal. In those instances that's exactly what its there for.