Search results

You are misinterpreting; if a player is fouled then continues of his own accord and stumbles, then clearly there is no continuity. Otherwise we would have players stumbling all over the place. VAR is irrelevant; the issue is continuity. TBH, I am amazed that the concept is causing such...

Dunno when he blew whistle but it should never be instantaneous just in case an advantage can be played, however unlikely the possibility.

Yes, that foul continued into penalty area, there was contact inside the box.

No, rules do not differentiate. It is VAR that make difference. Old days we would say that was lucky, would stare at dodgy replay and agree with pundits that it was just outside and everyone happy. But it was never the rules of the game, just the way they were interpreted. And in those days...

This. I thought March was lucky real time and once went to VAR, gave up hope. Think we need to accept it was the right decision and start to think about why Southampton are 5th and we are facing relegation scrap.

Ref should apply the rules to more serous offence, else players could (for example) get away with serious foul play having moments earlier committed a less serious offence and therefore avoid a red card.

In my experience as a ref, that is not the case.

Why? It gave the right answer; just as it did last week and the week before. We have to stop looking with blue and white tinted specs. March got away with one at Villa, and was unlucky tonight. BUT BOTH DECISIONS WERE CORRECT. Separate argument: was it clear and obvious error? But nor were...

Foul continues into area, stone bonker pen. It is actually where VAR works, just as it did last week. Gained a point, lost a point. Move on.