Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

[Football] Zaha watch - *** The SEGW finally managed to escape***



Triggaaar

Well-known member
Oct 24, 2005
50,200
Goldstone
I was going along the lines of The Diving One being booked after VAR overruling an awarded penalty. Is that not going to happen with Premier league version of VAR?
I thought I was replying to you when I posted this:
Yes you're right. However, word is that the way it's going to be used in the PL this season is that if the VAR team can see why the ref gave something (eg, a penalty), then they won't overturn it. Which makes VAR seem pointless (I think there are going to be a lot of problems with VAR that need addressing this season).

I would hope that refs are a little more cautious giving out penalties, as they know that if there really is one, then VAR will give it. With the VAR rules as they've been described, I'd rather see refs only give penalties when they're sure.
 




Taybha

Whalewhine
Oct 8, 2008
27,185
Uwantsumorwat
Quite possible VAR has put a few clubs off taking the plunge on him, shame he has this in his locker as he'd be playing his football for a much better club by now.

That's actually quite a plausible point, and whilst it's probably not the defining reason nobody stumped up the money it must come into a buying clubs thinking for next season when players have a Reputation for let's say amateur dramatics.
 


Happy Exile

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Apr 19, 2018
1,866
Saw an Everton fan somewhere making the same point. VAR will take a chunk of Zaha's game and point gaining ability off him so he's over valued.
 


West Upper Seagull

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2003
1,513
Woodingdean
Don’t rule out Bayern Munich making a bid for him by the end of the month now that their chances of signing Sane have been shattered by his cruciate knee injury ! :wink:
 


LlcoolJ

Mama said knock you out.
Oct 14, 2009
12,982
Sheffield
Can't wait for all the muppets on #cpfc who were lambasting him for the last 24 hours to suddenly change their tune
"We always loved u Wilf. Sorry for calling you a ****. God is grate."

Bunch of ****ing idiots.
 




Motogull

Todd Warrior
Sep 16, 2005
9,861
Who the fukk sanctioned the senile old woman to speak to Sky like that. Rambling confidential gibberish and a complete inability to note the January window. Dibley will have seen that and noted that that even if the money they wanted now is offered, he still won't be allowed to go.

Every night is amateur night up there.
 




FatSuperman

Well-known member
Feb 25, 2016
2,830
Haha, here's hoping. Could be worth a lot less next year!

The perfect sequel to this story is Palace get relegated - due to lack of Wan B and Zaha being in a strop half the season, but then they need him for the promotion season and refuse to sell him again. His ‘agent’ blatantly won’t have a relegation clause due to the gentleman’s agreement they have with Beaky. So Wilf is forced to spend next season in the championship.

Frankly if he doesn’t go somewhere during the Euro window he’s increasingly looking like a Palace for life player. How old will he be when his contract is up?
 




bhafc99

Well-known member
Oct 14, 2003
7,090
Dubai
Statement from Wilf just been released:

"Yesterday, I handed in a transfer request, as I believed I deserved a chance to play for my boyhood idols, AC Mancharsenalrton Utd Cityapoli Bremen.

I modestly felt that my widely-acknowledged status as The Third Best Player in the World meant that, at the every least, clubs should be building their Champions League campaigns around me, and I generously hoped to be able to allow them to do that.

However it has not proved possible to escape, and after further discussions with the Board of Crystal Palace, I am thrilled to now be pledging myself to another nine years servitude at this great club. The club has assured me that a number of key concerns have been addressed, which in my opinion more than make up for missing out on the multiple trophies my talent deserves.

For example, I am led to believe that the broken drains in the Holmesdale End mens' urinals will be replaced in the New Year (funds permitting), and that a new striker may well be signed in time for the 2023–4 campaign, definitely, honestly.

Moreover, Mr Parish has shown me a drawing of a new stadium that he really does have ring-fenced funding for this time. It is made of burnished kryptonite and platinum, and will float in cyberspace with seating for 490,000 fans, whilst also enabling them to virtually evict one another from seats they've sat in for years simply by stamping their feet and sulking. This is obviously something very dear to my heart.

As a result of this discussion, I have this very evening recommenced training for the forthcoming season by going out onto the streets of London, deliberately walking into people and then throwing myself to the ground. I hope to bring this skill back to the team on Saturday, and look forward to rejoining any of my team-mates who have equally "come to terms" with still being at this club. Thank you."
 




Acker79

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Nov 15, 2008
31,864
Brighton
Well that's ****ing stupid.

Is it? The law this sort of decision will apply to is for fouls, where a foul is defined as 'in the opinion of the referee'. If the process shows that what the ref is basing his opinion on is actually what happened, where's the problem? VAR doesn't change how referee's interpret the laws, just allows them the opportunity to have a second look to make sure they saw what they thought they saw. It's why I think a lot of people will still be disappointed with VAR - they are expecting it to mean referees will make the decision fans want them to make, rather than the ones the laws (and lawmakers) dictate they make.

Having said that, I've found this article from sky, which seems to have a slightly different slant than The Debate had. The Debate made it seem like they were trying to limit interference from VAR, that the video would be playing the Dermot Gallagher role of 'I can see why it's given' way of defending the ref while not denying the popular sentiment that it was the wrong decision. This article makes it sound like the video ref is going to be testing the ref on these decisions, an 'oh really? Is that what you think you saw, well let me check that... computer says no.'
 




dadams2k11

ID10T Error
Jun 24, 2011
4,947
Brighton
Parish and 'gentlemen's agreement' do not go in the same sentence.

Ian Holloway, in an interview said that Parish had a 'gentlemen's agreement' with him which he went back on and told him he should of had it in writing. He is a horrible man and him and palace suit each other.

Watch from 1hour 13mins in on this video

https://youtu.be/TV-djvS0B7Y
 


Brok

😐
Dec 26, 2011
4,338
Just read this on the BBS, and had to chuckle...

Wilf Zaha, Zaha,
He kisses the badge on his chest,
Then hands in a transfer request,
Wilf Zaha, Zaha
:)
 


B-right-on

Living the dream
Apr 23, 2015
6,176
Shoreham Beaaaach
Hodgson just said he's going to speak to Wilf tommorow and...

"hopefully by then he will have come to terms with the fact that he will be staying at Crystal Palace".

:lolol:


:tantrum:

Makes it sound worse than a jail sentence. Which it is of course.
 




Tooting Gull

Well-known member
Jul 5, 2003
11,033
Just read this on the BBS, and had to chuckle...

Wilf Zaha, Zaha,
He kisses the badge on his chest,
Then hands in a transfer request,
Wilf Zaha, Zaha
:)

Outstanding. I wonder how that would sound with, say, 27,000 people singing it very loudly in February. If he's still there, of course.
 


Triggaaar

Well-known member
Oct 24, 2005
50,200
Goldstone
Is it? The law this sort of decision will apply to is for fouls, where a foul is defined as 'in the opinion of the referee'. If the process shows that what the ref is basing his opinion on is actually what happened, where's the problem? VAR doesn't change how referee's interpret the laws, just allows them the opportunity to have a second look to make sure they saw what they thought they saw.
Well I can't be too sure how I feel about it without having seen it being used, but I don't like the sound of it.

For example, a foul would be when the referee thinks a player is careless, reckless or using excessive force when he:
charges; jumps at; kicks or attempts to kick; pushes; strikes or attempts to strike; tackles or challenges; trips or attempts to trip etc.

Now if the VAR team see that there was indeed contact, but thanks to the video evidence, they can see it wasn't careless, reckless or using excessive force, I would hope that their opinion (with the benefit of video replays) counts for something. You description makes it sound like they'd say to themselves 'well it looks like it wasn't careless or reckless etc, but there is slight gentle contact, which without the benefit of replays could have looked careless so I can see why the ref gave it, so it stands'.

It's why I think a lot of people will still be disappointed with VAR - they are expecting it to mean referees will make the decision fans want them to make, rather than the ones the laws (and lawmakers) dictate they make.
Personally I want them to make the decisions that the laws dictate they make, but your first post makes it sound like they won't, they'll ignore the laws because they can see why the ref got it wrong.

Having said that, I've found this article from sky, which seems to have a slightly different slant than The Debate had. The Debate made it seem like they were trying to limit interference from VAR, that the video would be playing the Dermot Gallagher role of 'I can see why it's given' way of defending the ref while not denying the popular sentiment that it was the wrong decision. This article makes it sound like the video ref is going to be testing the ref on these decisions, an 'oh really? Is that what you think you saw, well let me check that... computer says no.'
It's the penalty decisions I'm mostly concerned about, and that link doesn't say much about VAR reviewing whether or not the challenge should be considered a foul.

I guess we'll have to wait and see.
 


Triggaaar

Well-known member
Oct 24, 2005
50,200
Goldstone
Parish and 'gentlemen's agreement' do not go in the same sentence.

Ian Holloway, in an interview said that Parish had a 'gentlemen's agreement' with him which he went back on and told him he should of had it in writing. He is a horrible man and him and palace suit each other.

Watch from 1hour 13mins in on this video

https://youtu.be/TV-djvS0B7Y
Good find. Seems just like Zaha's agreement with Parish. Parish think he's all so bloody clever with his 'oh you're not a businessman, you shouldn't have signed it, I wouldn't have signed it'. Well good for you Parish, you've managed to piss off your manager/player, that's a great way to run a business.
 


Icy Gull

Back on the rollercoaster
Jul 5, 2003
72,015
Good find. Seems just like Zaha's agreement with Parish. Parish think he's all so bloody clever with his 'oh you're not a businessman, you shouldn't have signed it, I wouldn't have signed it'. Well good for you Parish, you've managed to piss off your manager/player, that's a great way to run a business.

More fool anyone who has any business dealings with him without it being in writing and looked over by a smart lawyer before signing. The man is the archetypal old school spiv. In fact everything about him right down to the way he dresses and his hairstyle SHOUTS spiv.
 




Acker79

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Nov 15, 2008
31,864
Brighton
Well I can't be too sure how I feel about it without having seen it being used, but I don't like the sound of it.

For example, a foul would be when the referee thinks a player is careless, reckless or using excessive force when he:
charges; jumps at; kicks or attempts to kick; pushes; strikes or attempts to strike; tackles or challenges; trips or attempts to trip etc.

Now if the VAR team see that there was indeed contact, but thanks to the video evidence, they can see it wasn't careless, reckless or using excessive force, I would hope that their opinion (with the benefit of video replays) counts for something. You description makes it sound like they'd say to themselves 'well it looks like it wasn't careless or reckless etc, but there is slight gentle contact, which without the benefit of replays could have looked careless so I can see why the ref gave it, so it stands'.

But that's the thing, there is no objective definition of careless, reckless or excessive - that is where it comes to the ref's opinion (and often where the disparity with the lawmakers/refs and the fans/pundits/players occurs). Where the VAR comes in is in confirming that the aspects of the challenge that led to the ref forming that opinion actually happened. If the ref says 'he was off the ground, leading leg goes over the ball catches his knee, it's a red' the VAR looks at it and sees he was off the ground, the leading leg did go over the ball and catch his knee, the decision will stand. If he looks at the challenge and sees the foot didn't catch the knee he might say to the ref 'actually, while he was off the ground, the foot misses the knee'. The ref then could change his mind, or decide to look at the video to see if he still feels it was dangerous enough to give a red despite the lack of contact, or to determine if instead of a red a yellow is more appropriate.

That was the other thing that came up - the ref won't always look at the video. The VAR can just describe what he sees and the ref can base his decision on that if he feels comfortable doing so, but there will always be a screen available so he can look for himself if he wants. The argument being that the assistants and 4th official currently can be used to offer advice by describing their view, so why is it any different?
 


Hugo Rune

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Feb 23, 2012
21,622
Brighton
Zaha watch 2019/20 ** DEMANDED TO LEAVE - BUT NOBODY WANTS the SEGW ***

So Napoli are prepared to pay approx £20m less than the bid Palace rejected from Everton?

I'm not convinced that'll do the trick, to be honest.

It really depends on his attitude up until the European deadline doesn’t it?

If he is back tomorrow, cap in hand pledging his allegiances to Palace alongside another new contract and big payrise, all could be well in your garden.

However, if the likes of Napoli & Bayern come knocking, you’ll have another month of this. He really won’t want to get injured like Sane either if he thinks he has a chance of a European adventure so I might choose to sit August out.
 


Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here