[Albion] Mic'd Up: Joe Willock's dive

[Bozza]

Always find these interesting to listen back to.

Match Officials Mic'd Up: Joe Willock's dive rightly punished against Brighton by VAR

We take a closer look at how VAR intervened to help referee Craig Pawson make the right decision for Brighton against Newcastle, where Joe Willock dived following a challenge from Jan Paul van Hecke.

www.skysports.com

 

[Eeyore]

I got the impression that Craig Pawson took instruction from the linesman on its awarding. He's clearly unsighted.

 

[Driver 8]

Is VAR not allowed to say “it’s a dive”?!

 

[Bodian]

Is VAR not allowed to say “it’s a dive”?!

They kept talking about 'minimal contact' as well. There was NO contact!

 

[Weststander]

I didn’t like the repeated VAR narrative “challenge from (JPVH”). It was clearly an expertly aborted at the last moment challenge. The former gave a ref a chance to get it wrong.

Pillock dived and his dive commenced just before JPVH arrived.

 

[Deadly Danson]

That is INCREDIBLY damning of Pawson who, as we all know, had an horrific game. Firstly, as Howard Webb says, he doesn't have a clear view so isn't sure and says, "I think he fouls him" two or three times very doubtfully. He cannot give the pen if he isn't sure in his own mind (I do understand why he might have thought it was a pen but that should never be enough) and frankly gives credence to the notion that he was desperate to give as much as he could to Newcastle.

 

[Weststander]

That is INCREDIBLY damning of Pawson who, as we all know, had an horrific game. Firstly, as Howard Webb says, he doesn't have a clear view so isn't sure and says, "I think he fouls him" two or three times very doubtfully. He cannot give the pen if he isn't sure in his own mind (I do understand why he might have thought it was a pen but that should never be enough) and frankly gives credence to the notion that he was desperate to give as much as he could to Newcastle.

Or like other refs he loved the look at me moments in dramatically pointing to the spot .

 

[Mackenzie]

VAR worked perfectly in that instance, Willock dived and was punished with the penalty rescinded. Fortunately it wasn't Salisbury on VAR duties as Hecke would have been sent off.

 

[Deadly Danson]

VAR worked perfectly in that instance, Willock dived and was punished with the penalty rescinded. Fortunately it wasn't Salisbury on VAR duties as Hecke would have been sent off.

Yep, he's so rubbish Darren England completely ignored his hopeless advice to give a handball at the weekend. The disdain in England's body language when he got to the screen and saw the incident was notable.

 

[The Colonel]

That is INCREDIBLY damning of Pawson who, as we all know, had an horrific game. Firstly, as Howard Webb says, he doesn't have a clear view so isn't sure and says, "I think he fouls him" two or three times very doubtfully. He cannot give the pen if he isn't sure in his own mind (I do understand why he might have thought it was a pen but that should never be enough) and frankly gives credence to the notion that he was desperate to give as much as he could to Newcastle.

Agreed. I always assumed the correct process in cases where the referee is obviously uncertain would be to not give a penalty and allow VAR to overrule if required.

 

[Triggaaar]

Always find these interesting to listen back to.

Match Officials Mic'd Up: Joe Willock's dive rightly punished against Brighton by VAR

We take a closer look at how VAR intervened to help referee Craig Pawson make the right decision for Brighton against Newcastle, where Joe Willock dived following a challenge from Jan Paul van Hecke.

www.skysports.com

When first viewing the footage they say that there's contact, which is somewhat jumping to an incorrect conclusion. They later do a 180 and get it right.

What I like though is how clear the communication is between the ref and VAR about what they're recommending and what's going to happen. That reminds me of the opposite when they got an offside decision wrong a season or two ago because VAR didn't realise what the on-field decision was. Maybe they're getting better?

 

[OzMike]

Willock should be carded.

 

[Stumpy Tim]

Willock should be carded.

He was

 

[ROSM]

When first viewing the footage they say that there's contact, which is somewhat jumping to an incorrect conclusion. They later so a 180 and get it right.

What I like though is how clear the communication is between the ref and VAR about what they're recommending and what's going to happen. That reminds me of the opposite when they got an offside decision wrong a season or two ago because VAR didn't realise what the on-field decision was. Maybe they're getting better?

I do think this programme is the emperor's new clothes. Owen never challenges and is keen to give Webb a way out. Clearly what has been said initially by the ref and var definitely raise more questions than they answered about how that decision was initially seen or how despite seeing it on a huge screen at stockley park they still thought there was contact.

Admittedly I havent seen the whole programme so I don't know if they covered the Gordon exaggeration or the pen we didn't get. I do agree with @Deadly Danson that this does nothing to alleviate the belief that Pawson was just itching to give smug Eddie a pen!