[Albion] Pawson

[jcdenton08]

Sure, when they have made mistakes. It doesn’t mean that every decision we don’t like is a mistake though. I’m not saying they never make any mistakes, but fans now are absolutely dying to find reasons to be angry at refs for not giving decisions the way they want them to be. Jesus, half of us don’t know the laws of the game well enough to know what is and isn’t a correct call.

I know the Laws of the Game, but you don’t need to be an expert to have seen what a dreadful game Pawson had. It was embarrassing.

- penalty given, wrong, outside of box
- penalty given, wrong, dive
- free kick given, wrong, dive
- subsequent penalty given, correct (but directly the result of a poor decision)
- Wieffer no second yellow given, wrong, it was clear cut
- Burn no yellow (or foul!!!) given, restarted with a Newcastle throw in

Those are just the important ones. He was getting the vast majority of decisions all over the pitch wrong. Throw-ins, free kicks, game management.

It was rank incompetence, at best. The only thing preventing me from feeling bias was involved was bottling the Wieffer red card.

He was absolutely atrocious and almost every single key decision, sans Wieffer, went against us.

 

[METALMICKY]

I don't normally complain about refs. Today's was the most inept & biassed I've seen

When Murphy was praising VAR, Rooney focused on how bad the ref must have been in the 1st place

Rooney's observation right at the end was the only piece of valid analysis!

 

[jcdenton08]

The reffing was bad, but it wasn't quite Attwell-at-Spurs level. That remains the gold standard for "refereeing so bad it's indistinguishable from corruption" imo

Can’t forget Michael Salisbury as VAR. Never forget. The most I’ve ever felt a ref had it in for us since Phil Prosser and Keith Hill in the Withdean years.

 

[kevo]

Can’t forget Michael Salisbury as VAR. Never forget. The most I’ve ever felt a ref had it in for us since Phil Prosser and Keith Hill in the Withdean years.

Indeed. Three CLEAR pens not given, two good goals originally awarded by ref overturned with no clear evidence. We lost 2-1, could've won 6-2!

That season still grates. Yes, we finished 6th but we lost a potential 13 points through clearly incorrect officiating/VAR.calls.

We should have finished 4th and qualified for the Champions League and would have deserved it.

 

[Lady Whistledown]

Wouldn't be the first time a referee has been falling over himself to award penalties to an Eddie Howe team at the Amex. If only VAR had been in place the first time Hoops turned up.

 

[Stumpy Tim]

I know the Laws of the Game, but you don’t need to be an expert to have seen what a dreadful game Pawson had. It was embarrassing.

- penalty given, wrong, outside of box
- penalty given, wrong, dive
- free kick given, wrong, dive
- subsequent penalty given, correct (but directly the result of a poor decision)
- Wieffer no second yellow given, wrong, it was clear cut
- Burn no yellow (or foul!!!) given, restarted with a Newcastle throw in

Those are just the important ones. He was getting the vast majority of decisions all over the pitch wrong. Throw-ins, free kicks, game management.

It was rank incompetence, at best. The only thing preventing me from feeling bias was involved was bottling the Wieffer red card.

He was absolutely atrocious and almost every single key decision, sans Wieffer, went against us.

I watched the half an hour highlights on Sky this morning. You can add O'Riley's penalty to your list. The replay clearly shows Tonali kicked O'Riley in the heel. VAR should have seen that too. Terrible

 

[jcdenton08]

I watched the half an hour highlights on Sky this morning. You can add O'Riley's penalty to your list. The replay clearly shows Tonali kicked O'Riley in the heel. VAR should have seen that too. Terrible

Haven’t seen that back yet, was astonished it wasn’t properly checked.

 

[Seagull on the Hill]

I don't think Pawson was biased, he is just an incredibly incompetent referee!
The inconsistency of his decisions was staggering.

 

[One Teddy Maybank]

I don't think Pawson was biased, he is just an incredibly incompetent referee!
The inconsistency of his decisions was staggering.

Erm, yes, inconsistent in that for the same type of incident he awarded Newcastle a free-kick, but not for Brighton….

I think that’s more a case of bias, but I’ll certainly agree re incompetency as well.

 

[Lady Whistledown]

Haven’t seen that back yet, was astonished it wasn’t properly checked.

I would assume it was checked- isn't everything?- and the official decided it wasn't worth changing Kelvin Morton- sorry, Craig Pawson's- original decision.

Had Pawson been as eager to award us a penalty as he was Newcastle, I would guess the VAR would have stuck with that decision, but similarly to our mate Stuey "COYS" Attwell, poor Craig missed it so VAR decided to leave that one alone and try to let him leave the Amex with the smallest shred of professional pride intact.

 

[Bodian]

I would assume it was checked- isn't everything?- and the official decided it wasn't worth changing Kelvin Morton- sorry, Craig Pawson's- original decision.

Had Pawson been as eager to award us a penalty as he was Newcastle, I would guess the VAR would have stuck with that decision, but similarly to our mate Stuey "COYS" Attwell, poor Craig missed it so VAR decided to leave that one alone and try to let him leave the Amex with the smallest shred of professional pride intact.

Yes - that's how I saw it. VAR looked and didn't change the onfield decision. And I think if Pawson had given a penalty, they wouldn't have over-ruled it.

Personally I didn't really think it was a penalty - but given that Pawson was whistle-happy at the other end, for consistency he should have given it.

 

[Machiavelli]

The report in the Times questions why the O'Riley "penalty" wasn't considered by VAR.

It was considered by VAR but whoever was on VAR (who did encourage Pawson to go to the screen to rule out one non-penalty and ruled out another) they obviously deemed it insufficient to overturn the original decision.

 

[Sid and the Sharknados]

The Guardian used the word “baffling” for the decision not to book Burn.

Surprisingly succinct for the Guardian's sport coverage.

I'd expect an extended metaphor about cheese running and the ambiguous nature of time itself.