Brighton 2-1 Leicester post match

[54 Silver Fox]

5 hours ago, sdb said:

That is true, but it was VAR that was even more concerning 

Whoever reviewed the Vestergaard hand ball should be named and shamed and sacked for their incompetence.

[Mickyblueeyes]

Watching it again, I can’t get over bad this is. As usual, it’s going to brushed under the carpet and same guys who were shown up all summer by genuine quality refereeing will keep their jobs which they’re not good enough to do. It’s bollocks. The reaction of the players after going 2-0 down should be the talk for his thread. Instead it’s these morons. They’re not good enough and it’s embarrassing.

[Hales]

I'm proud the players reacted the way they did to those decisions.  It would be very easy for your head to drop after 1 or 2 but 3!!!! They fought to the very end and that is a huge credit to the those players.

[enmac]

What did the pundits on Mod say about the decisions? 

[jim5000]

7 minutes ago, enmac said:

What did the pundits on Mod say about the decisions? 

 

Both Dublin and Shearer agreed that

 

1) It was not a penalty, Vestergaard was fouled. Shearer said 'he didn't understand how VAR had allowed the penalty to stand, they must have not looked into anything other than "did the ball hit his hand"'

2) First offside goal was marginal but Barnes was just in the eyeline of the keeper so offside is probably correct

3) Second offside goal was not marginal, Barnes was not in the eyeline of the keeper or impeding him and the goal should have stood

 

Chappers even read out the relevant law of the game prior to both offside goals being replayed in the studio.

Edited 19 September 2021 by jim5000

[54 Silver Fox]

6 minutes ago, jim5000 said:

 

Both Dublin and Shearer agreed that

 

1) It was not a penalty, Vestergaard was fouled. Shearer said 'he didn't understand how VAR had allowed the penalty to stand, they must have not looked into anything other than "did the ball hit his hand"'

2) First offside goal was marginal but Barnes was just in the eyeline of the keeper so offside is probably correct

3) Second offside goal was not marginal, Barnes was not in the eyeline of the keeper or impeding him and the goal should have stood

 

Chappers even read out the relevant law of the game prior to both offside goals being replayed in the studio.

These unbelievably poor decisions change the course of a game. 

[Stadt]

7 minutes ago, jim5000 said:

they must have not looked into anything other than "did the ball hit his hand"'

Does feel like most decisions are made without looking at the context. When whichever dickhead was reffing the West Ham game, the first frame on the monitor was Perez's studs on Fornals leg - completely ignoring the push in the back beforehand. It's not fair to completely isolate the one incident when other actions have led to it, like with Vestergaard.

[Swalshed]

29 minutes ago, Dan LCFC said:

It shouldn't detract from our flaws, as we have many of them, but that is up there with the most scandalously officiated game I've seen us involved in. A complete disgrace and just makes the league in general look like a joke. How the **** can you be on the end of that many decisions in one game?

Brings to mind the 1997 UEFA Cup home leg defeat and Martin O Neill raging afterwards about the incompetent officials 

[JeffreyDiddum]

You guys got some rough decisions. You're good enough to be 6-8th. 

[54 Silver Fox]

I would love to see the assessments of the referees performance and the VAR reviewers of the last two games.

 

[enmac]

16 minutes ago, jim5000 said:

 

Both Dublin and Shearer agreed that

 

1) It was not a penalty, Vestergaard was fouled. Shearer said 'he didn't understand how VAR had allowed the penalty to stand, they must have not looked into anything other than "did the ball hit his hand"'

2) First offside goal was marginal but Barnes was just in the eyeline of the keeper so offside is probably correct

3) Second offside goal was not marginal, Barnes was not in the eyeline of the keeper or impeding him and the goal should have stood

 

Chappers even read out the relevant law of the game prior to both offside goals being replayed in the studio.

So they agree with every City fan. I'm mystified by Jordan Blackwell's comments in the Mercury. Gave Barnes a rating of 5 and criticizing him for the 2nd disallowed goal, claiming that he should have "learnt his lesson" from the 1st one!

How do these people earn a living? 

[enmac]

10 minutes ago, Swalshed said:

Brings to mind the 1997 UEFA Cup home leg defeat and Martin O Neill raging afterwards about the incompetent officials 

Must be the worse officiating since then. Easily beats John Moss. Smells of something. 

[Swalshed]

5 minutes ago, enmac said:

Must be the worse officiating since then. Easily beats John Moss. Smells of something. 

If you fancy a wander down memory lane.....🤣

 

https://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/martin-oneill-hoping-finally-revenge-10243668

[jim5000]

3 hours ago, hejammy said:

Today's result has actually really deflated me. It's as a result of a combination of things, firstly the team selection. How long is BR going to persist with this supposedly first 11 with Maddison? Then also Youri just not being Youri since the FA cup final really. Then there's the lack of chance for Daka and to a lesser degree Nacho. Then on top of all that the really really poor decisions made by VAR. The penalty and the 2 "offsides". I've asked earlier but no one seems to know. Has the law changed? Before it was only offside if the player was 'interfering with play'. Now it seems if you are offside your offside regardless of how involved you are? So disappointed today.... 

Nacho was about to come on on 60 minutes but then Vardy scored. Came on around 80 in the end. Still not a great amount of gametime either way for our form forward.

[Red Squirrel]

To me this result will always be 1-3 to Leicester!

I'm hoping that second half performance will demonstrate that Lookman has to start, we can be much more incisive. Maddison's head needs a wobble and we need to find some stability and consistency in defence, albeit without Evans, Justin and Forfana. I'm confident performances will improve if we play those lads in form and find a system to support the inclusion of seniorman.

[ozleicester]

F8ck VAR!

the reason we were told for using var was to remove confusion and eliminate errors... it does NOT  do that...errors are a part of human nature and sport...all var does is ruin the spectacle and spoil the celebrations and flow of the game.

goal line tech is fine... but one ref watching telly, is less valuable than one ref at the game.

Edited 20 September 2021 by ozleicester

[Free Falling Foxes]

There will be a memo at Stockley Park re interpretation of the rules, or should I say misinterpretation.

Upshot will be opposite decisions will be made next week for similar scenarios.

Sort of progress I guess but bit late for us of course.

[Babylon]

I’d love to see how it works exactly with VAR at Stockley park. Who provides the video to them, who chooses what they see and when.

 

So many times with us, on the TV we see the same replays of an incident time and time again, often In slow motion to make it look worse, at the worst possible angle. Then once the decision is made, we see a new angle that shows it in an entirely different light. 

[UniFox21]

50 minutes ago, Babylon said:

I’d love to see how it works exactly with VAR at Stockley park. Who provides the video to them, who chooses what they see and when.

 

So many times with us, on the TV we see the same replays of an incident time and time again, often In slow motion to make it look worse, at the worst possible angle. Then once the decision is made, we see a new angle that shows it in an entirely different light. 

I'm not sure why they stopped showing us the angles being shown. Gives at least some clarity of what the hell they're looking at. Now we have absolutely no idea if they even looked at Maupay yanking down Vestegard. 

 

Shearer sums it up here, these things shouldn't be happening. We have so many angles, how the flying **** have they missed this?

 

 

[Daggers]

We went through a phase under Pearson when match in match out was a succession of complaints about poor refereeing decisions. Everyone was at it. It wasn’t resolved by the better selection or training of officials, it changed because Pearson wised up about team selection and tactics. We are suffering because of how we line up and start matches, it’s that simple. Rodgers needs to snap out of the failing approach because it’s stuck us in a rut. There’s a killer team in this squad - it isn’t the one that prioritises underperforming and coasting players.

 

Refs and VAR aren’t going to change - we have to.

[mozartfox]

It’s done now. But if were BR I would ask Rudders to make a request that the clown on VAR performance is looked at and he is taken off Foxes games for the rest of this season.  2 clear and obvious mistakes is just not acceptable in a league of this standard. 

[gerblod]

8 hours ago, Pliskin said:

I haven’t actually been impressed with Bertrand at all. I think he’s pretty shit. Castagne and Thomas are miles better. I was all for his transfer when he came in but having seen him play, not having it. Castagne please until JJ is back. 

As others have stated, since Thomas began appearing in the team, his link up play with Barnes had been impressive.

Until Barnes got crocked, that is.

 

Now Bertrand has arrived, he appears to have completely usurped Thomas as first choice - without establishing any credentials to have that honour.

And where was Thomas on Sunday?

I'm astonished that a young, consistent, technically skilled, enthusiastic and committed player is suddenly nowhere to be seen, while this transient gets the nod over him.

I'd be pretty cheesed off if I were Thomas - you step in and do an exceptional job and then get pushed to the sidelines for no discernible reason - especially when you can see your manager selecting underperforming players week-in and week-out.

[NasPb]

5 minutes ago, gerblod said:

As others have stated, since Thomas began appearing in the team, his link up play with Barnes had been impressive.

Until Barnes got crocked, that is.

 

Now Bertrand has arrived, he appears to have completely usurped Thomas as first choice - without establishing any credentials to have that honour.

And where was Thomas on Sunday?

I'm astonished that a young, consistent, technically skilled, enthusiastic and committed player is suddenly nowhere to be seen, while this transient gets the nod over him.

I'd be pretty cheesed off if I were Thomas - you step in and do an exceptional job and then get pushed to the sidelines for no discernible reason - especially when you can see your manager selecting underperforming players week-in and week-out.

It's simple. For the now bertrand is better than Thomas. Doesn't mean he's bad just the case

[Guest Danny Clender]

Let me assume that from last weeks training sessions, everyone was suitably assured that James Maddison could play on the right in a front 3 well enough in a Premier League game. That's behind the scenes stuff we don't get to see, fair enough, but the actual stage event we got to see yesterday of Maddison up front in a 3 was truly abysmal. 

This performance was obvious and many pointed this out upon first gleg at the starting 11, so we have to question or make assumptions like above to remain convinced.

Again, it's difficult to see how and where he now fits into our starting 11, maybe this is why Brendan tried him there yesterday? 

He's too fragile as a number 10, needs too much time on the ball and his timing is off at the moment.

I feel it's going to be an interesting problem for the LCFC staff to solve, I feel he may need to accept that he's going to need to reinvent his position, up to him where, but focus on that for the next few weeks and come back and try to slot back into the team.

I feel his best position would be where he's played his "best" i.e the attacking number 8 and then compete with Soumaré  / Tielemans...hmmmm okay, so where else? incorporate the team around him as a number 10? 

 

Lookman came on and proved exactly what we've been missing, I said this about Under too, but hey ho, I just have a different feeling about Lookman.

How Maddison looked better in training in this position is the weird one, I doubt we chose the 4-3-3 formation so close to the game, so it's all a bit weird. 

 

Absolute shocker for VAR. 

 

Edited 20 September 2021 by Danny Clender

[jmono84]

I don’t but this VAR missed the pull by Maupay, how could you miss it when it’s there clear as day. They ignored it, simple

as that.