This weekend got off to an odd start with West Ham annoucing the sacking of Graham Potter just before their next game. I fancy their prospects should be much better - eventually - under Nuno Espirito Sangto. But Monday night's visit to Everton will be very rough baptism for him.
Brentford absolutely dominated a lacklustre Manchester United in the lunchtime kick-off, and should have won much more comfortably - a very sharp display from United keeper Bayindir kept the visitors in the game, enabling Sesko to give them hope by pulling them back to 2-1 down with his debut goal in a scramble in the six-yard box (Brentford will feel that Kelleher was impeded by Mbeumo in initially jumping for the cross, but the goalkeeper was just too weak). United had nearly got back on terms when Mbeumo raced in behind and was apparently tugged off balance by Collins as he was in the act of shooting. (Once more, this was an instance where the VAR playback was not very helpful: one assumes there must have been a pull on the forward's arm, because he surely wouldn't have chosen to fall over looking for a foul in that moment when he was about to score; but you couldn't actually see the contact. We need much better resolution in these pictures, allowing for a tight zoom-in on some incidents. And we need a greater variety of camera-angles to be reviewed; this one only showed a distant view from the far side of the pitch, where Collins's hand was obscured by Mbeumo's arm.) This led to an agonising delay of fully 4 minutes, while VAR apparently pondered the issue of whether the incident was 'a denial of a goalscoring opportunity' that should have brought a red card for Collins, and ultimately decided that they couldn't decide - although it was absolutely clearcut that it was. Perhaps unsettled by the long wait, Bruno Fernandes then struck the kick weakly to the keeper's left, allowing an easy save. (I sympathise with Ruben Amorim's anxiety about moments like this; but it is really not a good look for a manager to be unable to watch his team take a penalty! Indeed, at the moment, Amorim frequently seems to be unable to bear to watch his team, and finds every excuse to look anywhere else instead but at the pitch.) Jensen's emphatic finish from a lightning-quick break put the result beyond doubt shortly afterwards.
Chelsea dominated comfortably in the first-half, without creating any clearcut chances apart from Enzo's close-range opener. The match changed early in the second-half when Chalobah got himself sent for a 'denial of a goalscoring opportunity' challenge on Diego Gomez just outside the box. The contact was slight and probably accidental, but absolutely clear; and Gomez was through behind, ahead of everyone else, and shapping to shoot from just inside the box; the mystery here is that hapless Simon Hooper needed VAR to point out what the decision should be. But VAR wasn't any better, taking a long look in the second half at Gusto kicking Minteh in the side of the head - and eventually deciding there was nothing wrong with it. I was assuming they were again weighing whether it should be a red-card offence (I would have said not, as it seemed clearly accidental) - but it was an absolutely clearcut penalty, and that somehow wasn't given. So, Brighton's 2 goals in added-on time to claim the win seemed entirely just.
Palace continued their record as Liverpool's bogey team of the moment with an absolute biff-bang game at Selhurst Park. Liverpool were at sixes-and-sevens in the first-half, and might well have been trailing by a cricket score at the break. Slot may gripe that the opening goal, a messy goalmouth scramble hooked in by Sarr, came from a corner that should have been awarded the other way; but it was impossible to see if the ball had ricocheted off Mitchell or Bradley last before going out of play; and it surely made no difference ultimately - the home side were well worth their half-time lead, and with some sharper finishing, and a less determined Alisson to repeatedly thwart their best efforts, they might have registered 5 or 6 or 7 goals in the opening 45 minuttes. Mateta's exquisite curler that beat Alisson but crashed back off the inside of the right-hand post was a particularly lucky escape for the league leaders. Palace, however, rested on their laurels a bit too much in the second-half, and mounting Liverpool pressure in the last quarter of the match made one begin to fear that they miight yet pull off another of their 'great escapte' late goals; and so it proved, with substitute Chiesa snatching a lifeline for the visitors with only a few minutes of regular time remaining. There was yet another long delay for fruitless VAR deliberations over this goal, with the high cross from the right having apparently brushed Salah's hand, high above his head as he tried to jump, as it crossed the six-yard box. It looked very much as though it had just lightly hit his fingers, and that had maybe diverted the course of the ball just enough to cause to Richards to misjudge his his attempt to clear with a stooping header - with the result that he headed weakly straight to an opponent 15 yards out to set up the scoring chance. However, the TV pictures just weren't clear enough to give any definitive view (which was obvious on the first playback, but the VAR team insisted on peering at replays multiple times). I've said before that I think it would take some pressure off VAR, and speed things up a lot, if we just acknowledged that sometimes the video playback is inconclusive, and allow a new category 'no determination possible' to reflect that. The only piece of evidence in favour of the eventual decision not to penalise Salah was that none of the Palace players seemed to appeal for it (and indeed, most of the players seemed particularly baffled as to what the VAR hold-up was for); on the other hand, Salah did look guiltily relieved when the verdict went his way! Anyhow, to the neutral if felt as though justice was served when Palace roared back defiantly against the visitors in add-on time and eventually snatched a winner in the through substitute Eddie Nketiah in the final minute.
Leeds had a very lively start at home against Bournemouth and were all over them in the early phase of the game - but couldn't make it count, largely thanks to some agile work from Dorde Petrovic in goal: he ended with 6 saves credited to him, and his low reaction stop from Calvert-Lewin was probably the save of the weekend, if not the month. Antoine Semenyo somehow keeps his scoring streak going - much longer than I would have expected (wasn't expecting him to be on penalties, but he is; wasn't expecting him to be taking free-kicks, but he is....); he didn't do much in this game, but managed to drill a free-kick under the wall to put Bournemouth in front, against the run of play. Leeds then showed great character to fight back, first equalising with a Rodon header from a corner (Petrovic, alas, rather at fault on this one: perhaps slightly bamboozled by the effort brushing Semenyo's hair on its way through to him, he parried thin air, when the effort should have been quite easy to stop) and a neat half-volley from the edge of the area by Longstaff. Alas, they couldn't quite 'stick the landing' as Bournemouth raised their effort and found an equaliser from substitute Kroupi eventually - yet another deciding goal coming deep in added-on time (so many of those this season; of course, it helps that we're see so much added-on time!).
For that deciding goal there was another inordinate VAR delay to adjudge whether Nketiah had been offside. It was extremely close; but the new 'semi-automated' system is supposed to be able to render decisions almost immediately - "within seconds", according to the Premier League - and this took 2 full minutes!! What gives?? Even Sarr's opening goal, where there seemed to be nothing to 'decide', took over a minute to clear. I really feel we ought to be pushing hard for a time-limit on VAR decisions: if they can't do what they need to do in 30 seconds, they should admit that technical shortcomings in the process render them unable to intervene effectively, and whatever the onfield decision was will stand. Furthermore, there was an unfortunate hold-up of several minutes due to a medical emergency in the crowd. The time added-on at the end of the first-half was advertised as 10 minutes, mostly because of this; but referee Chris Kavanagh somehow played just over 15 extra minutes! Yep, they should have been coming out to start the second-half before the first had actually finished. Again, what gives?
Burnley, despite having Esteve fire into his own net in the opening minutes, and then getting overrun for the opening portion of the first-half, hung in gamely and eventually settled themselves. After Anthony's equaliser, they started to look much more dangerous, and were unlucky not to take the lead early in the second-half, when Lyle Foster's shot from the edge of the box was deflected just wide. Conceding 2 goals in quick succession just after the hour-mark, including a second own-goal from the unfortunate Esteve, was really undeserved on the balance of play to that point - though they were perhaps to blame for going after the game, rather than just sitting in a permanent low-block, as they had done so effectively against Liverpool a few weeks back. However, Kyle Walker was very fortunate to avoid conceding a penalty with a clumsy challenge on Jeremy Doku a little later, twice lunging at the ball and missing, and definitely nudging the attacker's calves in the process; VAR eventually deemed that there was 'nothing decisive' in the replay - which looks like it might be a new surreptitious attempt to speed games up by minmizing the number of pitchside reviews ordered; in the past, whenever there's clearly been a contact, the ref has been asked to take a second look, but now VAR seems to be empowered to make a negative decision and shrug "not that much in it" themselves. People who'd gambled their Triple Captain on Erling Haaland could be grateful that he at least started (which hadn't been entirely certain, given that he'd missed some training sessions during the week with a back problem), and that he wasn't withdrawn early (which Pep almost invariably does, even when there are no fitness concerns), and that he contributed a rare 'assist' (winning the header in the six-yard box that led to Nunes's opener); this already was more than they might reasonably have hoped for, and a prettty good return for the chip. But then as the game moved into added-on time, a tiring Burnley defence made a couple of blunders which gifted the big Viking - who'd really been completely anonymous in the game up to that point - a brace of late, late goals: a very, very, very lucky outcome for the chip. The final scoreline wasn't at all a fair reflection of Burnley's performance: they had in fact given another one of the top sides a big scare.
Spurs fans wanted a penalty when Palhinha collapsed in the box midway through the first-half, but he'd plainly just run into the defender's raised leg from behind - and the contact was just ouside the box anyway: no controversy there. Kudus's free-header was parried on to the bar by Johnstone in the Wolves goal, and just before half-time Matt Doherty saw his crisp sidefoot half-volley smash against the angle of post and bar. After Santiago Bueno grabbed the lead with a poke-in from a Vicario error (he parried weakly against his own player, rather than catching a fairly tame shot), Wolves's confidence surged and they had the home side on the rack for a little while; then they soaked up pressure well for the final phase of the game - until being caught out by Palhinha's deft curler from the edge of the box, deep into added-on time, sparing the home side's blushes by salvaging a point they scarcely deserved. In truth, neither side looked very incisive up-front here; but Wolves are starting to look a much more robust team, and unlikely to remain in the bottom three too much longer.
Sunderland's goal against Forest provided yet another unsatisfactory VAR experience. Goalscorer Alderete must have been very close to offside (looked off, to the naked eye), but was deemed 'on' after a very long delay - with again no justificatory graphic being shown on TV to support this verdict. Poor defending by Forest; they didn't deserve a break on this - but it did look a very dubious call. Postecoglou claims the award of 'Most FPL-Unfriendly Manager' of the week for pulling Dominguez at half-time, and McAtee and Ndoye just shy of 60 minutes. Forest look completely toothless without their talisman Gibbs-White, who was rested for the first hour here. But even with him, they didn't create that much of a threat - although Roefs again notched 6 saves in he visitors' goal, some of them quite smart. I can't help thinking that Ange might soon join the ranks of managers with shortening odds on losing their jobs by Christmas.
Yet more painfully protracted VAR delays on Sunday, with one of the most excruciating being Arsenal's early penalty appeal against Nick Pope. It was abundantly clear from the angle the ball moved away from Pope and Gyokeres that the keeper had got a decisive touch on the ball - so, no foul. It was also reasonably clear from the three main TV views shown; though much more so from the close-up, unobstructed view from behind the goal - where it was not only crystal clear that Pope had cleanly got a toe on the ball, but had also done all he could to then twist his leg out of the way of the onrushing forward, and Gyokeres had merely done an elaborate spin-dive over where he thought Pope's leg was going to be. Here, VAR scratched its chin in doubt for getting on for two minutes before suggesting a trip to the monitor for referee Jarred Gillett - and he then took a similarly long time to watch all three replay views (two of which were fairly useless, perhaps actively unhelpfu), mutlitple times each. It was in fact a very straightforward, perfectly clearcut decision; and one I would have been qute happy to have VAR resolve on its own, to save us at least some of this needless 4 or 5-minute interruption. Also, if it had been a foul, surely it was also 'a denial of a goalscoring opportunity' and Pope should have been shown a red card for it. But if it wasn't, and in fact there wasn't even any - or at least not any substantial - contact to warrant Gyokeres's spectacular fall, then surely he should have been shown a yellow card for 'simulation'. Neither option appeared to be considered by the officials; it seems their little brains were so maxed out with the pressure of having to decide an early penalty call in favour of the leading title-chasers that they just couldn't keep track of any subsidiary issues. This is yet another problem with VAR; it just makes the referees' jobs even harder. (Arteta, of course, strutted and pouted on the touchline long afterwards, apparently protesting that his side had been somehow robbed of a clear penalty. This constant posturing of his, the vociferous disputing of even the most incontestable decisions against his side, is becoming very, very tiresome.)
There were more gripes and moans when Newcastle went in front from a Woltemade header. The claim this time was for a 'push' on Gabriel, but it looked as if the forward merely placed his hand on the small of the defender's back for a moment - no force, no pressure in it: Gabriel fell to his knees hoping for the foul to be given, when he should have stayed on his feet to do his job of heading the ball away. Arteta will again scream 'Injustice!', but it was an utterly fatuous claim. Newcastle had more reason to feel aggriieved when Gabriel shoved his arm in the German's face straight afterwards; the referee didn't see it, and VAR - evidently under instructions to remain 'low-key' this season - didn't want to say anything to him about it; but that really ought to have been a red card - for the ultimate match-winner, and top FPL points recipient. Newcastle also had a vigorous penalty shout of their own late in the game, when the ball struck Gabriel'sarm - but it had been driven at him hard from very close range by Elanga, so I have no problem with finding no culpability there (though under the current absurdly complicated guideliness, it might not be perfectly clear that this was the appropriate decision: TV pundits made much of the fact the ball had supposedly deflected off Gabriel's calf - but the TV pictures did not show that). Arsenal had looked more like the home side for most of the game, constantly on the front foot against a rather lacklustre Newcastle. Only a superb performance from Nick Pope was keeping the Geordies in the contest: he was officially credited with 5 saves (though I'd thought it was more like 7 or 8 at least; as with so many of the stats-based points awards, there is often scope for doubt about whether they've been calculated fairly; and it's a pity too that here is no qualitative element in the points system, because of a few of these stops were really world-class - unbelievable, game-changing efforts). Arsenal kept up the pressure admirably, and it was perhaps inevitable that, despite Pope's defiant brilliance, they'd find goals eventually from headers at set-pieces; Gabriel's winner came in the final seconds of added-on time.
At Villa, Josh King was very unlucky not to get a penalty when tripped by Emi Martinez, and very, very unlucky to get booked for diving. He might have been 'looking for it', but there definitely was substantial contact, and Martinez's leg was not merely static but sweeping forwards through the oncoming forward. A very 50-50 call perhaps; but these days, we see them more often given than not. And Fulham were already a goal up at that point, so it probably would have put the game out of Villa's reach. They had anoher good shout for a penalty a little later when King drove the ball against Cash's arm outstretched behind him. (Again, I'd be tempted to excuse Cash on the grounds of the power of the shot; but it did look to me as if he knew the shot was behind him and was deliberately stretching his arm further behind him in hopes of blocking it - and I would favour a 'strict liability' approach anyway in instances like this where the 'handball' blocks a goalbound shot.) Watkins's equaliser was an exquisite volley-lob finish - but he had looked well offside when he broke forward - and yet again, the VAR dissection of this was not publicly shared. But that goal - and perhaps the second-half introduction of the quietly influential Buendia - turned the game around: Fulham looked like they should have had it comfortably won inside the first half-hour, but after the break Villa steadily took control. I wouldn't get too excited about a 'revival' just yet, as they do have a very tough little run of fixtures coming up; but this second-half was certainly way, way better than we've yet seen from them this season.
There didn't seem to be any refereeing controversies in the gameweek's final encounter at Everton on Monday evening. The only big surprise of this game was that the home side weren't able to tturn their massive dominance, especially in the first-half (a curious measure of this is that apparently half the West Ham side - including all of their attacking players! - registered more 'defensive contributions' than the hitherto prolific James Tarkowski!!); a lack of cutting-edge denied them the comfortable win that seemed to be there for the taking. The major FPL quirk was that, under the new much more liberal interpretation of 'assists', Diouf was given an extra 3 points for starting the move that led to Bowen's against-the-run-of-play equaliser. While I welcome a move away from purporting to determine who the 'orginally intended recipient' of a pass was as a means of determining whether any intervening deflection by a defender was decisive in redirecting the ball,.... well, here, we were clearly in a subsequent phase of play: Diouf had merely hoiked a hopeful early cross into the middle of the box when there was no-one there, but Michael Keane's rushed attempt at a back-headed clearance had fallen into space at the edge of the area, and Bowen was first to recover it and get off his shot... fully 5 seconds later - there is NO WAY that was an 'assist': it was not a 'deflected cross', it was clearly a separate phase of play. There's also something odd going on with Dewsbury-Hall, who, although not being a conspicuously aggressive player, picked up his 5th yellow card in 6 games and is already suspended....
It's been a pretty dreadful weekend for VAR: red cards for Nathan Collins and (arguably) Gabriel clearly missed. an obvious penaltiy not awarded to Brighton (and also, though arguably, to Manchester City), and one (or two!!) not given to Fulham; yet again some very tight offsides being decided probably correctly, but not very convincingly, and with far too long a delay. And there was an egregious FPL points aberration in awarding an 'assist' to El Hadji Diouf last night. We've also seen an above-average degree of luck in the play itself, with an unusually large number of errors by defenders and keepers, and some very near-misses, including a lot of efforts smacking against the woodwork, and some stupendous saves - including an other-worldly performance from Nick Pope. Quite a few 'unexpected' results too: Wolves were not widely predicted to earn a draw with Spurs, nor Leeds with Bournemouth, nor West Ham at Everton, and Sunderland weren't really fancied to get a win away from home at Forest, nor Brighton at Chelsea, nor recently dreadful Villa against Fulham; and while Palace's chances against Liverpool were much stronger, not many people were betiting on them to win so emphatically. And then there's this slew of of late, late goals!!! The 'Team of the Week' is yet agaiin almost completely devoid of any of the highest-owned players (only Doku and Haaland gaining inclusion after Saturday's games; only the very fortunate-to-be-still-on-the-pitch Gabriel subsequently joining them). We usually hope to have at least 4, 5, 6 'haulers' every week; but this time most people had to make do with only 1 or 2! And if you were without Haaland, you were completely screwed... (His improbably massive return against Burnley - after be'd been nursing an injury during the week - was a major slice of LUCK in itself!!) This week's therefore looking like a strong 7 out of 10 on the 'Luck-o-Meter'.
No comments:
Post a Comment
All viewpoints are welcome. But please have something useful and relevant to say, give clear reasons for your opinion, and try to use reasonably full and correct sentence structure. [Anything else will be deleted!]