The malignant hand of Moss

However, to allow Moss to make such a decision when Everton is playing is a total abdication of responsibility by the Premier League. That was a disgraceful decision on that goal. He should be shot at dawn.

VAR is not the problem. It is the fact that they have one (dysfunctional) referee making that decision and it should be more than one and probably 3. Otherwise, just use the match referee.

What a fucking disgrace by the Premier League. IMO, Moss should be banned for life as he is far too biased!

As you so succinctly said at the end of the season I fear there will be a case in retrospect of so many points 'lost' through incorrect decisions. Of course I am slightly biased, but when you hear it from 'neutrals or supporters of another team' it starts to register that something is definitely amiss.

We need the points as it is if we are to seriously think in terms of European qualification, but decisions like this plus our own inability to close games from a winning position (Newcastle/injury time) will surely come back to haunt us.

However all not doom and gloom, I can see with optimistic eyes that we are slowly improving under the leadership of Carlo. I truly believe with a few additions in the Summer (FFP permitting) we will be a different side next season.

On another note, I like the passion of Ancellotti - he really seems to have taken to this club, making those many pundits who told us that he is coming to Everton for his last big payday look a bit silly. The guy is pure class, and I believe Everton and Carlo are made for each other, in a similar way that David Moyes and Everton were during the initial years of Moyes' spell.

In the context of the race for the European places, it is too early to write off our chances. There are 10 games (30 points) to play for, and this has been a crazy season. I expect that there will be many more twists and turns in the race for Europe, but Carlo is experienced enough to know that there is no point looking too far ahead - take it 1 game at a time.

In the World Cup in 2018, VAR worked. It was applied quickly and accurately. In particular, it cut out the cynical grabbing of attackers in the penalty area. In other European leagues, I am told, it works well.

In the Premier League, it's a farce. I am rapidly coming to the conclusion that it has been implemented not to ensure correct decisions, but to give employment to more officials and pundits and to ensure that Sky's darlings get the results the TV company and other media wish for.

Can you imagine if THAT goal had been at Old Trafford and the home side had 'scored' in the final minute? Do you think for one nano-second that it would have been overturned? Of course it wouldn't. A player laying prone on the floor could hardly be impeding the vision of a 6-foot tall goalkeeper who was standing up.

Don't get me wrong. I have long been in favour of some form of VAR. I like the rugby union method of a 3rd official quickly looking at an incident and reporting if the ref has missed something. I know that in a more flowing game there are issue with this. But, if the league officials haven't got the wit even to apply this by their OWN rules, they should scrap it. Or find some people who can run it properly. Fifa had no trouble with it.

Then, at a later date, all decisions should be assessed with a view to improving those making the decisions.

I'd prefer Delph to Sigurdsson but the latter takes better free kicks and corners, which are the only reason I think he is selected, he hasn't had a good game for a long time.

Next season I hope Walcott, Sigurdsson and Iwobi are gone, but that will take some doing.

As for VAR, the way it is applied stinks, like the poor quality and biased referees who apply it.

Sigurdsson was flattened by Wan Basaka, he is on the deck. De Gea can see the shot and it is deflected in off Maguire giving him no chance of saving it.

An absolute joke of a decision, what was Jon Moss thinking?? All the arguments for disallowing it – and none of the arguments for staying with the on-field decision.

The fact that it is completely debatable and dubious is in itself absolute proof that this was no CLEAR AND OBVIOUS mistake. The goal should have stood. VAR decisions such as these are bringing the game into disrepute.

It was a decision Jon Moss would not have given against Man Utd, in the last minute at Old Trafford.

100% guaranteed.

1) He's not obstructing De Gea's vision at the time of the shot, which by the letter of the law is what is required to be offside.

2) VAR is meant to overturn things only when clear and obvious.

3) De Gea is never saving that once it takes a deflection that puts it into the corner!

4) If not a goal then undoubtedly a penalty for AWB's tackle of Sigurdsson!!

However, I don't think it is VAR that is the problem so much as the officials that are using it. There seems to be no consistency in terms of applying it. Do they know their own rules?! I have seen video replays used in other countries and indeed in other sports to good effect; it just requires better officiating.

I would only use Stockley Park as an advisary tool, if they see a goal which may be lets say is dubious then they contact the match official and say he might want to check this on the monitor. Then the on field ref checks the monitor and makes the decision, not somebody miles away in Stockley Park.
Obviously the reason Riley didn't want the on field ref to take the decisions was to take any pressure off the on-field ref, as it's the official at Stockley Park and not the on-field ref.

Going back to yesterday's decision, from where I sit in the Upper Bullens, my first reaction was “This will be disallowed” as Sigurdsson was clearly offside. What I can't understand was why Sigurdsson just decided to sit there and not move and, by his reaction when the goal went in, he sprinted off so he wasn't injured. Had he got up and tried to get back onside, the goal would have been given. So I put more blame on Sigurdsson for our goal being disallowed than the VAR decision.

It reminded me of the goal Lucas Digne scored against United last season, when his shot fizzed in past De Gea when it looked like three of our players were stood in an "offside position" and clearly in the eye line of De Gea, yet the goal stood. Though, of course there was no VAR then, otherwise that goal might have been disallowed as well.

In saying that Gylfi should have fucking moved instead of sitting there feeling sorry for himself. Robbed of three points there and gave away three against the Gunners. Jesus it's frustrating.

All in all after a poor first half we were great to fight back and control the game. I loved Carlo walking out to the ref and the big brave lad he is hands Carlo Ancelotti a red card, claim to fame for the ref wonder.

I also loved Carlo saying it does not matter if he is in the stands against Chelsea and the team will be well prepared as if to say I have complete faith in my number 2. Great manager we have here ladies and gents.

I would go further, and give nanagers/ captain should get a set number of reviews for each match, like tennis or cricket. Bring an element of entertainment in to it.

People will point to the superb save he made right at the end but to me, this does not exonerate his earlier mistake.

He should be making these great saves IN ADDITION to the easy ones.

As it is, he's costing us almost a goal a game.

Get rid.

Corrupt? Come on.

Deeply frustrating but as Lyndon says, following the letter of the law there are grounds to disallow the goal. There are of course those of us who have a counter argument and interpret the event differently, but it isn't bent.
Plenty of other teams are aggrieved this season, we seem to be on the harsh end of it, but had the goal stood Utd fans and pundits would be arguing the opposite.
Now, now even looking at the penalty? Thats shocking. When they looked again for red card conduct in the Shaw and DCL bookings, when nothing seemed on, then to not even address a blatant foul with anything more than saying it wasnt an obvious error by the on pitch ref?

Did you know you can bet on VAR decisions now?

I wouldn't be in the slightest bit suprised to hear about gambling syndicates being involved.

Admittedly I do enjoy a good conspiracy theory.

Could also be Jon Moss is an incompetent buffoon of the highest order.

Jim, being “corrupt “ doesn't necessarily mean Moss or whoever are taking money. You say yourself that the fact that the obvious penalty when Siggy was wiped out seconds before the disallowed goal wasn't even considered. Moss. Moss himself decided that it wasn't a clear and obvious error when all the world can see that the incompetent referee had missed it. By not calling it a penalty or not going back a few seconds Moss has shown a clear bias just like he did at Brighton over the Keane incident. That bias is also a form of corruption.
The reason given for not allowing the goal was Siggy was in De Gea's “ line of sight” and preventing him from seeing the ball. De Gea COULD see the ball but was going the wrong way. Moss must have been able to see it because I could see it, so could you.
Moss should never be allowed anywhere near an Everton match again and I would like the club to make the authorities aware of that.
Remember Moyes threatening to take a QC to his hearing over the Clattenburg affair? The FA quietly allowed the case to disappear and Clattenburg didn't referee us again for years. If clubs stood up to the FA they'd crap themselves.

If that was Liverpool again Utd at home yesterday the goal would have stood I have no doubt. To not even get the penalty is more evidence that corrupt.

The fun, the drama and euphoria of football has gone from the game, how dare they be so picky to rule that injury time goal, a perfectly deflected goal out, yesterday stating that a player that never even touched the ball was the reason.

Decisions like that have completely spoiled the game for the match going paying supporter now.

It's no use saying they need to use VAR correctly, they will NOT!

They are corrupt and will only use VAR to protect and enhance the media darlings league positions.

Prime example yesterday, Kavanagh books Sidibe for having the gall to come back on the pitch rather than go over to him and explain the misunderstanding, he books him yet allows the odious little moaning bitching rats Fred and Maguire to basically do anything apart from throw stones at him.

Every referee we have in the British game is a prize pencil.

Sam #11, agree fully. If you boil it down a little further. If De Gea was obstructed by Siggy on the ground, he wouldn't have moved to his right and would have been far better positioned to save the defection.

I watch someone like Nigel Owens in the Rugby. He is informed of an issue by or requests information from a non-malignant Moss type TMO official. He looks at the big screen. Everyone sees what the ref sees or as is often the case in rugby, can see that the ref cannot see. Nigel will consult with an assistant and IMHO, has as near as 100% perfection as anyone could have. The refusal of the FA to show any contentious footage on the big screen for fear of mass civil disobedience is at the root of the problem. Best to apply the mushroom theory, rather than deal with any fallout that might occur. If the incident yesterday was replayed in full, the ref could give the offside, but rule that foul play had occurred previously and award the penalty. Happens all the time in Rugby.

We've had a high share of legitimate VAR grievances, but so have other clubs this season. It's like my long lost grandmother is looking at the footage and making the decisions. The Dele Alli handball against us is rarely quoted but until De Bruyne last week, was the most blatant application of 'accidental' hand ball, which went out with the ark. Compare with the Bournemouth player Billing's shoulder ball which was decreed deliberate hand ball. The Lo Celso tackle. The Maguire attempt to prevent Batshuayi falling on him. The list is endless for 'some' clubs.

Carlo seems to be giving everyone in his squad plenty of playing time to properly assess his best formation and players. Lots of changes each game to help him. I would assume he knows at this stage that Sigurdsson is not an option as a left sided midfielder in a 4-4-2.

Let's be honest, if it was at the other end we'd be all be crying out for offside. That's just the way it goes with us fans.

And why didn't Siggy get the fuck up? From where I was I thought it must have been Richarlison as he's always on his arse. Don't give me he was injured in the tackle because he sprung up like Lazarus when the ball went in.

Let's go down a dark road and say we lost to Chelsea and those other fellas. We will most likely be 8 to 10 points back of 5th place.

Our run in is not terrible. The last 8 games, especially under Ancelotti for me, we can go on a literal tear and climb the table rapidly if we remain focused and see out the entire season.

Comments like, "it's a dream that will probably have to wait until next season." just drive me nuts. I'm not prepared to give up until the bitter end. I'd argue we can't let that mindset creep into our Club until we're mathematically eliminated.

This isn't having a pop at Lyndon. On the contrary, it's (again, of course) a superb article, and his guess that we may have to wait until next season to qualify for Europe might be correct. The odds certainly tilt in that direction the further we go along.

I just see it a lot on TW - this assumption it's all over before it actually is. And I simply don't like it. It's not over until it's over.

Fight 'till you're dead.

First. In today's Mirror, there is a photograph of De Gea and Sigurdsson from the side. There is something like 3-5 metres between them and Siggy is sitting down. How this can in any sense be "interference" is beyond me.

Second. There is some suggestion that the dialogue between Stockley Park and the match officials would be broadcast. I suspect something like the following:

Ref: "Goal scored at Old Trafford / Anfield. "
Stockley Park: "Who for?"
R: "Everton, City, Leicester, Wolves, Bournemouth. "
SP: " How was it scored"
R "Player got it rolled to him by his goalkeeper, ran the length of the pitch, ran round the goalkeeper and walked it in"
SP: "Difficult... Let me look... Wait, is that Duncan Ferguson [fill in for other clubs] in the technical area in the Manu / Liverpool half?"
R "Yeeeesssss!"
SP:"No goal. Offside. He was interfering with play."
R: "But he wasn't on the pitch and he isn't a player"
SP: "Doesn't matter. There is no rule which says that a former player off the pitch cannot be interfering with play, so we'll say he was. We can use the usual (double secret probation) Rule S6 which prevents any goals against Sky6 teams if we can ever find any justification, however stupid."

I usually go berserk when Everton score at any stage of the game, but for both goals yesterday I waited for confirmation of both goals and the delay doesn't give you that joyous outpouring of emotion you let go with and have been doing since I was a very young boy when Everton get the nod that the goals okay.

I've even started leaving my rattle in the house.

No doubt this was a completely bullshit call against Everton today but, despite being wiped out, I would have expected Sigurdsson to at least jump up in protest and possibly not end up in that ridiculous position.

Yeah I know I'm being unfairly harsh on him as it happened extremely quickly. But I was annoyed because he again was off-pace all day today and everything he did seem to be done either too late or too imprecise in the final third. A couple of his corners were very good but not the majority of them.

Great article with an even better title; the only debate being malignant or just incompetent. Because in a sea of refereeing horse manure, and this is the worst group of refs ever in the history of the game. Moss's incompetence is almost awe-inspiring. After watching a match reffed by that fat fraud, you look at Lee Mason & Rowan Atkinson (oh sorry he's a different comedian), and say, "They're not too bad really".

All that aside, lot's of positives to take away. I thought Davies had a great 2nd half, and perhaps, just like Calvert-Lewin, who TWebbers used to refer to as a championship player, if he's given an extended run in his preferred position, just may surprise us.

Secondly, even with glaring deficiencies, we've been a match, and I would argue more than a match for the chasing pack. Okay, we're nowhere near Liverpool or Man City, but we're now playing with an identity, and hopefully with some smart additions in the summer, who knows?

I wonder what will happen. Fans everywhere are very unhappy with it, but big business and the dreadful referees all are fine with it. Something has to give, I think in the medium term the disapproval of it is just going to grow and they will eventually go back to the man in black.

Link

Similar issue with handball versus ball to hand or diving versus being clever. There are things that are clear cut like the ball crossing the line. But VAR is asking video refs to make absolute decisions on things that are written in law as interpretive.

At best, it's an oxymoron; at worst, it's open to corruption.

Given your literary ability, couldn't you draw up a petition to send to the FA endorsed by ToffeeWebbers and fellow Blues?

We can all write individually but you then get the standard response: "All decisions are reviewed by Mike Riley and discussed with the referees".

I am sure a petition with a few thousand endorsements would rattle their cages a little.

A player can be offside if they are "preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent's line of vision"

You could argue Sigurdsson blocked De Gea's line of vision but that didn't prevent him from playing or being able to play the ball. The fact he was half way across his goal saw to that. If Sigurdsson isn't there then De Gea is still going to be a couple of feet away with his weight on his other foot and he would therefore still not be able to play the ball.

If those reviewing the game know the laws of the game as well as they ought to, this goal should have stood IMO.

This debate could go on for weeks until the Premier League come out and say "Yeah, Jon Moss got it wrong and the goal should have stood". Imagine the uproar from us all then. Basically, VAR and Jon Moss should be fucked right off! Can't wait for VAR to totally piss us all off in our next home game.

I have to say, I'm very sorry VAR is ruining your experience and the atmosphere at the games. You're certainly not the only one to say so on these pages.

It's maddening to me. Myself and a few other Seppos and Ex-Pats over here have seen VAR (or Video Review if you like) used to great affect over here in just about every single sport. And I'd include in that our own MLS, as well as the NHL, NFL, MLB, NBA, NCAA Football, NCAA Basketball, etc.

I keep saying over and over that the English have completely screwed up VAR. And that, in an honest moment, is just a nasty, snide thing to say. The powers that be in the English Premier League have screwed it up, certainly not the English.

The saddest thing for me is seeing people like your good self, down on the game and the experience of the game. It truly is the sole reason I "got into" soccer in the first place. The passion. It's infectious, it's genuine, and frankly it's absolutely beautiful. The human soul roars with a goal unlike anything I've ever seen before in my time on earth. A thing of human beauty unquestionably for me.

The English Premier League must, absolutely must, strictly define the use of VAR, make it standard operating procedure (and follow the excellent NFL example) that only "clear and obvious" calls should be overturned, and have the on-field ref do the reviews or a panel of three in a booth.

The current system is terrible. VAR should be a tool to make your game better, and what's heartbreaking isn't the shit-the-bed application of VAR, it's people like you who see it as ruining the game they love.

it may not be popular here, but I'd still back the implementation of VAR. It's just been horrifically used, and needs to be massively overhauled. But what I hope would be met with resounding approval, is my sentiment that I'm genuinely sorry you feel it's ruining your match day experience.

'I will speak with him about what he has to do when he has the ball. The build up from the back, in my opinion that has to be better. After that the goalkeeper has to save'

What Ancelotti is saying that when Pickford received the ball in the penalty area prior to the goal, he wrongly made the decision. to pass the ball across the back, which subsequently put three different defenders under pressure and resulted in the loss of possession. Once possession was lost he then failed to save the shot on goal, which was savable.

In the case of the offside he did not say anything about Sigurdsson , but I guess it would go something like this, when he does;

' It is not good to sit on your ass in the penalty area, don't F. . . ing do it again'.

( eyebrow arched)

I saw a very spirited Everton team fight for everything in the second half yesterday, but I haven't really thought about the game, except for the realisation that this very important aspect, is one of the main things that really makes the crowd respond.

Most football supporters feel that Everton were cheated, but the professionals in the media, give a different slant on proceedings, which really makes me feel sick about the sport I love, but which I'm going off quite rapidly.

I doubt there is any corruption as such, just an ingrained tendency for referees to favour the big clubs, because they are politically more important at the FA and the EPL. How many points has VAR cost us this season? I think it was about seven before yesterday.

As well as biased, they are also not very competent; Jon Moss doesn't even know that VAR is to overturn "clear and obvious errors". We import the best players from abroad - why can't we import the best referees?

BTW, good article but I thought Tom Davies might have got a shout for his second half performance - I thought he did really well.

So many people are feeding voraciously from the trough, and those of us paying to attend matches are of no consequence.

The beauty of Association Football lies largely in the seconds when a goal is scored. Those moments are rare, such scarcity of critical moments is what defines the sport. We have been used to seeing the goal go in, take a quick glance at the ref and linesman, and then be consumed by elation or despair. It is high drama. To have interfered with that drama is utter folly.

Whether he genuinely is biased against us I'm not sure, think it's more likely that he is just crap; he seems to have upset pretty much every other team at one point or other.

As mentioned above, the introduction of VAR has been a disaster; I was all for it, but on the basis there was enough lessons/experience to be gained from other countries and other sports. Oh well. No doubt the Premier League will congratulate themselves on a job well done.

Different sport, different culture mate.

We want our game back!

Oh, and Roy Keane can just go do one!

On top of that wasn't Wan Bissaka interfering with play when he flew into Sigurdsson as he was taking his shot. He nearly took the Sigurdsson's legs off from the knee downwards. At any other time, in any other area of the pitch this desperate ,late and aggressive lunge by Wan Bissaka would have been a yellow card, at least. Why wasn't this investigated by Moss for a penalty ? Wan Bissaka made no contact with the ball whatsoever.

With these subjective decisions, it's just passing the buck. The ref needs advice , that's all, to look at the monitor and make the decision. It's got to be better than what we've got at the moment, which is worse than before.

What I would like to know is why Moss's appraisal was totally about reasons to be able to disallow the goal . No thought whatsoever was given for the reasons to allow it .It didn't reach the threshold of Clear and Obvious it was a subjective 50/50 situation at best.

Why wasn't the build up appraised and a penalty given for the clear and obvious foul on Siggurdson as he was shooting?

#32 James Lauwerine
I also jumped from my sofa and said exactly the same thing (to my mrs rather than father) - that'll be disallowed

I'm still amazed our equalizer earlier this season at OT was allowed (another OG) after Dom barged into De Gea. Clearly not malignant Moss on VAR that day - class headline that.

Nothing wrong with VAR in itself - just the numpties in this country using it.

What I don't accept is refereeing decisions being sub-contracted to a long-winded process that manages to slowly get decisions wrong and spoils the experience of the matchgoers. My other suspicion still stands; that this has been introduced to create some artificial 'excitement' for those with little attention span and feel for the game.

Give us our game back!

But now, VAR gives batsmen out LBW, by giving a computerised prediction of what the ball "would have done" if it hadn't hit the batsman's pad [which for non-cricketers, can be 7 or 8 feet in front of the stumps].

Hawkeye was not invented to give correct decisions, but to eliminate howlers. No cricket fan on the planet, thought Rhodes was out.

Was the referee's decision to award a goal on Sunday correct - possibly not. Was that decision a 'howler' - absolutely not!!

In other sports it works because the decisions are binary - did the tennis ball hit the line, was the rugby ball grounded properly, would the ball have hit the stumps and was it a no-ball, and so on.

Scrap it.

No-one is complaining about technology to check if the ball has crossed the line. That's been a great improvement.

Offside is a binary call in the sense that the attacker is either beyond the defender or not. I think there should be a margin of error to factor in the margin of error for when the ball is struck but I can live with VAR calling those too.

Where they have come unstuck is looking for clear and obvious errors. Even the nature of what is clear and obvious is subjective. Ditch that bit.

And if they can't face that, then ditch the lot. It's baby out with the bathwater but so be it - they're ruining the game.

Using Sunday as the example, having given the goal on the field, Sigurdsson would have touched the ball to overturn the call. If the goal hadn't been given on the field, there would be no concrete evidence to give it so we'd have to suck it up.

How to process that? A challenge system to limit the amount of time taken out of the game. Players would eventually learn to use it sparingly. (understanding that the call on the field has to be absolutely clear and contrary to what they've seen)
Sure, occasionally it will be used as a fishing trip like in cricket (I'd actually take the referral down to one in cricket too) but that, to me, is an acceptable cost of progress. It's not fundamentally changing the game, it keeps the authority of the official but we have a mechanism which would stop a clear miscarriage within a game.

We cannot persist with checking almost every marginal call on the field. It's intrusive, time consuming, and ultimately not within the spirit of the game.

Was surprised when I came in here and found out the English media lined up in favor of the decision. Martino and Mustoe had it a bad call all the way.

''Was the referee's decision to award a goal on Sunday correct - possibly not. Was that decision a 'howler' - absolutely not!!''

So, the obvious penalty, missed by the on field referee and then perused over by the idiot Moss,who said it was not a 'clear and obvious error' was not a 'howler'?
The fact that De Gea COULD see the ball but was wrong footed, yet Moss, again, called it wrong by claiming that Siggy was in De Gea's 'line of sight' was not a 'howler'? (he quite clearly was not preventing De Gea from seeing the ball)
That Siggy was not 'interfering with play' yet Moss states that he was. Siggy was sat on the floor and made no attempt to play the ball.Is that not another 'howler'

I would lie to hear your interpretation of a 'howler'.

Please don't say a 'monkey native to South and Central American forests.' The only monkey I saw on Sunday was the referee, and yes, he had a howler.

How are ya? It's astounding the way one set of people see the event on the other side of the Atlantic, and how our pundits here see it. How two sets of people interpret two completely different interpretations of the rules shows how shitty the Laws of the Game are written. Far too obscure and vague!

Sir John has the way forward with VAR for me, coupled with a great definition of what should be reviewed and what shouldn't by Roger @79.

I wish the powers-that-be read TW.

Edit button? It's gone away. I miss it dearly.

In defence of Sigurdsson, I wonder if he stayed down hoping for a VAR check on Wan-Bissaka's challenge? He might have thought our chance was gone, so stay down to draw attention to the challenge.

He would have done better to stay prone and still, as if badly injured and get the medic on to emphasise the foul play. Instead, he came to life and tucked-in his feet, showing he was fine and active.

If he hadn't had to withdraw his tootsies, he would have had a better claim to being inactive. Also sitting up was a mistake, he should have stayed flat. Any way one looks at it, he made the wrong decision. Just like Moss, who should wake-up to a horse's head in his bed.

Cracker (but the RSPCA have been informed).

The whole VAR system has become a pantomime and the ugly sisters are now in charge.

Therefore, on Sunday, I would have expected VAR to say: 'that [awarding the goal] decision might not be correct, but it's not so shockingly awful, that it needs to be overturned.'