Ashley Young’s penalty call against Manchester United bizarrely overturned by VAR

That being said, Moyes should have swapped in Alcaraz for Doucoure around at about 60 minutes, when it was obvious we were losing control of the midfield battles. More calmness and composure on the ball would have suited us well and perhaps avoided Doucoure's fouls which led to the goals against.

A small consolation that we are still above them in the table this week!

Maguire was one of the worst culprits… if he had been carded for the pullback on Gueye early in 2nd half, I doubt he'd have taken the risk with Young and the misdirection by VAR doesn't happen.

All said, it was still a game we should have won.

That may come up at the League managers meeting and also be brought up with the Premier League and referee association.

VAR has too much of a say and is making a mockery of the spur of the moment referee decisions in continuity of the game.

I couldn’t get out the way, (so I will fall over myself) type of dive, is how I viewed it, a little admission of guilt, by a player who had the referee in his pocket for most of that second half

The ref SHAT himself!!!
It's discrimination, disgraceful, utter bias.

On the positives, they've spent 100s & 100s of millions on that side, and they need to cheat to get a draw from us !!

If he'd gone backwards when pulled instead of forwards, I don't think VAR coukd have reversed it but he was pulled backwards yet dove forwards.

Ridiculous dive.

The referee must have said the penalty was for a foul by Maguire. Well I'd be inclined to agree that Maguire didn't do enough to warrant a penalty.

But the error wasn't the award of a penalty, it was that the referee solely nominated Maguire when it was actually a combination of Maguire and De Ligt.

If the referee says it was a combination then VAR couldn't overrule it.

What VAR should have done is actually help the referee by clarifying (and showing) that it was De Ligt who pulled Young's shirt.

As I've said many times over the last few years. The fundamental issue with VAR is that it isn't there to reach the right decision. It's there to satisfy a process. Howard Webb will justify that decision and congratulate the referees on following the process.

I'm not going to bother watching pundits. They're all going to offer an opinion on whether it was a penalty or not and completely miss the point that it was overturned on a technicality. If it's given for the pull by De Ligt then it stays given regardless of what some ex-red thinks. An opinion of whether it was 'soft' or 'harsh' really doesn't come into it. A match got decided on the technicality of which offending player the referee nominated. That's terrible.

By the way, I'm not sure why Young has to stay up when being fouled in the area. When did that come in?

Secondly, Maguire shoves him in the back while de Ligt has another bite at the cherry by pulling Young's shirt again. It was the lack of balance being sandwiched by two players that sent Young to ground. Perhaps he was theatrical but if Salah does it, he gets a penalty. So why not us?

Then once Madley reaches the video footage, he apparently develops amnesia about what he saw in real time and PGMOL bluff their way through the rest and United are spared another weekend of being ridiculed for being so utterly useless in the first half and sliding further down towards the relegation zone.

Yes, Moyes was caught short on game management whereby we should never have been hanging on like this. But that doesn't mean the PGMOL shouldn't be held to account and scrutinised.

I know what you mean however Salah has been diving off in any old direction for 5 years, irrespective of where the alleged impact came from. I've seen him fall into a heap after slumping backwards when his momentum was all forward. The FA and PGMOL don't seem to have noticed this strange interaction Salah has with gravity, or they haven't bothered addressing it.

In my book, neither of them are awarded penalties by acting in good faith. Both are exaggerating their falls to con the refs. But if Salah gets them, why doesn't Young?

It's a foul. The referee sees it's a foul... he just implicates the wrong person.

I can understand them deciding that Maguire didn't do enough to warrant a penalty. But they never checked De Ligt, who did do enough.

That's a screw up. They'll defend the process but it's fundamentally the wrong outcome.

I was sat behind the goal and saw the whole incident unfold. Penalty all day long.

VAR is a disaster for the game we all love. The ref was a disgrace all day. As for VAR being for clear and obvious errors, well that's a joke.
Beto scores and we're waiting ages to see if VAR can find something, some imaginary reason to disallow it. Doucoure scores and we're waiting ages to see if VAR can find something, anything to disallow it.

Well, the penalty decision, the less said… Footy as we know it has gone. Most left the ground, and those in the pubs after, feeling like we'd lost.

He was fouled by having his shirt pulled twice, being grabbed and I think there was a push in there as well. How is he supposed to fall backwards? His momentum is taking him forward, so if he falls, he's going to fall forwards.

VAR has shot itself in the foot on this one. Add to it the ridiculous amount of time it took the wise owls of Stockley Park to decide what we all knew; Beto's goal was a good goal.

Not a great example of implementation of a technology that was brought in to resolve the incompetent officialdom we had previously. There is arguably the issue: the standard of officials remains in the main poor.

Football has managed to royally screwed VAR up, whereas it works in other sports.

It also appears that it is being "weaponised" to give advantage to some "chosen" sides over others.

How you overcome that, I have no idea?

It's something that is now part of the game and to be expected, great for TV, a disaster for fans actually in the stadium.

Not worth spending any more time bleating about it, feels like a loss but I would have been happy with a point from this one before the game, we are a bit stretched just now.

31 points in Feb is something we only could've dreamed of a couple of months ago. Up ‘glass half full' Toffees!

Also, what the fuck was going on with yellow cards and Man Utd players falling over when an Everton player was beside them??? Yes, beside them with no contact and they fell over and got a free kick with yellow cards shown.

They recommend Madley to view the VAR screen and show him the one angle that shows possible doubt about the legitimacy of the penalty call, and do not show the other 99% of angles that show a cast iron penalty.

No guarantees we would have scored the penalty, but definitely robbed of the chance to try and score a winner.

VAR is a joke, and I was fully expecting them to "Spot" a handball against us in that melee in the very last minute when Man Utd had a corner.

As for Madley's overall performance… well, it was pathetic. Obviously the bigwigs at the Premier League and FA are a bit concerned about one of their luvvies being so near to the bottom of the league and have now decided to do something about it.

Am I going overboard...? Probably, but it makes you fucking sick when yet again a wrong VAR decision goes against us. No doubt Dermot Gallagher will side with Madley, but I fully expect an apology from Howard Webb to make its way to Goodison Park.

Personally, I feel Masters et al sell the Premier League brand and let foreign ownership run this league on an even playing field, or outsource all officiating to Europe, scrap the PGMOL. They are in no way or shape fit for purpose.

I don't think this country even has a 'standard' of officiating. It's beyond belief how incompetent people are at their jobs, and the discussion points, week-in & week-out, seem to be around officiating.

I've just received a WhatsApp message saying the VAR yesterday, Matt Donoghue, hails from Greater Manchester.

This would have changed his whole approach to the game which seemed to revolve around continually committing fouls without any fear of being carded. It was a blatant a yellow card, as it was a penalty.

I was listening on TalkSport to the game and, after Beto's goal went in and the ludicrous VAR went on for an eternity, the commentator actually said, "It seems to me they are looking for a reason to disallow it but can't find one so are going to have to give it". Unbelievable.

Regardless of the result yesterday, VAR has ruined football for me: I don't allow myself to celebrate anymore because I immediately expect it to be chalked off. Players look bemused, confused and scared to join in the emotion fitting for scoring a Premier League goal for your team.

I wouldn't mind so much if VAR was any good but it's a fucking shit show.

Good first-half performance, I don't want to knock anyone although, once Fernandes scored, you kind of knew what would happen. I think Moyes should have put on Alcaraz earlier and Young is not to be considered an option for us IMO. Hindsight bias of course.

Moyes has done such a brilliant job, I was underwhelmed by his appointment but have always championed his achievements on here during his first tenure. He seems to have grown, matured, wiser somehow. It looks to me like he has come home at the right time and we may just see something special happen next season if they get recruitment right. Onwards. COYB.

Rob, I've always been against officials having affiliation with clubs or the area they are from. It doesn't sit right with me.

Ashley Young dived so obviously, I can't understand why anyone thinks it was a penalty. Yes De Ligt grabs his shirt but he goes flying over like he's been taken down by sniper fire - If you've played the game you'd know that movement is clearly faked. Having your shirt grabbed does not make you leap forward onto the floor. I know we all want to win games, but seriously, if you start giving penalties for obvious and blatant dives then we're screwed.

If anything Young should have been booked for diving.

Yes De Ligt grabs his shirt.........

1) Is shirt pulling a foul?

Yes.

2) Did the shirt pulling occur inside the penalty area?

Yes.

Point being, before VAR we would talk about these sort of decisions and we'd all have an opinion - now we all have the same thing, an opinion, nothing more.

Bin it, go back to having the discussion on a base level, not a microscopic one.

My view is still that it wasn't a penalty, and most of yours are that it was a penalty. The net result was that, well, it wasn't a penalty, so you and Alan Shearer and Danny Murphy can all say it was, and I can say it wasn't. VAR also says it wasn't so while I'm not making my point in order to feel superior or prove that I'm right - I am right because VAR agrees with me.

Shearer and Murphy have opinions, nothing more. They're no more qualified to judge it was or wasn't than you or I are. If Bruno Fernandes had done the same thing, you'd all be calling him a cheat, a shithouse, and it was a soft penalty, there's no way that should be given etc.

I'll say it again - having your shirt pulled like that does not make you leap forwards and fall over the way Young went down. It was entirely unnatural and that alone probably meant the VAR didn't give it because it looked like a dive.

Yes he pulled his shirt, no it wasn't enough for a penalty. Shirt pulling in the area happens all the time, but that doesn't mean they're always penalties. If they were there'd be 5 penalties each every game.

It gives officials the ability to re-referee the game from numerous angles at slower speeds, making challenges look way worse than they are.

I hate VAR so much, it's ruining the game. There are 2 BIG things in football that get talked about constantly these days - VAR and money. Personally I want to talk to you lot about actual football, not video refereeing and high-finance.

Var isn't here to get the right answer, it's here to get the right answer for the moneyed clubs that Sky buy and sell.

Weve had so many of these down the years. Hutchinson goal disallowed, a goal disallowed because Sigurdsson was sat down in an off side position which impacted De Gea sight line. Last attack of the game 4 vs 2, and the ref blows up.

Playing 12 men, thats how it is.

It is pretty obvious on the penalty, and there are hardly any of the journos who disagree, that a foul was committed, certainly shirt tugs plus a possible arm grab. Would that normally be given a pen by the ref? Probably not. Was Young Shakespearean in his antics? Yes definitely, but both are irrelevant.

The fact is, the ref gave it and because there was a foul committed, there is no obvious error and it should stay onfield. VAR protocols indicate it should be a 'whole incident' review to instigate an OFR, not limited to what the ref thought happened. The idea is to correct an obviously wrong decision.

I think we can safely say that had the ref not given it, there is no way VAR would have challenged it, it was a very borderline pen by today's standards. But that is also irrelevant. The ref's on field decision is intended to carry weight by the protocol and once it is made, it takes clear evidence to the contrary to change. In other words guilty till proven innocent (or the other way round at times).

i think anyone who has "played the game" will read your comments and know you havent.

Because it was a dive, the player wasn't pulled back; he felt contact and did a belly flop. It was a "homer" decision — rightly reversed under scrutiny.

Look at it this way: if clutching at shirts were punished every time, every corner kick would result in a penalty.

I just watched the Tarkowski wrestling match — they are entirely different events.

More importantly perhaps, there would have been no double shirt tugging outside of the box – because there would have been no point to such a cheap foul.

The double shirt tugging was a desperate move to stop a goalscoring chance. Young had just snuck in front of the defenders so they fouled to kill his chance – and he dived because he'd lost his momentum / to draw attention to the foul.

It doesn't matter that it was a bit theatrical. It's a double foul to stop a goalscoring chance.

Nailed on penalty and disgraceful just how hard VAR was working yesterday to cheat us out of a win.

There lies the problem, yanking someone's shirt in an effort to impede him is a foul all over pitch, except it seems off corners.
If they started giving penalties, it would stop very quickly.

Watching MotD last night, I saw Cuccarela (spelling?) virtually wrestle a Villa player to the floor to stop him getting to the ball... nothing given.

It's a shit show, a foul is a foul, either change the rules to allow shirt-pulling or give free kicks, you can't have it either way.

I can put up with mistakes, what I can't bear is not being able to properly celebrate cos you know that, three or four minutes later, it may get overruled. It is killing the game.

It comes down to interpretation of the laws of the game as they are now. It's to do with forward motion – was that instigated by the foul? No, it was instigated by Young throwing himself forward. It was a dive, hence no penalty.

Yes, De Ligt had hold of his shirt, but did that shirt tug cause Young to flop forward and fall over? After review, no it did not. Not a penalty.

You don't know me, so quite how you can claim I never played the game is beyond me.

What would be nice, Colin, is to hear your opinion rather than a veiled dig at another poster. :-)

The real problem is people see the contact as "tugging" thus impeding the player to cause a cataclysmic fall.

I saw an instaneous shirt contact and release that did absolutely nothing.

Moreover, when you watch Young take flight, it isn't the shirt contact but his foot touching Maguire.

Ligt and Maguire prevented Young from getting the ball with a shirt pull = Stonewall Penalty.

Usually, shirt pulling is not given as a penalty by the ref. However, on the rare occasions it is, I have never seen VAR overturn it, except where the player who has gone down was also shirt-pulling or where there are obvious mitigating circumstances, eg, a foul committed earlier in the process. Neither applies here.

I tend to agree — there wasn't enough to merit a penalty in the first place, and I would not have complained had it not been given. But once awarded, neither is there evidence of no foul.

It was a truly bizarre decision by VAR. Here is what former Premier League ref Mark Halsey has to say:

‘VAR Matt Donohue should not have got involved because referee Andy Madley's on-field call was in no way a clear and obvious error.

‘When Madley went to the monitor on the advice of VAR, he was then shown the wrong footage.

‘They failed to take into account that Matthijs de Ligt had pulled Young back by the shirt. And had Madley been shown footage filmed from behind the goal he would have seen this. The incident was embarrassing.'

You might need to watch a re-run. Young wasn't affected at all by the shirt contact hence the VAR reversal.

You just resubmitted this First Game at the New Stadium story...

Was that intentional (in which case, it's already up!) or did you mean to send in something about yesterday's trials and tribualations, perhaps?

It's understandable why the ref gave it. Young is between 2 Man Utd players, hands are on him, and he goes down and it's the home team — penalty.

But slo-mo shows the contact doesn't stop him; Young's decision to do a dying swan is what stops him.

It would have been wrong to confirm the ref's initial reaction.

The nature of the fall does not negate the two pulls of the shirt (De Ligt) or the push (Maguire) that occurred before Young fell. Nor is the question of whether Young could have stayed on his feet relevant.

Once Young received contact he was under no obligation to stay on his feet. He went down and so would every other premier league player and I don’t see why Everton players should act differently.

If a Liverpool player did the same then the penalty would not even have gone to VAR for review. As we know from the 10 penalties they have been given this season. We’ve been awarded 1 penalty.

Madley was appalling but they did him no favours in this incident.

I'm looking at a still picture on my screen of De Ligt. He hasn't just got hold of Youngs shirt. He has a proper fist and is pulling it very hard about five inches from his back. THAT (whether you have "played the game" or not) is a foul. Its not a new rule it has always been a foul.

Whether Young fell trying to free himself, or whether he simply threw himself to the ground is immaterial. A clear and blindingly obvious foul had been committed before he did anything. It's not about having played the game or not. Its about knowing the rules and I don't think you or Barry do - Either that, or you are ignoring them

Barry enjoys being the contrarian and I often enjoy watching him do it, but I feel both he (and you) are beginning to embarrass yourselves here. You're trying to get De Ligt off on a technicality. Using a movement after the foul was committed to contest the incontestable.

My opinion - As requested

Obviously we can respectfully agree to disagree, but neither intent nor outcome are material to determining a foul. They might well apply if one was considering a yellow or red card (in fact both of them apply then) and a referee might well consider outcome in deciding to wave play on.

But not on whether a foul has been committed in the first place.

For sure, in a situation like this, it is definitely not for VAR to take a view on whether the player might have stayed on his feet or not. It's immaterial. In fact it's not even for them to decide a foul is committed. They have to have evidence that a clear and obvious error applies to the existing decision. That is quite a high bar and not remotely reached with this.

The defenders did just enough to make sure he wasn't going to reach the ball ahead of them. Foul = penalty.

I ask because I saw McGuire’s little dive to the floor, after Young had already gone down, as a little bit of professionalism. Like his actions meant that he just couldn’t get out of the way?

The decision has gone but the most galling thing is that most people don’t feel that if this happened at the other end of the pitch in front of the Stretford end, then the penalty kick would have stood, and this can’t be good for the game.

Lampard got fined for stating something that most nuetrals, believe is a fact, and this is why I am slowly being driven away from watching football played in the EPL.

Football is horrible now because almost everyone is happy to take a bad decision in their favour but are outraged when a similar bad decision goes against them.

We all want to win but the cheating is now d soo far off the scale that it has become sickening

Shirt grabbing isn't allowed.

But like umpteen other rules in the game individual examples are open to interpretation. I go back to my corner kick example and other areas of open play shirt grabbing does NOT always result in a foul being given - it is an unassailable fact.

The interpretation of var officials was different to the ref they clearly reckon Young was not impeded and dived - I agree

Young may have made a meal of it, BUT it is still a foul and therefore a penalty

I’ve never bought the “we’d be be seeing penalties every week” argument.

If the refs clamped down on it, the players would soon stop. The officials spend enough time stopping players pulling and pushing in the box before a corner is taken. If they carry on, penalise it.

shirt pulling is considered a form of holding and can result in a direct free kick if it impedes an opponent's movement or interferes with a promising attack.

I think that is the question - was Young impeded or not?

The ref thought he was and VAR thought otherwise.

100% agree.

The panel watching for the game - Michael Owen, Tim Howard and Ian Wright - made the same point. And, I believe the TV channels get to see all the VAR replays shown to the referee.

So it depends what “looked at the actions” means.

I said shirt pulling is against the rules but as I pointed out later the rules say :

shirt pulling is considered a form of holding and can result in a direct free kick if it impedes an opponent's movement or interferes with a promising attack.

It's an important caveat which explains why shirt pulling on its own is not always punished and in this case why var reckon Young was being camp.

The player gets his shirt pulled, the ref says pen. Shirt pulling equal a foul, so there has definitely not been a clear and obvious error.

It’s gone, until the next time and the same repetition arguments will ensue.

Don’t answer a question otherwise you will have to answer another one is why a lot of people choose to reply no comment, when they are questioned whilst under arrest.

These refs don’t even have to utter this because they are protected beyond belief

Besides, had VAR shown Madley every possible angle of this, then the penalty decision would have stood, and we wouldn’t be having this discussion. Had we scored the penalty is a different matter, but we were without doubt, denied the opportunity of scoring a winner.

Shirt pulling is something of a grey area based on the rules stated above, and is open to interpretation as to whether it causes a player to fall over or not. In this instance I (and VAR) believe Young dived and the shirt pull did not cause him to fall over the way he did - he himself caused himself to fall over like that and therefore VAR and the ref didn't give it after review.

I'm clearly in the minority on this, but the fact we're having this discussion pretty much shows what a grey area shirt pulling is, and what a contentious decision it was.

Moving on, I thought it was a good game despite the result. 2-0 up you'd hope to win the game, but we've been here before this season haven't we. I thought the free kick was a disaster - the wall was all wrong and you could see before Fernandes hit it that it was a mess.

Utd improved greatly after that and in the end a draw wasn't the end of the world. We're looking up rather than down, and for that we can all be a lot happier.

Not sure if "intention" overrides what actually happened.

I completely refute your analysis I don't see Young being impacted one jot by the utd man. If he'd stayed on his feet he probably would have got to the ball but it was going away from goal so probably would have come to nothing.

Maybe thats why he dived.

Thanks.

It's still open to interpretation but my view is Young wasn't impeded and, in the cold light of slo-mo, looked a bit of a tart diving like he did. I think one thing we now all know is shirt pulling on its own does not equate to a foul.

Barry is quoting the following “shirt pulling is considered a form of holding and can result in a direct free kick if it impedes an opponent's movement interferes with a promising attack.” This proves rather than contradicts the case for a penalty.

A shirt pulls does impede movement, as it slows the forward done or causes him to hesitate in his movement - that is why De Ligt did it. Therefore, a penalty.

Equally, there was no basis for VAR to call the referee to the monitor. If the debate above proves anything, it is that the decision was a marginal call and certainly not a clear and obvious error.

I think one thing we now all know is shirt pulling on its own does not equate to a foul.

Maybe my eyes doth deceive me… but I'm sure I've seen a shedload of fouls called, free-kicks given, and yellow cards brandished, exactly for the crime of shirt-pulling to hold back an opponent.

But only if it's outside the penalty area.

"to hold back an opponent"

Possibly equates to the caveat within - shirt pulling is considered a form of holding and can result in a direct free kick if it impedes an opponent's movement or interferes with a promising attack.

I think the bank balances of these bent bastards could do with a good coat of looking at!

The decision was overturned so it’s not a penalty, but would that decision have been overturned at every stadium?

If Everton got relegated by a point and they could prove that the referee wasn’t shown every angle,in a court of law, and argue they have been shafted by a corrupt organisation?

Sounds ridiculous but it won’t be long, no wonder I’m going off watching football.

The only discussion should be VAR and re refereeing the game when there was 100%, no clear and obvious error.

This is not a discussion. Its just two people demonstrating they do not know the rules and are perpetuating their ignorance by sticking their fingers in their ears as others try to educate them.

A foul is determined by what the perpetrator does. Not how his victim falls.

How many of the matchday threads over the last 12 months, or the excellent matchweek thread (except for today, looking at the score in Manchester) have descended into the same type of argument over the last 12 months because of this? Quite a few, I'm sure?

Quite why he was talked out of going with the evidence of his own eyes by VAR officials showing only carefully selected footage is something only he can explain. If he was shown the angle from behind Young, where the United defender could clearly be seen with a fist full of his shirt, the outcome would have been very different

Why don't these referees have to explain themselves? I'd love to hear the answer to that question

"shirt pulling is considered a form of holding and can result in a direct free kick if it impedes an opponent's movement or interferes with a promising attack."

Sorry, Colin, according to the rules "shirt pulling" has to meet the above criteria to be a foul.

Rules is rules.

If you don't think a player grabbing a fist full of an opponent's shirt isn't impeding his movement, or that the intention was to do anything else, I may start to think your tales of being chased by Shankly were because you owed him some money.

No need for the tantrum; quite clearly I'm not the only one who can see that he wasn't impeded – no matter how much it upsets you.

People here and Mr VAR included.

Calm down, for fuck's sake!!

What's your considered view?

Did De Ligt impede Young or was his flight all his own work?

So why the fuck didn't they say so in the beginning? It would have saved a lot of argument here.

Perhaps our Young lad will have the decency to apologise to those two nice Mancunian gentlemen for their well-meaning effort.

Bugger me, and our Young player thought they were trying to foul him! Well, well just goes to show how wrong I have been all along.

Meanwhile, we've got Brentford to get ready for in 3 days time.

The players can put the disappointment of being denied the opportunity to snatch it at the end and take the positive of earning a decent point and being one step closer.

Another win and I'll be more confident than I am now and be able to declare Phase 1 (safety) achieved.

Then aim for over 40 points and beyond. It's possible if we don't take our foot off the gas once we're over the line.

The reason you are in a tiny... very tiny, minority, is because the people who have played the game will be able to differentiate between De Ligt's blatant and incontestable infringement of the rules and and Young's....

Actually. I've decide to take Brian's advice @112.

Use that ignore button. 👍

Look, the problem with coming out with dogmatic statements and painting yourself into a corner is you come out with stuff like this:

“Shirt pulling is a foul... end of. ”

Irrefutably wrong according to the rules.

Have a black coffee, for fuck's sake.

Are you okay?

Did my question terrify you?

Does the idea of cogent debate make you ill?

Come on, man, stop hiding — answer the question!

Reading between the lines, he hangs on my every word to have a little snark like another ne'er dowell who may or may not show.

Can't be doing with it.

It's one thing when somebody who clearly doesn't know the rules comes on spouting nonsense dressed as "cogent debate".

But when they then go away and read the rules and still don't understand them, it renders further debate a bit of a pissing-against-the-wind exercise

Penalty? Not for me.

You've seen the rule explain what I'm not understanding

Even the mearest of a shirt pull outside the box is stopped for a foul.

99 out of 100.

Yet, watch 90% of corners, or free kicks getting crossed into the box and it's almost like you can pull the shirt until you are actually dragging your opposition player to the ground.

But it's similar to fouls committed outside the box, most penalties given for challenges in the box, wouldn't get a second look out side the box, so it's a farce, the rules are different if you are in, or outside the box, or are at least interpreted differently which is wrong.

It's been happening for years, the pundits, commentators and managers saying "there's contact " when a player makes a challenge in the box, but the same contact means nothing outside the box !

So what is it ? Are you allowed to pull a shirt in the box, but absolutely not outside ?

Are you allowed to make contact in a challenge outside the box, but absolutely not inside ?

There's not 2 sets of rules for inside and outside the box, yet the refs interprete the same offences totally different.

Having skin like a rhino and big shoulders help.

If your logic stands then every shirt grab should be a foul - explain why they're not.

Best answer I've heard in years, well done.

You must think it's beneficial. If it doesn't impede them in any way, what's the point?

I'm reffing three games this afternoon, so I've got my ref bag at my feet, and my rule books have nothing resembling your quote in them. Please cite your source or stop citing it as fact.

However, on the flip side, Colin, there is also no such thing as "end of" when it comes to fouls. All potential fouls are subject to the referee's judgement. It's a foul if I say it is.

That's the conundrum. The ref called the foul and VAR called him to review it. VAR didn't overturn it, the ref did, but he did so on incomplete evidence because VAR didn't provide a view of the first foul.

My opinion is Young was impeded and the penalty should have stood... and Young deserved a yellow for the dramatization. I saw Phil Dowd actually call that once. Called it once myself in a semipro game many years ago. Would never be called now, but it should.

Grant #132, correct. I whistle maybe half of what I see in my adult league games because otherwise it would be just a string of stoppages. I use the words "play your advantage" very, very often.

Your last line is one example of a huge improvement over the years in ref guidelines.

It used to be that if I played advantage and the advantage didn't happen, sorry, too bad.

Now, I can bring the ball back to the spot of the original foul, as much as five seconds later. Fairer for everybody.

Had he fallen backwards, the way he was pulled, then it's a penalty. His theatrical dive worked against him.

Hoisted by his own petard.

It shouldn't be a matter of the consequences Mike should it, the player should think of that, and the ref should be thinking of the rules.

That's what's gone wrong yesterday, the refs worrying about the consequences of giving a pen against utd.

Inside the box Var zooms in, spins angles round and stops and start the footage to see if the players made the slightest of contact, of course sometimes in the box it's the case that it might stop a goal scoring opportunity, outide the box the same challenge and the refs not even blinking or even us fans, not even asking for a foul, but the rules are interpreted differently inside & outside the box.

Which is wrong.

The way Young fell is irrelevant. If he was impeded, it doesn't matter if he fell forwards, backwards or did a double somersault... it would be a penalty.

He wasn't impeded.

The guy has his shirt twice.

I will respectfully disagree and leave it there.

Opinions and arseholes, eh? 🙂

The shirt pull restricted Young's movement towards the ball, and therefore he was impeded in his attempt to get to the ball first. Why is that so hard to understand?

I've met a few ToffeeWeb "arseholes" who are great company. Obviously they've met a serious one as well.

Perhaps someday?

It wasn't a penalty at either end but it might, perhaps, have been given at the other end.

Paul - no, I don't think it was a penalty at either end, or any other ground for that matter.

If he had done that dive against us, which he has done in the past, I would be furious… but unfortunately he now plays for us.

Having said that, I was very impressed with our performance against the Mancs and realise now that the return of Moyes is not such a bad thing.

Likewise, Rio Ferdinand, a distinguished Man Utd (and England) defender, and Michael Owen. a celebrated Liverpool (and England) attacker, say that he was. That, also, will do for me.

When you grab someone's shirt, you're not doing it to work out whether it's made from Egyptian or Vietnamese cotton; you're grabbing it in the hope that doing so will stop the other person from doing something he/she would otherwise be able to do.

The actual match going fans represent a very small percentage in comparison and TV is where the money is. So, rather than remove the controversy it actually adds to it which is why I think it is here to stay and although there may be some “improvements” made it will continue to be controversial. The incident yesterday being a very good example with opinions divided.

For the record; it was a penalty in my opinion and until they start to award these consistently, the shirt pulling will only get worse. But, see my initial point above to answer why it was overturned.

For me personally, it's not a penalty. I've played rugby and had my shirt pulled. You simply don't go down like that. It's a dive.

Unless he possesses Keane Reeves matrix like abilities, I’m not sure how he manages that.

Most referee’s change their minds on similar incidents quite often, and are often backed up by the powerful pundits on TV. (Who are just as inconsistent with their views, that I don’t even want to hear)

I know there will be someone to take my place but VAR, does absolutely nothing for the spectators inside the stadium, imo, because it’s the last thing I go to watch a game of football for.

Danny, if that was meant for me, I didn't suggest he should have fallen backwards, because yes, that would have been impossible. I was saying, had he fallen backwards, it would be more likely to have been given.

The problem is people think VAR Is the all conquering, final solution and that's that all sorted.

It's still humans, making decisions, using their judgement and discretion.

So when they get it wrong on the field, in the VAR room, after multiple replays then people will be even more

Disgruntled and angry when they gey it wrong.

If its one man in the middle of 22 making an honest decision in the moment, people might not like it, but can relate.

We all make mistakes, and we fume about it, but get over it.

When it's several officials conspiring to get an outcome none of us believe in, then it's hard to support it.

This isn't a bit of jostling for position before a ball is delivered that you can take completely out of context.

In this instance the ball is bouncing in front of goal, the attacker is on the move to try to knock it in, and the defender instinctively hinders him.

You look at the vision prior to the pull and he's favourite to get there first. The slightest pull and he's no longer favourite. He has to go down in that situation - no-one would stay on their feet nor should they have to. The left leg being thrown out is what makes it look bad, but the foul and the hindrance is absolutely there. How much hindrance there was barely matters when you are trying to attack a loose ball in the 6 yard box with the keeper on his backside. It's significant not because he's dragged him severely, but because it impacts his ability to get to the ball first in a situation where fractions of seconds make a difference.

But that's all irrelevant, because they didn't check that incident. They checked Maguire, who didn't contribute much to it. It's pretty easy to overrule the referee's decision if you just look at Maguire's action and Young's reaction.

It doesn't appear that they even looked at De Ligt's role. Even if they had I suspect they would have deemed it not enough to overrule a referee who hasn't awarded a penalty for that infringement.

Basically it's a shambles. A player gets fouled, the penalty is given, it gets overturned, and apparently it's all perfectly within due VAR process.

What about actually reaching the right decision?

Apart from it being against the rules?

I googled something like “shirt pull football rule” and pasted the salient quote proffered by Ai and now can’t find it.

However, this popped up from https://footballcollective.org.uk/rules/is-shirt-pulling-allowed-in-football/ -

“One of the interesting things about the rules of football is that there isn’t anything in the handbook that outlaws shirt pulling. Law 12: Fouls and Misconduct, as governed by the International Football Association Board (IFAB), details all manner of reasons as to why a direct or indirect free kick can be given. Shirt pulling isn’t mentioned by name – the closest thing to it might be the prohibited ‘impeding an opponent with contact’. Weather shirt pulling falls under that remit is surely open to interpretation.

The crucial take aways are the offense includes “impeding an opponent” and is “open to interpretation” blowing the idea of shirt pulling by default being a foul clean out of the water.

But it doesn’t matter emotions rule here not facts

Contact is a thing. Fouls are also a thing. The rules are supposed to differentiate what is just contact and what constitutes over-stepping the mark.

Grabbing their shirt is cynical attempt to impede a person from doing something and has nothing to do with coming's together when challenging for the ball.

At every dead ball situation before the ball is lumped into the box half the defenders have a grip of the forwards shirt presumably with intent so is that a foul?

Personally, from my playing days, shirt pulling was a pet hate of mine and I consider it cheating. That's just my view as a player and is something I can honestly say that I never did. I hated it.

I still have a slightly different slant on VAR. It could and should have worked, but football has made a total balls up of it.

I will keep repeating, until the standard of officials improves and there is more transparency that would keep them honest, as in Rugby Union. We still wouldn't be able to change anything, but at least we would have the commentary and understanding of their process and logic in coming to a decision, even if we still don't agree with it.

Right now, football supporters in the stadium, and at home, are like mushrooms in the dark. All we get is a notice on the screen informing there is a VAR check; possible handball, possible offside, possible red card etc. Meanwhile the cloak and dagger discussion happening over headsets for 3 - 4 minutes is silent to us. That's another thing, why so long to make a decision? The only defence I think I can offer are that the rules aren't clear enough and keep changing as do interpretations of them.

I understand calls for it to be scrapped in it's current format, but I would lean towards improving it rather than scrap it completely.

Anyway, I think I've said enough on VAR and the was it a foul, was it a dive discussion. We all know each others' stances.

Probably one I'll repeat on the Brentford pre-match thread and preview, but let us know of any good meet up places. Last time I went, I was sat outside a pub on the Thames in the sun very close to the stadium. I don't think I'll be doing that on Wednesday. It seems that they aren't too precious about the home / away fan things around the ground.

And as none of those variables have definitive values assigned such decisions MUST be subjective.

This is entirely at odds with the perceived wisdom of those saying "SHIRT GRAB - DEFINITE FOUL - NO DOUBT ABOUT IT"

I get that I really do but that is your interpretation and thats the point - your interpretation.

The whole shirt pulling thing is subjective and not the definitive "DEFFO A FOUL" presumption as declared by some.

I'm going to have to interpret what you meant because that doesn't make sense.

The rules can't govern in isolation. You couldn't write enough rules to cover every situation, nor should the authorities try. You need people who understand the game to make decisions based on context.

Not every contact with the shirt can be a foul. Where are you drawing the line? A finger on the shirt, a swipe of the shirt, a handful for a split second? Can you imagine VAR determining what constitutes a shirt pull? Games would be going for days.

The significance of any impact is always a factor. People seem to want to argue that all situations are the same with no context. So what is the line now? The player needs to pulled back in a way that halts them entirely for it to be a foul? It's actually being suggested that he shouldn't have been able to fall forwards - so he needed to be flung backwards? Can you imagine how severe a pull that would be drag an advancing player backwards? You're in Saka Euro final territory!

The significance should be measured on whether it actually made a difference.

In this instance, with a split second difference between Young getting to a loose ball or not, the pull of the shirt was significant. Instinctively it was designed to be that way - a little pull to stop him getting to ball that he was favourite for. A natural reaction by a defender who was about to be beaten to the ball in a key position.

That's a foul. In the past they were either seen or they weren't seen. Nowadays we have the technology to see it, yet they're choosing to administer the rules in a way that make it ok.

(and if they don't they should - waves fist at sky)

*Puts on best Jeremy Clarkson voice*...'Some say shirt pulling might be called Ungentlemanly Conduct, we don't, we just call it Cheating'

But the fact is all rules are subject to Interpretation from The exact 'Letter of the Law', no exceptions, no special cases - all the way to - 'The Spirit of the Law'...it's more of a guideline, zeitgeist, the whole vibe of the thing dude,

PGMOL provide the Referees who apply the rules (as far as I know)

Who pays their wages and thus has the chance to call the tune.

Under what interpretation do they operate, where on that Letter / Spirit sliding scale are they?...or, as I suspect, they've gone down a offshoot of their Pay Masters own devising.

The Referees are all Premier League sheep and VAR is Lassie's nasty big brother (in both definitions) who keeps them in line.

Ernie @ 170; I stand corrected, apparently shirt pulling is not mentioned - but if somebody has a fist full of your shirt, slows you down, then quickly let's go, like Young you might stumble and fall on your face...the fact he is a diving that is neither here nor there, ye canna change the laws of physics.

But all this is mere semantics.

VAR was wrong - Why is the real question?

I call out the Referees paymasters, the Premier League, for their pressure of biased Interpretation.

Some shirt pulling or holding seems to be permitted in the run up to taking a corner, and possibly other dead ball situations, seemingly because the ball is not yet "in play". So is any sort of misconduct overlooked at any situation where the game has stopped, throw ins, substitutions, players leaving the pitch? Well, obviously not during, or should that be just after, the derby game during the last week.

Does anyone believe the Premier League will do anything about it given their efforts so far to improve officiating which has at least been recognized by FIFA when appointing officials for World Cup Finals.

Happy to take the word of someone who has expertise and actual experience in the field of refereeing at the top level.

It is obvious that the referee, if he finds a reason not to give a foul, he will take it. Young’s anpparer simulation gave that reason and outweighed the other infringements.The referee initially gave the penalty for either a push or a trip. When he was called to the VAR screen, he must have seen doubts in what he thought he saw.

Everton lost the game due to their performance in seeing out the game in the second half. Moyes took the decision to see out the game. He got it wrong in implementation.

A draw is a good enough result, but Moyes has raised doubts that he can win big games. That game was winnable.

Man Utd are not dependable. The structure does not appear to have had good foundations.

I think bringing Young on for Lindstrom was the wrong choice. Consider, you have a 39-year-old with limitations or a 22-year old, buzzing from scoring his first goal for the club last week, with good technique and an eye for a pass.

So who do you go for? The 39-year-old – for his "experience" presumably, but experience is only of any use if you are capable of influencing the game. I don't think this applies to Young. I also think that the other change came too late when Man Utd were getting control. The penalty would have been a bonus but shouldn't have been necessary.

It doesn't matter if you think the shirt pulling was enough for a penalty, the on-field referee did, and he awarded one.

The VAR intervention was utterly ludicrous, they should not have got involved because 100% of people agree it wasn't a clear and obvious error.

Then, when they did, it was a totally biased narrative with emphasis on the wrong actions. It was total incompetence at best, unconscious bias or disguised cheating at worst.

All decisions made by referees are subjective, and what you seem to be ignoring is the ref on the day awarded a penalty, and VAR are there to prove he has made a mistake to rectify it. So why should the subjective perception of a VAR official over rule the on field ref. there was no clear and obvious mistake as Alan Shearer said they could have given it for 2 pulls on Young not one.Whether you think Young made a meal of it or not is irrelevant that shirt pull was a foul and that's why the ref awarded the penalty.

Besides, if they get a fine Radcliffe will probably just sack a couple of tea ladies to mitigate it.

I thought Everton had a good first half not because they were brilliant, I don’t think we were but United were so pathetic with misplaced passes given away to us with regularity and at half time and until Lindstrom was replaced we were looking forward to more goals because of United’s’ lack of effort or any kind of fight although we started slowly after the break, as we have a few times this season including last weeks game at Palace.

When I saw Young coming on instead of the expected Alcaraz, by me anyway, I couldn’t believe it, I like Young by the way, because we are short of skill all over the pitch and here was a young lad, who had played in three games over a week when he came had a full weeks rest from playing most of the winning game last week, scoring and assisting in a game we won and generally made a good impression but was only used for the last ten minutes on Saturday.

United had most of the play in the second half and after the first goal we were hanging on, got worse when they equalised and though we had good efforts by Doucoure and an open goal missed by Beto United were attacking at will led by Fernandez who had taken over the game and United looked more likely to win this game in those last ten minutes with the crowd anxious and getting more worried as the minutes ticked towards the end.

The penalty, if scored, would have clouded over a desperate win, when we looked like a Dyche team hanging on for the final whistle to blow.

Not so. I said earlier in the thread, Man Utd players had their hands on Young, he went down, it was at home, so understandably the ref gave a penalty.

At that moment, it was a penalty — the question then arises: Should there be further evaluation?

Like it or not, there was… and under scrutiny, the flaws are clear: Man Utd players grasping do not impede Young; he is stopped by his swan dive; hence the decision is overruled.

Ex ref Mike Dean called it as a penalty live – then changed his mind on seeing the VAR footage.

What can I say?

Once our intensity and pressing lessened, maybe through tiredness, it gave Man Utd the time on the ball they needed.

Like you, I don't think we were great in the first half but the workrate had them on the back foot and they couldn't cope.

Once that workrate dropped, their better players (and they do have some players better than ours) were able to play and gain confidence.

It's a lesson learned… but we do need better players in the long run.

The ball was there to be tapped in. The shirt pull wasn't enough to pull him down.

Only thing I know is that I was sat behind the goal, saw Young's shirt being pulled, and the obvious penalty given by that pitiful excuse of a ref.

I, like thousands of others, couldn't understand why it went to VAR. As soon as the ref went to the screen, then the air of resignation hit. They had spent ages trying to find something, anything, to disallow Beto's goal. Similarly Doucouré's goal. No way VAR was going to lose 3 attempts.

I've hated VAR from the minute it was mooted. Hated it more when it was introduced... and still do.

After the game, in the pub, I watched the replays on the telly. Everyone was as shocked. As a football supporter, it was a disgrace to overturn. Footy as we know it has finished and I can't believe to read some are defending the final corrupt decision.

That is the difference in mentality. One mindset makes you a winner and the other makes you Everton! Professional pushovers and the kicking dog for the Premier League and referees everywhere. No wonder we have only been awarded one penalty compared to ten for the Redshite this season.

Do we want to win things or not?

What can I say?

Try this one:- "I am not always right." Roll it around your head and digest…

Now personally I think it was a penalty, but I've argued against plenty of decisions that have gone in our favour. The Forest home game last year for example.

I don't see how this makes our supporters losers. It just means their opinions are credible.

Liverpool supporters' uninformed and biased opinions don't make them winners.

Bringing Alcaraz on earlier I would have expected more moves like that.

We do have a threadbare squad with very limited skill, so bringing on a player who looks like he has skill to spare was the obvious choice to me and I think a third goal would have taken the fight right out of United.

I think some people are finding it difficult to understand that the “dive” had bugger all to do with anything.

The shirt pull came first, therefore impeding, slowing down, restricting – whatever you want to call it – Ashley Young the chance of reaching the ball first, and therefore the chance of scoring.

Is that really hard to understand?

There's never been a requirement for a shirt pull to actually force a player to the ground before it can be considered a foul. That would be one hell of a shirt pull.

Steve, are you serious?

The rs fume from the derby lasted a week. Some of the comments were comical from them. Had it involved Utd they'd have lost their heads even more.

Think you've misjudged that one mate.

Dave.#189

Agreed mate.

I thoroughly enjoyed that first half. You're right, we didn't play particularly great football but the intent, the aggression, the skills, and the sense of purpose was a million light years away from what we watched before Dyche left.

Moyes has worked wonders since he arrived and I'm looking forward to watching Everton again rather than dreading another disappointment.

The players are making a statement every game: "Dyche was wrong about us – we can play!"

The referee awarded a penalty and the manner in which it was overruled was a breach of the rules.

To say it was never a penalty is to defy reason. It was a penalty because the referee said so.

I expected Everton to win and it looked like we were on the way to winning but it was more down to me the way United were playing with no heart fight or will to win, looking disinterested even with lots of their players injured.

But the second half told a different story and showed the Everton we have seen a lot of this season. Although you were looking forward to seeing this new Everton rather than the old one, you finished up being disappointed and not only with the penalty not given.

I love being wrong — that's how you learn.

But now you've brought it up, you can explain to the class why I and others are wrong to say it wasn't a penalty.

I can't wait.

How on earth can you not see that, whether Young was felled by a shirt pull that "would not have pulled down a toddler" or struck over the head with an axe, is entirely irrelevant.

Smug Oliver, never broke stride and had to strain every single muscle in his face to stop himself from smiling, brandished a red card, and burst the atmosphere in one sly movement.

I've never forgotten it, especially when I remember some of the very soft penalties he has given against us over the years, and it is moments like this when I definitely feel the professional game is corrupt.

I wouldn't want to be a Liverpudlian, Steve, but I take your point: I'm sure they would have been asking for the audio tapes right after the game.

I just read the VAR can intervene if he sees a "'clear and obvious error' or a 'serious missed incident' " for penalties, goals, red cards and misidentity when dishing out cards.

Presumably he jumped straight onto it after spying the immediate footage and further investigation ensued. Interestingly the ref on the pitch has the final decision so he must have agreed a mistake was made.

The rule may be ambiguous, but it is still impeding the player. The fact that two players tugged his shirt also matters.

The fact that Young made a swan dive is irrelevant, it was still a penalty

Also could you please try to stop being so condescending,

Please explain to class, what is that all about, boy!

99% of footballers would have done exactly what Young did and go down; sadly, it's the game now.

Me, I'd have run through a brick wall to tap that in.

I watched the first half on my laptop at home whilst prepping some slow-cooked lamb shanks for dinner. I was alone with the game and delighted with the 2-0 lead. I should've stayed at home.

My son was watching the game from the pub and asked me to join him for the second half. I walked to the pub "knowing" that it was too early to start crowing but made the mistake, in the pub, of winding up the local "Manc" hoard with an "Up The Fucking Toffees" shout, as I entered, just before they scored.

Once that first went in, I just knew what was going to happen and even predicted that the game would end with a dodgy VAR decision for either side.

Despite the disappointment at not beating them fucking wools, I'm still much more positive about our future, with or without Moyes. That "Best stadium in the Championship" jibe has been silenced and I'm even looking forward to the Anfield derby. They will be bricking it!

I personally don't think Young would have tapped that in even if he had got there first.

But that's irrelevant — it was a penalty.

Bit rich coming from someone diving in with "Roll it around your head and digest".

You admit the rule is ambiguous (actually there isn't a specific law for shirt pulling as I explained earlier) but assert dogmatically "it is still impeding the player". Not so, or at least not according to VAR and the ref who awarded the pen as he accepted the review – he didn't have to.

Try again but this time drop the snark; I respond in kind.

If you took a kid into the garden, Paul, waited for him to start sprinting then pulled his shirt hard for a second and then quickly let go of it, then I reckon this would make the child fall forward and then he would have to dive to protect his fall?

The game is played at breakneck speed and my own view of this action was that Young pulled away from the shirt tug but then couldn't move towards the ball the way he wanted to because he was then blocked off by Maguire.

What would I sooner see? Everton getting favourable decisions or referees being consistent right across the board and with every team?

This is where I differ from a lot of football fans (especially those across the park) because I much prefer to see an honest game refereed fairly.

I'm not going overboard because it's way too early, but this kid does look like he's got that little bit extra because of his calmness on the ball. Let's hope so!

Now, we're happy to see professional footballers go down easily.

Original post was, was please accept you are not always right. Doesn't seem to be happening.

As Mark Twain said:-

Never argue with an idiot, they will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

Mate, you are winning, take care.

I'm a follower of that law, never ever look at the clock in the ground, harder when watching on my iPad with that bleedin' clock in the corner of the screen.

In the past once or twice ,I've looked at the time then panicked until the opposition have finished their attack and haven't scored. Long time ago it seemed every time I looked at the clock the opposition scored!

Silly superstition? Not sure.

Reality is he's doing what he's good at. Getting the right results from the right fixtures. Enabling players to perform to a better level rather than being held back by an atrocious manager.

But on occasions like Saturday, he hasn't got the capability of managing with success.

A manager will always bestow their own shortcomings into the team that takes the field and that's what we saw second half. And we saw it against Bournemouth because he hasn't got it in him to win a major trophy.

"The best angle is from the goalkeeper's view, through the net, and you see De Ligt pulling him.

"What they showed him was that [side-on] angle over and over again.

"If the ref had been shown the through the net angle, he'd have stuck with his decision."

Steve Warnock:

"In the same game, you've got the Beto goal which they forensically go through. They're looking for three or four incidents to wipe the goal out, or find something wrong with it.

"You look at the penalty and you say why don't you look at every single angle? The three images they show the referee are of the first incident where you can only see Harry Maguire.

"Flip it round, go round the back, and we're all sat at home asking where the one is from behind the goal showing the Matthijs De Ligt shirt pull.

"If they're only looking at Harry Maguire, they've got it completely wrong. It is a penalty, there's definite pulls on the shirt."

Sue Smith on Sky Sports News:

"There's a lot of very frustrated Evertonians out there after this game. First of all, why did VAR get involved, it's not a clear and obvious error.

"We've seen there's no foul from Maguire, but there's a clear shirt pull from De Ligt. Some people have said Young dives, but he's got to go down and otherwise he doesn't get the decision.”

You keep on going about kids falling over, running through brick walls, Ashley Young's dive, stay on your feet etc, but you still haven't given us a reason why you think it wasn't a penalty?

Presumably "not always winning" related to this thread hence my invitation to explain why?

You failed miserably and as your graceless ilk always do just kept on digging.

"Any man can make mistakes, but only an idiot persists in his error"

Your epitaph.

Pretty comprehensive and answers clearly most of the questions raised about the decision to overturn the penalty call.

I have a secluded place near Bewdley where you can hide till the toffee taliban go looking for another sacrifice.

Brave soldier.

2 problems I see.

1. They are pundits there to create controversy not impartial analysis.

2. They weren't working the rewind machine at the moment of decision.

Once suspicion was confirmed detailed scrutiny took place and both var and the match ref agreed a mistake had been made.

Eric #214, thanks for that link. I love ESPN's regular Monday feature analyzing VAR controversies from the weekend. That one clarifies both the VAR guidelines and the reasoning that went into the De Ligt issue. I still think VAR got that part wrong, but Johnson at least makes it more comprehensible.

Barry #222, Eric's post provides a link to illuminating facts. Your posts deliver AI, Google and "toffee taliban" idiocy.

I don't get that surely "simulation" (diving) as opposed to tumbling/falling is a punishable offence.

Simulation is inventing a foul that never happened. Or do you now think that's what Young was doing?

Most definitely I don't think a single person disagrees that Young's orbit was anything but self inflicted after seeing the footage. Even those still arguing it should have remained a pen are calling it a dive

People will bitch either way but if it's gone at least the unbounded joy of celebration is restored

There was a vote on VAR towards the end of last season and the Premier League voted overwhelmingly to keep it. I think only one team voted to ditch it.

Worth noting also that never, in any sport, has any VAR or video review system been removed after implementation. Once it's in, it's in. They just continue to refine it.

Which is necessary, because most of them don't work very well in their early years.

He dived rob, simple.

I give up, I really fucking do. You obviously cannot understand between what came first, and what came second.

I sometimes think people post utter shite just to wind others up!

I hate those clocks Dave, and wish I couldn't see them. They are like a fly trap or magnet when we're hanging on.

On Alcaraz, like you and Tony, although we've only seen him in a few games, he excites whenever he has the ball. He likes to run at players, as we've already seen. Winning and then taking the free kick against Bournemouth that was a goal post away from rippling the net, all down to his positive forward running. His drive at the defence against Palace that led to Doucoure adding another goal. And then his calmness on the ball when every Everton player and supporter were still screaming for a penalty to his immediate right.

He held his nerve, kept his calm and cooly passed it in at the near post.

You don't get many instantaneous mood swings from fury to elation like that in football, but it was great. I can't wait to see him and Ndiaye in the line up.

Paul, various, if I was running forward and my shirt gets pulled, causing me to fall, the momentum will carry me forward.

I don't see how it mattered whether he could have tapped it in or not. Players fouled on the fringes of the box, get awarded penalties when they have no chance of being through on goal.

As for staying on his feet, the pace in real time means that it can only take the slightest of touches. Look at Andy Johnson. He was moving forward that quickly, that it only took the slightest of clips to unbalance him.

No VAR then, but we did have Mourinho and once he'd said his piece in front of the cameras to his then adoring Sky interviewers, that was it. Reputation damage for Johnson and from then on, known as a diver. He wasn't.

Imagine arguing relentlessly that your own team should be denied a penalty when most former players serving as the match day pundits and referees like Dermott Gallagher and Keith Hackett are adamant it should have been given.

It demonstrates the weak, loser mentality that has dogged this club for 30 years.

Ashley Young, in his attempt to go for a loose ball, suddenly has his shirt pulled back, maybe forcing him off balance, which results in him going down, but he was impeded, he was prevented from reaching a loose ball due to the shirt pull. Decision…..Penalty!

Can you see what I’m getting at……the Beto goal was disallowed because he was offside, the Young penalty was given because he was pulled back…..the offside and the shirt pull both came first in the build up, what happened afterwards is totally irrelevant ie the goal and the dive.

I’ve not seen what the VAR official showed Madley, but it sounds like he only showed him an angle where Madley could not see the shirt pull, but he must have seen it to award the penalty in the first place, and therefore he should have stuck with his original decision told the VAR official to do one.

But here is the rub. In every game we see the utter disgraceful holding of players in penalty areas and nothing is ever given unless the offended party pushes the defender off him when the referee blows for a foul.

It is destroying the game its that bad.

Referees should be instructed to stamp it out, award penalties for every obvious offence. It will stop immediately.

Now defenders think they have a license to grapple and clinch, were the attacker is immediately penalised for any attempt to free themselves..it's a blight on the game and leads to defenders thinking they can get away with holding, impeding or shirt pulling at every opportunity in the area, when the same offense is pulled up 99 times out of a 100 elsewhere on the pitch.

It's wrong and it's ruining the game.

Click on Eric's link. Scroll down to the third picture. Observe De Ligt's hand taking a fistful of Youngs shirt and yanking it back 8-9 inches. Argument settled.

Unless of course you're looking to demonstrate a rare capacity to deny the evidence of your own eyes and claim De Ligt's attempt to remove Young's shirt didnt in anyway impede his movement.

You're a fair minded man, civil and courteous, thank you.

I try and debate from a position of fact to explain my conclusion (in any debate) and in this case the salient fact is the player offended has to be impeded for it to become a foul. Saying the shirt has been grabbed is not enough but that's the issue, some still think it is regardless of rules and others go further saying it doesn't matter he WAS definitely impeded.

That I and others agree with the var view is neither here nor there the crux of the matter is the officials saw it that way and thats the end of it.

I have no idea what makes people turn into raving lunatics when putting their opinion - you don't, I don't (admittedly I fight fire with fire sometimes) and the vast majority manage to retain perspective.

Way of the internet I guess.

Nothing more embarrassing than a contrarian refusing to concede defeat in the face of irrefutable proof.

Fools nobody.

You need to name names it's like you're trying to fool people.

See what I did?

Fkn hilarious.

Most watchers thought it was a penalty, some thought it wasn't a clear enough error for VAR to intervene and a minority thought it wasn't a pen at all (mostly due to Ashley Young's impersonation of a 12 year old doing a belly flop)

If we hadn't been given it in real time I wouldn't have complained, but we were. I thought the rules were on pitch decision stays unless definite evidence says otherwise.

I'm over it now though tbh. Next game can't come quick enough. Which I never thought I'd be saying less than 2 months ago. UTFT!

"kn hilarious" Yes it was. You even identified yourself.

I havent laughed so much since you told us half the top teams in the country were chasing you after you scored for the school team.

If you think yanking a players shirt 10 inches doesnt impede his movement. I don't think you've ever played at any level beyond the play ground

Better.

I know it's not your forte but get your facts right "half the top teams in the country " - clown. If you must fester over what I said in the past get it right.

As for your 10 inch assertion - did you have a ruler? did you have a digital force gauge to measure forces involved and pop them on a spreadsheet to calculate whether impeded or not?

You're bullshitting again just as you have from the get go.

Give me something to go out not your emotive opinion.

One thing that always drove me crazy was the proliferation of pens for accidental handballs, but the PGMOL obviously changed its standards before this season, because only six handball pens have been given across the entire league in 24-25. Last season we saw three in one weekend.

I'll say this, look at what Cucurella got away with in the Villa game. If VAR isn't supposed to order up a penalty for that one, then De Ligt's grab was definitely not gonna get awarded.

I give you and anybody else who is interested "something to go on" when I drew attention to the third picture in Eric's link - post 214.

You're right I didnt have a ruler. Nor did I have digital force gauge - Which is why I under played it.

Do you mean the pic with this accompanying text?

Penalties awarded through VAR this season have all been for extreme examples of holding -- save for the red card shown to Southampton's Ryan Fraser for denying an obvious goal-scoring opportunity (DOGSO).

Donohue decided that the holding was "fleeting" (we've heard this before) and Young threw himself to ground in an exaggerated way. Therefore, this didn't meet the threshold for a clear and obvious error for a penalty.

Kinell lad are you the full shilling?

I would add to the list, simulation and exaggeration by players staying on the turf when no foul is given and holding their faces in agony when they haven’t been touched.

It was a penalty when young was hauled back, but doing the worm to exaggerate the foul didn’t help the cause.

Hopefully tomorrow with the pre-match press conference, Michael and Conor will put something up to focus the minds.

Meanwhile it's day 3 in the Big Brother Blue House!!!

He gave a penalty for a foul by Maguire. Then judged whether Young's fall was reasonable given the contact by Maguire. Fair enough - you can call that an error.

Then look at the contact by De Ligt. Would it be a clear an obvious error not to give that? I think it's a penalty but I can understand them not overturning the ref's decision to not award a penalty for that.

But that whole review missed the point. They looked at two issues for 'clear and obvious errors' but missed the big one. The clear and obvious error wasn't awarding a penalty - it was believing that the perpetrator was Maguire.

VAR could have cleared that up by saying "we think you've picked out the wrong offender", do you want to take another look. If they'd then shown him the right footage then he could have decided whether De Ligt's actions warranted a penalty.

That would be a referee refereeing the game and being supported by VAR. As opposed to VAR re-refereeing the game and influencing the referee by what they show him.

For some reason the entirety of my post was lost it should have finished with:

"The cornerstone of the VAR review was the original on-field decision. Madley gave a penalty for a foul by Maguire on Young, so that's what the VAR checks. …. Maguire placed a hand on Young's hip, but there was no hold or pull that would cause the Everton player to go to ground in the way he did.

It was a clear and obvious error to give a penalty for this and the VAR was correct to overturn the penalty.
If the VAR doesn't think there was a foul by Maguire, he cannot unilaterally support the penalty for another reason, in this case the actions of Matthijs de Ligt."

In other words your focus on the shirt pull is entirely irrelevant - got it now?

What would have been more sensible would have been to review the incident in its entirety. The referee singled out the wrong offender - that was the error.

If he had instead stated "foul by a combination of De Ligt and Maguire" then I'm very confident that the penalty decision would have been upheld. It really shouldn't come down to something as minor as that, should it?

That penalty was overruled on a technicality - they judged Young's fall in relation to Maguire's action. That's an absurdity - his fall actually related to a foul by De Ligt. They should have presented the full picture to the referee, not allowed Utd off on a process-driven loophole.

What are you blustering about the words are from the piece not me do focus.

The problem I see with that is the var guy just didn't think De Lightbulb played any major part and for good reason. Young's theatrics were of a trip not a pull - he didn't go backwards did he?

While your comment is plausible I think it very unlikely given the physical actions of both Young and McGuire ending up on the deck.

You continue embarrass yourself.

I'm not interested in the fuck-witted opinions of the guy who wrote the article. He shoots his own foot all by himself.

I have more respect for him than you though, because his misguided opinion is based on a little more than idiotic contrarianism.

You have shifted from saying that a serious yank of the shirt didnt hinder Youngs movement to jumping on this fuck-witted claim that the referee and the VAR prick were following procedure.

I was at Goodison on Saturday. I saw 37000 people rise as one when they saw an obvious penalty. I saw a bungling fear-ridden ref all to readily be persuaded to doubt what he had clearly just seen. I saw an incompetent VAR official avoid showing the referee the crucial evidence. I saw a circus.

You on the other hand saw nothing. You are desperately clinging to the opinions of a tiny minority while ignoring the crescendo of noise coming from the overwhelming majority. All saying that the ref and VAR had fucked up big time.

The picture shows just how hard Youngs shirt was pulled. How much he was impeded. It proves you were as wrong as wrong can be. Yet you cant find the good grace to admit it. Instead you moronically push your fingers further into your ears and try to seek refuge in some other clowns point of view - One which hadnt occurred to you before.

You've run aground and I no longer feel that you deserve to be educated

You cant take a contrarian to water, but you will never make him think

The pic shows fuck all but your warped imagination and don't moan like a little girl about the piece it was you who said "have a look".

You're pissed again, what a tool.

Nite nite

As for why Davy started Doucs over Alcaraz, that choice was vindicated by a goal and an assist. At least until he f***** up his positioning on the free kick.

Take care don't let the bed bugs bite . or pull your pyjamas

BOOOOOMMM!!!

Yep, a pic of the jumbotron at the ground confirms, it says.

"Decision No Penalty
No Foul
#5 McGuire"

Keep it under your hat a number of folk can't cope with the fact that no officials thought the shirt grasp a factor.

I'm getting the words "grassy knoll"

Mykolenko got done by Ugarte and Dalot, but no yellow for either. No wonder Tarkowski was protesting before and after half time.

Obrien got a yellow for minimal contact, whilst Garner got a yellow for non contact.

Corruption or fear, answers on a post card to Howard Webb.

Well... He's back

And it is just your (weird, warped) opinion, not fact. You have absolutely no idea (because it’s not been publicised) whether the officials discussed ALL the right stuff or whether one simply fucked up / deliberately kept the ref in the dark.

Young didn’t have to go backwards for it to be a foul. It was his forwards motion that the defenders took steps to prevent, because he reacted when they didn’t and was ahead of them in pursuit of the ball.

70/30 in favour of a penalty.

Think it needs to be higher still to meet the "stonewall" threshold.

As Mike says @ 271 Young didn’t have a bad game, laying a goal on a plate for Beto who missed it then gaining a legitimate penalty which the ref. gave to Everton and then allowed a studio ref. to con him into cancelling it.

Alcaraz was the natural substitute to replace Lindstrom because he can play right across the line and could have given Everton some added forward play while still backing OBrien up still leaving Young and Tim to come on relieve the tiring players before United got a complete hold on the game which they did.

But I am very suspicious that Moyes bottled it with his substitutions.His win rate against Man United is still 0.72.We will have to see more games against the top six to draw a definitive conclusion.

You've a sauna at home...

I was referring to the narrative by some on here not the VAR threshold.

And there's at least one report that VAR did indeed draw the refs attention to the De Ligt "pull" but the ref didn't feel it impeded Young sufficiently to merit a penalty.

Why have you put "pull" in quotation marks like it didn't actually happen. It clearly did, and either more than once or once shared between both of his hands.

I watched it live on TNT and when the ref went to the monitor they repeatedly showed him only the angle where De Ligt's tugging wasn't visible. They eventually seemed to flick to an angle from which you could have seen De Ligt's actions but by that time Madely had decided to reverse the decision. There was certainly no opportunity for a detailed discussion about De Ligt's actions.

Someone else has posted that the ultimate decision put up on the screen specified that Maguire alone was ‘exonerated'.

I'll restate my overall opinion; VAR is useless for the subjective decisions unless the discussions can be heard.

I put "pull" in quotation marks because I don't think (nor did the ref, nor VAR) it impeded Young to the extent his fall suggested.

TNT perhaps looking to keep viewers interested?

Nothing was put up to suggest that Maguire alone was exonerated.

Well that's not true is it? The referee was denied the opportunity to form any proper view on De Ligt's actions. And the VAR officials presumably decided that the referee must have seen that De Ligt pulled Young's shirt and they determined that the ref hadn't made an error that was clear and obvious.

You can see the problem in this? The referee gives a penalty and based solely on the name he gave (incorrectly) the review of the incident was tainted.

The only thing that constituted a clear and obvious error was the referee naming Maguire. And that could have been cleared up easily instead of ruling out the entire incident.

The local Leisure Centre. It is where I get the run down on International and local events .Intrepretations can be a bit off the wall though and very funny.

Lot of supposition needed for that to play out and surely at least as plausible is Mr VAR saw the shirt grab and dismissed it in an instant just like the ref.

After all it was clear as crystal Young was not impeded by his shirt so no foul and no need for further scrutiny.

( toffee taliban starting up armed flat bed toyotas at the very suggestion).

I find it inconceivable that during the entire stoppage the complete incident was NOT observed, I repeat inconceivable, making the possibility of a conscious decision to ignore "shirtgate" distinctly possible.

But I accept you might be right we just don't know.

We changed approach second half due to either tactics or tiredness. If the latter, subs should have come sooner, and Alcaraz not Young. We then allowed Fernandes to dictate the game.

Manchester United were as poor a team as I remember; galling to drop points to them. Pickford was at fault for the first goal, terrible positioning, it was his side, not even in the corner.

Lastly, a few stones thrown at Moyes. Yep, I think he got his subs wrong… but 7 games ago we were on 17 points. 7 games later, we are on 31, I have to pinch myself.

They report Moyes as saying that people generally think it was a penalty kick. He says pulling a jersey is a free kick or penalty kick but he doesn't think there's much Everton can do. "We can complain about it but what can we do?"

Moyes concluded that he wants to move on from the penalty incident because he's tired of reading Barry's ludicrous posts.

The 30 will be Rednose and Mancs.

I put this duration and significance of shirt pull argument in the same basket as the popular cry of "his studs were showing, he had to go".

If you've played football, then you know what a 'studs up' challenge really is and why it is a red card offence. But now it's codified – you "show studs" and you're off. And football watchers defend the decision.

And if you've played football, then you know what is significant when it comes to having your shirt dragged.

Only conclusion I can come up with is that Madley gave the penalty for the “foul” by Maguire, and he never saw the shirt pull by De Ligt, and then, when viewed on the VAR monitor, all that was shown was the “dive” by Young. I understand the shirt pull wasn't shown by the VAR, and had it been shown, it would have made the “dive” totally irrelevant, and the penalty would have stood.

The ref gave the penalty and should have demanded more footage of the incident to try and prove himself correct… but then maybe they are just all bent.

Link

39 seconds just to make it easy for Barry.

VAR has managed to recreate the inconsistencies it was meant to reduce. IMO, the rules are not clear and simple enough, get inconsistently tweaked without improving the communication or conclusion.

The studs-up challenge on Pickford was clearly a red card offence IMO but a week or so later VAR communicated they got it wrong and it wasn't a red card offence, I completely disagree with it. The human judgment and opinions after seeing this incident from several angles baffles me.