The NSNO Everton Forums

I thought it would be worthwhile having a thread about recent VAR / refereeing decisions so we can keep track of what's gone for and against us.

Feel free to add your own as I can't remember all the decisions this season.

Gomes Vs Spurs
The original decision was a 50/50, it could easily go either way... Had it been given as a foul I'd have little complaint (other than it's soft and defender needed to be stronger), likewise the decision to not give a free kick equally valid imo.

Issue here is that which ever way it went there was no room for VAR to overrule as it wasn't ever going to be a 'clear and obvious error'. So on this one we were screwed over.

Onana Vs Man City
I don't agree with the rule that if it hits a hand and it's goal bound then it's a penalty. His arm wasn't in an unnatural position nor was it deliberate handball... However as stupid as the handball rule is, it was applied correctly.

DCL Vs Palace
Ref got it spot on, not even a foul as he correctly called. It even looked like once he went to the screen VAR had to coach him through why he had to send off DCL. It's one of the worst decisions since VAR came out and I don't believe for one second the ref felt he needed to send him off even after 20 slow mo replays. Absolutely screwed by VAR

Other decisions where I can't remember who we were playing:

Doucoure got away with some serious 'grappling' in our box where we should have conceded a penalty but it wasn't given and VAR absolutely should have.

Onana having his shirt pulled at a corner (City?). Should have been a penalty but as he didn't bother to appeal then I don't really blame VAR... That's on us / Onana for not demanding it was checked.

It's like a lot of stuff in life, you think something is being done for transparency and fairness for all but ends up being a stick to beat you with when they feel like it, it's just another thing that's destroying the fun in the game.

I can't do any more VAR chat

Club have appealed it.

https://www.evertonfc.com/news/3849759/ ... n-red-card

I'd be pretty shocked if it was overturned. They'll latch onto his studs being over the ball.

This wasn't a red card though:

Would be interesting to know if any extra large bets were placed in the Far East on Everton getting a red card !

The Ayew one was unbelievable

I’m always telling myself that there’s nothing weird going on but it’s hard not to think that there’s nothing weird going on.

Bob Sacamano wrote: ↑Fri Jan 05, 2024 3:28 pm I’m always telling myself that there’s nothing weird going on but it’s hard not to think that there’s nothing weird going on.

I'm definitely not a conspiracy theorist. I genuinely do not think there's some clandestine mission to "get us".

But it's all a bit mad isn't it?

Some stats, also clearly most of those challenges highlighted are actually with force and out of control in contrast to DCL’s one.

Apparently it was the same guy on VAR who as a ref sent off the Forest player for getting his own foot stood on a few weeks ago. So, it makes a bit more sense now.

https://dubz.co/v/nzhs0q

So VAR So BAD

It's a witch hunt

AjaxAndy wrote: ↑Fri Jan 05, 2024 11:21 am
Onana Vs Man City
I don't agree with the rule that if it hits a hand and it's goal bound then it's a penalty. His arm wasn't in an unnatural position nor was it deliberate handball... However as stupid as the handball rule is, it was applied correctly.

Wasn’t correct as the shot wasn’t goal bound, it was going miles over the bar.

AjaxAndy wrote: ↑Fri Jan 05, 2024 11:21 am
Onana Vs Man City
I don't agree with the rule that if it hits a hand and it's goal bound then it's a penalty. His arm wasn't in an unnatural position nor was it deliberate handball... However as stupid as the handball rule is, it was applied correctly.

Wasn’t correct as the shot wasn’t goal bound, it was going miles over the bar.

Shogun wrote: ↑Fri Jan 05, 2024 2:38 pm I'd be pretty shocked if it was overturned. They'll latch onto his studs being over the ball.

This wasn't a red card though:

Still in disbelief every time I see that