Forest have had enough

[cambridgeshire canary 6,764]

Don't think I have seen a tweet quite like this one..

 

[Robert N. LiM 4,447]

I saw a very similar one here

 

[GodlyOtsemobor 2,337]

Every club that isn't a fancied club should all have had enough, it's the same bollox every year. 

Time for the ESL to come into play again and they can all fùçk off to their circle jerk. 

[Canary73 160]

Forest may have been better to let the dust settle before sending that (assuming it was cleared by their comms team) as I expect the Premier League and FA will charge them for those comments and citing Atwell as having a bias. However, they do have a point about the accuracy of decision making and who is getting the benefit from them. There is no accountability or scrutiny of errors that can cost clubs and this is something that the regulator needs to have powers to address. Demoting referees that make errors to VAR or lower decisions isn't the answer.

[Capt. Pants 4,269]

I'm struggling to find sympathy with Forest after the money they've sprayed around.

[The Real Buh 3,450]

You might as well just go for it and just honestly just start slagging off the authorities. Just don’t pay the fines, what are they going to do? They are already trying to engineer you out of the league anyway you might as well go out on your sword.

The PGMOL are full on corrupt as well btw. I’m praying for the expose documentary. 

[ricardo 7,395]

Referring decisions will always be subjective.

Having seen the Everton- Forest highlights its not hard to see why they feel done over.

[Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man 3,827]

It's a bit unprofessional, isn't it? Shooting from the hip like this so soon after the final whistle is a bit silly.

Every club/manager/fanbase seems to think the world is biased against them and they would've had 10/15 more points if it hadn't been for refereeing decisions.

This statement against Attwell is surely defamatory. I wouldn't blame Attwell for taking legal action. 

[Mark .Y. 352]

The no handball decision for a Forest penalty was shocking, VAR made it's mind up in about 1 minute - when they normally take about 5 for a straightforward decision.

I can absolutely see why they are incensed.

[hogesar 9,711]

7 minutes ago, Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man said:

It's a bit unprofessional, isn't it? Shooting from the hip like this so soon after the final whistle is a bit silly.

Every club/manager/fanbase seems to think the world is biased against them and they would've had 10/15 more points if it hadn't been for refereeing decisions.

This statement against Attwell is surely defamatory. I wouldn't blame Attwell for taking legal action. 

Ah, f*ck them. I doubt there's any specific Forest bias but they've got away with being diabolical at their job and I'm afraid VAR not giving the 3rd pen appeal is unexplainable.

 

[Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man 3,827]

2 minutes ago, hogesar said:

Ah, f*ck them. I doubt there's any specific Forest bias but they've got away with being diabolical at their job and I'm afraid VAR not giving the 3rd pen appeal is unexplainable.

 

But why is it only acceptable to criticise referees for dreadful errors?

Players make awful mistakes all the time. I haven't seen Burnley put out tweets against Trafford and Muric for all the ****-ups they've made season, no pundit has called for them to be dropped to the Football League and the public at large haven't made a sweeping generalisation about awful goalkeeping standards are in this country.

It just seems that when referees make mistakes, it's totally unacceptable. But when players, who earn in a week what a referee earns in a year, make sloppy schoolboy errors like misplaced passes, missing open goals or awful defensive mishaps, their managers defend them and pundits and social media are never anywhere near as critical as they are towards referees. 

The referees get a far higher percentage of decisions right than players have competed passes, or a sporting director has successful transfers. Yet nobody ever accuses a sporting director of corruption because they spunked £10m on Christos Tzolis.

I'd love referees to have the same freedom when it comes to criticising players and managers. I'd just love to hear a referee interviewed after a game and say something like, "how has a striker at this level missed a chance like that? And as for the manager, why on earth has he made those substitutions? Such poor decisions. It's clear that he never played at this standard; he just doesn't understand the game at this level".

It just seems to be getting worse as well. Referees are being criticised more and more, and it just adds more pressure, making the job even more difficult when they know they're going to be screamed at by one of the managers, regardless of which way they give the decision. Quite often we see managers going mad on the touchline over a decision which most people think the ref actually got right. 

I genuinely think we're not too far away from a referee getting physically attacked, either outside the ground after game or even after they've gone home. It's already out of hand, it's getting worse and the Premier League and the FA really need to clamp down on it.

[The Real Buh 3,450]

If Stuart Atwell is a Luton fan then it’s totally unacceptable that he’s involved in the game, right? That’s the flip side.

I’ve often thought the thing that real big thing that could bring the premier league down is a refereeing scandal like we had in Italy. There’s no way they aren’t on the take. It’d be weird if they weren’t to be honest.

Edited April 21 by The Real Buh

[ricardo 7,395]

I doubt there is any covert corruption but refs are no different to anyone else in having favourites.

[Helsinki canary 242]

1 hour ago, Canary73 said:

Forest may have been better to let the dust settle before sending that (assuming it was cleared by their comms team) as I expect the Premier League and FA will charge them for those comments and citing Atwell as having a bias. However, they do have a point about the accuracy of decision making and who is getting the benefit from them. There is no accountability or scrutiny of errors that can cost clubs and this is something that the regulator needs to have powers to address. Demoting referees that make errors to VAR or lower decisions isn't the answer.

I think the only way this will be resolved is through litigation and law suits - bring it on and hopefully we will see an end to this biased support the big clubs game of monopoly 

[Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man 3,827]

Oh, and have Forest completely forgotten about the Playoff final which got them to the Premier League in the first place? VAR was in operation that day and turned down two big penalty shouts against them late on, one of which looked pretty clear. 

It's convenient how clubs forget the decisions that go for them.

[ricardo 7,395]

12 minutes ago, Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man said:

Oh, and have Forest completely forgotten about the Playoff final which got them to the Premier League in the first place? VAR was in operation that day and turned down two big penalty shouts against them late on, one of which looked pretty clear. 

It's convenient how clubs forget the decisions that go for them.

People only remember the bad calls that go against them.

[chicken 2,640]

10 minutes ago, Helsinki canary said:

I think the only way this will be resolved is through litigation and law suits - bring it on and hopefully we will see an end to this biased support the big clubs game of monopoly 

Won't happen. As some folks keep saying on here, the reason the powers that be are taking so long in doing anything about the rules breaches with Man City is because the club is so wealthy they are fearful they will be able to outmuscle them in the courtroom.

Forrest might be able to flex, but to that degree?

VAR is being used entirely wrong IMHO. Offsides have been a mess long before VAR, it just got worse because the offside rules were never written for pin-point laser precision.

Really simple - make it like tennis. Give each side so many challenges per half, then let the referees get on with it. Challenges go to a replay on the monitor for the referee to view and decide whether to change their mind. Done.

Clear up offsides. If it's going to be "when the ball is played" they need to get rid of the "unless it takes a minimal glancing touch off a defender on the way through". Said defender may not know whether the player who is beyond them is offside or not... and if it is from when the ball is played... why are we worrying about after the ball is played.

Good old KISS, keep it simple stupid.

[chicken 2,640]

Just now, ricardo said:

People only remember the bad calls that go against them.

I would be nice though if perhaps clubs started to support each other in these situations. I don't see why they need to use refs who are "fans" of other premier league clubs officiating VAR... pretty sure anyone who has used a games console could do it, let some lower league Carlisle supporting official do it. 

[Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man 3,827]

54 minutes ago, chicken said:

Really simple - make it like tennis. Give each side so many challenges per half, then let the referees get on with it. Challenges go to a replay on the monitor for the referee to view and decide whether to change their mind. Done.

That would make things worse, in my opinion. 

Imagine if a team challenges a dodgy decision, but the ref goes to the monitor and decides to stick with the original decision.

The club that challenged will be twice as furious: they'd be angry because the decision went against them, AND they've lost one of their challenges.

[Branston Pickle 3,673]

The first was one of those that ‘might’ be given, the other two look pretty clear-cut - that var didn’t feel there was enough to intervene on either is very poor.

The weird thing is Forest having taken Clattenberg on as consultant, it hasn’t exactly changed their fortunes, has it?!

[littleyellowbirdie 2,566]

10 minutes ago, Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man said:

That would make things worse, in my opinion. 

Imagine if a team challenges a dodgy decision, but the ref goes to the monitor and decides to stick with the original decision.

The club that challenged will be twice as furious: they'd be angry because the decision went against them, AND they've lost one of their challenges.

Obviously corrupt VAR officials will cause it to be rubbish whatever you do .

[Branston Pickle 3,673]

1 minute ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

Obviously corrupt VAR officials will cause it to be rubbish whatever you do .

Thing is I don’t think they are corrupt, just inept and poor at their jobs.  If anything, Var has underlined just how bad refereeing is in general.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,566]

2 minutes ago, Branston Pickle said:

Thing is I don’t think they are corrupt, just inept and poor at their jobs.  If anything, Var has underlined just how bad refereeing is in general.

That's what Forest are accusing the referee of. They're accusing him of a conflict of interests that influenced his decisions, and they're accusing the footballing authorities of having received a protest beforehand about a potential conflict of interests that they ignored, which is negligence on their part.

Edited April 21 by littleyellowbirdie

[K Lo 226]

I was just about to watch the Everton Forest highlights then I remembered that I don't really care about either team.

[The Real Buh 3,450]

9 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

That's what Forest are accusing the referee of. They're accusing him of a conflict of interests that influenced his decisions, and they're accusing the footballing authorities of having received a protest beforehand about a potential conflict of interests that they ignored, which is negligence on their part.

It’s also the tip of the iceberg. I’d love for them to throw the door open on this weird referee cabal.

[chicken 2,640]

32 minutes ago, Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man said:

That would make things worse, in my opinion. 

Imagine if a team challenges a dodgy decision, but the ref goes to the monitor and decides to stick with the original decision.

The club that challenged will be twice as furious: they'd be angry because the decision went against them, AND they've lost one of their challenges.

Happens in tennis.

[Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man 3,827]

41 minutes ago, Branston Pickle said:

Thing is I don’t think they are corrupt, just inept and poor at their jobs.  If anything, Var has underlined just how bad refereeing is in general.

I think VAR has just put too much pressure on the officials. Too many people thought it meant every decision would be right, but in a sport where the vast majority of calls are subjective, it was never going to happen. Even the pundits can't agree on a lot of them.

 

22 minutes ago, chicken said:

Happens in tennis.

In tennis, decisions are 'matter of fact': was the ball in or out? In football, the only decisions like that are whether the ball crossed the line or if a player was offside. And even the latter of those two still causes arguments.

Officials will never be able to satisfy everyone in football; there are multiple decisions in every game, some of the big ones, where both sides are adamant the decision should be in their favour and they'll scream in the ref's face if it goes the other way.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,566]

10 minutes ago, Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man said:

I think VAR has just put too much pressure on the officials. Too many people thought it meant every decision would be right, but in a sport where the vast majority of calls are subjective, it was never going to happen. Even the pundits can't agree on a lot of them.

 

In tennis, decisions are 'matter of fact': was the ball in or out? In football, the only decisions like that are whether the ball crossed the line or if a player was offside. And even the latter of those two still causes arguments.

Officials will never be able to satisfy everyone in football; there are multiple decisions in every game, some of the big ones, where both sides are adamant the decision should be in their favour and they'll scream in the ref's face if it goes the other way.

There's no good reason for VAR not to work far better in football than it does. Rugby is not a simple sport, but VAR works far better. The failures in football are more down to bad rules and poor application of rules.

The idea that, all else being equal, it could ever be better in terms of fairness to not have assisting technology is just absurd.

Edited April 21 by littleyellowbirdie

[Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man 3,827]

26 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

There's no good reason for VAR not to work far better in football than it does. Rugby is not a simple sport, but VAR works far better. The failures in football are more down to bad rules and poor application of rules.

The idea that, all else being equal, it could ever be better in terms of fairness to not have assisting technology is just absurd.

Agreed on both points.

The handball rule has been overcomplicated too much, possibly in an attempt to improve consistency because of the presence of VAR, but it has become too convoluted. The rules are often the problem, and VAR gets the blame. 

Football needs VAR, because whilst referees get 95% of decisions right, they're only human so they do get some wrong, and history shows that some of those are big calls which are spectacularly wrong.

The problem for me is that VAR is used too much. We often see it two or three times per game, when it should be two or three times per round of matches. The threshold for 'clear and obvious' is way too low in my opinion; it's being used for decisions which are borderline.

Oh, and also, the audio between refs and VARs should be broadcast, either immediately after the game or possibly live, if feasible. I think that would help the public understand why a decision was reached a lot better, even if a lot of people disagree.

Edited April 21 by Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man

[Ulfotto 640]

An interesting dimension to this that Forest employe Mark Clattenburg as a “consultant”.

Ultimately it shows a total lack of class on Forest behalf though is anyone surprised by this.