PGMOL can't really afford to have Oliver and Taylor to get on the bad side of big clubs with poor performances.
I'm wondering about this because Tuchel basically agreed with banning Taylor from Chelsea games apparently in a post match press conference. Does anyone know what the actual contracts say? Do they get to black list a set number of officials? What if PGMOL just tells them to go pound sand? I'm very curious.
I was going to put a blurb in here about how they’re Manchester United and not United. But didn’t want to side track this thread already. but like Rufus said. They’re matches are now going to be a bit more tricky since they’re not quite on the same level playing wise as the other top tier English teams but they have such huge stakes and long tenured history it’ll make for very entertaining matches.
I don't know what other incidents Chelsea fans are annoyed with AT about, but I know the Reece James handball red card last season against Liverpool is one of them. Even though we all know on here that Taylor had no choice there.
For sure fans are capricious whiny bitch babies. But this is a coach agreeing he shouldn't ref their games, and he's one of the top 3 refs in the league. That might become a problem that PGMOL won't be able to easily deal with.
Tottenham fans held the Pedro Mendes non goal against Man United against Clattenburg for like a decade even though a a goal line decision isn't his to make and the assistant referee had no chance of being in position to make the call.
Tuchel's reply when told he might not be coach against Leeds next weekend after his red card."I cannot coach but the referee can whistle the next game?"#CFC— Adam Newson (@AdamNewson) August 14, 2022
From Taylor’s view looks like a clean tackle. Here’s the angle. https://streamja.com/ro97M Looks like a foul from the AR and broadcast side, Taylor’s view is totally different. Given that Taylor clearly saw the play, immediately pointed, and was likely verbalizing on the radios “ball, ball”, it would be very difficult for Beswick to come over the top and insist on a foul. Gotta let AT live and die with that one.
If PGMOL lets fans and coaches dictate assignments, Howard Webb should rescind his acceptance and stay with PRO. You can’t let the ignorant mob influence assignments.
It would be like HS where coaches can scratch refs for no reason. And when you scratch all the good ones, well we all know what’s coming next.
Well what's coming is already here, a bunch of coaches whining they can't get 3 referees for games. And the referees they do get aren't up to snuff because all the good ones realized they'd rather not be screamed at nightly.
I didn't get to watch the whole match live so didn't want to comment too much before I could catch up. On the two (and a half) big incidents: 68' A) Yes, I think the tackle on Havertz is more foul than not, but I would say that from Taylor's perspective he sees the touch on the ball and can't discern when the contact occurs relative to the touch all that easily. You see those given and you see those not given. I don't think the miss on this tackle--on its own--is the travesty that people are making it out to be. It's an aggressive tackle that gets man and ball and goes uncalled; it's not exactly a man bites dog situation. And while I'm sympathetic to the argument that it should have been a restart for Chelsea due to the tackle, I also think/know that this incident (unlike the Henderson one last week) would not qualify as an APP foul given what unfolded in the aftermath. B) I think the goal is offside. Richarlison is in an offside position and even if he's not obscuring the ball at the immediate point of contact, he certainly obscures it as it passes. And Mendy has to wait for it to pass Richarlison in this case because there's a chance at a deflection. In fact, Richarlison seems to move toward the ball and then take up the statue pose to indicate not involvement. I could make an argument that he's both guilty of the line of sight provision and the obvious action provision. This goal gets disallowed in MLS and most other competitions with VAR that I'm familiar with. C) Everyone is focused on Tuchel and Conte later in the match, but I have absolutely no clue (well, I have a clue--more on that in a second) why they weren't just sent off here. The following acts of misconduct are sending off offences for technical area personnel: - deliberately leaving the technical area to act in a provocative or inflammatory manner - entering the opposing technical area in an aggressive or confrontational manner - physical or aggressive behavior towards an opposing... team official The technical areas were so close to each other that it's hard to tell if Conte entered Tuchel's area or if Tuchel left his area. Regardless of which one is true (as one of them is certainly true) Conte is guilty of 2 or 3 of these and Tuchel is guilty of 1 or 2 of these. We have somewhere between 3 and 5 reasons why 2 coaches should be dismissed, yet they both get perfunctory yellow cards. Top officials resort to the yellow card here because...? Well, because it's there. This is what you get when you move to carding bench personnel. A bunch of yellow cards that don't calm anything and the ignoring of behavior that should lead to dismissal. 77' Tuchel has to go. No excuse. Sheer dereliction from the fourth at this point. What's the point of the pointless caution if you're not going to follow-up and... oh, wait. 90+4' It's violent conduct and a red card. Again, not to defend Taylor too much but I can totally see him missing it. We have dozen things to be looking at simultaneously on corner kicks and though it was close to him, it wasn't near the drop zone. I guess I just don't understand what Mike Dean is doing there. If no one ever saw it and play wasn't held up, that would be very disappointing but I guess also sort of understandable. But Dean saw enough in the incident to delay play to check it, yet not get to a recommendation for a clear red card? Huh? Was this reckless hair-pulling? Was it clear hair pulling but not clearly a red card? I fail to see any logic to justify a check but a non-intervention once you establish that the hair pull did, indeed, occur. This wasn't trifling. All in all, I think Taylor was more unlucky than bad. Dean was, unfortunately, bad--but if we're grading on the England VAR curve, perhaps he wasn't and this just exposed how dangerously poor VAR instruction is in England. Regardless, it's just not a positive performance from the officiating team. Taylor will not be pleased with this post-match. I also thought Tuchel made a fool of himself post match (and at 77'). I could see how Conte was more of the aggressor at 68', but once they both got off with only a caution, everything was titled in Tuchel's direction after that. Might as well pencil Oliver in for February 25th now.
Not sure why can be done at this point but some of these technical areas are wayyyyyy too close to each other.
Thank you as always for your analysis! What bothers me the most is that I feel like any referee team that does competitive soccer should get this offside correct without VAR and now we have a tippy-top ref get it wrong with VAR. Taylor is a phenomenal ref and he’s getting worse because of VAR. Kinda sad, really.
I think he’s getting worse in England. He’s still outstanding in UEFA competition. I’ve said it before-I think he’s a totally different referee for UEFA than PGMOL. Oliver is the best referee on EPL matches, but he’s not quite as good as Taylor internationally (but I do think he’s a lot better in UEFA than in past years). I think Taylor is just not as good of a referee domestically as he is in UEFA. I have my reasons for my opinion, and I’m sure others share it.
I’m not saying it doesn’t happen. I’m saying it’s not right that it does. At that level, unless the officials say “I can’t work for X coach or team”, then you ignore the outside forces and assign who you feel should work the matches. I can’t go into a restaurant and say “I don’t want X cook working on my food.”
There’s a difference between clubs expressing a veto and PGMOL trying to keep their employees away from unnecessary controversy. Outwardly, they can effectively be the same thing. But there is a difference.
Today's discussion started on page 7 post #156, and is currently on Page 9 post #223. Looks like some excitement happened today. Looks like I better watch the entire Chelsea-Tottenham game, I assume that's what most of these comments are about.
Big Chelsea fan here. I can live with the non call on the Havertz tackle. The challenge is from the opposite side where Taylor is but he's got a decent angle and made his decision. Looks like defender gets a toe on the ball, tough to tell if he gets Havertz first. Bang-bang play, fine. Seems like Tott. attacker is guilty of offside on the 1st goal. If the ball had not crossed Richarlison (stayed to the GK left) I could see the non call. But once it goes to the GK right I think you have to give it. I don't see how VAR doesn't intervene on the hair pull. For me that's a straight takedown and VC all day long. On the coaches - Conte is for sure yellow on the Tott. goal, hard to tell how close he is to Tuchel when he's pointing and yelling. Borderline red. Sure seems like he's going out of his way to incite the Chelsea bench. Tuchel has to be RC for the chest bump and aggression. After the 2nd Chelsea goal Tuchel has to get 2nd YC there ... dude, you're 50 yards out of the technical area and just ran past the other team's coach who you had a confrontation with 10 minutes ago. If the goal had been scored at the other end I could let it go as celebration. But he for sure knew what he was doing there. Post match I'm booking Tuchel for RC instead of 2YC. Would have to see it again on Conte 2YC, Tuchel was the aggressor, not sure if Conte did much.