It becomes an issue though, doesn't it? Villa would say that at one-down, they'd have been able to be more expansive in order to try to get at least a point from the game (which is a nonsense given they needed the win more) and can point to the fact that, truthfully, they were the team presenting more threat going forwards. And then if they go down by that one point, or even worse by one on goal difference, then the legal arguments would start.
Remember the last time a team got relegated on goal difference because of some dodgy decision about a technicality when the league didn't step in and attempt to deal with until it was far too late...?
Yeah, the sensible thing would have been to get it sorted at half-time, award SUFC the goal, and it leaves Villa the entire 2nd half, which is basically what there was anyway. but there's no protocol for that as I understand it. The ref can't just say "Whoops..." and award the goal. From his vantage point he was relying on the VAR and GDS to tell him it was in. All he could have done was to have a word with Chrissy and Dean Smith, and try to get Villa to negotiate letting us walk one in. But if Villa had have said "fuck that" - which they almost certainly would have done - there's nowhere to go.
I mean, its not that i disagree with you. You're absolutely right in that there is something not right about it. Hand on heart - if this had happened to another team i'd be in the same place saying the same things about how unfair it is. Whether it was Norwich, Liverpool, Leeds, West Ham, or even Wednesday. The teams i take some bleak amusement in results going poorly for i don't want to get fucked over by the vagaries of technology or dodgy decisions - i want Wednesday to be going down because they're shite, for example.
The FA and the EPL, UEFA and FIFA and IFAB and all the rest harp on about how the flow of the game is most important, and they want to leave the decision with refs, and to respect the referee decisions and all the other bullshit they rolled out when they didn't want to implement VAR in the first place, but the number of incidents that started being highlighted as being "wrong" once TV coverage really started paying attention forced their hands. So then they implement a system where technology which is there to provide referee assistance is put in such a way that the referee isn't actually
ALLOWED to "refer to VAR" - the VAR instead has set things that it sticks its nose into regardless of what the ref wants. No pitchside monitor option. and a GDS which, as it turns out, can be confused by there being a defender stood next to the keeper near a post - because
THAT never ever happens in football, ever, right? And a set of ancient, hidebound rules and protocols that means the referee doesn't even have the option or opportunity to correct it once it is apparent the decision is incorrect.
Presumably the referees have been briefed to take heed of the GDS and VAR, especially when they don't have a clear view. And after 6 or 7 years of it, it's entirely reasonable that they would take it as read and not bother trying to make sure they get into a position to see it properly. Even if the liner had seen it, but the GDS system said "no goal", do you think the ref is going to believe the ref, or the magic technology?
The ONLY person i don't really blame for this, per se, is Michael Oliver. His hands really were tied as far as I understand it.
