Why does VAR exist if we're not going to use it for blatant penalties? - Newcastle United robbed at Bournemouth
Newcastle United and Bournemouth almost took the crown for most boring Premier League game of the season on Sunday afternoon, playing out a largely uneventful 0-0 draw at the Vitality Stadium.
The current holder of the aforementioned title is Leeds United v Newcastle United, a couple of weeks ago, another soulless, goalless draw.
It was so poor yesterday that it was hard to think of any real talking points for the match review after the game, but on reflection, we did miss one big talking point.
That one being, how the chuff did Newcastle United not get a penalty on 55 minutes when Nick Woltemade was being clearly held back by his shirt in the area?
Shirt-pulling: Is it an offence or not?
Shirt-pulling is a weird one when it comes to referees. It just seems to depend on their mood as to whether they pay any attention to it at all. It's in the rules, though, and in the penalty area, surely, when there's a blatant shirt pull on an attacker that stops them from gaining control of the ball, that's a penalty. Right?
Part of what seems to throw off the decision is when a player is being pulled back and falls forward, like Nick Woltemade did on Sunday. Even the Sky Sports commentators mentioned how they don't understand how he fell forward.
The point is, if he doesn't fall, the referee has zero chance of seeing it because he's doing it behind Woltemade's back, out of view of the ref.
What's the purpose of VAR then?
This is, is it not, exactly why we have VAR? They looked at the blatant shirt pull, which clearly stops Nick Woltemade from bringing the ball under his spell in the area, and thought, "Yeah, that's fine, that is".
Yet, we know that if the referee had spotted it and awarded the spot kick, VAR wouldn't overturn it. Make it make sense, please.
A penalty is probably Newcastle's only chance of scoring goals right now; we can't afford to have officials missing them like this.
