Forum | General Discussion

The incident between Arsenal and West Ham is being classed as one of the biggest VAR calls in Premier League football since its introduction. The decision ultimately has launched Arsenal into a title-winning position, whilst also being a blunder to West Ham, who are fighting for survival, and despite their best efforts, it was ruled out in the cruelst way possible.

West Ham, the day after the misery, immediately requested the audio files to be released from VAR that day, where the revelation of an unfathomable amount of incompetence was revealed.

As it was ‘clear and obvious’, the VAR decision only lasted a short four minutes and 11 seconds.

Here’s the rundown: initially, VAR see a ‘foul’ on David Raya. At first, they weren’t bothered, but after four replays and three angles, they determined it was a foul.

Other aspects of concern occurred, the VAR officials started to review both other fouls, but in doing so, they only focused on both Trossard and Declan Rice, not Pablo’s shirt being grabbed.

Assistant VAR, Akil Howson, said, “I don’t like Trossard not facing the ball”, which was followed by “What are we saying about Declan Rice behind?”

Lead VAR, Darren England, then responded, “Yeah. He still gets a hand to the ball, doesn’t he? When he’s getting to the ball.”

The next line was recommending referee, Chris Kavanagh, to review the incident on the pitch, despite the fact they’d agreed Raya had still got a hand, and both Rice’s rugby tackle and Trossard’s brilliant ‘screen’ block were points of concern… yet the opinion swiftly changed seconds later.

Upon looking at the monitor, despite being told everything in his ear for the previous four minutes, Kavanagh goes up to the screen and says “I don’t know what you’re trying to show me, give me a clue.” - This is followed by showing a horrific angle of the foul on Pablo before Kavanagh instantly dismissed the incident saying “I don’t think there’s much in that at all, I’m happy with that.”

The grabbing of Mavropanos by Declan Rice wasn’t checked, as it was after the foul on Raya.

Poor angles, poor communication and lacklustre awareness, the Premier League official, after watching numerous replays, needs a ‘clue’ to see what is going on…? Comical officiating!

There are two significant talking points from the VAR perspective: was there enough to even consider sending the referee to the monitor in the first place? Both officials agreed that Raya had got a hand to the ball and that Pablo hadn’t impeded, so why was the on-field decision not adhered to?

Furthermore, VAR change their tune three times across the four-minute ordeal, which certainly doesn’t scream clear and obvious as the rule book states. The VAR initially believed it was the correct decision to give a goal, yet changed their tune after four minutes and 17 replays!

Whilst the result is said and done, corruption claims have been ramped up again.

Former Hammers manager Sam Allardyce was furious with the decision being overturned, calling it a scandalous call.

"There's so much pulling, shoving and pushing that never gets given, so to give this one in such a big game - irrespective of how you look back at it - is a scandal.

"The game has become a war in the penalty box - it's become rugby, not football. It's just all nonsense."

West Ham fans’ rage ultimately will wind up to nothing, but the outcome of the situation shouldn’t be ignored; it is rather unfortunate that it had to be West Ham to fall victim to another poor mistake, of which there have been many at the London Stadium for both sets of teams.

Whilst all is said and done, none will be forgotten.

West Ham’s mountain to climb has grown, but is still within reaching distance… just about.

The weekend’s difficulties were met with Tottenham securing a point against Leeds, extending their gap from one point to two, placing them on 38, whilst we remain on 36 with just two Premier League fixtures to go.

A win against Newcastle and a Spurs defeat against Chelsea is the only way possible that the Hammers could be ahead coming into the final day. A point in both games against Leeds and Newcastle, presuming Spurs lose both games, would still not be enough come the final day, due to our goal difference being abysmal.

The situation remains to be what many expected, another game, another do or die for West Ham.

Newcastle away will ultimately decide West Ham’s fate - a pessimistic view would be that we could be relegated before the final day, as a loss at St. James’ Park would mean a Spurs win would relegated us as well as a draw, as the goal difference would be virtually impossible to claw back.

The Hammers haven’t had the greatest away record as of late, with Nuno’s side scoring just three goals in the last five matches and achieving just one victory.

St James’ is no fool’s location - Newcastle is known to be a tough team to play at home, and matters could be made worse as Eddie Howe is in dire need of a victory in his final home game to make sure he’s got a chance at being in the dugout for next season.

Pressure is on for both sides.

Nuno is now faced with another set of decisions to be taken before Sunday, with this game having to be the banker, the one that can’t fail. With time running out, West Ham’s woes can only go on for so long before the dreaded becomes inevitable.

Anything other than a victory against Newcastle would be viewed as a failure among fans.

A grandad with his walking stick, struggling with each step he takes whilst his granddaughter smacks her Hammers scarf on the poorly positioned metallic railing upon VAR denying the equaliser, summarises West Ham’s time in the Premier League this season.

Arsenal’s monumental time wasting and bickering amidst breaks in play saw the Hammers amount to success in the 95th minute as the ball bundled its way into the net, but was disallowed due to Pablo’s arm blocking David Raya, not to mention, Raya got two hands onto the ball but could only parry it away before it made its way in, which is a second phase of play, but that didn’t seem to matter in this instance.

Arsenal fans will be quick to reject that it was fair play, but they’ve had numerous incidents with Raya and gotten away with all of them - such as the punch on Joao Pedro - but VAR, as history has indicated, always tends to sway in favour of the keeper.

Tomas Soucek, after the game, spoke on VAR’s decision: “It's a BIG error by VAR! I don't see any foul. Every game Arsenal does so many blocks, so many small fouls, and now suddenly they need the title and they get it. For football this is very disappointing. Even for Arsenal fans this is not what we want."

Jarrod Bowen questioned as to why the decisions were enforced today, as they haven’t always been across the season, and Nuno bellowed that ‘even the referee doesn’t know what is or isn’t a foul’

Countless times West Ham have been on the wrong end of the bizzare instances, the one this evening, Manchester United’s mystical added time, Rutter’s handball for Brighton at the AMEX which was deemed a handball but the ball was in the ‘second phase of play’ when it hit the back of the net, subsequently denying West Ham two points, or the foul on Pablo against Brentford last week which was deemed to be a ‘slip’.

The incidents do not stop.

A decision that has benefited both Arsenal’s title hopes and Spurs staying in the Premier League is seriously shocking.

Most Hammers fans would’ve expected a defensive performance such as the 1-1 result against Manchester City, but Nuno changed. Nuno formulated a game plan enough to take down Arsenal, but it unfortunately didn’t unfold.

Mateus Fernandes missed a golden one-on-one opportunity with Raya, and of course, the disallowed goal is the other talking point.

West Ham’s fate is now once again out of their hands as tomorrow’s result for Spurs against Leeds essentially decides if Nuno’s side has another two dances left in them.

From the central defenders to the forwards, correct decisions were made, correct positions of play were orchestrated, but ultimately none of it would prove dividend. A result that doesn’t feel at the players’ own fault, but has astronomical ramifications for the Hammers.

With two games to go, it’s just one point adrift, but Spurs have yet to play, and we now await to see if it remains at one, or increases to two, worst case scenario being four.

A painful 90.

West Ham fans have been rather vocal about their dismissal of all members from the initial GSB Out campaign, and as time passes, now only one remains. David Sullivan. The phrase ‘fish rots from the head’ ultimately summarises the situation at West Ham United, but recent speculation has seen that David Sullivan has actually INCREASED his stake in the club, which would heavily criticise what Hammers fans have gunned for, but ultimately, it could symbolise the beginning of the end.

But why is this positive? David Sullivan is rumoured to have increased his stake to 40% buying out shares of the late David Gold, but he has also been matched by Daniel Kretinsky, who has increased his stake from 27% to 40%, giving him now ‘equal power’ within the club.

David Sullivan has officially ‘given up’ his power. The idea of matching rights puts the idea of ‘power’ up in the air. Whilst some may believe that David Sullivan still has decision power, which he of course still will, it is believed that Kretinsky will hold the majority of it, making the decisions behind the scenes and in charge of hiring a boardroom, which he has done previously with many other companies of his before, taking a ‘majority’ stake in the club allowing him to decide who is in the back room and who isn’t, to make his business investment successful.

Kretinsky tends to buy a small stake in his investment before a major takeover, but in this instance, he has purchased a stake near the majority, but not entirely. The reason for this? David Sullivan has handed the reins over to Kretinsky, which was one of the handful of reasons as to why Karen Brady left her position not too long ago after 16 years.

There is a reason behind the madness.

The matching rights are the crucial factor for the time being. This ‘equality’ within the club now forces an EQUAL financial interjection to be placed into the club SHOULD one be made.

For example, if Daniel Kretinsky decides that he wants to put £50m into the club this summer, David Sullivan would have to match him with no questions asked. It is still unlikely that Kretinsky will throw money at the problem as it hasn’t gotten to that stage yet, but whether the Hammers stay in the Premier League or not, the solution of selling players will ultimately be the answer.

This temporary solution of going 40/40 may not be ideal long-term, but for the time being, it is what West Ham needs to stay afloat.

Kretinsky is a winner - money has little value to a man of his stature. It is the pride that drives him forward in his career. Whilst his investment might appear doom and gloom considering where we were when he initially bought the club, he certainly isn’t leaving us to drown, given that he wants more cake…

A sign of positivity to come.