Gary O’Neil says Wolves’ controversial defeat to Fulham on Monday Night soccer has “finally turned me against VAR”.
The Wolves boss re-watched a number of incidents from their 3-2 loss at Craven Cottage with the match officers and revealed referee Michael Salisbury admitted to 2 errors.
O’Neil mentioned the referee conceded VAR ought to have suggested him to overturn his resolution to award Wolves their first penalty when Nelson Semedo bought his foot to the ball earlier than making contact with Tom Cairney.
Speaking to Sky Sports, O’Neil mentioned: “Nelson plays the ball and doesn’t touch Cairney. I’ve watched it back with the referee and to be fair, he says he thinks they got it wrong and he should have been sent to the monitor.
“It does not assist me and it does not assist all of the followers which have travelled all this manner to assist their crew. It does not assist the gamers, who’re feeling annoyed once more.”
Willian transformed the penalty to make the rating 2-1 to Fulham, and he repeated the trick in stoppage time to seal the win when VAR suggested Salisbury to overturn his resolution to not give a penalty when Joao Gomes made contact with Harry Wilson.
“The one on Wilson, we disagree on a little bit,” mentioned O’Neil. “He thinks there’s enough contact there to give a penalty. I think it’s really soft.”
O’Neil additionally felt Carlos Vinicius ought to have been despatched off for making contact with Max Kilman’s head when he confronted the Wolves captain, and that Tim Ream ought to have acquired a second yellow card when he fouled Hee-Chan Hwang for the guests’ penalty.
On the choice to not give Ream a second reserving, O’Neil mentioned: “We had an interesting debate. He thought the pen was enough.
“[One of my staff said] by the letter of the legislation Ream needs to be despatched off.”
Highlights from Fulham’s Premier League match against Wolves
O’Neill additionally revealed the officers admitted Vinicius ought to have been dismissed, saying: “He said it was a soft headbutt – I said that was crazy. We can headbutt people on a football pitch as long as it’s deemed soft or not hard enough?
“They’ve since come out after that and mentioned by letter of legislation we bought that one flawed – that needs to be a crimson card.
“Do I need to tell Max to roll around on the floor when someone headbutts him? I don’t want to. Do I want my players to surround the referee for a second booking for Ream?
“You can argue that two of them might go against us however all 4 go against us. It’s a troublesome one for the lads, supporters and myself to take.”
Wolves had already had four controversial penalty decisions go against them this season, and O’Neil added: “We’ve been right here lots this season. We did not deserve that.”
O’Neil: I wanted VAR but it’s causing problems
Gary O’Neil noticed Wolves concede two penalties
O’Neil believes Wolves have already been denied seven factors by officiating errors this season, saying: “Bad luck keeps going against us. I’ve had a real, grown-up conversation.
“I’m attempting to stay calm. I’m not offended with anyone. I’m not abusing anybody. It’s only a dialog round, ‘come on guys, it is six or seven factors which have gone against us’.
“I’m managing a big football club here – the difference you’re making to my reputation, the club’s progression up the league, people’s livelihoods is huge.
“It cannot be with all of the know-how, in the perfect league in the world, it could actually’t be OK. We ought to talk about the sport actually however sadly we’ve got to debate this.”
O’Neil has previously spoken to Howard Webb, the head of referees’ body PGMOL this season, but said: “I will not be calling anyone. What can I do?
“I’ve got two options. I keep behaving in the way that I should and make my players behave in the way we should. We respect everybody and the decision-making.
“Or we begin to go, ‘that is not working. We’re going to need to make some noise’. They are the 2 choices I’ve.
“I’ve been really honest. I’d rather be a decent human being and answer things honestly but things need to get better.
“I am unable to settle for us being on the flawed finish of choices as usually as we’re. That must get higher.”
O’Neil conceded he may be at the end of his tether with VAR, explaining: “I’ve at all times been for VAR however I believe it is inflicting a giant drawback for the time being.
“Maybe tonight has finally turned me against VAR. I thought it would probably help but it doesn’t seem to be.”
Carra: Ref harsh to provide first Fulham penalty
The Monday Night Football panel talk about whether or not Fulham had been proper to be awarded each their penalties against Wolves
Sky Sports’ Jamie Carragher on Fulham’s first penalty:
“I think it’s extremely harsh. We speak about wanting the on-field referees to make the decision. There’s no doubt Semedo gets something on the ball. He stands on his big toe.
“You can have a look at a lot of completely different angles. I believe it is harsh. I’m not an enormous fan of VAR slowing issues down. We’re speaking a few toe. After the ref has given the choice, VAR have gotten an issue as a result of we’re in the territory of ‘clear and apparent’.
“This phrase ‘clear and obvious’ is a grey area. Different people have different opinions – how far does it have to go before it’s a howler?”
Carra: VAR flawed to advise ref to provide second Fulham pen
Sky Sports’ Jamie Carragher on VAR serving to to provide Fulham’s second penalty:
“Again, it’s harsh. The referee has got a great position, sees it and shakes his head straight away.
“When you gradual it down it seems to be worse. When you watch at full pace, just like the ref did from 5 – 6 yards away, it is harsh.
“I think it’s more of a penalty than the first one – but the problem for me is, after the ref doesn’t give it on field, the decision shouldn’t be overturned. That’s my feeling.
“I do not suppose it’s a penalty. The ref has an ideal view. VAR thinks that is a transparent and apparent error. I do not see it.”
Discussion about this post