-
)
Premier
01 Jan 19:30
)
CrystalPal
)
Fulham
- - -
Premier
01 Jan 19:30
)
Liverpool
)
LeedsUnite
- - -
Premier
01 Jan 22:00
)
Brentford
)
TottenhamH
- - -
Premier
01 Jan 22:00
)
Sunderland
)
Manchester
- - -
)
Serie A
02 Jan 21:45
)
Cagliari
)
ACMilan
- - -
)
Ligue 1
02 Jan 21:45
)
Toulouse
)
Lens
- - -
)
LaLiga
02 Jan 22:00
)
RayoVallec
)
Getafe
- - -
Serie A
03 Jan 13:30
)
Como
)
Udinese
- - -
Premier
03 Jan 14:30
)
AstonVilla
)
Nottingham
- - -
LaLiga
03 Jan 15:00
)
CeltaVigo
)
Valencia
- - -
Serie A
03 Jan 16:00
)
Genoa
)
Pisa
- - -
Serie A
03 Jan 16:00
)
Sassuolo
)
ParmaCalci
- - -
Premier
03 Jan 17:00
)
Brighton&a
)
Burnley
- - -
Premier
03 Jan 17:00
)
Wolverhamp
)
WestHamUni
- - -
LaLiga
03 Jan 17:15
)
Osasuna
)
AthleticBi
- - -
Ligue 1
03 Jan 18:00
)
Monaco
)
Lyon
- - -
Serie A
03 Jan 19:00
)
Juventus
)
Lecce
- - -
Premier
03 Jan 19:30
)
AFCBournem
)
Arsenal
- - -
LaLiga
03 Jan 19:30
)
Elche
)
Villarreal
- - -
Ligue 1
03 Jan 20:00
)
Nice
)
Strasbourg
- -
THE VAN DE VEN TACKLE: THE SURPRISE REASON VAR REFUSED TO SHOW A RED CARD
Liverpool striker Alexander Isak faces six months out with a suspected broken leg following Micky van de Ven’s tackle.
After Liverpool's tight 2-1 win against Tottenham on Saturday, everyone's talking about Micky van de Ven's tackle on Alexander Isak. Isak, who scored the first goal, might have a broken leg because of it.
Right after Isak scored, Van de Ven slid in and caught his leg as he planted it. Isak had to leave the game. Everyone was worried; it looked bad. They called for a stretcher, but he managed to walk off with help from Liverpool's medical staff.
The club doesn't think it's an ACL injury, but what they suspect is still pretty serious. Reports said Sunday it could be a lower leg break. But they don't know how bad it is or how long he'll be out until they get more scans and updates.
Lots of people are wondering why Van de Ven didn't get a penalty because the tackle looked rough. Replays showed he went in hard and didn't really have a chance to get the ball, which led to a bad injury for the £125m player.
The tackle started a big argument. The experts on Sky Sports' Ref Watch didn't agree whether it should have been a red card. Jay Bothroyd, a former pro, said that Van de Ven probably didn't mean to hurt Isak, but the tackle was still reckless and deserved a red card.
Bothroyd said Van de Ven wasn't trying to hurt Isak on purpose. He was just trying to stop a goal.
But even though Isak scored, it should still be a red card. He lunged and went right into him. It checks all the boxes for a red-card challenge. They let it slide because he scored.
He was out of control. He's trying to block, but he's not going to get there. If that happened in the middle of the field, it would be a red card.
Dermot Gallagher, who used to be a referee, disagreed. He thinks it wasn't a red-card tackle and that what happened after shouldn't change how you see the tackle itself.
Gallagher said, I don't see anything he did that a normal soccer player wouldn't do. I'd be shocked if that got a red card anywhere on the field.
Players mess up tackles all the time. He was a bit late, but it's not a red card whether it's in the penalty area, the D, the centre circle, or the other half.
But both experts did agree that the ref was right to send off Xavi Simons for his tackle on Virgil van Dijk earlier in the game. Simons went in dangerously on van Dijk, catching his calf with his studs.
Gallagher said about the Simons thing, I want to be clear that I don't think Simons meant to do it, but he did it. Once you see the replay, you can't ignore it.
In today's game, VAR is always going to call that a red card. He's unlucky, but he's going to get a red. You just can't make tackles like that anymore.
VAR REVIEW: CHELSEA 2-2 BOURNEMOUTH, ESTêVãO PENALTY DRAMA EXPLAINED! WAS IT A FOUL OR A DIVE
Explaining the VAR: How an 11th-minute penalty check at Stamford Bridge saved a point for Chelsea against a resilient Bournemouth.
Every week, the Video Assistant Referee stirs up drama in the Premier League. Let's break down how these calls are made and if they're actually right.
This season, we're digging into the big moments to explain the VAR process and the rules of the game.
What went down: Chelsea's Estêvão was moving into the Bournemouth box, with Antoine Semenyo on his tail. Estêvão went down after some contact with Semenyo. The ref, Barrott, waved off Chelsea's penalty shouts, saying there wasn't a foul. He thought both players made contact naturally as they were running, and Estêvão basically tripped himself.
VAR said, "After looking at it, VAR Pawson suggested Barrott take another look at the monitor for a possible penalty because Semenyo might have tripped Estêvão."
VAR's take: Pawson had to figure out if the contact was just part of the play, like the ref thought, or if Semenyo fouled Estêvão. It was clear Estêvão tripped, but the question was how the contact started.
At first glance, it would be hard for Pawson to disagree with the ref because the main TV angle wasn't clear. But after checking out the sideline and behind views, Pawson saw that Semenyo stepped into Estêvão's path, making enough contact with his leg to cause him to trip.
Pawson told Barrott to check the monitor for a possible penalty. Barrott watched the replays, agreed, and gave Chelsea the penalty.
The call: It was a reasonable VAR call based on today's standards. But it's a borderline case.
Barrott seemed unsure of the monitor and needed some convincing from different angles.
A lot of the time, this kind of contact is just from players running normally, and someone goes down. To give a penalty, there really needs to be a clear foul by the defender. You could say that happened here, but it's a pretty low standard for VAR to get involved.
Chelsea 2-2 AFC Bournemouth
Referee: Sam Barrott
VAR: Craig Pawson
What: VAR check for a foul in the box
When: 11th minute
BREAKING: UNAI EMERY REVEALS THE REAL REASON BEHIND HIS COLD ARTETA HANDSHAKE SNUB NOW
Unai Emery explains why he skipped the post-match handshake as Arsenal’s 4-1 win ends Aston Villa’s 11-game streak at the Emirates.
Unai Emery said he didn't shake Mikel Arteta's hand right after Aston Villa lost at the Emirates Stadium since the Arsenal manager kept him waiting.
This loss stopped Villa's winning streak at 11 games, their first in almost two months.
Villa held their own in the first half, but Arsenal scored early in the second when Gabriel got to the ball before Emi Martinez on a corner.
Martin Zubimendi quickly made it 2-0, and Leandro Trossard scored a third goal a little after an hour had passed.
Soon after entering the pitch, Gabriel Jesus scored, making it 4-0. Ollie Watkins was able to respond by tapping in a goal late in the game after Donyell Malen's nice play.
After the game, Emery waited to shake Arteta's hand, but he went to the locker room since Arteta was still celebrating with his team.
It’s easy to see. I like to do things fast,” Emery said when asked about why he didn’t shake Arteta’s hand.
“I shake hands, then I go to the dressing room with my players and coaches. I was waiting.
“Arteta was busy with his coaches, so I went inside. It’s not a big deal for me.”
About the match, Emery commented, “We played great in the first half, and things were going our way. We had corners and defended well. We didn’t let them get a corner in the first half.
“We felt good, but we let in the first goal in the second half. Onana getting hurt didn’t help since he’s important for set pieces and in the midfield.
“We didn’t quit, and we kept playing hard. We scored one goal and almost scored more. Arsenal is the best team in the league and should win the title.
“I’m not sure which day it is since we’ve played Arsenal twice already, and we still have to play Nottingham. But I’m happy with our goals and how we're trying to attain them.
Premier League Standings
Must Read
Read More News