VAR is a VAT! (Value Added Tax)

So goals are being refused by VAR when a toe is judged to be offside? I thought that the powers-that-be were trying to learn how to use VAR properly? How come that a goal scored with such skill can be chalked off because the player's toe is too long? What kind of game are they trying to create?

Hands up anyone who remembers that the 'three points for a win' law was introduced in 1981 to encourage more goals to be scored; to move away from the defensive mentality. Today we have the unfortunate situation that team managers are scared of losing, hence their support for VAR even though it remains so much a debatable tool in the way it is being used.

For a while yesterday, the refusal of Diaby's 'goal' had the effect of encouraging the Palace's mass defence and breakaway tactic to the point that it nearly made the game sterile. Until they scored just after the break. That had the benefit of making Villa realise they had to do more, and with a few team adjustments, 'more' was achieved in the shape of three goals. But even one of those brought about more controversy.

Well, we have to thank Jhon (spelling?!) for a remarkable goal to bring hope back to Villa Park. His shooting really is good; rarely does he shoot off target, but that shot was a cracker. Whether he is really the entire answer to Ollie's scoring difficulties just now, I'm not sure, but the thought does occur to me that perhaps we should play both of them, with Ollie lying deeper. One issue is, however, that there would be no other recognised striker to warm the bench in case of need unless Zaniolo is able to plug the gap.

One positive development for me, yesterday, was the better contribution from Tielemans. It was he who set Diaby racing through to provide the assist for the third goal, and Tielemans it was who provided the slide rule pass to Watkins, who won the penalty.

Ah, the penalty. I was impressed by the referee yesterday as he clearly stood his ground having recognised the intent of the defender to stop Ollie at all costs. It was a clever tackle, in my opinion, to give the impression that he was playing the ball, but this referee was having none of it. The VAR check again took so long, and the referee in charge at VAR HQ seems to have been taken in by the clever tackle. The ref on the turf, however, would not be intimidated. Good for him, and I am not saying that because he made a decision in our favour. Perhaps our ref was disgusted by the chalking-off of Diaby's goal! Justice was done in my view. And good for Douglas Luiz, too, as he also kept his nerve.

In the end a much-needed (and deserved) win to restore confidence, especially with a visit to Chelsea coming up who (despite - or because of - their league position) will be wanting to be top dog in that match), and then we have Brighton, who are really impressive just now.

UTV!