Heroes & Villains, the Aston Villa fanzine
Heroes & Villains => Heroes Discussion => Topic started by: Legion on July 03, 2019, 04:25:41 PM
-
Vote and post your thoughts.
-
Down with this sort of thing.
-
I saw a tweet that sums up VAR for me.
Football isn’t supposed to be perfect. VAR is unnecessary.
-
For.
Mostly to be in contradiction with Danny Baker who bangs on like a petulant twat about it.
-
I’m all for it. It should cut out the decisions that the officials miss. My main concern is that it doesn’t unduly disrupt the flow of the game and the fans are kept informed of what is going on
Having seen the England pen several times last night I didn’t think it was an offence initially. Shown from a slightly different angle, it clearly was. Ditto the goal we scored which was given off side.
Ultimately we want the right decision on important points in the match. Some go for your team, some against. Along as justice is done in the end, I’m all for it
-
Absolutely for. The amount of maddening and unfair decisions that cost teams points (across all the leagues) needs addressing, and because there's a Mike Dean for every honest mistake I'll take what I can get in terms of eliminating game-changing errors.
-
As it stands, the way it is being used at the moment is wrong in many ways. We all want the correct decisions but the way it is being applied takes too long and makes the game too clinical. If you are going to introduce new technology then you also have to update the rules accordingly rather than apply to rules suitable for human error.
As an example, the way marginal offside decisions are being applied now is completely wrong IMO but the rules and application could easily be improved as follows:
I can see the point of VAR, but they need to change offside so that any part of the attacking player being onside means that they're onside. People will stop turning up if the game is littered with such anticlimaxes.
-
For - it’s a pain at times but getting decisions right is paramount. What I would like to see is challenges versus everything that is mildly controversial being reviewed. That way a manager has 1 or 2 challenges a game. Ideally 2 but only if he gets the first one right. If he gets it wrong he loses the second. The NFL has a similar system. The rest is up to the ref.
-
The right result is right foe me. Especially if it nullifies the all-in wrestling style of defending at corners. The offside by a toe decisions are frustrating and maybe die for a review.
-
I saw a tweet that sums up VAR for me.
Football isn’t supposed to be perfect. VAR is unnecessary.
My feelings summed up in a sentence. The troubles is that too many footie fans are now from the era of TV and computer games, where everything HAS to be exact.
-
Rotten.
Loads of reasons (delays, still often a matter of opinion, sport is not perfect, etc.) but for me a big issue is that fans in the ground will be further robbed of the experience of watching the game live.
Can you trust that you just scored or conceded a goal? Too often it will just prompts 5 minutes of delay where the crowd in the ground is further marginalised and ignored.
All in the name of offering talking points for dull pundits in a TV studio to be parroted by complete bores sat on their sofas or in the pub (note - this is not a dig at fans that watch their football at home or in pubs, just those bores that obsess about one or two decisions or incidents in a game).
Plus it means that the 'elite' game gets further away from the experience of grassroots football.
I would prefer they invest a fraction of the cost of VAR in improving the quality of officials - not just in professional game but at all levels of football as the best refs are at the top of the pyramid and the broader the base the better the standard.
-
Football is a game, played by people, people make mistakes. It's not a computer programme. Sometimes decisions go for you, sometimes they don't. It's a game. After every goal that goes in from now you won't know whether to celebrate or sit on your hands and wait for some computer to tell you that someone's left knacker was slightly offside. Just leave the bloody game alone, it's not perfect but then it's not supposed to be.
-
We as football fans are on a hiding to nothing if we think that incorrect decisions and goals that aren't goals should be part and parcel of the game. Technology isn't all good, but it's not all bad either, and if we're saying we don't need it to improve the game then that's just conservatism to me. If it temporarily interrupts the game, so what? The referee will do that anyway to consult his linesman on occasion, and I don't see anyone complaining when that results in a fairer decision.
-
Is there a sitting on the fence option? Half of it is ideal, the other half is a load of bollocks.
-
For, but it needs to be quicker. And if there is a major doubt it stays with the on-pitch decision.
-
Not impressed with what I’ve seen so far, against.
-
It's a necessary evil. There is so much (money) riding on games these days that when a referee makes a mistake the cost can be astronomical. I agree that it needs to be quicker though as it breaks the flow of the game and disconnects the fans thereby diminishing the atmosphere.
-
Decisions to the letter of the law are correct, but being used for far to much of what goes on and is so slow - so overall it’s a no from me
-
I saw a tweet that sums up VAR for me.
Football isn’t supposed to be perfect. VAR is unnecessary.
Then that applies to every single sport with a similar technology to assist refs make calls. Wimbledon will be constantly adjudicated by that magic eye thing for balls that are in or out. It’s hard to imagine the game now without it. Football is a different sport off course and VAR needs to be used way more sparingly to get the most critical decisions right.
-
Managers make mistakes, players make mistakes yet we have expect perfection from the officials. If the technology was slicker and didn’t take an age then I might have more time for it but as it stands I am firmly against.
-
Hate it with a passion. Half the crowd will celebrate a goal the other half (glass half empty folks) like me will just stare at the ref for a minute or two awaiting the disallowed goal. No spontaneous limbs anymore
-
I've voted against purely on what I have seen so far.
For me I don't want to see goals disallowed because the strikers foot is offside or a player was 6 inches offside in the build up to a goal. I still want the officials to be able to officiate the game.
What I would like to see is 'referees/linesmans call' similar to that of umpires call in cricket. For instance the recent goals scored by England in the nations league and the goal scored by the lioness' last night. In both instances the linesman didn't flag and not a single player complained. In essence it was simply to close to call and should revert to referees call and the goals stand. The reversal of the decision killed to game for both players and supporters. VAR will stop the immediate euphoria of scoring.
I also don't want to see penalties given for the slightest touch. Football is a physical game and contact is part and parcel of the game. The problem with VAR is that in slow motion all/any contact has to result in a penalty and that can't be right.
VAR has its place in that it need to be there to overturn the really bad decisions it should be used for what are marginal or minimal contact decision.
-
I think it completely ruins football. There’s literally no point celebrating goals anymore.
-
For, but it needs work.
-
For it in theory but the application and efficiency of it are key. Using last year's World Cup as an example, it was being used all the time in the group stage and then far less in the knock-out stages. It should be used for glaring mistakes and nobody wants to be waiting several minutes for a decision.
-
I'm going to say for with the caveat that it has to be carried out a lot better than it is now. It's all a bit lost headed at the moment, but I have confidence it will get a lot better. The England game last night showed that we deserved a penalty and we were offside, which I think on balance is better than not getting those and other similar decisions right.
If it could stop grown men rolling on the floor like they've been shot then I'd have it imposed on all leagues.
-
I'm going to say for with the caveat that it has to be carried out a lot better than it is now. It's all a bit lost headed at the moment, but I have confidence it will get a lot better. The England game last night showed that we deserved a penalty and we were offside, which I think on balance is better than not getting those and other similar decisions right.
If it could stop grown men rolling on the floor like they've been shot then I'd have it imposed on all leagues.
That in my opinion wasn’t a penalty. Two players crossed and she bought her leg back to shoot and guess what contact was made. We are going to get loads of penalties with VAR, rules are still open to interpretation. Don’t start me on the handball bollocks rule change either oh my days
-
'Against' until they correct the current damaging problems with it.
I agree that the most blatant refereeing mistakes cause a problem for the game now but the solution isn't what we have been shown to date with this technology. It CAUSES too many time delays in the flow of the game and produces too many occasions which are marginal.
If they kept it out of the game on the pitch UNLESS the VAR officials spotted a completely blatant and decisive major event then I might change my mind but it only causes problems for the game at the moment so get rid.
-
I think it completely ruins football. There’s literally no point celebrating goals anymore.
Don't be silly.
-
I think it completely ruins football. There’s literally no point celebrating goals anymore.
Don't be silly.
There is you just have to wait a couple of minutes
-
VAR is a good thing if used correctly i.e. where there is a glaring error that drastically affects a game and which most observers can see clearly even if the officials are dumb, blind, incompetent or "pretending not to see". e.g. the Lampard goal against Germany, the hand of God goal, Thierry Henry's double handball against Ireland, even El Ghazi's sending off at Leeds and Gayle's penalty swan dive against Forest. etc. It should never be used for marginal bloody offside decisions where someone's cock-end is slightly ahead of the last defender and to review every bloody goal that is scored in case there was a nudge on someone in the build up. That is totally killing the spontaneity of the game and is ridiculous.
In the hands of FIFA/UEFA it's a disaster because they aren't using it in a sensible way. Either apply only to the glaringly obvious, or else allow each team two appeals per game and nothing else.
-
I expect that each game will last about 3 hours for the first couple of months, until the officials work out how it is to be used properly.
I guess the companies who provide the VAR equipment and officials will be making a few quid?
-
Think I'd be more in favour if it really was restricted to being used to correct "Clear and obvious" errors.
Unfortunately it seems to be used for marginal offsides, debatable tackles etc that can be given either way.
Now instead of let's talk about the penalty Alan, we get replays of referees looking at different camera angles. Or Peter Walton chiming in. It seems to me that if it really was used to correct clear and obvious errors there'd be no need to talk about it afterwards.
Carragher putting on his VR headset last season to see what the linesman saw, was probably my jumping off point.
Shrug It's here to stay, but lets hope it improves.
-
Hate it.
Most football matches will now be 100 minutes.
-
Either apply only to the glaringly obvious, or else allow each team two appeals per game and nothing else.
I completely agree. All we're going to get is 15 minutes a match of players making a square symbol with their fingers, like they've invented a new category on Give Us A Clue.
-
Sack it and let referees do what they get paid to do. The referee should ask the questions rather than have idiots in a studio, influence him. Only absolutely blatant issues that the referee misses should be mentioned to him, or her.
-
No, I don't like it at all. It seems to be used for everything. I stand correct but I don't think us as Villa fans have been involved in a game using it yet so who knows, it might grow on us all as the new season wears on. I doubt it though.
-
I get both arguments but I’m swayed in favour of it for the
Main reason that referees tend to favour the bigger teams. We’ve had many decisions go against us For games against the top 4 or 6 throughout my lifetime which have been totally unjustified. At least now we’ll have certainty regardless of how much the kop screams. They do need to speed up the process though.
-
VAR is the inevitable consequence of decades of players, managers, journalists, commentators, ex-players turned pundits and, yes, us the fans scrutinizing, analyzing and criticizing every decision made by a referee that was even marginally wrong. If you weren't part of that either in the ground or in front of the TV, then you can have your moan about the less than perfect system than is VAR. However, the reality is that virtually everyone of us bears some responsibility for where we now are - and the fact that the technology is here to stay.
-
maybe each team is allowed just one review or something like cricket. If you waste it , tough shit.
-
VAR is a good thing if used correctly i.e. where there is a glaring error that drastically affects a game and which most observers can see clearly even if the officials are dumb, blind, incompetent or "pretending not to see". e.g. the Lampard goal against Germany, the hand of God goal, Thierry Henry's double handball against Ireland, even El Ghazi's sending off at Leeds and Gayle's penalty swan dive against Forest. etc. It should never be used for marginal bloody offside decisions where someone's cock-end is slightly ahead of the last defender and to review every bloody goal that is scored in case there was a nudge on someone in the build up. That is totally killing the spontaneity of the game and is ridiculous.
In the hands of FIFA/UEFA it's a disaster because they aren't using it in a sensible way. Either apply only to the glaringly obvious, or else allow each team two appeals per game and nothing else.
Totally agree with this. It should only be used in Red Card or Penalty-type decisions. Not for every nit-picky offside or minor foul in the build-up of a goal. If someone makes a blatant dive (which happens all too often), and they're demanding a red-card, the head official should be able to call the replay booth and get a definitive answer within 30 seconds. Too often, these moments wind up with both teams screaming at a back-peddling ref who's try to get some order of the situation, and it usually takes 2 or 3 minutes just to get things sorted. Instead, have him call the booth, give a card to the offender/diver and play on. VAR would actually speed up the process in this instance, penalize the proper party, and probably help to eventually eliminate diving.
-
VAR is a good thing if used correctly i.e. where there is a glaring error that drastically affects a game and which most observers can see clearly even if the officials are dumb, blind, incompetent or "pretending not to see". e.g. the Lampard goal against Germany, the hand of God goal, Thierry Henry's double handball against Ireland, even El Ghazi's sending off at Leeds and Gayle's penalty swan dive against Forest. etc. It should never be used for marginal bloody offside decisions where someone's cock-end is slightly ahead of the last defender and to review every bloody goal that is scored in case there was a nudge on someone in the build up. That is totally killing the spontaneity of the game and is ridiculous.
Sums it up perfectly for me.
-
I am in favour of it, but the technology needs to work.
I would support its use by captains with 1 referral a game. If you correctly overcome turn the decision, then you keep your referral. There has to be a time limit as well.
The 15 seconds from the incident currently in the CWC to review seems right.
-
Against. Purely for the fuckaboutery that happens. It’s far too long a process taking the steam out of a team. I love the pace of football, especially in the UK, this seems completely at odds
-
I'm very against it. It just feels like it was made by, and for, people that don't go to matches. I guess it all seems very dramatic on the telly, but last night I was just imagining being in the stadium, squinting to see a figure slightly off the pitch watching telly for a few minutes... What were the fans saying to each other? It seemed the fans only actually realised what had been given after the match restarted, which is ridiculous. I guess we'll find out first hand next season how excruciating it is to watch live. (Will they take as much time over decisions no matter how important the match, or the stage in the match? Genuine question as I don't really know how it works)
While the ref should never be the centre of attention, I also don't want them to be irrelevant; they are part of the theatre. The pompous gent in the top hat, that you boo when they get things wrong, and laugh at when they fall over. But they will stop making decisions soon, knowing that anything big they miss will get corrected anyway, so why put their neck on the line. What does a linesman do these days?
As for getting decisions right, I just don't care that much. I think there is something beautiful about the fact that we, as a nation, still talk about Maradona in '86. And I cling to the bitterness I feel towards Vidic not getting sent off in the League Cup final like Linus does to his blanket. Do I wish it had gone differently? Of course I do. But isn't that all part of why we go every week? To feel that sort of passion that still builds up 10, or 30, years after the event. To witness the brilliant, the mundane and the downright wrong? It's all part of the package. It's what we signed up for, and its being chipped away.
I think it fixes a problem that was never there, and does absolutely nothing to make watching football more fun. Which is what it is all about, right?
-
VAR would be OK for glaring mistakes. But not for marginal offsides. Lingard in the ENgland semi-final was about 5mm offside. That is not a glaring mistake because the human eye wouldn't spot it, same with the England Women's goal last night. Penalty decision was a good call by VAR and exactly why it is needed.
Red cards, penalities, mistaken identity are fine plus goal line decisions.
Beyond that - it's a no from me!
-
It doesn't need to ruin the game if applied properly though. For me there have been so many blatantly wrong incidents that have gone against England, Ireland or Villa that I've longed wanted video replays. Just not the risibly incompetent way the authorities are currently applying it.
It might have stopped that wanker Poll from "managing the occasion" and obliged him to apply the rules and send Vidic off.
-
Yeah, but by not sending Vidic off we can claim we lost to the ref instead of an aging Michael Owen. When the bad decisions go for you you celebrate and when they go against you can ignore your own deficiencies. Win-win.
-
I think it could help in terms of offsides. There are plenty of reverse examples of goals disallowed for offside that should have stood, so if linos were more inclined to hold off on raising the flag and get it reviewed than they might otherwise be, then I think it would be worth it.
-
Very in favour but clearly it’s a work in progress and will improve over time
-
Because it is an open invitation to examine the minutiae of the game I am against it. An official's decision is imperfect but it is instantaneous. Technology will make it possible to confirm a call down to a millimetre. Witness Stokes dismissal against India when Hawkeye enlarged a shot of the bowler's foot and the dismissal was upheld by the width of a matchstick. What we are going to get is the football equivalent of Hamlet's soliloquy needing to be repeated in mid play because somebody in the audience thought the Prince of Denmark said "slings and marrows of outrageous fortune".
-
VAR is a good thing if used correctly i.e. where there is a glaring error that drastically affects a game and which most observers can see clearly even if the officials are dumb, blind, incompetent or "pretending not to see". e.g. the Lampard goal against Germany, the hand of God goal, Thierry Henry's double handball against Ireland, even El Ghazi's sending off at Leeds and Gayle's penalty swan dive against Forest. etc. It should never be used for marginal bloody offside decisions where someone's cock-end is slightly ahead of the last defender and to review every bloody goal that is scored in case there was a nudge on someone in the build up. That is totally killing the spontaneity of the game and is ridiculous.
In the hands of FIFA/UEFA it's a disaster because they aren't using it in a sensible way. Either apply only to the glaringly obvious, or else allow each team two appeals per game and nothing else.
Totally agree with this. It should only be used in Red Card or Penalty-type decisions. Not for every nit-picky offside or minor foul in the build-up of a goal. If someone makes a blatant dive (which happens all too often), and they're demanding a red-card, the head official should be able to call the replay booth and get a definitive answer within 30 seconds. Too often, these moments wind up with both teams screaming at a back-peddling ref who's try to get some order of the situation, and it usually takes 2 or 3 minutes just to get things sorted. Instead, have him call the booth, give a card to the offender/diver and play on. VAR would actually speed up the process in this instance, penalize the proper party, and probably help to eventually eliminate diving.
Pretty much spot on, and I would also add that the VAR goal line technology has been excellent and is a perfect example (like tennis or cricket) of how technology should continue to be used.
-
VAR is a good thing if used correctly i.e. where there is a glaring error that drastically affects a game and which most observers can see clearly even if the officials are dumb, blind, incompetent or "pretending not to see". e.g. the Lampard goal against Germany, the hand of God goal, Thierry Henry's double handball against Ireland, even El Ghazi's sending off at Leeds and Gayle's penalty swan dive against Forest. etc. It should never be used for marginal bloody offside decisions where someone's cock-end is slightly ahead of the last defender and to review every bloody goal that is scored in case there was a nudge on someone in the build up. That is totally killing the spontaneity of the game and is ridiculous.
Sums it up perfectly for me.
Yep, me too.
-
Goal line technology works well because there's no human involved. The technology automatically and immediately knows the ball was, or wasn't, over the line. VAR is different in that it involves a few humans and once we're involved it tends to be a bit shit.
-
For me I don't want to see goals disallowed because the strikers foot is offside or a player was 6 inches offside in the build up to a goal. I still want the officials to be able to officiate the game.
Agree. The offside rules need to be adapted and updated in line with technology improvements if they are going to keep using it for offside. As it stands, the use of VAR for offside with the current rules is too clinical and basically wrong (a trailing foot or arm shouldn't result in a goal being disallowed particularly when the VAR video at when the time the ball is played is open to interpretation frame by frame).
I also don't want to see penalties given for the slightest touch. Football is a physical game and contact is part and parcel of the game. The problem with VAR is that in slow motion all/any contact has to result in a penalty and that can't be right.
Also agree with this. With VAR you can't argue that England shouldn't have had a penalty last night, however the end result of this will be that players will be going down under the slightest of touches knowing that they will most likely get a penalty under VAR review...we will soon have "professional divers" being justified by VAR. You think diving has been bad for years now...just wait until players start diving to take advantage of VAR.
-
It’s the right technology poorly implemented.
The day will come when decisions are reversed after the game, goals ruled out and points awarded or deducted, it will happen it’s just a case of when.
-
I doubt many will be offside for a trailing arm or foot. :P
It would be nice if VAR was used for dives and the FA really clamped down on it by dishing out decent bans. I'm not overly hopeful.
-
I get both arguments but I’m swayed in favour of it for the
Main reason that referees tend to favour the bigger teams.
VAR will not change that. They just won’t see it on the screen.
-
I doubt many will be offside for a trailing arm or foot. :P
Are you stalking me PWS? :P I'm pretty sure the Cameroon goal against England was for a trailing foot at the time the ball was played.
-
Arsene Wenger to be appointed as head of VAR?
-
I doubt many will be offside for a trailing arm or foot. :P
Are you stalking me PWS? :P I'm pretty sure the Cameroon goal against England was for a trailing foot at the time the ball was played.
Yes and you love it.
-
How long before the TV companies see the stoppages for VAR as an opportunity to show some adverts?
-
Yeah, but by not sending Vidic off we can claim we lost to the ref instead of an aging Michael Owen. When the bad decisions go for you you celebrate and when they go against you can ignore your own deficiencies. Win-win.
Except the bad decisions seem to go in favour of the big teams, so things don't tend to even themselves out.
-
Rich, not necessarily big.
-
Last night - the disallowed England goal should have stood, it wasn't offside in real time, only when you freezeframed it. It was a goal.
The penalty - wasn't a penalty. The touch was minuscule. Justice was done.
-
Justice was not done then, as it would have been 2-2 at the time.
Edited for punctuation fail. Hangs head in shame.
-
What if VAR had been around for the last 60 years or so ?
The Russian linesman overruled in 66, no Maradona Hand of God, Lampards goal given against Germany 2010, and most important of all Pat McMahons goal given at Leicester April 1970 which ultimately may have meant we never got relegated to the 3rd division.
-
I was largely for it until the Women's World Cup. The refs have been piss poor, but there's no way on earth it should take nearly ten minutes to work out if someone is offside or not.
I'm already resigned to the fact there's no way I'll still be able to hit the 5.30 train from New Street back to London every other Saturday.
-
Justice was not done then, as it would have been 2-2 at the time.
Edited for punctuation fail. Hangs head in shame.
I suppose I meant it both ways - justice was done giving us a pen, but then looking at that in isolation justice was done that we didn't score, as I didn't think it was a pen anyway.
See . the VAR double jeopardy controversy !!
-
I'm still undecided about VAR because I can see the advantages and disadvantages but I think an independent timekeeper (as is used in Rugby Union) would be just as useful.
-
If the poll is all square, I demand we go to VAR for the final decision.
-
Last night - the disallowed England goal should have stood, it wasn't offside in real time, only when you freezeframed it. It was a goal.
The penalty - wasn't a penalty. The touch was minuscule. Justice was done.
"It wasn't offside in real time, only when you freezeframed it." Sorry but what a load of bullshit. It was offside or it wasn't, otherwise the principle of the rule couldn't exist in the first place. It's perhaps a separate debate, but don't blame technology for uncovering flaws in the rules of the game. Either way that's some of the most nonsensical shite I've read in a while. "Their horse won by a nose, but only when you freezeframed it. In real-time it was our horse."
-
Might as well get rid of all pitch officials, then.
-
Might as well get rid of all pitch officials, then.
Because football, simply catching up with other modern sports, has decided it's wise to use video evidence to assist the pitch officials? Pull the other one Leej.
-
It's the way it is currently used that is the issue.
-
It's a made up game, with made up rules. Beyond either physically supporting a club, or playing the game which is the primary point because it's blummin fun, I don't see why anyone else is entitled to give a shit and/or be entitled to decide what counts and what doesn't.
-
I'd rather take football as a warts and all sport than the slick, user-friendly game show it's becoming.
-
I don’t mind it for the factual decisions ie goal line & offside - what I don’t like is the 20 slow motion replays making nothing incidents look like something - with the ear piece in opens itself to collision / corruption also etc.
Would prefer the authorities looked at the officials more - need younger, fitter referees who can get about the pitch better, the two guys with the flags need to be involved more, VAR means they will hardly give offsides now & in most cases the refs are giving the throw ins. Give the refs assistance not make it harder.
IMHO the game would be improved immeasurably by getting rid of half the tv cameras/angles/slow motion replays - controversy and talking points feed the media and so much of it centres on decisions - much easier soundbite to bitch about a ref than slaughter an old team mate for missing a sitter or missing a tackle
-
It's a made up game, with made up rules. Beyond either physically supporting a club, or playing the game which is the primary point because it's blummin fun, I don't see why anyone else is entitled to give a shit and/or be entitled to decide what counts and what doesn't.
So no referee at all then. Got it.
While we're at it, let's get rid of the FA and the Football League. Go grassroots. God, thinking about it now, don't you really miss the old lead balls that used to give defenders and strikers brain damage. Those were the good old days. Back to jumpers for goalposts and four up front. Who needs industry and innovation destroying the game.
-
When I said before I was in favour of VAR, what I meant was, as long as it benefits us to the detriment of anybody we play.
-
Imagine if it was around 10 years ago. Liverpool would have spent a few seasons finishing in the bottom half of the table and Gerrard’s cheating antics would have been fruitless. Well, maybe not the first bit.
In addition to the fairness it will bring we might also see Jack win a few more spot kicks.
-
It's a made up game, with made up rules. Beyond either physically supporting a club, or playing the game which is the primary point because it's blummin fun, I don't see why anyone else is entitled to give a shit and/or be entitled to decide what counts and what doesn't.
So no referee at all then. Got it.
While we're at it, let's get rid of the FA and the Football League. Go grassroots. God, thinking about it now, don't you really miss the old lead balls that used to give defenders and strikers brain damage. Those were the good old days. Back to jumpers for goalposts and four up front. Who needs industry and innovation destroying the game.
Yeah, because that's exactly what I said.
-
As it stands, the way it is being used at the moment is wrong in many ways. We all want the correct decisions but the way it is being applied takes too long and makes the game too clinical. If you are going to introduce new technology then you also have to update the rules accordingly rather than apply to rules suitable for human error.
As an example, the way marginal offside decisions are being applied now is completely wrong IMO but the rules and application could easily be improved as follows:
I can see the point of VAR, but they need to change offside so that any part of the attacking player being onside means that they're onside. People will stop turning up if the game is littered with such anticlimaxes.
I agree with KRS.
-
VAR for me will take all the joy of celebrating a goal out of the game, we will have to wait 5 mins to see if the goal has been given! - no more scrambles in the penalty area trying to put the ball over the line etc...
I think that games will be lower scoring, because there will be more reasons to disallow a goal rather than give the goal.
-
I'm for it if used properly.
You are either offside or you are not. Simple as. If that can be eradicated then good.
This comes about partly because Lineker, Shearer, Neville et al can use the technology and can say it was not within the rules of the game. Why shouldn't we as fans expect that in real time rather than our view confirmed by some pompous overpaid ex pro 3 hours after the game?
The problem I see is the delay. That will improve. It should also be shown on the big screen of the ground and not treat us all like dummies
-
It works brilliantly in rugby and I don’t see why it can’t in football with a few sensible adjustments.
-
It works brilliantly in rugby and I don’t see why it can’t in football with a few sensible adjustments.
Rugby, like cricket, has more natural stoppages than football so it is less intrusive. Plus all those fat blokes that play it are glad of the rest. ;-)
Perhaps the answer is to trial it in a less high profile environment to work out how to make it slicker.
-
Personally I would only use VAR for offsides. It is an impossible rule for Referee Assistants to be able to check the line of defence and when the ball is kicked. At best this can only be done with peripheral vision so will always have an element of human error.
Like a few of us here I have refereed and run the line at junior matches and it is a thankless job, I would like to think that all referees in the British game oversee the games fairly and although every team will have decisions against them it tends to even out over the season.
-
It's a no from me. Sanitises the game and pretty much takes away all the talking points/post match pub debates.
-
I would like the VAR people to be responsible for the decision rather than kicking it back to the ref. If you are going to use it to evidence a foul, a penalty, offside or whatever then they should tell the ref the decision rather than "have a look on the telly by the pitch" for a week.
-
The strangulated celebration will become a hallmark of the game in the years to come, no more "limbs" and "scenes" as the realisation that the goal might be ruled out after a certain time. Once it is given that magic moment has gone, it's just beyond awful. The whole game revolves around that moment of unbridled joy, overwhelming emotion, an eruption of relief and celebration and it has been reduced to a calm, dispassionate reading of events leading to a precise outcome that may be correct but is utterly joyless. Stripping the game of that emotion is stripping the game of it's very soul, it's why we watch and take part, the unpredictable rollercoaster will have it's dips flattened out and it's peaks reduced. The sense of injustice that fires both fans and players and indeed managers to go that extra yard, to sing that bit more loudly, to bear a grudge for 20 years, to foster an irrational hatred of a previously benign opponent will be removed and replaced by a perfectly reasoned and scientifically proven decision so we can all sleep easy at night. Not the sleep of the disturbed and angry, vengeful supporter who will claim forevermore that that ref denied their team untold glory due to a dubious offside in a 3rd round cup tie.
Offer me VAR, Vidic being sent off and a League Cup win and I would turn you down.
VAR will not go away but I predict that the "appeals" system will be introduced to avoid disruption to the game, the likes of which we've seen in this Summers World Cup and we can then return to that primeval roar of delight when the ball hits the back of the net and more often than not wave goodbye to "hang on lads, we need to wait for VAR"
-
Does contact constitute a foul? Of course it doesn’t.
Looking back at the penalty incident from the other night, it took multiple camera views played over and over again at various speeds to determine that there was the slightest brush against the England attacker from the defender. The England player was already going down and I don’t believe the touch was enough to deny her a goal scoring chance.
But, that’s my opinion. VAR didn’t PROVE that there was a foul, it was interpreted as such.
Applying that principle, If VAR had been used at Wembley, you could guarantee that McGinn’s goal would have been looked at, and if one of the 10 camera angles showed that he brushed the goalie in any way, that goal would not have stood.
-
I said penalty in real time.
-
The strangulated celebration will become a hallmark of the game in the years to come, no more "limbs" and "scenes" as the realisation that the goal might be ruled out after a certain time. Once it is given that magic moment has gone, it's just beyond awful. The whole game revolves around that moment of unbridled joy, overwhelming emotion, an eruption of relief and celebration and it has been reduced to a calm, dispassionate reading of events leading to a precise outcome that may be correct but is utterly joyless. Stripping the game of that emotion is stripping the game of it's very soul, it's why we watch and take part, the unpredictable rollercoaster will have it's dips flattened out and it's peaks reduced. The sense of injustice that fires both fans and players and indeed managers to go that extra yard, to sing that bit more loudly, to bear a grudge for 20 years, to foster an irrational hatred of a previously benign opponent will be removed and replaced by a perfectly reasoned and scientifically proven decision so we can all sleep easy at night. Not the sleep of the disturbed and angry, vengeful supporter who will claim forevermore that that ref denied their team untold glory due to a dubious offside in a 3rd round cup tie.
Offer me VAR, Vidic being sent off and a League Cup win and I would turn you down.
VAR will not go away but I predict that the "appeals" system will be introduced to avoid disruption to the game, the likes of which we've seen in this Summers World Cup and we can then return to that primeval roar of delight when the ball hits the back of the net and more often than not wave goodbye to "hang on lads, we need to wait for VAR"
You'd rather scrap a first-pass at a piece of technology for which the game has been crying out for years than see Villa win a trophy? Baffling.
-
We assume VAR would see Vidic sent off. It didn't get the American sent off in the World Cup semi did it?
-
Apart from being used badly I think it highlights some problems with the laws of the game and their interpretation by humans. The offside law, as others have said, should be onside if any part of the body is onside, not the reverse. It favour the attacking team and would result in more goals, and is probably easier to spot. Apparently, so I've read, Linesmen have been told not to flag for offside and let it go to VAR if there's any doubt. If true then that's utterly ridiculous, I mean, what the fuck are they there for if not offside decisions?
The other issue is diving - you'd hope it would be eradicated by VAR but I can actually see the opposite happening. Some officials these days seem to see any contact as a foul so the merest touch is going to result in penalties. Slow motion replays often make contact look a lot worse than it was. VAR is not going to eradicate bad human decisions unfortunately.
The only way is to limit it to appeals by each team, one or two per game max, if marginal let the referee's decision stand like in cricket. Then it would work I reckon.
-
The strangulated celebration will become a hallmark of the game in the years to come, no more "limbs" and "scenes" as the realisation that the goal might be ruled out after a certain time. Once it is given that magic moment has gone, it's just beyond awful. The whole game revolves around that moment of unbridled joy, overwhelming emotion, an eruption of relief and celebration and it has been reduced to a calm, dispassionate reading of events leading to a precise outcome that may be correct but is utterly joyless. Stripping the game of that emotion is stripping the game of it's very soul, it's why we watch and take part, the unpredictable rollercoaster will have it's dips flattened out and it's peaks reduced. The sense of injustice that fires both fans and players and indeed managers to go that extra yard, to sing that bit more loudly, to bear a grudge for 20 years, to foster an irrational hatred of a previously benign opponent will be removed and replaced by a perfectly reasoned and scientifically proven decision so we can all sleep easy at night. Not the sleep of the disturbed and angry, vengeful supporter who will claim forevermore that that ref denied their team untold glory due to a dubious offside in a 3rd round cup tie.
Offer me VAR, Vidic being sent off and a League Cup win and I would turn you down.
VAR will not go away but I predict that the "appeals" system will be introduced to avoid disruption to the game, the likes of which we've seen in this Summers World Cup and we can then return to that primeval roar of delight when the ball hits the back of the net and more often than not wave goodbye to "hang on lads, we need to wait for VAR"
You'd rather scrap a first-pass at a piece of technology for which the game has been crying out for years than see Villa win a trophy? Baffling.
The game hasn't been crying out for it. There are a lot of things football needs before this.
-
Spot on there Nev, agree 100%. I don't think the game has been crying out for technology for years as some say. Football's been going for a few year now and has managed to attract one or two people to pop along. I don't think anyone's ever stopped going to the game because of a dodgy goal being given against them. Some might though if all we're going to see for 90 minutes is players drawing imaginary squares in the air, which is what will happen.
-
Is there a sitting on the fence option? Half of it is ideal, the other half is a load of bollocks.
Dave you need VAR to help you?
-
The strangulated celebration will become a hallmark of the game in the years to come, no more "limbs" and "scenes" as the realisation that the goal might be ruled out after a certain time. Once it is given that magic moment has gone, it's just beyond awful. The whole game revolves around that moment of unbridled joy, overwhelming emotion, an eruption of relief and celebration and it has been reduced to a calm, dispassionate reading of events leading to a precise outcome that may be correct but is utterly joyless. Stripping the game of that emotion is stripping the game of it's very soul, it's why we watch and take part, the unpredictable rollercoaster will have it's dips flattened out and it's peaks reduced. The sense of injustice that fires both fans and players and indeed managers to go that extra yard, to sing that bit more loudly, to bear a grudge for 20 years, to foster an irrational hatred of a previously benign opponent will be removed and replaced by a perfectly reasoned and scientifically proven decision so we can all sleep easy at night. Not the sleep of the disturbed and angry, vengeful supporter who will claim forevermore that that ref denied their team untold glory due to a dubious offside in a 3rd round cup tie.
Offer me VAR, Vidic being sent off and a League Cup win and I would turn you down.
VAR will not go away but I predict that the "appeals" system will be introduced to avoid disruption to the game, the likes of which we've seen in this Summers World Cup and we can then return to that primeval roar of delight when the ball hits the back of the net and more often than not wave goodbye to "hang on lads, we need to wait for VAR"
You'd rather scrap a first-pass at a piece of technology for which the game has been crying out for years than see Villa win a trophy? Baffling.
The game hasn't been crying out for it. There are a lot of things football needs before this.
Such as? Please elaborate. Bearing in mind this is your opinion, and some people - professionals and spectators alike - have actually been crying out for video technology for a long time now.
-
Don't like bin it. It's not fair either and football is a game of errors so leave it alone. Take offside decisions for example. If a goal is scored it's immediately checked for offside regardless of on pitch officials intervention. If it's offside it's disallowed. Fine, however if the Line Assistant wrongly flags a player offside the game is either stopped or effectively stopped even if the player goes on to convert. There is no VAR solution for that so by default it's unfair way to judge offside.
-
Such as? Please elaborate. Bearing in mind this is your opinion, and some people - professionals and spectators alike - have actually been crying out for video technology for a long time now.
Better redistribution of wealth, help for grassroots football, the farcical loans system, FFP, re-arranged fixtures and their inconvenience to supporters. Little details like that.
-
Such as? Please elaborate. Bearing in mind this is your opinion, and some people - professionals and spectators alike - have actually been crying out for video technology for a long time now.
Better redistribution of wealth, help for grassroots football, the farcical loans system, FFP, re-arranged fixtures and their inconvenience to supporters. Little details like that.
Just because those issues exist doesn't mean another problem, like the chronic mismanagement of games by pitch officials, shouldn't also be addressed by the use of video assistant. It's not a case of focusing on one thing to the detriment of others, holistic improvements can be made across the board in tandem with each other.
The Chelsea goals against Cardiff last season are a good example of why VAR is needed. I don't have any affinity to either club, but Cardiff should not by rights have lost that game, and when enough of those decisions go against you it means relegation. Hopefully VAR will mean that poor decisions are less of a contributing factor to Villa's fortunes in the PL.
-
The strangulated celebration will become a hallmark of the game in the years to come, no more "limbs" and "scenes" as the realisation that the goal might be ruled out after a certain time. Once it is given that magic moment has gone, it's just beyond awful. The whole game revolves around that moment of unbridled joy, overwhelming emotion, an eruption of relief and celebration and it has been reduced to a calm, dispassionate reading of events leading to a precise outcome that may be correct but is utterly joyless. Stripping the game of that emotion is stripping the game of it's very soul, it's why we watch and take part, the unpredictable rollercoaster will have it's dips flattened out and it's peaks reduced. The sense of injustice that fires both fans and players and indeed managers to go that extra yard, to sing that bit more loudly, to bear a grudge for 20 years, to foster an irrational hatred of a previously benign opponent will be removed and replaced by a perfectly reasoned and scientifically proven decision so we can all sleep easy at night. Not the sleep of the disturbed and angry, vengeful supporter who will claim forevermore that that ref denied their team untold glory due to a dubious offside in a 3rd round cup tie.
Offer me VAR, Vidic being sent off and a League Cup win and I would turn you down.
VAR will not go away but I predict that the "appeals" system will be introduced to avoid disruption to the game, the likes of which we've seen in this Summers World Cup and we can then return to that primeval roar of delight when the ball hits the back of the net and more often than not wave goodbye to "hang on lads, we need to wait for VAR"
You'd rather scrap a first-pass at a piece of technology for which the game has been crying out for years than see Villa win a trophy? Baffling.
If the game carries on in this fashion I won't want to watch it, or Villa. My point is that the emotion and soul of the game are being eroded. In order for the team I follow to prosper the game must be healthy, no game, no Villa.
And "the game" hasn't been crying out for it for years, certain followers have, lead by the media and juvenile managers who cast the blame everywhere else to cover up their own deficiencies. There was/is nothing wrong with the game, good teams win, bad ones lose, officials, like players and managers make mistakes.
-
I agree 100% with Nev.
-
Personally I would only use VAR for offsides. It is an impossible rule for Referee Assistants to be able to check the line of defence and when the ball is kicked. At best this can only be done with peripheral vision so will always have an element of human error.
Like a few of us here I have refereed and run the line at junior matches and it is a thankless job, I would like to think that all referees in the British game oversee the games fairly and although every team will have decisions against them it tends to even out over the season.
This is one of football's great cliches. What if it's a 'six pointer' game and the wrong decision is given meaning the '6 points' go one way relegating the wronged team? I prefer the other cliche...the bigger clubs get the favourable decisions. And they do. VAR might address or should address that.
I too have reffed and run the line in my time, it adds little to the debate though because we are talking about a far higher level where much money is involved on the outcome, jobs could be involved on the outcome too.
-
Such as? Please elaborate. Bearing in mind this is your opinion, and some people - professionals and spectators alike - have actually been crying out for video technology for a long time now.
Better redistribution of wealth, help for grassroots football, the farcical loans system, FFP, re-arranged fixtures and their inconvenience to supporters. Little details like that.
Just because those issues exist doesn't mean another problem, like the chronic mismanagement of games by pitch officials, shouldn't also be addressed by the use of video assistant. It's not a case of focusing on one thing to the detriment of others, holistic improvements can be made across the board in tandem with each other.
The Chelsea goals against Cardiff last season are a good example of why VAR is needed. I don't have any affinity to either club, but Cardiff should not by rights have lost that game, and when enough of those decisions go against you it means relegation. Hopefully VAR will mean that poor decisions are less of a contributing factor to Villa's fortunes in the PL.
65% of those who have voted on this poll obviously don't see it as a problem. As you said earlier, you have your opinion.
-
Personally I would only use VAR for offsides. It is an impossible rule for Referee Assistants to be able to check the line of defence and when the ball is kicked. At best this can only be done with peripheral vision so will always have an element of human error.
Like a few of us here I have refereed and run the line at junior matches and it is a thankless job, I would like to think that all referees in the British game oversee the games fairly and although every team will have decisions against them it tends to even out over the season.
This is one of football's great cliches. What if it's a 'six pointer' game and the wrong decision is given meaning the '6 points' go one way relegating the wronged team? I prefer the other cliche...the bigger clubs get the favourable decisions. And they do. VAR might address or should address that.
I too have reffed and run the line in my time, it adds little to the debate though because we are talking about a far higher level where much money is involved on the outcome, jobs could be involved on the outcome too.
Well said that man.
-
I like the idea of goal line technology but thats about it.
-
Such as? Please elaborate. Bearing in mind this is your opinion, and some people - professionals and spectators alike - have actually been crying out for video technology for a long time now.
Better redistribution of wealth, help for grassroots football, the farcical loans system, FFP, re-arranged fixtures and their inconvenience to supporters. Little details like that.
Just because those issues exist doesn't mean another problem, like the chronic mismanagement of games by pitch officials, shouldn't also be addressed by the use of video assistant. It's not a case of focusing on one thing to the detriment of others, holistic improvements can be made across the board in tandem with each other.
The Chelsea goals against Cardiff last season are a good example of why VAR is needed. I don't have any affinity to either club, but Cardiff should not by rights have lost that game, and when enough of those decisions go against you it means relegation. Hopefully VAR will mean that poor decisions are less of a contributing factor to Villa's fortunes in the PL.
Cardiff got relegated because they were fuckin' shit, like every team does, like we did. They had 37 other games in which to put it right but didn't. Warnock is prime example of the kind of arsehole that championed VAR when a decision went against him but kept his bigoted gob shut when it went for him, like Wenger, Allardyce and all the others. Hypocrites of the highest order. And it's all if's but's and maybe's. We didn't lay a glove on Newton Heath in 2010 so there is no evidence to suggest that we would have run out winners against 10 men. People cite Lampards "goal" against Germany as an injustice, we were taken apart by a young dynamic German side so at best it would've made it 4-2.
-
The Offside rule is killing the game..
Players Diving is killing the game...
"You can't tackle anymore"...is killing the game
All these have been trotted out glibly over the distant years and recent years. You know what? The game has got even bigger. But now VAR will kill the game. Let's see, it isn't anywhere near perfect as yet as it takes far too long. I'm sure they will iron that out in time.
-
I'd also like to add that it's been far too nicy nice on here of late, we need a good debate where there are completely opposing opinions to stir it up.
-
I also agree with Nev and Mr Woodhall.
-
I like the idea of goal line technology but thats about it.
Yes. It's immediate and it's effective anything else is total bullocks.
-
Maybe the next step will be all games will be simulated via FIFA 20xx and there will be no need to actually play the physical game.
-
Anyone else thinking that it the decisions take any longer then how long before Sky drop in a quick commercial break?
That I feel is a bigger concern
-
I was all for it at first because of the ‘ correct decision ‘ thing
and in fairness you do get that most of the time
Im not too bothered about the time aspect either a minute or two is nothing to get it right most times ,
no more Rodriguez cheating hand ball goals would be good I thought
the thing I didn’t realise was it’s sucking the sheer joy out of the game
The goal celebration is probably one of the greatest experiences you ever have in your life,
it’s instant unifying chaos jumping around with people you don’t know and in that minute they are your closest friends in the world
and that won’t be the same, VAR threatens the joy, the energy, the uniqueness of the moment
so I’m not so sure about it anymore as it will change the way we watch the game for the worse
-
Those games would have been different though, going in at 2-2 after being 2 down could have meant the second half was very different. We may have lost 6-2 we have won 4-2, but the whole mindset with the English and German players would have been different at 2-2 with the Germans blowing a 2-0 lead.
Vidic goes then either Owen or Berbatov are subbed or at least moved position, considering they were both involved in the equaliser then again the whole game would have been different.
It's as big a nonsense to say those decisions made no difference as it is to say that Villa/England would definitely have won those games if the correct decisions had been made as we'll never know, what does seem obvious though is that both games would have been different from those moments on. All imo of course.
The game has been evolving since it began, if it didn't offside would still be 3 defenders between the forward and goal, there'd be no linesman, football nets, added time or subs and so on. This is latest and it will be a bit shit if they can't improve on it, but if they do it could be alright.
-
the thing I didn’t realise was it’s sucking the sheer joy out of the game
The goal celebration is probably one of the greatest experiences you ever have in your life,
it’s instant unifying chaos jumping around with people you don’t know and in that minute they are your closest friends in the world
and that won’t be the same, VAR threatens the joy, the energy, the uniqueness of the moment
so I’m not so sure about it anymore as it will change the way we watch the game for the worse
I'd imagine/hope that most goals will be the same as they were as there'll be nothing to even consider reviewing, be interesting to know what percentage of goals at the WWC have stood with no delay to give us an idea if it is going to be shit like that on a regular basis.
-
I'd be fine with it if the guidelines were changed so that the VAR people could only use real time replays, this way only the clear and obvious errors would be flagged up. The use of slow motion is the most damaging as it distorts judgement of the game (particularly for handballs)
So the powers that be have rectified this by.....changing the handball laws to make the whole thing into a guaranteed farce
-
Such as? Please elaborate. Bearing in mind this is your opinion, and some people - professionals and spectators alike - have actually been crying out for video technology for a long time now.
Better redistribution of wealth, help for grassroots football, the farcical loans system, FFP, re-arranged fixtures and their inconvenience to supporters. Little details like that.
Just because those issues exist doesn't mean another problem, like the chronic mismanagement of games by pitch officials, shouldn't also be addressed by the use of video assistant. It's not a case of focusing on one thing to the detriment of others, holistic improvements can be made across the board in tandem with each other.
The Chelsea goals against Cardiff last season are a good example of why VAR is needed. I don't have any affinity to either club, but Cardiff should not by rights have lost that game, and when enough of those decisions go against you it means relegation. Hopefully VAR will mean that poor decisions are less of a contributing factor to Villa's fortunes in the PL.
65% of those who have voted on this poll obviously don't see it as a problem. As you said earlier, you have your opinion.
Well it may not be that they don't see it as a problem, just that they don't like the solution, or perhaps the way the solution is being implemented. A lot of the tweaks suggested on here and by many others are not only common sense, but would allow VAR to correct glaring errors without disrupting the flow of the game or detracting from the spontaneous excitement of goals too much. It's the incompetence of the implementation that is making a mockery of it. But then I'd expect nothing less of FIFA, UEFA et al.
-
I'd be fine with it if the guidelines were changed so that the VAR people could only use real time replays, this way only the clear and obvious errors would be flagged up. The use of slow motion is the most damaging as it distorts judgement of the game (particularly for handballs)
So the powers that be have rectified this by.....changing the handball laws to make the whole thing into a guaranteed farce
Yes, another good suggestion.
-
I'm all for it. Improvements to its implementation will come soon enough.
-
I am so for it - but I think the way it has been implemented in the WC/CL and in England is almost done in a way to make it binned - everything goes to VAR - that wasn't supposed to be the case.
For crossing lines, offside it is "factual" - but for fouls and goals, it has to be clear and obvious error - which it isn't how it is being used.
When I used to see it in the Bundesliga - never was an issue. E.g. a handball in the box, and the ref might wave away VAR option, as he has maybe seen it and assessed it as no foul - then it doesn't go to VAR. The same with fouls in build up to goal (I think you can argue for a foul for every goal scored from a corner).
-
I don't like the idea of the game being officiated by someone not there. But I'd be kind of okay with the referee getting a second look if they or their assistants think there might have been something specific happen in a specific incident they're not 100% certain of, something they've already nailed down with the goal line thing. Was it controlled with an arm? Was there a tug back? Was it offside? Was the player taken first or after? We all know the sort of thing. Isn't that how it happens in rugby, the ref asks the question, rather than being told?
-
Where possible, how can Villa turn VAR to their advantage? You can guarantee teams like Liverpool and Manchester United etc will be scrutinising VAR through a microscope and training their players/management to make the most of it. Afterall, VAR will be very important for deciding the outcome of many games next season.
Should Villa set up its own fully equipped 'video assistance' room with a hotline to the bench.
Should we establish 'a line of communication' to our players to get in the referees ear (when appropriate) and as soon as possible. Speed will be of essence.
Should we train our players to fall in the box when defending any set piece. Preferably, a player who has no chance of getting the ball. We can then query any goal that is conceded.
I am sure there are lots of other things that teams will do to try and turn VAR to their advantage. The most 'streetwise' teams often end up nearer the top of the league!!
-
Where possible, how can Villa turn VAR to their advantage? You can guarantee teams like Liverpool and Manchester United etc will be scrutinising VAR through a microscope and training their players/management to make the most of it. Afterall, VAR will be very important for deciding the outcome of many games next season.
Should Villa set up its own fully equipped 'video assistance' room with a hotline to the bench.
Should we establish 'a line of communication' to our players to get in the referees ear (when appropriate) and as soon as possible. Speed will be of essence.
Should we train our players to fall in the box when defending any set piece. Preferably, a player who has no chance of getting the ball. We can then query any goal that is conceded.
I am sure there are lots of other things that teams will do to try and turn VAR to their advantage. The most 'streetwise' teams often end up nearer the top of the league!!
Eh?
I thought all goals were subject to VAR scrutiny already?
-
How are they going to stop teams, crowding the ref, stoping the game on purpose by feigning injury to get a VAR replay?
How are they going to stop the refs abdicating responsibility to VAR?
The new interpretation of handball is ridiculous.
-
I don't like the idea of the game being officiated by someone not there. But I'd be kind of okay with the referee getting a second look if they or their assistants think there might have been something specific happen in a specific incident they're not 100% certain of, something they've already nailed down with the goal line thing. Was it controlled with an arm? Was there a tug back? Was it offside? Was the player taken first or after? We all know the sort of thing. Isn't that how it happens in rugby, the ref asks the question, rather than being told?
In rugby the ref can ask specific questions - such as "is there any reason why I can't award this try" or "Try or no try" The wording makes a difference - with the former the assumption is that it's a try and there needs to be positive evidence to disallow it. With the latter it's all down to the video ref.
BUT, the video ref can also draw the refs attention to other incidents during play, foul play, forward pass etc. You may think this sound like interfering, but it's only an extension of what the touch judges do anyway. I appreciate this would be harder in football because it's a faster game.
To be honest it works absolutely brilliantly. There is still controversy and some decisions still get called into question, but coupled with the extremely high level of refereeing and the natural respect of players towards officials in rugby, it just works and has improved the game enormously in my view.
I get the impression FIFA just wanted to row their own boat with their own system from day one. I do wonder if they ever conferred with world rugby about the merits and difficulties they face when developing their systems. They may have done, but I suspect not.
I still think it can be made to work. Rome wasn't built in a day.
-
I don't like the idea of the game being officiated by someone not there. But I'd be kind of okay with the referee getting a second look if they or their assistants think there might have been something specific happen in a specific incident they're not 100% certain of, something they've already nailed down with the goal line thing. Was it controlled with an arm? Was there a tug back? Was it offside? Was the player taken first or after? We all know the sort of thing. Isn't that how it happens in rugby, the ref asks the question, rather than being told?
In rugby the ref can ask specific questions - such as "is there any reason why I can't award this try" or "Try or no try" The wording makes a difference - with the former the assumption is that it's a try and there needs to be positive evidence to disallow it. With the latter it's all down to the video ref.
BUT, the video ref can also draw the refs attention to other incidents during play, foul play, forward pass etc. You may think this sound like interfering, but it's only an extension of what the touch judges do anyway. I appreciate this would be harder in football because it's a faster game.
To be honest it works absolutely brilliantly. There is still controversy and some decisions still get called into question, but coupled with the extremely high level of refereeing and the natural respect of players towards officials in rugby, it just works and has improved the game enormously in my view.
I get the impression FIFA just wanted to row their own boat with their own system from day one. I do wonder if they ever conferred with world rugby about the merits and difficulties they face when developing their systems. They may have done, but I suspect not.
I still think it can be made to work. Rome wasn't built in a day.
Agree with every word of this. TMO is used brilliantly in my opinion and while VAR might not be up to scratch yet, the need for it is (and always has been) clear as far as I'm concerned, and with tweaking and natural evolution it will end up being less intrusive.
-
I still think it can be made to work. Rome wasn't built in a day.
And what happens to all the games, people and clubs damaged by the shit-show currently in place until they get there?
Not a direct repost to you just a convenient point at which to make it :)
I think they should take the results they've got so far and treat them as an experiment, remove VAR worldwide, go into a dark room and work out what needs to happen when it's implemented next time so it only delivers benefits not problems of any sort. That's not too much to ask because at the moment the damage far outweighs the benefit. Get it right THEN implement it.
-
I still think it can be made to work. Rome wasn't built in a day.
And what happens to all the games, people and clubs damaged by the shit-show currently in place until they get there?
Not a direct repost to you just a convenient point at which to make it :)
I think they should take the results they've got so far and treat them as an experiment, remove VAR worldwide, go into a dark room and work out what needs to happen when it's implemented next time so it only delivers benefits not problems of any sort. That's not too much to ask because at the moment the damage far outweighs the benefit. Get it right THEN implement it.
Agree, hence my questions above.
They can take the WW Cup as evidence.
-
Where possible, how can Villa turn VAR to their advantage? You can guarantee teams like Liverpool and Manchester United etc will be scrutinising VAR through a microscope and training their players/management to make the most of it. Afterall, VAR will be very important for deciding the outcome of many games next season.
Should Villa set up its own fully equipped 'video assistance' room with a hotline to the bench.
Should we establish 'a line of communication' to our players to get in the referees ear (when appropriate) and as soon as possible. Speed will be of essence.
Should we train our players to fall in the box when defending any set piece. Preferably, a player who has no chance of getting the ball. We can then query any goal that is conceded.
I am sure there are lots of other things that teams will do to try and turn VAR to their advantage. The most 'streetwise' teams often end up nearer the top of the league!!
I’ve mentioned this previously in the thread but I fully expect teams like Man Utd, Citeh and Liverpool to exploit and take advantage of minimal contact in the box. A new breed of VAR simulated diving is literally on the horizon, and VAR will justify decisions in their favour.
-
Are people now saying that something which was called for to help eradicate diving will, in fact, encourage and legitimise it?
-
I’m not sure if it’s people or just me predicting the future. If you use the England penalty the other night as an example and replace White with Sterling, Aguero or Salah, then I foresee players going down under the slightest of touches, calling for VAR and penalties being awarded. VAR to this extent has only been used in the WWC so just imagine how bad it could get when professional males get the chance to exploit it. I hope I’m proved wrong, but under the current rules and VAR implementation, this is what we can look forward to.
-
Are people now saying that something which was called for to help eradicate diving will, in fact, encourage and legitimise it?
Yep, any contact will be a penalty.
-
Are people now saying that something which was called for to help eradicate diving will, in fact, encourage and legitimise it?
Yep, any contact will be a penalty.
Not really. A foul will still be a foul. A dive will still be a dive. If anything, VAR will allow officials to tell the difference between well-trained/practiced simulation and genuine contact leading to a foul.
Implying that the denial of a goalscoring opportunity in the box could ever NOT be a penalty is just contrary to the rules of the game, full stop. That's not new.
-
Are people now saying that something which was called for to help eradicate diving will, in fact, encourage and legitimise it?
Yep, any contact will be a penalty.
People will be crying every 5 minutes for VAR and as we saw at the Women’s World Cup with England’s penalty which should never have been given.
-
Although I have been a proponent of refs being supported better with technology, I have concerns with the current VAR Approach:
(i) it has turned offside into a science of the minutiae. Refs have long been advised to give strikers the benefit of the doubt on offsides - this has effectively now been reversed and will create massive frustration in football grounds.
(ii) 'minor offences' in the box punished by refs may lead to them seeking to 'balance things up' during the course of a game; not a great basis for refereeing, in my opinion.
(iii) will VAR discourage diving or simulation (a scourge on the game)? - probably not unless it's in the penalty area.
(iv) the use of a pitchside screen for refs extends the time-out required for decisions to be made: I think on-pitch refs should be guided by the VAR without the need to be assured, themselves, by having seen it.
(v) the role of linesman / asst ref has almost become redundant: they now no longer appear to have any other role than ins and outs and the occasional offside. I believe that if you have linesmen they should be more active in guiding refereeing decisions.
I hope that the use of VAR is further developed to become a little more subtle, and that it does not make the role of ref any more 'melodramatic' (some refs do not need much encouragement to become centre of attention - e.g. Phil Fucking Dowd).
-
A lot of valid points well made there Mr E but, I have to take issue with point (ii). Referee's 'balancing things up' is a total myth. Having been there, done that so to speak never once did it occur to me to do that, why would I? I've given a decision be it right or wrong and then never dwelt in it.
I was in the game a long time, and over that time spoke to many referee's and this topic came up from time to time and to a man/woman not one agreed that it was a regular occurrence in the game. It is understandable that it could look like that but as I say, in my opinion and that of many others, it's a myth.
A referee that does that would soon be found out and deemed incompetent and God knows we've enough to be deemed incompetent for without being afraid of what players and club officials may think of us.
Many years ago when I first attended the Referee's Coaching Course, it was emphasised very strongly that having made a decision you don't change it unless informed otherwise by an officially appointed linesman (who would be a qualified referee) and even then you would have the power to ignore that information should you choose to do so.
I still can't decide whether I like VAR or not. One thing for sure, no matter what I, or any of us think, it's here to stay.
-
A lot of valid points well made there Mr E but, I have to take issue with point (ii). Referee's 'balancing things up' is a total myth. Having been there, done that so to speak never once did it occur to me to do that, why would I? I've given a decision be it right or wrong and then never dwelt in it.
I was in the game a long time, and over that time spoke to many referee's and this topic came up from time to time and to a man/woman not one agreed that it was a regular occurrence in the game. It is understandable that it could look like that but as I say, in my opinion and that of many others, it's a myth.
A referee that does that would soon be found out and deemed incompetent and God knows we've enough to be deemed incompetent for without being afraid of what players and club officials may think of us.
Many years ago when I first attended the Referee's Coaching Course, it was emphasised very strongly that having made a decision you don't change it unless informed otherwise by an officially appointed linesman (who would be a qualified referee) and even then you would have the power to ignore that information should you choose to do so.
I still can't decide whether I like VAR or not. One thing for sure, no matter what I, or any of us think, it's here to stay.
Agree great post Mr E. Dave thanks for the insight and totally agree with your last paragraph. Hopefully VAR usage improves sooner rather than later
-
A lot of valid points well made there Mr E but, I have to take issue with point (ii). Referee's 'balancing things up' is a total myth. Having been there, done that so to speak never once did it occur to me to do that, why would I? I've given a decision be it right or wrong and then never dwelt in it.
I was in the game a long time, and over that time spoke to many referee's and this topic came up from time to time and to a man/woman not one agreed that it was a regular occurrence in the game. It is understandable that it could look like that but as I say, in my opinion and that of many others, it's a myth.
A referee that does that would soon be found out and deemed incompetent and God knows we've enough to be deemed incompetent for without being afraid of what players and club officials may think of us.
Many years ago when I first attended the Referee's Coaching Course, it was emphasised very strongly that having made a decision you don't change it unless informed otherwise by an officially appointed linesman (who would be a qualified referee) and even then you would have the power to ignore that information should you choose to do so.
I still can't decide whether I like VAR or not. One thing for sure, no matter what I, or any of us think, it's here to stay.
As a fellow ref (but probably not to such a level as you got to, I suspect, from your many postings) I'd agree that refs do not try to 'balance things up' as a rule. Maybe I overstated that point, although I think that refs do come under considerable psychological pressure to be seen to be fair to each team and this may sometimes translate into balancing up.
Although I have some misgivings about VAR's use in the women's World Cup, we certainly live in interesting times and I'm looking forward to the debate.
-
We'll have to get together sometime Mr E and put the footballing world to rights.
-
Refs don’t know they when they even things up. It’s unconscious bias
-
Are people now saying that something which was called for to help eradicate diving will, in fact, encourage and legitimise it?
Yep, any contact will be a penalty.
Not really. A foul will still be a foul. A dive will still be a dive.
The fundamental things apply
As time goes by
-
Refs don’t know they when they even things up. It’s subconscious bias
Bollocks.
-
Another good game getting ruined by VAR. Yay.
-
It’s getting to the point where I don’t even enjoy a goal the same way because there seems to be a 50/50 chance of it getting annulled after a tedious VAR delay.
That handball was bullshit. In super slow mo everything looks deliberate but if you’re jostling with a defender with your arms at your side and the ball richochets off the top half of your arm it’s debatable at best.
-
Another England goal disallowed by an alleged handball by White as she controlled the ball and was being challenged by a Swedish defender. The camera angles available were unable to show if it was clearly or definitely handball, however the ref decided to disallow it even though the footage does not prove beyond doubt that it was handball.
The poor camera angles and zoom available is another flaw in the VAR system, and I don't believe they can be entirely accurate particularly "from when the ball was played" for offsides for this very reason (a single frame backwards or forwards for the ball leaving the foot can make the difference between onside or offside). For offsides too, there also seems to be inconsistency over which part of the body makes a player offside...the other day it was Whites elbow that was offside against the USA players foot.
-
That handball was bullshit. In super slow mo everything looks deliberate but if you’re jostling with a defender with your arms at your side and the ball richochets off the top half of your arm it’s debatable at best.
The new handball rules are to blame for that not VAR, however you can blame VAR for the footage being inconclusive whether it touched her hand or not and the benefit of the doubt went against the attacking team as per offside decisions.
-
Its a good point. VAR itself isn’t the issue (although the interminable delays aren’t great), so much as the fact that by trying to impose 100% accuracy it’s highlighting flaws and ambiguities in the rules themselves.
-
I've said it several times before and I will say it again...you can't implement a technology based system whilst using old rules. The rules of the game need to be updated and adapted in line with the implementation of new technology.
-
I don't think the replay footage should be slowed down. They can either see something or they can't. They've the benefit of different angles, and rewatching any number of times. Slow-mo and boomeranging makes anybody doing anything look guilty.
-
I don't think the replay footage should be slowed down. They can either see something or they can't. They've the benefit of different angles, and rewatching any number of times. Slow-mo and boomeranging makes anybody doing anything look guilty.
Which is a problem that video-reffing in Rugby suffers from, in my opinion.
-
Refs don’t know they when they even things up. It’s subconscious bias
Bollocks.
Debating badge awarded 😉
-
It's all down to the refs. All VAR does is provide information. Sometimes the info is clear, sometimes it's unclear. What happens next is the ref's decision. And as we all know the quality of reffing is variable to say the least. Seems to me at the moment that too many of them are relying too much on unclear information.
-
Yes, apologies. I meant to write utter bollocks!
-
I don't think the replay footage should be slowed down. They can either see something or they can't. They've the benefit of different angles, and rewatching any number of times. Slow-mo and boomeranging makes anybody doing anything look guilty.
Absolutely agree with this. The players actions are committed at full speed so any decisions should be based on replays at full speed too with as many camera angles as available. Sure there will be purists saying that we have the technology so we should use it, but leave the slow motion replays for the tv pundits to discuss and debate after the game.
-
I don't think the replay footage should be slowed down. They can either see something or they can't. They've the benefit of different angles, and rewatching any number of times. Slow-mo and boomeranging makes anybody doing anything look guilty.
Absolutely agree with this. The players actions are committed at full speed so any decisions should be based on replays at full speed too with as many camera angles as available. Sure there will be purists saying that we have the technology so we should use it, but leave the slow motion replays for the tv pundits to discuss and debate after the game.
How will that increase the number of correct decisions?
-
I couldn't give a shit about achieving the correct decision being the be all and end all, if I'm honest.
-
I’m not convinced that slow motion replays result in the correct decision. As many ppl have said previously, slow motion replays can make incidents appear to be intentional or much worse than they are. This also has a crossover into the minimal contact debate that will no doubt see many players going down and penalties awarded for incidents which would not have done so previously without VAR in slow motion.
-
I’m not convinced that slow motion replays result in the correct decision. As many ppl have said previously, slow motion replays can make incidents appear to be intentional or much worse than they are. This also has a crossover into the minimal contact debate that will no doubt see many players going down and penalties awarded for incidents which would not have done so previously without VAR in slow motion.
Yeah but you could equally say that in real time a lot gets missed. And players already go down like flies for non-existent things.
-
I don't like VAR, one point is I think it makes the linemen either lazy, or takes responsibility away from that they should have. Will they be removed to be replaced by a computer soon?
The game will become sterile, as every decision is over anaysised.
And as for the new handball rule.....
Either way the genie is out of the bottle.
Anyway we overheard a boy and a girl play football, and one said 'we need to look at VAR...' ::)
-
I don't think the replay footage should be slowed down. They can either see something or they can't. They've the benefit of different angles, and rewatching any number of times. Slow-mo and boomeranging makes anybody doing anything look guilty.
Which is a problem that video-reffing in Rugby suffers from, in my opinion.
This is true. On the other hand the standard of officiating in rugby is a gazillion times better, the rules are clearer and technology has been embraced far earlier, and integrated better, which is probably the decisive factor.
-
Another England goal disallowed by an alleged handball by White as she controlled the ball and was being challenged by a Swedish defender. The camera angles available were unable to show if it was clearly or definitely handball, however the ref decided to disallow it even though the footage does not prove beyond doubt that it was handball.
The poor camera angles and zoom available is another flaw in the VAR system, and I don't believe they can be entirely accurate particularly "from when the ball was played" for offsides for this very reason (a single frame backwards or forwards for the ball leaving the foot can make the difference between onside or offside). For offsides too, there also seems to be inconsistency over which part of the body makes a player offside...the other day it was Whites elbow that was offside against the USA players foot.
Second paragraph is very good point. Argentina-Chile yesterday, Chile were (correctly) awarded penalty but one of main angles ref had to decide from whether foul was in or out of the area was long range camera shot from top of main stand.
If people remember the Liverpool-WBA game a couple of years back I remember the ref going to the replay booth and assumed he'd have some super slow closed ups, instead he was having to decide on a penalty from a camera angle that was seemingly perched on top of Liverpool's main stand which is miles up.
Don't understand with 20-30 cameras in stadium showing the game there isn't better available especially as you get these spider cameras above the play now.
It will certainly be odd for the first one at VP next season. Us scoring, thinking "he looks half a yard offside there", celebrating and then as the players run back the ref puts his hand to his ear...
-
There you have it, the penalty for the US, all VAR had to establish was contact and the penalty was awarded.
-
Was a clear foul, should've been spotted straight away.
-
This is the point, if you say any contact in the penalty area is a clear foul then you have changed the game.
-
It was a penalty. Defenders are going to have to adapt.
-
This is where I have a problem.
When players go for the ball and neither has control is this a penalty? ( previous applications of the law were different)
Can we be sure that Morgan did nothing to initiate contact?
Did Morgan make the most of the contact? Again, before if she does not throw herself to the floor nothing would have been given.
I don’t see this and similar incidents once you bring in slow motion analysis as clear.
They have now changed the response to both handball and contact in the penalty area.
These are massive changes and we have not even began to deal with player and match official behavior.
I am actually in favour in using technology to improve accuracy but I do not think they are not even close to understanding how to do this without fucking up the game.
-
I just saw it as high foot and dangerous play and she dosen't make any contact with the ball.
In the old days I'm pretty sure indirect free kicks used to get awarded for high foots or obstructions in penalty area but that changed a while ago.
-
This is the point, if you say any contact in the penalty area is a clear foul then you have changed the game.
It’s a foul anywhere else on the pitch so it’s also a foul in the box. There is no argument. A reckless attempt at winning the ball, she should have known better.
-
Yeah don’t have a problem with that one, daft challenge.
-
I just saw it as high foot and dangerous play and she dosen't make any contact with the ball.
In the old days I'm pretty sure indirect free kicks used to get awarded for high foots or obstructions in penalty area but that changed a while ago.
Correct.
-
This is the point, if you say any contact in the penalty area is a clear foul then you have changed the game.
It’s a foul anywhere else on the pitch so it’s also a foul in the box. There is no argument. A reckless attempt at winning the ball, she should have known better.
Agreed. A foul is a foul and a pen is a pen. People really are overthinking this stuff.
-
Good to see Mike Riley saying that VAR won't be used in the same way as in the Women's World Cup and that some of the decisions made would've been different in the Prem.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/48903289
I'm not sure how that'll land with FIFA/UEFA given he's essentially saying we'll apply the laws differently in the UK but I think his interpretation of how VAR should be used is more sensible than how it seems to have been used in the WWC.
-
Thanks for posting that link. That article gives me hope and reassurance that common sense will rule when it comes to VAR and it won’t ruin the game.
-
http://www.bbc.com/sport/football/49057675
Why is it different for Man Utd and Liverpool??? Are they trying to gain an advantage already. Crafty feckers.
-
Can somebody explain the use of VAR in the Bournemouth game in respect to:
Offside, there were a couple of attacks when the ref stopped the game due to off side when we were through their defense. I thought they were supposed to play on just in case a goal is scored before double checking VAR.
Also their penalty call, which looked pretty much definitely a pen to me. Why wasn’t VAR used? It was for our penalty shout.
I just don’t get the inconsistency of it all. Which makes me wonder what the point of this technology is, if they pick and choose when to use it.
-
I'm sure any goal scoring opportunity or penalty shout can be reviewed if either the ref or the VAR officials feel that it should be. Their penalty was obvious, so unless the VAR team had spotted something in the build up that required a second look, then there was no need to review it. With offsides, it wouldn't be practical to just let play go on regardless of how obvious an offside was, there will have to be an element of discretion on that.
-
I'm sure any goal scoring opportunity or penalty shout can be reviewed if either the ref or the VAR officials feel that it should be. Their penalty was obvious, so unless the VAR team had spotted something in the build up that required a second look, then there was no need to review it. With offsides, it wouldn't be practical to just let play go on regardless of how obvious an offside was, there will have to be an element of discretion on that.
I meant their penalty shout in the second half, which looked a penalty all day to me in real time.
-
Ah, apologies. Yeah that looked like one to me too, so no idea on that score i'm afraid.
-
Ah, apologies. Yeah that looked like one to me too, so no idea on that score i'm afraid.
Glad they missed it mind, but the question has to be how could they have possibly missed it? Wonder if we will get our VAR celebrations on Friday. .... or VAR frustrations.
-
I think VAR was used for their penalty. Referee had his finger to his ear, and took a few seconds to give the penalty. I think it was just reviewed very quickly because it was an obvious call. I've been relatively impressed with how unobtrusive VAR has been in Villa's games so far.
-
I think VAR was used for their penalty. Referee had his finger to his ear, and took a few seconds to give the penalty. I think it was just reviewed very quickly because it was an obvious call. I've been relatively impressed with how unobtrusive VAR has been in Villa's games so far.
He seemed to give it straight away for me.
-
I think VAR was used for their penalty. Referee had his finger to his ear, and took a few seconds to give the penalty. I think it was just reviewed very quickly because it was an obvious call. I've been relatively impressed with how unobtrusive VAR has been in Villa's games so far.
He seemed to give it straight away for me.
On that one he took 2-5 seconds, it’s the second one which didn’t even get a VAR review that puzzled me.
-
I think VAR was used for their penalty. Referee had his finger to his ear, and took a few seconds to give the penalty. I think it was just reviewed very quickly because it was an obvious call. I've been relatively impressed with how unobtrusive VAR has been in Villa's games so far.
He seemed to give it straight away for me.
He might have done but was clearly listening to someone so could have reversed the decision had he been instructed to do so.
I think the thing that differs from the Women's World Cup is that if you're not seeing "VAR Review" appear on the video screen, it doesn't necessarily mean that a VAR review isn't taking place.
-
I hate the handball law changes.
-
I hate the handball law changes.
I think that it’s fair enough. An accidental handball gives you an advantage then it shouldn’t be a goal. Takes away any doubt and argument. Bloody frustrating if you’ve done your bounciest celebrations though.
-
If any reviews need to be made, they need to be made on the referees say so. Both the decisions in yesterday's man city/spurs game would've been different if it was down to the ref without VAR influence
-
If any reviews need to be made, they need to be made on the referees say so. Both the decisions in yesterday's man city/spurs game would've been different if it was down to the ref without VAR influence
But isn’t it in place to check the refs and linesman’s decisions. Rather than relying on their discretion?
-
What if the referee doesn't see something? Surely spotting incidents that referees miss is one of the main points of VAR?
-
If any reviews need to be made, they need to be made on the referees say so. Both the decisions in yesterday's man city/spurs game would've been different if it was down to the ref without VAR influence
But isn’t it in place to check the refs and linesman’s decisions. Rather than relying on their discretion?
Clear & obvious mistakes yes .
What we are seeing at the mo is VAR calling the decision & not the ref calling it, & him being corrected if he had got it wrong
-
If any reviews need to be made, they need to be made on the referees say so. Both the decisions in yesterday's man city/spurs game would've been different if it was down to the ref without VAR influence
But isn’t it in place to check the refs and linesman’s decisions. Rather than relying on their discretion?
Clear & obvious mistakes yes .
What we are seeing at the mo is VAR calling the decision & not the ref calling it, & him being corrected if he had got it wrong
But the ref made a clear and obvious mistake with Bournemouth’s second penalty shout IMO. Also he didn’t spot the accidental hand ball in the man City game. VAR is inconsistent which is not what it should be. It can’t be used at the behest of the ref it must be independent IMO.
-
If any reviews need to be made, they need to be made on the referees say so. Both the decisions in yesterday's man city/spurs game would've been different if it was down to the ref without VAR influence
But isn’t it in place to check the refs and linesman’s decisions. Rather than relying on their discretion?
Clear & obvious mistakes yes .
What we are seeing at the mo is VAR calling the decision & not the ref calling it, & him being corrected if he had got it wrong
But the ref made a clear and obvious mistake with Bournemouth’s second penalty shout IMO. Also he didn’t spot the accidental hand ball in the man City game. VAR is inconsistent which is not what it should be. It can’t be used at the behest of the ref it must be independent IMO.
I agree Man City could also have had a penalty yesterday it wasn't even looked at. From what I have seen so far it is inconsistent.
-
No way in a million years was that a clear & obvious hand ball in the city/spurs game & missed by the ref.
Yes it was handball when it was reviewed by VAR but in the spirit of the game there was absolutely need to review it
-
No way in a million years was that a clear & obvious hand ball in the city/spurs game & missed by the ref.
Yes it was handball when it was reviewed by VAR but in the spirit of the game there was absolutely need to review it
Every goal is reviewed to see if there is any reason not to give it.
I think spirit of the game has no place in modern football sadly.
-
The "spirit of the game" sounds like the kind of shit Tim Lovejoy would come out with.
-
Spirit doesn’t apply, it was an accidental handball that led to a goal. It’s the rules of the game, not VARs fault. It should be used behind the scenes for every penalty area incident IMO. It’s the inconsistency that’s a concern as it wasn’t used (no on score board notification or pause)for Bournemouth’s justifiable shout.
-
I can't recall a Bournemouth penalty claim, except for the one that was given?
-
I can't recall a Bournemouth penalty claim, except for the one that was given?
I think it was Trezeguet that clumsily bought down their striker, when he was facing away from goal. Typical forwards tackle and he went through the opponent to get to the ball. I believe it’s on the MOTD lowlights.
-
It was a penalty imo as Trez kicks his foot not the ball, no idea why it wasn't given unless they didn't review it or didn't see the one angle that showed it clearly, which kind of defeats of the whole point of it.
-
Trez literally tapped his foot and he fell over like he’d been shot. I was relieved it wasn’t given and would have been very harsh if it had.
-
VAR is just another abomination of the modern game - to go alongside Friday/Monday/Sunday fixtures, third kit releases, celebrity officials, immoral weekly wages, SKY TV, simulation/ diving, time wasting,semi finals at Wembley, biased punditry,
Etc
Yes I'm an old fart ............but at least I can recall the time when most games kicked off at 3pm on a Saturday, there was no "big six", ex players run boozers in their retirement, a replica kit could be bought from Harry Parkes at a reasonable cost, :)
I'll resist the jumpers for goalposts line ....
As some managers have already stated VAR is taking the spontaneity out of the game - I really don't like it
-
Rich, not necessarily big.
-
There was a big 5 in the 80s.
-
There was a big 5 in the 80s.
Was there? When I started watching football you knew the title was going to end up in Liverpool, just not which side of it.
-
There was a big 5 in the 80s.
Was there? When I started watching football you knew the title was going to end up in Liverpool, just not which side of it.
Liverpool, Everton, Man U, Arsenal, Spurs.
-
There was a big 5 in the 80s.
Was there? When I started watching football you knew the title was going to end up in Liverpool, just not which side of it.
Yes. Regularly mentioned from about the mid 80s onwards.
-
There was a big 5 in the 80s.
Was there? When I started watching football you knew the title was going to end up in Liverpool, just not which side of it.
Liverpool, Everton, Man U, Arsenal, Spurs.
With all due respect, one of those you've listed only got included when the debate got stretched to a big 6.
-
They really didn't, the big five of the 80s was talked about on a regular basis and it was those 5 clubs.
-
They really didn't, the big five of the 80s was talked about on a regular basis and it was those 5 clubs.
It was a TV thing to hype them up in the early days of talks about a breakaway league.
-
Was it bollocks! Liverpool, Everton, man u, Arsenal, Villa. There is absolutely no cocking way anybody on the planet in the eighties thought spurs were "bigger" than us. Even fucking spurs fans.
No. Cocking. Way.
-
There was a big 5 in the 80s.
Was there? When I started watching football you knew the title was going to end up in Liverpool, just not which side of it.
Liverpool, Everton, Man U, Arsenal, Spurs.
With all due respect, one of those you've listed only got included when the debate got stretched to a big 6.
Spurs!? .
Sure it was Villa aswell as the other 4 mentioned at the time
-
Apart from they were. It was all to do with a super league, and those 5 were the ones in meetings that led to the Premier League. As Dave says it was a media thing but to say it didn't exist is wrong.
-
There was a big 5 in the 80s.
Was there? When I started watching football you knew the title was going to end up in Liverpool, just not which side of it.
Liverpool, Everton, Man U, Arsenal, Spurs.
With all due respect, one of those you've listed only got included when the debate got stretched to a big 6.
With all due respect, that isn’t correct.
-
It was those 5, started around the time we were shit, we may even have been in division 2 at the time, can't remember exactly what year it started, was around the mid 80s though.
-
I would guess it was 1986/87, the season we went down and Clive Allen scored something like 49 goals and Spurs still won nothing after losing the FA Cup final. It would have been hilarious had we not gone down and the fact they lost that final to Coventry.
-
Do we need to go back to late 80s and review some footage in order to confirm the big 5?
-
Do we need to go back to late 80s and review some footage in order to confirm the big 5?
Who cares
-
Do we need to go back to late 80s and review some footage in order to confirm the big 5?
Some guys in a studio somewhere have already done it and the result will come up in the scoreboard any second now.
-
It was about 1985/86ish, and Spurs were in it based on finishing third once that decade.
-
Only use it when the studio refs spot something absolutely obvious and the on pitch referee doesn't see it, or if the on pitch referee asks for a review himself (or herself). Slows the game down and doesn't allow fans to know what's being said, like they do now in cricket on the big screen. It's of no use whatsoever when is comes to Billing kicking fuck out of Villa players and getting scot free away with it either.
-
The "Big Five" was a load of London-centric bollocks trying to pretend that no marks Tottenham were a big club and Villa weren't.
It did exist as a concept, though.
-
Not a fan.
I get that they want to get decisions right - especially with the money tied up in the game - but it makes games too stop start, and you almost cant celebrate a goal just in case someone's left testicle was offside.
Also the lack of consistency. We had a very strong penalty shouy last week not reviewed, but they looked at a "potential red card" for McGinn which was a total non-incident. It almost feels like they pick and choose which incidents to review just to suit them.
-
I don't think it has been very stop start so far. Much better than in the Women's World Cup where every ninety minute match seemed to last at least one hundred.
-
Not a fan.
I get that they want to get decisions right - especially with the money tied up in the game - but it makes games too stop start, and you almost cant celebrate a goal just in case someone's left testicle was offside.
Also the lack of consistency. We had a very strong penalty shouy last week not reviewed, but they looked at a "potential red card" for McGinn which was a total non-incident. It almost feels like they pick and choose which incidents to review just to suit them.
First bold bit this is the teething problems, once they're more used to it decision like the Gabriel Jesus one last week will go away, changing marginal decisions was never the point.
Second bold bit, it was reviewed, they decided no penalty, the commentators mentioned it at the time, the 'problem' was not going back far enough to see the blatant shirt pull just before it which would've been a free kick in a dangerous area.
-
If you start reviewing potential dangerous free kicks it will be much more stop start than it is now.
-
If you start reviewing potential dangerous free kicks it will be much more stop start than it is now.
I agree, that's why I said problem rather than mistake, I don't think they were wrong not to check it.
-
I've just seen the Man City 'goal' that was ruled out by VAR, and I'm not sure why there was so much fuss over the decision?
A Man City player went to head the cross, missed with his head, it then hit his arm which then changed the direction of the ball, allowing it to fall to another Man City player who then scored.
No goal = correct decision. Well done VAR.
-
I've just seen the Man City 'goal' that was ruled out by VAR, and I'm not sure why there was so much fuss over the decision?
A Man City player went to head the cross, missed with his head, it then hit his arm which then changed the direction of the ball, allowing it to fall to another Man City player who then scored.
No goal = correct decision. Well done VAR.
I think the argument around VAR is not that there's any opposition to getting the right result - it's hard to argue with that.
It's about the implementation - that example in the Man City match, for example, the delay between goal celebrations and VAR verdict was insanely long.
That evening, I'd looked at the score of that match, seen it was 2-2, and watching the highlights, the delay between goal and no-goal was so long, I actually started thinking maybe I'd misread the final score on Fotmob.
With the reason for the goal being ruled out, that's a whole other discussion, and due to a rule change this season. In this example, I think we've seen the two combine to create the perfect storm.
-
Its killing the game already. Football is aerobic which means its non stop or supposed to be, whilst Rugby or cricket where VAR is used successfully is anaerobic (stop and start) that's the difference and why it will never fit well in the game.
-
The new handball rules are wrong in many ways and it’s not the fault of VAR that it’s technology is used to enforce it. It’s been used twice against Wolves and Man City so these shitty new rules are here to stay for this season at least.
The offside rule also needs a tweak with the implementation of new technology. There is no way that the default rule should disallow a goal because an inch of a shoulder, elbow, toe or any other body part was deemed to be offside. A person isn’t an inanimate object so it can’t be black and white like a ball over a line, so may be they should use a specific point of the body such as the head or groin.
-
The new handball rules are the fault of the EU, Ian Holloway said. He gets paid to air opinions like this you know.
-
The new handball rules are the fault of the EU, Ian Holloway said. He gets paid to air opinions like this you know.
Does that mean we can use VAR on the Irish border?
-
The new handball rules are wrong in many ways and it’s not the fault of VAR that it’s technology is used to enforce it. It’s been used twice against Wolves and Man City so these shitty new rules are here to stay for this season at least.
The offside rule also needs a tweak with the implementation of new technology. There is no way that the default rule should disallow a goal because an inch of a shoulder, elbow, toe or any other body part was deemed to be offside. A person isn’t an inanimate object so it can’t be black and white like a ball over a line, so may be they should use a specific point of the body such as the head or groin.
I may be completely wrong here - wouldn't be the first time!! - but I thought that for a player to be offside the part of the body deemed thus had to be a part that could be scored with. So if your arm was in an offside position it wouldn't count as offside.
-
I still think a review system will be implemented in due course. It would certainly eliminate a lot of the complaints about the current set up, it would certainly help with the flow of the game and in most cases give back the joy of scoring a goal, if the ref is happy and reviews have been used up, a goal is a fucking goal!
Our game last weekend would've been different for a start. Billings potential second yellow was not referred, even though it was a major decision and potential game changer. To refer these sorts of incidents to VAR regularly would be barmy, increasing the amount of disruption but if we had used a review, he may have been sent off. Reviews will be precious and who knows, Smith may not have used one for the Billings incident(s) but as things stand we have a hue and cry for everything and it's solving nothing.
And Ian Holloway can go and fuck himself, the galloping ignoramus.
-
In the same way that the ball is in the field of play if part of it is touching the by line offside has to be given only if the entire player is in an offside position. Either that or adopt rugby interpretation that touching the line is over the line. You can't be a bit pregnant.. You can't be a bit offside.
-
And Ian Holloway can go and fuck himself. Illiterate blockhead.
-
With the offsides, if they're going to give things off by millimetres, does this mean that the powers that be are 100% sure that the chosen frame to judge when the ball was played is also accurate to a zero percent error margin? Like, on a quantum level, that that was the exact moment the attacker played the ball? A movement at a leisurely 20mph and filmed at 1,000fps will travel best part of a centimetre between frames.
-
I still think a review system will be implemented in due course. It would certainly eliminate a lot of the complaints about the current set up, it would certainly help with the flow of the game and in most cases give back the joy of scoring a goal, if the ref is happy and reviews have been used up, a goal is a fucking goal!
Our game last weekend would've been different for a start. Billings potential second yellow was not referred, even though it was a major decision and potential game changer. To refer these sorts of incidents to VAR regularly would be barmy, increasing the amount of disruption but if we had used a review, he may have been sent off. Reviews will be precious and who knows, Smith may not have used one for the Billings incident(s) but as things stand we have a hue and cry for everything and it's solving nothing.
And Ian Holloway can go and fuck himself, the galloping ignoramus.
How many "challenges" would you get a game though? If it's more than one per team it would stop games more than VAR does now as it's average usage (which causes a stoppage) per game up to now must be less than three times.
-
All of Billings' subsequent challenges were right in front of the ref, and we were awarded a free kick in each instance. That he didn't get sent off was down to the referee on the day not deeming them worthy of a second yellow.
-
Are potential second yellow cards supposed to be reviewed or only straight reds?
-
All of Billings' subsequent challenges were right in front of the ref, and we were awarded a free kick in each instance. That he didn't get sent off was down to the referee on the day not deeming them worthy of a second yellow.
Yes, but the VAR ref, with the benefit of slow motion replays, may have come to a different conclusion had we been able to appeal. This is the issue with VAR, in the case of foul challenges it will boil down to opinion but you still see a VAR check for "possible red card", that's not a matter of fact at all.
VAR is meant to correct clear and obvious errors, that's what I saw on Saturday (twice).
Having said all of the above, I would accept what happened on Saturday in return for VAR being consigned to the fuckin' dustbin for evermore.
-
Just straight reds.
-
On the margin of errors issue why not represent the error on the screen as a band and if the player is ahead of the error band they are offside. If they are in the band then apply the rule like they do in cricket with Umpire's call, i.e. if they were flagged they are offside, if there was no flag they're onside.
-
Just straight reds.
Ta. So we can't blame VAR for the referee on Saturday being a massive bottling bottle merchant bottler.
-
Just straight reds.
Ta. So we can't blame VAR for the referee on Saturday being a massive bottling bottle merchant bottler.
No, he was just shit. Hopefully he gets a telling off from the ref bosses.
-
Doubt it. It was only Villa he cheated.
-
The new handball rules are the fault of the EU, Ian Holloway said. He gets paid to air opinions like this you know.
Does that mean we can use VAR on the Irish border?
That'll make it V.A.Orr
-
Has the totting up procedure for persistent fouling gone out of the game this season? you know, where the ref points to a number of areas on the pitch then reaches for the back pocket.
-
I've never understood why that rule is so vague. How many is "persistent"? Three, five, ten, twenty?
Pick an actual number and have somebody in the stand count how many each player has done, tell the referee by earpiece when a player needs booking.
-
'Persistent' usually means a number of tackles, that by themselves weren't worthy of a booking, but when considered together do. That cheating Bournemouth scrote simply commited at least 3 or 4 tackles that were worthy of a booking all day long, and the shithouse of a ref just bottled it.
-
I've never understood why that rule is so vague. How many is "persistent"? Three, five, ten, twenty?
Pick an actual number and have somebody in the stand count how many each player has done, tell the referee by earpiece when a player needs booking.
Two. E.G. a defender climbs all over an opponent, referee gives the appropriate free-kick and warns the defender if he does it again he will receive a caution for persistent infringement. The defender does it again, the ref books him. It doesn't happen that way normally but it can.
-
I've never understood why that rule is so vague. How many is "persistent"? Three, five, ten, twenty?
Pick an actual number and have somebody in the stand count how many each player has done, tell the referee by earpiece when a player needs booking.
When I reffed - at a very local level - if a team persistently fouled, I'd warn the team captain that he would receive a yellow card if it continued.
Amazingly, the captain always looked amazed when I pulled a card on him, even after making it very clear that he needed to control his team.
-
'Deliberate'
'done consciously and intentionally.
"a deliberate attempt to provoke conflict" intentional, calculated, conscious, done on purpose, intended, planned, meant, considered, studied, knowing, wilful, wanton, purposeful, purposive, premeditated, pre-planned, thought out in advance, prearranged, preconceived, predetermined;
When it came to a goalkeeper picking up the ball, it only took the footballing community a few weeks to acknowledge what was a deliberate back pass and what was accidental. The transition of that was very smooth and should now be applied to the handball rule.
Alas, we have made a 'mountain out of a molehill' when it comes to the handball rule. Either it is deliberate or not. The footballing community is wise enough to know what is a deliberate handball and what is accidental.
Lets cut out all this crap about hands behind the back, arms in unnatural position etc and just apply common sense.
In my view, over 90% of penalties given for handball were never deliberate (see meaning above) but merely because a player was fortunate enough to be born with two arms.
As for the offside law, unlike VAR, a player does not have the advantage of lines been drawn all over the pitch. Goals are the bloodline of the game and should not be ruled out because someone has got a big nose, big feet etc. IMHO, a player should only be offside if there is a 'clear gap' between the last defender and the attacker. For the sake of the game, let's give the attacking team some breathing space and change the law accordingly.
-
I've never understood why that rule is so vague. How many is "persistent"? Three, five, ten, twenty?
Pick an actual number and have somebody in the stand count how many each player has done, tell the referee by earpiece when a player needs booking.
When I reffed - at a very local level - if a team persistently fouled, I'd warn the team captain that he would receive a yellow card if it continued.
Amazingly, the captain always looked amazed when I pulled a card on him, even after making it very clear that he needed to control his team.
Don't think you'd get away with that these days.
-
I've never understood why that rule is so vague. How many is "persistent"? Three, five, ten, twenty?
Pick an actual number and have somebody in the stand count how many each player has done, tell the referee by earpiece when a player needs booking.
When I reffed - at a very local level - if a team persistently fouled, I'd warn the team captain that he would receive a yellow card if it continued.
Amazingly, the captain always looked amazed when I pulled a card on him, even after making it very clear that he needed to control his team.
Don't think you'd get away with that these days.
?
I never did it in all the years I was involved, I see it as delegating responsibility. Everything was/is there to deal with infringements of the laws. Always keep a sharp pencil and a couple of biro's for back-up. The only thing I can think of, off the top of my head, is when officiating on your own a mass brawl breaks out. Best action? don't get involved, stand back and let them sort it themselves then abandon the game and report it to the relevant authorities. No point in you getting whacked.
-
I was in favour of VAR but it's been a disaster the way it's being implemented. It's exacerbated by ridiculous handball and offside laws, but really it's the micro-analysis of every bloody incident of note that is a farce, when it was supposed to be for clear and obvious situations were an injustice was clearly done. It's as if they are determined to use their new toy at every possible opportunity. A two reviews per team system is probably the only way to stop that.
-
I think it will settle in. I'm delighted that the correct decision will be reached on offsides and hand balls, however marginal they may be. I don't really buy into this losing the moment of euphoria stuff - the for majority of goals it will be pretty clear there are no potential issues. Getting the correct decision and the correct result is far more important to me.
-
I would be totally against limited appeals.
Imagine you've used your (two?) appeals, possibly by millimetres, and someone scores a crucial illegal goal against you, missed by the ref - think Maradona, Henry et al. It almost makes it a waste of time having the system.
Once teams know the opposition has no more challenges left, often near the end of games, they may as well start pushing the acceptable boundaries to gain an advantage.
If we're going to have it we should use it to cut out all illegal goals, however 'boarderline'. That's the only way we get a level playing field.
Use it, or dont. But, please, none of this wishy washy nonsense leading to games still being won by cheating or officiating mistakes.
-
I was in favour of VAR but it's been a disaster the way it's being implemented. It's exacerbated by ridiculous handball and offside laws, but really it's the micro-analysis of every bloody incident of note that is a farce, when it was supposed to be for clear and obvious situations were an injustice was clearly done.
This. A million times this.
It's supposed to be there for clear injustices and the refereeing community and their willing supporters are using it to manufacture work for themselves by micro-analysing issues we didn't even think were issues. It's damaging the game.
When you get to the position we are in now where people watching in the ground and worldwide hold their breath and stifle their celebrations for minutes after a goal is scored in case there was a brush of the arm or someone's toe was offside in the buildup (something no-one on the pitch, acting as referee, in the stands or watching on the TV saw in real-time) then the game has subjugated the entertainment value and history and joy of the game in the service of bureaucrats.
Stop it now and only use it for gross injustices.
-
If the delays get as lengthy as they did in the Womens WC then I would imagine it wont be long before sky / BT slip in a quick advert just like US sports are always breaking to commericals
And lets face it every other feature of US sport TV has crept into our game
-
The delays don't seem nearly as bad on the basis of what I've seen, and I've no problem with broadcasters copying ideas from other sports. The score and time at the top/bottom of the screen has been an excellent innovation, for instance.
They won't be squeezing adverts in but it wouldn't amaze me if you start getting "VAR decision sponsored by...", though if they go down that route they'd be copying cricket, not the Americans.
-
Bumping the persistent infringement debate. Last night saw classic examples of it. How many times was Gomez penalised for fouling? I have no idea, but he should have been cautioned long before he was. I can't remember but I'm sure someone will, but was he eventually booked for failing to retreat the required distance to allow a free-kick to be taken? If it was him, he wouldn't have been cautioned for persistent infringement and that would be disgraceful.
-
Are we going to have Alan Shearer explaining VAR to us before every game?
-
I don’t understand how the ref decided to book both Trez and their player after he kicked the ball and went straight through on Trez. That could have been a nasty injury and Everton stood over our freekicks all game.
Also with the new handball rules, didn’t Mina (?) block the ball with his arm/hand in an “unnatural position” when sliding to block the shot from Wes? I’m sure we’ll see plenty of them given this season.
-
For Trezeguet got booked for not retreating the required distance at the free-kick despite Everton doing it all game. There's a case for sending off Coleman but, I'm guessing it wouldn't stand up on appeal. The referee took the easy option and booked him.
-
I don’t understand how the ref decided to book both Trez and their player after he kicked the ball and went straight through on Trez. That could have been a nasty injury and Everton stood over our freekicks all game.
Also with the new handball rules, didn’t Mina (?) block the ball with his arm/hand in an “unnatural position” when sliding to block the shot from Wes? I’m sure we’ll see plenty of them given this season.
They are trying to use common sense, regarding natural position. The ref and co decided, with the way Mina was sliding in to defend the ball, his arm was in a natural position for that movement.
-
The Derby Baggies game was a good argument in favour of VAR. I think most would agree that we want actual cheating stamped out.
-
I'm in favour. I cant grasp the 'i'd rather keep the wrong decisions' argument. As for celebrating goals only to see them disallowed, that happens without var. We've all done it.
-
Interesting that compared to last week we have so far barely noticed VAR. It seems to have been used a lot quicker or at least more efficiently.
-
Interesting that compared to last week we have so far barely noticed VAR. It seems to have been used a lot quicker or at least more efficiently.
Tell that to Manyoo who had 2 additional penalties declined even after VAR review ...
-
Interesting that compared to last week we have so far barely noticed VAR. It seems to have been used a lot quicker or at least more efficiently.
Tell that to Manyoo who had 2 additional penalties declined even after VAR review ...
If it’s an end to the Old aTrafford penalty then great.
-
Interesting that compared to last week we have so far barely noticed VAR. It seems to have been used a lot quicker or at least more efficiently.
Tell that to Manyoo who had 2 additional penalties declined even after VAR review ...
If it’s an end to the Old aTrafford penalty then great.
Yeah 'cos two wrongs DO make a right ...
-
Interesting that compared to last week we have so far barely noticed VAR. It seems to have been used a lot quicker or at least more efficiently.
Tell that to Manyoo who had 2 additional penalties declined even after VAR review ...
Were they correctly declined?
-
I think the decisions were correct at Old Trafford, however the decisions could have gone either way. This is partly due to the Man Utd players being schooled in the dark arts of going down easily which makes it even harder for the officials to make the correct decision even with VAR.
-
I would have been delighted either way.
-
Interesting that compared to last week we have so far barely noticed VAR. It seems to have been used a lot quicker or at least more efficiently.
Tell that to Manyoo who had 2 additional penalties declined even after VAR review ...
If it’s an end to the Old aTrafford penalty then great.
Yeah 'cos two wrongs DO make a right ...
Sense of humor by pass.
-
some one tole me once, I am sure in jest that any player joining them has to undergo an induction course in, how to waste time and how to play for penalties.
-
VAR is a joke. Clear and obvious penalty for Spurs not given by the ref, then also not given by VAR. What's the point of it then?
-
VAR is a joke. Clear and obvious penalty for Spurs not given by the ref, then also not given by VAR. What's the point of it then?
But in the end isn’t it still humans making the decision?
-
VAR is a joke. Clear and obvious penalty for Spurs not given by the ref, then also not given by VAR. What's the point of it then?
But in the end isn’t it still humans making the decision?
Bang on pen. What’s the difference between diving and taking the player down or sticking out a leg and doing the same. In both cases it’s a pen
-
VAR is a joke. Clear and obvious penalty for Spurs not given by the ref, then also not given by VAR. What's the point of it then?
But in the end isn’t it still humans making the decision?
Bang on pen. What’s the difference between diving and taking the player down or sticking out a leg and doing the same. In both cases it’s a pen
I get that. But VAR is just technology to help a human make a “better” decision. That’s all I’m pointing out.
-
That tackle on Kane was as clear a penalty as you will ever see. Mike Dean is Billy Big Bollocks in refereeing circles so the VAR assessors keep their noses up his arse and decline e to overrule him.
-
That tackle on Kane was as clear a penalty as you will ever see. Mike Dean is Billy Big Bollocks in refereeing circles so the VAR assessors keep their noses up his arse and decline e to overrule him.
That's what the commentators alluded to, which makes me think we're giving up all the spotaneity and fun of football for not very much. If the VAR team aren't going to overrule their mates when it's that obvious, then they can poke it quite frankly.
-
Yet more proof that VAR is a joke. The referee and a room full of clowns with every conceivable camera angle, couldn't call a stonewall penalty.
Not fit for purpose.
-
Yet more proof that VAR is a joke. The referee and a room full of clowns with every conceivable camera angle, couldn't call a stonewall penalty.
Not fit for purpose.
+1
-
That Kane call today tells me that VAR will be used for very minor incidents like a toe offside but not for basic fouls. The bloody horrors of VAR will be inflicted on the game to enable nits to be picked. Major incidents like dragging down a centre forward as he is about to score will be botched with a shrug. Or in Dean's case today when challenged by the Spurs players AFTER the VAR decision had been made, he pointed to his ear piece as much as to say "not me, it was them in the stands. I only blow the whistle."
-
VAR is a joke. Clear and obvious penalty for Spurs not given by the ref, then also not given by VAR. What's the point of it then?
Indeed. Earlier, a Bournemouth player missed the ball and trod on Agüero’s foot bringing him down, as every subsequent angle showed. VAR evaluated and shrugged. Mystified.
-
I don't like VAR, but could put up with it if it leads to a right decision. If it doesn't, we're getting all the bad stuff and still having to put up with shit decisions.
-
I agree, so it doesn't give pens for Kane or Silva despite them both being penalties, so what's the point of it. Either give the correct decision every time or bin it.
-
Agreed, an absolutely pointless piece of technology if its going to be used so arbitrarily. You just create a greater clusterfuck doing it that way.
They've used VAR (they call it the Bunker) in Rugby League in Asutralia for the last couple of seasons. It's done nothing but create more controversy. They've also moved to having 2 on field refs that work as a team - one behind the play one in front. They still get things wrong.
-
The myth that using VAR will get decisions correct till exists. Fouls are always going to be subjective, all VAR does is ask for a second opinion.
For years people cited Tennis, Rugby and Cricket as examples but in almost all cases in those sports it's a decision based on fact, not opinion. The handball/offside VAR decisions may be factual but they have not made the rules clear enough for the video ref to come to a definitive decision so we have a shitty mess full of conjecture and argument. If people are hell bent on demanding the correct outcome every time just feed the data of each team into a computer and see what the result is, all human error, player or official is removed.
If you look at the cricket, much has been made of Joel Wilson's error in not calling the LBW yesterday, but Nathan Lyon made an equally crucial mistake. Why does a player get a pass but the umpire doesn't? Those errors just added to the drama. As did Paine's decision to refer just a few moments earlier.
I still see a second yellow card as a potential game changing decision yet there is no referral so what's the fuckin point.? Give it back to the ref and let's get on with it for fucks sake.
-
And there you have it in a few words. As I have stated on here many times to the point of boredom that the laws of football are so wide open to interpretation that you as a player/team are going to be at the whim of a human being. Ok, VAR will go some way to removing some of the ambiguity from the game but as Nev has alluded to, it all comes back to a human decision and, as we saw yesterday if, as alleged some humans hold a certain sway over others then the whole concept of VAR is, imo redundant. Who police's the policeman?
-
Anywhere else on the pitch and the Kane challenge would be given as a foul. Probably the Silva one as well if seen. It show VAR official are just as prone to bottling penalty decisions as on the field refs.
Accidental slip or not the Newcastle player took Kane out as he was about to shoot. Compare the penalty awarded int he CL final against Spurs where the defender had zero chance of getting out of the way, and anyway it arguably hit his shoulder. Ludicrous decisions despite re-runs.
-
It looks like they will not over rule a refs decision on a penalty but they will over rule a goal decision.
It does not make any sense.
-
The myth that using VAR will get decisions correct till exists. Fouls are always going to be subjective, all VAR does is ask for a second opinion.
For years people cited Tennis, Rugby and Cricket as examples but in almost all cases in those sports it's a decision based on fact, not opinion. The handball/offside VAR decisions may be factual but they have not made the rules clear enough for the video ref to come to a definitive decision so we have a shitty mess full of conjecture and argument. If people are hell bent on demanding the correct outcome every time just feed the data of each team into a computer and see what the result is, all human error, player or official is removed.
If you look at the cricket, much has been made of Joel Wilson's error in not calling the LBW yesterday, but Nathan Lyon made an equally crucial mistake. Why does a player get a pass but the umpire doesn't? Those errors just added to the drama. As did Paine's decision to refer just a few moments earlier.
I still see a second yellow card as a potential game changing decision yet there is no referral so what's the fuckin point.? Give it back to the ref and let's get on with it for fucks sake.
Or just let it bed in and get it right.
As for rugby, a lot of the decisions are far from factual - it deals with foul play anywhere on the field and any potential offences leading up to a try.
We've been moaning for years about duff decisions, diving, off side goals, people not being sent off in cup finals, Patrick Bamford being a ****** etc etc. I just don't get why people aren't prepared to work through the various teething problems to get a system that works and hopefuly improves the fairness of the game in the long run.
-
The myth that using VAR will get decisions correct till exists. Fouls are always going to be subjective, all VAR does is ask for a second opinion.
For years people cited Tennis, Rugby and Cricket as examples but in almost all cases in those sports it's a decision based on fact, not opinion. The handball/offside VAR decisions may be factual but they have not made the rules clear enough for the video ref to come to a definitive decision so we have a shitty mess full of conjecture and argument. If people are hell bent on demanding the correct outcome every time just feed the data of each team into a computer and see what the result is, all human error, player or official is removed.
If you look at the cricket, much has been made of Joel Wilson's error in not calling the LBW yesterday, but Nathan Lyon made an equally crucial mistake. Why does a player get a pass but the umpire doesn't? Those errors just added to the drama. As did Paine's decision to refer just a few moments earlier.
I still see a second yellow card as a potential game changing decision yet there is no referral so what's the fuckin point.? Give it back to the ref and let's get on with it for fucks sake.
Or just let it bed in and get it right.
As for rugby, a lot of the decisions are far from factual - it deals with foul play anywhere on the field and any potential offences leading up to a try.
We've been moaning for years about duff decisions, diving, off side goals, people not being sent off in cup finals, Patrick Bamford being a c*** etc etc. I just don't get why people aren't prepared to work through the various teething problems to get a system that works and hopefuly improves the fairness of the game in the long run.
Maybe we like the misery.
-
I don't. I want to see cheats like Bamford punished, and I want to make it more difficult for referees to give ludicrous penalties to the home side at Old Trafford. VAR should help. It needs to improve, but judging by how it is working now compared to just a few months ago at the Women's World Cup, it already is improving rapidly.
-
I don't. I want to see cheats like Bamford punished, and I want to make it more difficult for referees to give ludicrous penalties to the home side at Old Trafford. VAR should help. It needs to improve, but judging by how it is working now compared to just a few months ago at the Women's World Cup, it already is improving rapidly.
agreed
-
I just don't get why people aren't prepared to work through the various teething problems to get a system that works and hopefuly improves the fairness of the game in the long run.
Because if the "teething problems" are penalties not given when they should be, goals not given when they could be and referees getting just as many things wrong as before then it doesn't look like it's improving the fairness.
I don't understand why people who want to improve the fairness of the game aren't prepared to work through the teething problems in workgroups between the referees and the authorities until they have a system which delivers fairness compared to now and THEN bring it into the game, not before. The PL is too important to be a test-site; prove it works through rigorous testing and we'll back it.
This isn't how important things like airplane wings are tested so why do it to football?
-
The myth that using VAR will get decisions correct till exists. Fouls are always going to be subjective, all VAR does is ask for a second opinion.
For years people cited Tennis, Rugby and Cricket as examples but in almost all cases in those sports it's a decision based on fact, not opinion. The handball/offside VAR decisions may be factual but they have not made the rules clear enough for the video ref to come to a definitive decision so we have a shitty mess full of conjecture and argument. If people are hell bent on demanding the correct outcome every time just feed the data of each team into a computer and see what the result is, all human error, player or official is removed.
If you look at the cricket, much has been made of Joel Wilson's error in not calling the LBW yesterday, but Nathan Lyon made an equally crucial mistake. Why does a player get a pass but the umpire doesn't? Those errors just added to the drama. As did Paine's decision to refer just a few moments earlier.
I still see a second yellow card as a potential game changing decision yet there is no referral so what's the fuckin point.? Give it back to the ref and let's get on with it for fucks sake.
Or just let it bed in and get it right.
As for rugby, a lot of the decisions are far from factual - it deals with foul play anywhere on the field and any potential offences leading up to a try.
We've been moaning for years about duff decisions, diving, off side goals, people not being sent off in cup finals, Patrick Bamford being a c*** etc etc. I just don't get why people aren't prepared to work through the various teething problems to get a system that works and hopefuly improves the fairness of the game in the long run.
Because the sense of injustice fuels our support, being on the right end of an incorrect decision makes us feel like naughty school kids as we giggle at our opponents, the unpredictability appals us and thrills us in equal measure, we build certain officials into bogeymen and villains, we love the drama, we love the arguments and conjecture, what might have been, what should've been and those garrulous tales of huge decisions that denied our team the world dominance they so richly deserved if it wasn't for a fat bloke from Staffordshire or a school master from Harrow.
Sport is a glorious thing, Sunday afternoon was a perfect example, yes technology was used but it was human bravery and skill, fallibility and misjudgement that gave it the drama.
I have enjoyed football for almost 50 years and the addition of VAR has not enhanced that at all. I want justice and order in life, I want chaos and disorder in Sport, it's what makes it for me.
-
Couldn't agree more Nev. My feelings exactly.
-
I just don't get why people aren't prepared to work through the various teething problems to get a system that works and hopefuly improves the fairness of the game in the long run.
Because if the "teething problems" are penalties not given when they should be, goals not given when they could be and referees getting just as many things wrong as before then it doesn't look like it's improving the fairness.
I don't understand why people who want to improve the fairness of the game aren't prepared to work through the teething problems in workgroups between the referees and the authorities until they have a system which delivers fairness compared to now and THEN bring it into the game, not before. The PL is too important to be a test-site; prove it works through rigorous testing and we'll back it.
This isn't how important things like airplane wings are tested so why do it to football?
Really? The thing is that VAR hasn't been used because a clear and obvious error - which means that it has solely been the referee's decision at that moment - now guess what, that is just like before without VAR.
-
I just don't get why people aren't prepared to work through the various teething problems to get a system that works and hopefuly improves the fairness of the game in the long run.
Because if the "teething problems" are penalties not given when they should be, goals not given when they could be and referees getting just as many things wrong as before then it doesn't look like it's improving the fairness.
I don't understand why people who want to improve the fairness of the game aren't prepared to work through the teething problems in workgroups between the referees and the authorities until they have a system which delivers fairness compared to now and THEN bring it into the game, not before. The PL is too important to be a test-site; prove it works through rigorous testing and we'll back it.
This isn't how important things like airplane wings are tested so why do it to football?
It was always going to take time to settle down. It will and when it does it will improve the game.
-
I just don't get why people aren't prepared to work through the various teething problems to get a system that works and hopefuly improves the fairness of the game in the long run.
Because if the "teething problems" are penalties not given when they should be, goals not given when they could be and referees getting just as many things wrong as before then it doesn't look like it's improving the fairness.
I don't understand why people who want to improve the fairness of the game aren't prepared to work through the teething problems in workgroups between the referees and the authorities until they have a system which delivers fairness compared to now and THEN bring it into the game, not before. The PL is too important to be a test-site; prove it works through rigorous testing and we'll back it.
This isn't how important things like airplane wings are tested so why do it to football?
It was always going to take time to settle down. It will and when it does it will improve the game.
Everyone just accepting that humans make mistakes and life ain't always fair would improve it more.
-
The myth that using VAR will get decisions correct till exists. Fouls are always going to be subjective, all VAR does is ask for a second opinion.
For years people cited Tennis, Rugby and Cricket as examples but in almost all cases in those sports it's a decision based on fact, not opinion. The handball/offside VAR decisions may be factual but they have not made the rules clear enough for the video ref to come to a definitive decision so we have a shitty mess full of conjecture and argument. If people are hell bent on demanding the correct outcome every time just feed the data of each team into a computer and see what the result is, all human error, player or official is removed.
If you look at the cricket, much has been made of Joel Wilson's error in not calling the LBW yesterday, but Nathan Lyon made an equally crucial mistake. Why does a player get a pass but the umpire doesn't? Those errors just added to the drama. As did Paine's decision to refer just a few moments earlier.
I still see a second yellow card as a potential game changing decision yet there is no referral so what's the fuckin point.? Give it back to the ref and let's get on with it for fucks sake.
Or just let it bed in and get it right.
As for rugby, a lot of the decisions are far from factual - it deals with foul play anywhere on the field and any potential offences leading up to a try.
We've been moaning for years about duff decisions, diving, off side goals, people not being sent off in cup finals, Patrick Bamford being a c*** etc etc. I just don't get why people aren't prepared to work through the various teething problems to get a system that works and hopefuly improves the fairness of the game in the long run.
Because the sense of injustice fuels our support, being on the right end of an incorrect decision makes us feel like naughty school kids as we giggle at our opponents, the unpredictability appals us and thrills us in equal measure, we build certain officials into bogeymen and villains, we love the drama, we love the arguments and conjecture, what might have been, what should've been and those garrulous tales of huge decisions that denied our team the world dominance they so richly deserved if it wasn't for a fat bloke from Staffordshire or a school master from Harrow.
Sport is a glorious thing, Sunday afternoon was a perfect example, yes technology was used but it was human bravery and skill, fallibility and misjudgement that gave it the drama.
I have enjoyed football for almost 50 years and the addition of VAR has not enhanced that at all. I want justice and order in life, I want chaos and disorder in Sport, it's what makes it for me.
Fair enough. Personally I'd have preferred Maradonna's goal to have been disallowed, Vidic to have been sent off for his assault at Wembley, Rodriguez handball goal to be disallowed and El Ghazi not sent off for the ghost punch on Bamford. The romance of human fallibility and misjudgement does nothing for me when it results in travesties like those.
-
Personally, although I do get enraged by poor refereeing, I do accept there is a difference between a genuine mistake and a terrible match official.
For me, the referee's job is not to make a game of football completely fair, because he never can. The key role of a referee for me is to make the decision when one needs to be made in order to enable the game to continue. Else we end up as we were as kids with arguments raging and fights breaking out every two minutes about every little thing.
-
We're all willing to accept "human mistakes" when they are going for us though.
As England cricket fans, after the World Cup 'win' and the latest Ashes 'win', we have absolutely no right to ever moan about a decision against us ever again. We will though.
VAR is here to stay, along with goal line technology, thank god. If they chalk out every offside goal and allows every correct goal (even by millimetres), and stops every goal assisted by a handball, then I will be happy.
There will still be plenty for people to moan and argue about, for those that like that side of the game, like the Kane 'penalty' at the weekend. Which, by the way, many ex-players have disagreed on the validity of.
Why people would want to risk going back to blatant injustices, for the 'fun of it' or because it's 'not 100% right' (according to them), is beyond me.
-
The myth that using VAR will get decisions correct till exists. Fouls are always going to be subjective, all VAR does is ask for a second opinion.
For years people cited Tennis, Rugby and Cricket as examples but in almost all cases in those sports it's a decision based on fact, not opinion. The handball/offside VAR decisions may be factual but they have not made the rules clear enough for the video ref to come to a definitive decision so we have a shitty mess full of conjecture and argument. If people are hell bent on demanding the correct outcome every time just feed the data of each team into a computer and see what the result is, all human error, player or official is removed.
If you look at the cricket, much has been made of Joel Wilson's error in not calling the LBW yesterday, but Nathan Lyon made an equally crucial mistake. Why does a player get a pass but the umpire doesn't? Those errors just added to the drama. As did Paine's decision to refer just a few moments earlier.
I still see a second yellow card as a potential game changing decision yet there is no referral so what's the fuckin point.? Give it back to the ref and let's get on with it for fucks sake.
Or just let it bed in and get it right.
As for rugby, a lot of the decisions are far from factual - it deals with foul play anywhere on the field and any potential offences leading up to a try.
We've been moaning for years about duff decisions, diving, off side goals, people not being sent off in cup finals, Patrick Bamford being a c*** etc etc. I just don't get why people aren't prepared to work through the various teething problems to get a system that works and hopefuly improves the fairness of the game in the long run.
Because the sense of injustice fuels our support, being on the right end of an incorrect decision makes us feel like naughty school kids as we giggle at our opponents, the unpredictability appals us and thrills us in equal measure, we build certain officials into bogeymen and villains, we love the drama, we love the arguments and conjecture, what might have been, what should've been and those garrulous tales of huge decisions that denied our team the world dominance they so richly deserved if it wasn't for a fat bloke from Staffordshire or a school master from Harrow.
Sport is a glorious thing, Sunday afternoon was a perfect example, yes technology was used but it was human bravery and skill, fallibility and misjudgement that gave it the drama.
I have enjoyed football for almost 50 years and the addition of VAR has not enhanced that at all. I want justice and order in life, I want chaos and disorder in Sport, it's what makes it for me.
Fair enough. Personally I'd have preferred Maradonna's goal to have been disallowed, Vidic to have been sent off for his assault at Wembley, Rodriguez handball goal to be disallowed and El Ghazi not sent off for the ghost punch on Bamford. The romance of human fallibility and misjudgement does nothing for me when it results in travesties like those.
Then you would be happy with the result of the 1966 WCF to be different? And as for the last two, overcoming Sandwell in the paly offs made it all the sweeter as did Leeds getting gubbed by Derby. I can see we're not going to agree and everyone has a different opinion but the more emotional sport is, the more I enjoy it.
-
You're the first sports fan I've encountered that would enjoy being cheated out of a win.
Personally, our '66 WC win and the latest cricket WC win will always be tainted somewhat (as well as Sunday's Ashes win). I don't enjoy losing unfairly, and I'm honest enough to admit I don't get the full satisfaction from winning unfairly.
-
You're the first sports fan I've encountered that would enjoy being cheated out of a win.
Personally, our '66 WC win and the latest cricket WC win will always be tainted somewhat (as well as Sunday's Ashes win). I don't enjoy losing unfairly, and I'm honest enough to admit I don't get the full satisfaction from winning unfairly.
You're reverting to hyperbole now.
There is no evidence that in any of the games you mentioned that there was any impropriety whatsoever, there was however, human error from the officials, something that is accepted of players but not the officials even though both are human. To infer that there is widespread "cheating" from officials is laughable, particularly when all the evidence points to the ref being the only person taking to the field without the express intention of gaining an unfair advantage.
If I considered there to be widespread corruption I wouldn't watch or pay to attend. My view isn't based on the long term prospects of Aston Villa but the long term prospects of the game without which there will be no Villa and I see much bigger problems for it than the competence of our officials. In a week where we see two proud old clubs go to the wall, many others teetering on the brink, where the gap between the haves and have-nots grows ever bigger where obvious cheating by players goes unpunished and the amount of cash and support afforded to grass roots shrinks by the year I believe there are bigger threats to Football as we know it.
I can see that we have our own opinions and are not going to agree on this matter, perhaps we should bring in a neutral observer to oversee our argument and make a rational decision? We must first agree on this though before we go any further and accept the decision as final......
-
No thanks.
I'd rather technology gave us an important win than a 'well-meaning', but error-ridden, official take it from us.
And it it falls the other way, then so be it. I can handle fairness, even if it goes against me.
As I said earlier, despite technology correcting errors on offsides/onsides, goals/no goals, Henry/Maradona handballs, etc., there will still be plenty left for people to moan about/claim injustice on. "Was that really their free-kick /throw in 5 minutes before we scored that own goal!?" and the like.
To want to get rid of technology just because some people can't agree on a foul is ludicrous. Linking the argument to clubs going out of business even more so.
-
No thanks.
I'd rather technology gave us an important win than a 'well-meaning', but error-ridden, official take it from us.
And it it falls the other way, then so be it. I can handle fairness, even if it goes against me.
As I said earlier, despite technology correcting errors on offsides/onsides, goals/no goals, Henry/Maradona handballs, etc., there will still be plenty left for people to moan about/claim injustice on. "Was that really their free-kick /throw in 5 minutes before we scored that own goal!?" and the like.
To want to get rid of technology just because some people can't agree on a foul is ludicrous. Linking the argument to clubs going out of business even more so.
I don't want to get rid of technology, the goaline technology is brilliant, dealing with matter of fact. I don't like VAR because it doesn't add anything to the game in my opinion. Spurs were happy at Man City, not so much so last week and that is likely to happen with an on field ref so what have we gained?
VAR has nothing to do with clubs going out of business, I never inferred that, my point was that football has more serious problems but chooses to ignore them.
-
VAR is proving that it's not completely accurate but it's still more accurate than the time before VAR. Like most technology it will improve over time.
-
I hope so, because it's a dog's breakfast at the moment.
-
It's utter bollocks.
I didn't actually mind the World Cup version that much. The ref -if he was unsure of a big call- could go to the third umpire or whatever. A bit of a wait occasionally, but felt like progress.
This is nausing fans out at the majority of grounds and just feels like a mess.
Video analysis has helped rugby, tennis and cricket without drastically altering the flow and feeling of those sports. In cricket, it actually adds an element of excitement and additional strategy with the use (or misuse) of the review system.
I don't mind change. But it has to be change for the better.
-
It's fundementally flawed in my opinion. Those saying that offside is offside even if it's only by a millimetre are missing this. They are calling "offside" by putting two parralel lines red & blue but when your talking in millimetres can it really be that accurate? I don't think so. To be so precise you also have to ascertain the milli-second the ball leaves the passing players foot. The system simply isn't accurate enough to make such precise calls. No the only way to make it work is to have an observer who can invoke VAR when and only when he see's a clear and obvious mistake by the officials. When VAR was first mooted it was said that it wouldn't be intrusive in games and would only be used to rectify a "clear and obvious mistake by the match officials" We should get back to that or drop it apart from goal line technology which is absolutely conclusive.
-
Until 100% perfection is fully proven, for offside, a 'margin of error' of 10 centimeters should be allowed to the advantage of the attacking team. :)
-
The myth that using VAR will get decisions correct till exists. Fouls are always going to be subjective, all VAR does is ask for a second opinion.
For years people cited Tennis, Rugby and Cricket as examples but in almost all cases in those sports it's a decision based on fact, not opinion. The handball/offside VAR decisions may be factual but they have not made the rules clear enough for the video ref to come to a definitive decision so we have a shitty mess full of conjecture and argument. If people are hell bent on demanding the correct outcome every time just feed the data of each team into a computer and see what the result is, all human error, player or official is removed.
If you look at the cricket, much has been made of Joel Wilson's error in not calling the LBW yesterday, but Nathan Lyon made an equally crucial mistake. Why does a player get a pass but the umpire doesn't? Those errors just added to the drama. As did Paine's decision to refer just a few moments earlier.
I still see a second yellow card as a potential game changing decision yet there is no referral so what's the fuckin point.? Give it back to the ref and let's get on with it for fucks sake.
Or just let it bed in and get it right.
As for rugby, a lot of the decisions are far from factual - it deals with foul play anywhere on the field and any potential offences leading up to a try.
We've been moaning for years about duff decisions, diving, off side goals, people not being sent off in cup finals, Patrick Bamford being a c*** etc etc. I just don't get why people aren't prepared to work through the various teething problems to get a system that works and hopefuly improves the fairness of the game in the long run.
Because the sense of injustice fuels our support, being on the right end of an incorrect decision makes us feel like naughty school kids as we giggle at our opponents, the unpredictability appals us and thrills us in equal measure, we build certain officials into bogeymen and villains, we love the drama, we love the arguments and conjecture, what might have been, what should've been and those garrulous tales of huge decisions that denied our team the world dominance they so richly deserved if it wasn't for a fat bloke from Staffordshire or a school master from Harrow.
Sport is a glorious thing, Sunday afternoon was a perfect example, yes technology was used but it was human bravery and skill, fallibility and misjudgement that gave it the drama.
I have enjoyed football for almost 50 years and the addition of VAR has not enhanced that at all. I want justice and order in life, I want chaos and disorder in Sport, it's what makes it for me.
It’s like reading poetry.
-
Until 100% perfection is fully proven, for offside, a 'margin of error' of 10 centimeters should be allowed to the advantage of the attacking team. :)
How are you going to decide whether it is ten centimetres, use VAR? I'd say it would be much more difficult to judge whether a player is 9.9 or 10.1 cm offside than it would be just to judge if a player is offside.
I don't really get why people are so worried about offsides and VAR, it's one area that the technology should get right 99% of the time. The only issue would be where an official or a player who wasn't interfering with player obstructed the camera so as to make it unclear, in which case the decision would be made by the assistant referee.
-
The myth that using VAR will get decisions correct till exists. Fouls are always going to be subjective, all VAR does is ask for a second opinion.
For years people cited Tennis, Rugby and Cricket as examples but in almost all cases in those sports it's a decision based on fact, not opinion. The handball/offside VAR decisions may be factual but they have not made the rules clear enough for the video ref to come to a definitive decision so we have a shitty mess full of conjecture and argument. If people are hell bent on demanding the correct outcome every time just feed the data of each team into a computer and see what the result is, all human error, player or official is removed.
If you look at the cricket, much has been made of Joel Wilson's error in not calling the LBW yesterday, but Nathan Lyon made an equally crucial mistake. Why does a player get a pass but the umpire doesn't? Those errors just added to the drama. As did Paine's decision to refer just a few moments earlier.
I still see a second yellow card as a potential game changing decision yet there is no referral so what's the fuckin point.? Give it back to the ref and let's get on with it for fucks sake.
Or just let it bed in and get it right.
As for rugby, a lot of the decisions are far from factual - it deals with foul play anywhere on the field and any potential offences leading up to a try.
We've been moaning for years about duff decisions, diving, off side goals, people not being sent off in cup finals, Patrick Bamford being a c*** etc etc. I just don't get why people aren't prepared to work through the various teething problems to get a system that works and hopefuly improves the fairness of the game in the long run.
Because the sense of injustice fuels our support, being on the right end of an incorrect decision makes us feel like naughty school kids as we giggle at our opponents, the unpredictability appals us and thrills us in equal measure, we build certain officials into bogeymen and villains, we love the drama, we love the arguments and conjecture, what might have been, what should've been and those garrulous tales of huge decisions that denied our team the world dominance they so richly deserved if it wasn't for a fat bloke from Staffordshire or a school master from Harrow.
Sport is a glorious thing, Sunday afternoon was a perfect example, yes technology was used but it was human bravery and skill, fallibility and misjudgement that gave it the drama.
I have enjoyed football for almost 50 years and the addition of VAR has not enhanced that at all. I want justice and order in life, I want chaos and disorder in Sport, it's what makes it for me.
What about those thousands even millions when you take in the gambling sector out there who in their lives want "justice and order in life" but their lives and work are involved in sport? Your personal requirement for chaos and disorder will affect them while there's money involved. Justice and order in life and justice and order in sport or as near as we possibly can is what I want.
-
The myth that using VAR will get decisions correct till exists. Fouls are always going to be subjective, all VAR does is ask for a second opinion.
For years people cited Tennis, Rugby and Cricket as examples but in almost all cases in those sports it's a decision based on fact, not opinion. The handball/offside VAR decisions may be factual but they have not made the rules clear enough for the video ref to come to a definitive decision so we have a shitty mess full of conjecture and argument. If people are hell bent on demanding the correct outcome every time just feed the data of each team into a computer and see what the result is, all human error, player or official is removed.
If you look at the cricket, much has been made of Joel Wilson's error in not calling the LBW yesterday, but Nathan Lyon made an equally crucial mistake. Why does a player get a pass but the umpire doesn't? Those errors just added to the drama. As did Paine's decision to refer just a few moments earlier.
I still see a second yellow card as a potential game changing decision yet there is no referral so what's the fuckin point.? Give it back to the ref and let's get on with it for fucks sake.
Or just let it bed in and get it right.
As for rugby, a lot of the decisions are far from factual - it deals with foul play anywhere on the field and any potential offences leading up to a try.
We've been moaning for years about duff decisions, diving, off side goals, people not being sent off in cup finals, Patrick Bamford being a c*** etc etc. I just don't get why people aren't prepared to work through the various teething problems to get a system that works and hopefuly improves the fairness of the game in the long run.
Because the sense of injustice fuels our support, being on the right end of an incorrect decision makes us feel like naughty school kids as we giggle at our opponents, the unpredictability appals us and thrills us in equal measure, we build certain officials into bogeymen and villains, we love the drama, we love the arguments and conjecture, what might have been, what should've been and those garrulous tales of huge decisions that denied our team the world dominance they so richly deserved if it wasn't for a fat bloke from Staffordshire or a school master from Harrow.
Sport is a glorious thing, Sunday afternoon was a perfect example, yes technology was used but it was human bravery and skill, fallibility and misjudgement that gave it the drama.
I have enjoyed football for almost 50 years and the addition of VAR has not enhanced that at all. I want justice and order in life, I want chaos and disorder in Sport, it's what makes it for me.
What about those thousands even millions when you take in the gambling sector out there who in their lives want "justice and order in life" but their lives and work are involved in sport? Your personal requirement for chaos and disorder will affect them while there's money involved. Justice and order in life and justice and order in sport or as near as we possibly can is what I want.
That's fine, surely to get that would require the elimination of human error completely, not just from officials. as I stated earlier, feed the data into a computer and let it decide the result.
-
Until 100% perfection is fully proven, for offside, a 'margin of error' of 10 centimeters should be allowed to the advantage of the attacking team. :)
How are you going to decide whether it is ten centimetres, use VAR? I'd say it would be much more difficult to judge whether a player is 9.9 or 10.1 cm offside than it would be just to judge if a player is offside.
I don't really get why people are so worried about offsides and VAR, it's one area that the technology should get right 99% of the time. The only issue would be where an official or a player who wasn't interfering with player obstructed the camera so as to make it unclear, in which case the decision would be made by the assistant referee.
Based on an assumption that the snapshot used to determine when the ball is played is correct. We all seem happy with a couple of coloured sharply depicted lines on the telly which "clearly" show from some angle a gnat's bollock betwixt attacker and defender, whilst there's simultaneously a blurred foot delivering the pass.
-
Absolutely. Just as it does at the 100mtrs, tennis, cricket etc. The cricket being the main one of recent impact. Had Australia not wasted their last review they'd have won the game and the Ashes. You could argue that technology added to the drama but the rules as they are in that instance were to England's benefit.
Human error has to be eradicated if it can, there's too much at stake for it to be based on the opinion of an individual who might for whatever reason favour a team in red over one in Claret and Blue.
-
A tool is only as good as the person using it. VAR is a very useful tool, being applied by a bunch of, well, tools. They spout the "clear and obvious" mantra, but ignore it completely and nit-pick over trifles. They interfere when no interference is required or beneficial, and ignore when it is.
Marginal offsides are not "clear and obvious" errors. Handballs where it is ball to hand are still very subjective and should be left to the ref. Handballs like Thierry Henry's against Ireland and Rodriquez against Villa are not subjective ball to hand instances, they are clearly and obviously deliberate movements of hand to ball. The ones that everyone in the ground can see except for the officials.
Balls over the line like Lampard's against Germany have been resolved by other tech.
Refs make mistakes and so will VAR officials. But there have been proven cases of corrupt officials, and given the sums involved and betting syndicates etc. it would be naive to think that there isn't still some undue influence.
There is also bias, whether conscious or unconscious. I can't recall any game Elleray reffed for us where there wasn't some kind of controversial decision against us. He was a total twat, every time. Some of that could have been stopped by VAR. The older readers will recall how often Liverpool would edge a 1-0 win at Anfield with a late controversial penalty, or how often a visiting side would get one there, or at Old Trafford.
VAR will make it harder for any corruption and/or bias to feed through to decisions made. I've said many times, take it out of the hands of the officials to decide when it's used, because they are fucking clueless, QED, over and over. Use a review request system, two per team per game. It will then tend to be used for more blatant issues rather than marginal calls, at least until the last few minutes when unused reviews would be used up.
Stopping VAR would be throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
-
A tool is only as good as the person using it. VAR is a very useful tool, being applied by a bunch of, well, tools. They spout the "clear and obvious" mantra, but ignore it completely and nit-pick over trifles. They interfere when no interference is required or beneficial, and ignore when it is.
Marginal offsides are not "clear and obvious" errors. Handballs where it is ball to hand are still very subjective and should be left to the ref. Handballs like Thierry Henry's against Ireland and Rodriquez against Villa are not subjective ball to hand instances, they are clearly and obviously deliberate movements of hand to ball. The ones that everyone in the ground can see except for the officials.
Balls over the line like Lampard's against Germany have been resolved by other tech.
Refs make mistakes and so will VAR officials. But there have been proven cases of corrupt officials, and given the sums involved and betting syndicates etc. it would be naive to think that there isn't still some undue influence.
There is also bias, whether conscious or unconscious. I can't recall any game Elleray reffed for us where there wasn't some kind of controversial decision against us. He was a total twat, every time. Some of that could have been stopped by VAR. The older readers will recall how often Liverpool would edge a 1-0 win at Anfield with a late controversial penalty, or how often a visiting side would get one there, or at Old Trafford.
VAR will make it harder for any corruption and/or bias to feed through to decisions made. I've said many times, take it out of the hands of the officials to decide when it's used, because they are fucking clueless, QED, over and over. Use a review request system, two per team per game. It will then tend to be used for more blatant issues rather than marginal calls, at least until the last few minutes when unused reviews would be used up.
Stopping VAR would be throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
Despite my opposition I'm pragmatic enough to accept that VAR will not be removed and I agree with an appeals/review system to simplify the system and make it more palatable for luddites such as myself.
-
Until 100% perfection is fully proven, for offside, a 'margin of error' of 10 centimeters should be allowed to the advantage of the attacking team. :)
How are you going to decide whether it is ten centimetres, use VAR? I'd say it would be much more difficult to judge whether a player is 9.9 or 10.1 cm offside than it would be just to judge if a player is offside.
I don't really get why people are so worried about offsides and VAR, it's one area that the technology should get right 99% of the time. The only issue would be where an official or a player who wasn't interfering with player obstructed the camera so as to make it unclear, in which case the decision would be made by the assistant referee.
If we add a 10cm 'margin of error' line on to the current VAR line that denotes the last defender that should do the trick. As mentioned in a previous post, to simplify matters, I would prefer there has to be a 'clear gap' between the forward and the last defender before being flagged offside.
Football is an entertainment, goals are its bloodline. We can't be disallowing goals because someone has got big feet or a big hooter. A forward does not have the advantage of lines drawn across the pitch and by instinct, will try to gain an inch on the defender. We don't want our forwards to have to go backwards to often. The current law is to the advantage of defenders and for the sake of entertainment, the advantage should be to the attacking side.
That is my worry, Mr Bully.
-
Refs make mistakes and so will VAR officials. But there have been proven cases of corrupt officials, and given the sums involved and betting syndicates etc. it would be naive to think that there isn't still some undue influence.
There is also bias, whether conscious or unconscious. I can't recall any game Elleray reffed for us where there wasn't some kind of controversial decision against us. He was a total twat, every time. Some of that could have been stopped by VAR. The older readers will recall how often Liverpool would edge a 1-0 win at Anfield with a late controversial penalty, or how often a visiting side would get one there, or at Old Trafford.
The first point, it won't eradicate that completely but it will improve it massively. The 2nd, it will be interesting to see the amount of pens that are given to them and against compared with previous seasons. Steven Gee's scoring record would look a lot sadder had VAR been around when he was playing.
-
Until 100% perfection is fully proven, for offside, a 'margin of error' of 10 centimeters should be allowed to the advantage of the attacking team. :)
How are you going to decide whether it is ten centimetres, use VAR? I'd say it would be much more difficult to judge whether a player is 9.9 or 10.1 cm offside than it would be just to judge if a player is offside.
I don't really get why people are so worried about offsides and VAR, it's one area that the technology should get right 99% of the time. The only issue would be where an official or a player who wasn't interfering with player obstructed the camera so as to make it unclear, in which case the decision would be made by the assistant referee.
If we add a 10cm 'margin of error' line on to the current VAR line that denotes the last defender that should do the trick. As mentioned in a previous post, to simplify matters, I would prefer there has to be a 'clear gap' between the forward and the last defender before being flagged offside.
Football is an entertainment, goals are its bloodline. We can't be disallowing goals because someone has got big feet or a big hooter. A forward does not have the advantage of lines drawn across the pitch and by instinct, will try to gain an inch on the defender. We don't want our forwards to have to go backwards to often. The current law is to the advantage of defenders and for the sake of entertainment, the advantage should be to the attacking side.
That is my worry, Mr Bully.
The ten centimetre lines could work, I suppose.
One change I would make to the offside rule now is to make it so that attacking players' arms don't count. As they can no longer possibly gain an advantage by handling the ball, even accidentally, then they can't gain an advantage if their arm is offside. Therefore it shouldn't be a foul.
-
But what about a millimetre in or outside of the 10cm? Where do you stop having an argument?
-
Until 100% perfection is fully proven, for offside, a 'margin of error' of 10 centimeters should be allowed to the advantage of the attacking team. :)
How are you going to decide whether it is ten centimetres, use VAR? I'd say it would be much more difficult to judge whether a player is 9.9 or 10.1 cm offside than it would be just to judge if a player is offside.
I don't really get why people are so worried about offsides and VAR, it's one area that the technology should get right 99% of the time. The only issue would be where an official or a player who wasn't interfering with player obstructed the camera so as to make it unclear, in which case the decision would be made by the assistant referee.
If we add a 10cm 'margin of error' line on to the current VAR line that denotes the last defender that should do the trick. As mentioned in a previous post, to simplify matters, I would prefer there has to be a 'clear gap' between the forward and the last defender before being flagged offside.
Football is an entertainment, goals are its bloodline. We can't be disallowing goals because someone has got big feet or a big hooter. A forward does not have the advantage of lines drawn across the pitch and by instinct, will try to gain an inch on the defender. We don't want our forwards to have to go backwards to often. The current law is to the advantage of defenders and for the sake of entertainment, the advantage should be to the attacking side.
That is my worry, Mr Bully.
The ten centimetre lines could work, I suppose.
One change I would make to the offside rule now is to make it so that attacking players' arms don't count. As they can no longer possibly gain an advantage by handling the ball, even accidentally, then they can't gain an advantage if their arm is offside. Therefore it shouldn't be a foul.
Arms don't count anyway. Only parts of your body that can legally score can be offside.
-
Is that right? Well, ermm... that's okay then!
-
But what about a millimetre in or outside of the 10cm? Where do you stop having an argument?
I was going to post something similar. 😂
-
But what about a millimetre in or outside of the 10cm? Where do you stop having an argument?
I was going to post something similar. 😂
And a shoulder being an inch past a defender's foot several yards outside the penalty area... not much of an advantage in my opinion.
-
I would prefer there has to be a 'clear gap' between the forward and the last defender before being flagged offside.
Totally agree, the problem here is not with VAR it's with the offside rule - something that cannot be detected by the human eye at normal speed should not be checked/overruled by a slowed down video - you cannot detect millimeter infringements at normal speed, you need the gap.
-
I would prefer there has to be a 'clear gap' between the forward and the last defender before being flagged offside.
Aye, 100 per cent.
Should be looking to reward attacking play, not hinder it.
If a forward is half soaked enough to wander offside as JPA always seemed to do, penalise that. But it's a nonsense flagging an offside because the forward's arm/ eyebrow/ left testicle is fractionally just past the last man.
Benefit of the doubt should be given to the attacker.
-
I would prefer there has to be a 'clear gap' between the forward and the last defender before being flagged offside.
Aye, 100 per cent.
Should be looking to reward attacking play, not hinder it.
If a forward is half soaked enough to wander offside as JPA always seemed to do, penalise that. But it's a nonsense flagging an offside because the forward's arm/ eyebrow/ left testicle is fractionally just past the last man.
Benefit of the doubt should be given to the attacker.
I'm not sure Tyrone Mings, Bjorn Engles, et al, would agree with you.
Defending can be an art form/skill, just as much as attacking.
They're all playing to the same rules, so it fair. Once you start asking defenders to get a tape out to measure if they've got a gap of 9.9cms, and not 10cms, the games completely fucked.
No reward/advantage should be given to strikers/attackers. If they're good enough, they'll score within the rules, and without needing help.
-
Until 100% perfection is fully proven, for offside, a 'margin of error' of 10 centimeters should be allowed to the advantage of the attacking team. :)
How are you going to decide whether it is ten centimetres, use VAR? I'd say it would be much more difficult to judge whether a player is 9.9 or 10.1 cm offside than it would be just to judge if a player is offside.
I don't really get why people are so worried about offsides and VAR, it's one area that the technology should get right 99% of the time. The only issue would be where an official or a player who wasn't interfering with player obstructed the camera so as to make it unclear, in which case the decision would be made by the assistant referee.
If we add a 10cm 'margin of error' line on to the current VAR line that denotes the last defender that should do the trick. As mentioned in a previous post, to simplify matters, I would prefer there has to be a 'clear gap' between the forward and the last defender before being flagged offside.
Football is an entertainment, goals are its bloodline. We can't be disallowing goals because someone has got big feet or a big hooter. A forward does not have the advantage of lines drawn across the pitch and by instinct, will try to gain an inch on the defender. We don't want our forwards to have to go backwards to often. The current law is to the advantage of defenders and for the sake of entertainment, the advantage should be to the attacking side.
That is my worry, Mr Bully.
The ten centimetre lines could work, I suppose.
One change I would make to the offside rule now is to make it so that attacking players' arms don't count. As they can no longer possibly gain an advantage by handling the ball, even accidentally, then they can't gain an advantage if their arm is offside. Therefore it shouldn't be a foul.
Arms don't count anyway. Only parts of your body that can legally score can be offside.
What about dicks? Can a player be offside just for getting a bit too excited?
-
Well, correct me if I am wrong, but I don’t believe the rules of the game prohibit a goal being scored with a penis, so yeah technically you could be offside via an erection I guess.
-
One change I would make to the offside rule now is to make it so that attacking players' arms don't count. As they can no longer possibly gain an advantage by handling the ball, even accidentally, then they can't gain an advantage if their arm is offside. Therefore it shouldn't be a foul.
Arms don't count anyway. Only parts of your body that can legally score can be offside.
Pretty sure a few goals have been disallowed for elbows being offside...an England goal certainly was in the WWC.
-
Well, correct me if I am wrong, but I don’t believe the rules of the game prohibit a goal being scored with a penis, so yeah technically you could be offside via an erection I guess.
Scored a hattrick with mine once.
-
Well, correct me if I am wrong, but I don’t believe the rules of the game prohibit a goal being scored with a penis, so yeah technically you could be offside via an erection I guess.
Scored a hattrick with mine once.
Big head
-
Well, correct me if I am wrong, but I don’t believe the rules of the game prohibit a goal being scored with a penis, so yeah technically you could be offside via an erection I guess.
Scored a hattrick with mine once.
I remember Subbuteo, too! ;)
-
Well, correct me if I am wrong, but I don’t believe the rules of the game prohibit a goal being scored with a penis, so yeah technically you could be offside via an erection I guess.
Tammy scored a goal with his todger last season.
One minute in on the video
-
One minute's a bit of a quick finish ain't it?
-
Excuse my faulty memory of matters penile but I would have thought, from memory an erection would tend to bring the most forward part of the male anatomy back onside while a semi would have the organ in a more horizontal position. A floppy might be onside or offside depending on the angle of dangle.
-
One minute's a bit of a quick finish ain't it?
Hark at Mr Showoff there!
-
One minute's a bit of a quick finish ain't it?
Hark at Mr Showoff there!
Just admiring efficiency! :D
-
POINTLESS
-
Where was it today?
-
If it can't correct a decision like that and put manners on a complete homer such as Kevin Bellend then what is all the fuss about.
-
Is it from next season that they're using VAR? Because they don't seem to want to use it this season.
-
https://twitter.com/it_is_elliott/status/1167828693827424257
How the fuck does VAR not give that as a goal? If that had been a goal disallowed in our favour i'd have thought we were jammy as fuck to get away with it, and i'd still be asking what exactly is the point of VAR.
Kevin Friend and VAR can suck my fucking balls, useless wankers.
-
A neutral viewpoint of this incident from somewhere else....
"Another completely laughable decision in Villa's game today where VAR should clearly intervene.
Grealish is tackled as he passes leading to a goal, but the ref wrongly sees it Grealish as the offender and gives a freekick cancelling the equalizer. Anyone with 2 eyes can clearly see this is a wrong decision, but yet VAR doesn't intervene costing Villa a point. Great protests from the Villa players "
-
I said exactly this about VAR.
it all well and good using it to rules goals out, but it cant overrule shit decisions by a ref that immediately led to a goal.
Waste of fucking time.
-
It can, and should, overrule shit decisions like that by the referee.
I've said all along it should be up to managers to have two challenges. Don't let cheats like Friend have the final say.
-
Implementation of VAR isn't right, last weekend you saw obvious penalties not being given. We got away with one when Trezeguet kicked a Bournemouth player in the box.
If the ref is wrong, he's wrong. You shouldn't make a song and dance about bringing this in if you're just going to side with refs when they make wrong decisions.
-
There is no point at all in having VAR it wild seem.
-
Bag of fucking wank.
-
There is every point in VAR. Today was a great example of why it should be used. It shouldn't be left up to cheats like Friend, though.
-
VAR is going with the on-field decision 9 times out of 10. It's the referee's union sticking up for eachother.
-
There is every point in VAR. Today was a great example of why it should be used. It shouldn't be left up to cheats like Friend, though.
The point is, it wasn't and that's why it's currently not fit for purpose. It's ruining the game.
-
I hate VAR and would gladly abandon it now but this was an instance where it should have been used to correct the mistake, if it wasn’t there, same outcome surely?
-
How did it ruin the game, it wasn't used!
-
Fuck it in the fucking bin. I defended it in the summer but after seeing how it's been used or rather not used so far this season, there's entirely no point to it. Hasn't changed shite refereeing one bit. All it's done when it's been used is get people's backs up about millimetres. No improvement on where we were before.
-
Dreadful decision in the Leicester game as well. One of the worst tackles you’ll see reviewed and then not given as red.
-
How did it ruin the game, it wasn't used!
By game, I mean the sport.
Yes, it wasn't used, that's the point. It should have been used to correct the refs mistake.
-
Get rid. Utterly pointless.
-
It's not pointless, it needs to be used properly. And Friend needs to be banned, stop using VAR as a reason to excuse the cheating bastard
-
It's not pointless, it needs to be used properly. And Friend needs to be banned, stop using VAR as a reason to excuse the cheating bastard
VAR supported his decision. Which we all agree - as do all neutrals I've seen comment on the decision - was incorrect. So what's the point of VAR then?
-
Make it simple:
Each manager gets 2/3 challenges per game. They can choose when to use them.. simple?
-
It's pointless because it serves no purposeful use.
-
The premier league directive is the issue.
It's odd as in FA cup you've had refs going to monitors constantly to look at decisions. I know the time delay annoys people as much but at least the ref is getting visual evidence of whether his decision is right or not rather than just a word in the ear.
Don't think I've seen a ref yet this season go and watch a monitor pitch side. Put one by the corner flag if people are worried about the time it will take.
-
Friend didn't cheat and it's pretty saft saying he did, and I don't think VAR checked the decision at the time. Or even if it did it couldn't overrule on the goal if Friend had already blown for the 'dive'.
What should happen, imo, is that in that situation now we have VAR even if the ref thinks there's a dive play continues, if a goal is scored and ref immediately indicates a VAR check. He says "I felt X player dived, please check if he did" and VAR looks and says yes he did or no he didn't.
-
VAR could not have given us the goal back, as the ref, mistakenly in my view, blew his whistle before we scored.
As far as I'm aware, VAR is not yet going to be used for every free kick or foul given, unless it results in a penalty or denies a penalty.
-
The premier league directive is the issue.
It's odd as in FA cup you've had refs going to monitors constantly to look at decisions. I know the time delay annoys people as much but at least the ref is getting visual evidence of whether his decision is right or not rather than just a word in the ear.
Don't think I've seen a ref yet this season go and watch a monitor pitch side. Put one by the corner flag if people are worried about the time it will take.
How many Premier League screens have big screens in their grounds to show replays anyway? They don't need to come over to the touchline to view a small screen when it's being shown to the crowd seconds later anyway.
-
It's pointless. I didn't like it, and I like it even less tonight.
No doubt we'll get Alan Shearer telling us all about it again on the big screen at Villa Park before the West Ham me.
-
Gary Lineker
The disallowed goal for @AVFCOfficial in the last minute has to be seen to be believed. Why VAR didn’t correct what appeared to be an awful refereeing error is beyond me.
-
Utterly pointless if it isn’t going to correct stuff like that.
-
Friend didn't cheat and it's pretty saft saying he did, and I don't think VAR checked the decision at the time. Or even if it did it couldn't overrule on the goal if Friend had already blown for the 'dive'.
What should happen, imo, is that in that situation now we have VAR even if the ref thinks there's a dive play continues, if a goal is scored and ref immediately indicates a VAR check. He says "I felt X player dived, please check if he did" and VAR looks and says yes he did or no he didn't.
As ever PWS trouble with that is far too much common sense would be applied and we see frequently in Football it's rarely used on and off the pitch.
To think a player has dived and actually book them you must be 100% and well from the replays it simply wasn't due to contact from at least one Palace player.
Really poor and exactly the sort of decision that should be looked at and reversed.
Only thing I would say is last week Jack had similar run in at the other end with Richarlison. I thought there was enough there for a penalty tbh and was amazed it wasn't referred.
So we lose out on point today but could've easily struggled to get one last week if that was given and Everton had scored to go one up.
-
It's not pointless, it needs to be used properly. And Friend needs to be banned, stop using VAR as a reason to excuse the cheating bastard
VAR supported his decision. Which we all agree - as do all neutrals I've seen comment on the decision - was incorrect. So what's the point of VAR then?
Where has this info come from please?
If accurate that’s pretty scary that Friend wasn’t the only imbecile on the ref team.
-
The premier league directive is the issue.
It's odd as in FA cup you've had refs going to monitors constantly to look at decisions. I know the time delay annoys people as much but at least the ref is getting visual evidence of whether his decision is right or not rather than just a word in the ear.
Don't think I've seen a ref yet this season go and watch a monitor pitch side. Put one by the corner flag if people are worried about the time it will take.
How many Premier League screens have big screens in their grounds to show replays anyway? They don't need to come over to the touchline to view a small screen when it's being shown to the crowd seconds later anyway.
Just going by what they do at World cups and in the foreign leagues, always a monitor on the halfway line by the dugouts.
-
The frustration of VAR is that this utopia of getting everything right just doesn't exist so both ourselves today and Spurs last week feel doubly hard done by which is surely not the intention. It sounds like Freind had a stinker, you can view it as cheating or incompetence, but if we go down by a point it will be our own fault, not down to him. We still have plenty of time to redress the balance.
VAR is as flawed as the team of officials it claims to help.
-
Indeed, so maybe get an independent group working on VAR and not guys that will be in the VAR office one week and refereeing on the pitch the next week.
-
It's not pointless, it needs to be used properly. And Friend needs to be banned, stop using VAR as a reason to excuse the cheating bastard
VAR supported his decision. Which we all agree - as do all neutrals I've seen comment on the decision - was incorrect. So what's the point of VAR then?
Where has this info come from please?
If accurate that’s pretty scary that Friend wasn’t the only imbecile on the ref team.
Reported as follows in the Telegraph amongst other sources: "A Premier League official at Selhurst Park confirmed the decision would have been reviewed by VAR as a matter of course."
As I said before it doesn't work so fuck it out the window.
-
If var had been used it would at least have cast doubt on Friend's decision. I expect Friend didn't use var because he was worried about what the response would be. A bit like, if you don't like the answer don't ask the question.
-
VAR won’t solve corrupt officiating.
-
You have just described corrupt activity.
-
VAR won’t solve corrupt officiating.
Outside the realms of possibility for it to happen in the English game, according to some. Just have to ignore the evidence before your own eyes.
-
OK we know there are mistakes by referees, but fuck me, how is that clown today allowed to ref a game, and how the fuck will he be allowed to ref any other Premier League game?
And please tell me, why the fuck wasn't the cheating bastards decision looked at and overturned???
My understanding of VAR, was that those who were on the VAR monitors, contacted the ref if a decision was a Fuck up.
If that's the case, then those refs on the monitors were either totally fucking incompetent, or they were all fucking cheats.
Sorry if my swearing upsets anyone, and leads me to being banned, but tough shit.
I've said it as I've seen it !!!
-
Having just seen on MOTD you are right Eddie, it’s cheating
-
And how was it not a pen for Haller in the West Ham game?
-
And how was it not a pen for Haller in the West Ham game?
Yeah another shocking refereeing decision and an even worse one by whichever numpty was controlling VAR.
-
Not sure if this has been shared yet but the following is from the Premier League's statement on the incident:
"Under the IFAB Protocol the VAR is allowed to review the potential penalty situation. Having reviewed the incident the VAR judged that no ‘Clear and Obvious’ error had occurred and the on-field decision of simulation remained.
The VAR was unable to check the ‘goal’ because the whistle went before the ball went into the net."
So there we are. VAR says it was a dive too.
Fuck it out the window.
-
If it's not going to give the correct decision I fail to see the point of VAR.
-
And how was it not a pen for Haller in the West Ham game?
VAR has missed loads of clear penalties so far, players getting kicked in airs and yet no penalties given as it dosen't seem "clear and obvious" enough apparently.
You all see awful challenges like Tielemans not getting punished either.
I'm not anti-Var but the implementation so far has been poor and made it pretty worthless in its use.
-
The Newcastle goal should have been disallowed as well.
-
Imagine today’s scenario with Liverpool at home needing a goal in the 96th minute. Ref still makes the same decision? They’re fucking corrupt at times
-
Not sure if this has been shared yet but the following is from the Premier League's statement on the incident:
"Under the IFAB Protocol the VAR is allowed to review the potential penalty situation. Having reviewed the incident the VAR judged that no ‘Clear and Obvious’ error had occurred and the on-field decision of simulation remained.
The VAR was unable to check the ‘goal’ because the whistle went before the ball went into the net."
So there we are. VAR says it was a dive too.
Fuck it out the window.
Well, I’m not sure, it’s concluding it’s a dive, it’s in their opinion saying it wasn’t clear and obviously missed penalty, ie it could have been a fair challenge/fall etc, but not a glaring penalty.
What it’s not doing presumably is reviewing if it was or wasn’t a dive, do that decision remained.
It’s hard to imagine how you can undo the appalling decision to blow the whistle, which of course any oppo player could say they stopped playing after.
It’s deeply disappointing that we have this system but it’s not set up to be able to avoid cock ups like that. My gut feeling is we’ll eventually get better usage but that’s no comfort to the victims of a failed experiment, us.
All of that doesn’t challenge your conclusion about the defenestration of VAR.
-
Has to be clear and obvious. Yet it's only use has been to chalk off goals where 1.5mm of a right knee has strayed offside.
Fucking shite.
-
And to disallow a Man City goal for an accidental handball, but not disallow the Newcastle goal today for the same thing.
-
In the 40 odd games so far, has VAR overturned an on field decision by a ref? I don’t mean disallowing a goal, or pointing to something completely missed by a ref, I mean the ref has blown his whistle, and VAR has said, “No, you’ve got that wrong”?
Has a penalty been given by a ref and then rescinded by VAR?
I just wonder how much remit there is - if any - for VAR to contradict a ref for an onfield decision he’s made, and if that’s by design, or is just working that way in practise.
-
Ok it's the day after the event. I've now watched THAT incident over and over. My take is this. The first foul on Grealish was outside the box so VAR coul not have given us a pen. The referee is the culprit here. He's totally on board with the "Grealish is a fucking diver" bullshit. He couldn't wait to wipe the smile off Jacks face so to me it was personal and totally unproffessional bordering on a charge of bringing the game into disrepute. Jack was fouled but in stumbling forward still had the presence of mind to poke the ball to the unmarked Lansbury. He made no appeal for any foul or penalty. He did what we've been calling for him to do. He made a great forward run which completely unhinged Palace.He made a killer through ball and we snatched a last gasp and probably undeserved equaliser. Then Mr Friend let his preconception of Jack take over which totally clouded his mind and he quite literally couldn't wait to "punish" Jack and punish us. It was unproffessional. It was personal. I don't see how he can keep his reffereeing credentials after that. As for VAR i haven't seen them get involved with any decision for fouls outside the box with the exception of offsides. Even there i think it's fatally flawed. You can not give offside when your talking about a few millimetres. At the speed of todays game you have to be 100% certain of the precise moment the ball leaves the foot of the passing player and the system simply isn't accurate enough to do that. My two penneth.
-
Some odd VAR decisions in the leicester game too.
-
As with the handball laws I think the use or misuse of VAR has thrown up issues/inconsistencies with the rules around simulation. If there's a situation where there is contact but it is not a foul (which it is arguable is the situation in the penalty area yesterday) is it fair to book the player who's gone down? Being hyper-critical you could say Jack went down flamboyantly and certainly Conor was appealing strongly for a pen even if Jack wasn't. Personally I think it is harsh in the extreme to book someone for diving when there has been contact, see also the Man U player last week. Also I should add I think you could easily have given a pen there and Palace wouldn't have had much complaint. To go completely the other way and penalise us is just baffling. We have been extremely unlucky to be the victim of a ridiculous decision which by all accounts was the icing on the cake of a one eyed display. This has then been compounded by a chain of events that have meant that VAR is in no position to right this wrong.
-
As with the handball laws I think the use or misuse of VAR has thrown up issues/inconsistencies with the rules around simulation. If there's a situation where there is contact but it is not a foul (which it is arguable is the situation in the penalty area yesterday) is it fair to book the player who's gone down? Being hyper-critical you could say Jack went down flamboyantly and certainly Conor was appealing strongly for a pen even if Jack wasn't. Personally I think it is harsh in the extreme to book someone for diving when there has been contact, see also the Man U player last week. Also I should add I think you could easily have given a pen there and Palace wouldn't have had much complaint. To go completely the other way and penalise us is just baffling. We have been extremely unlucky to be the victim of a ridiculous decision which by all accounts was the icing on the cake of a one eyed display. This has then been compounded by a chain of events that have meant that VAR is in no position to right this wrong.
The one thing you can't blame Friend for is the sending off of Trezeguet. His assault on Zaha while already on a deserved yellow was just plain stupid. I've been pretty underwhelmed by him up to now. Having said all that i think Chris Kamaras reaction on Sky live commentary was very telling "Kevin Friend seemed very happy to send a Villa player off. He couldn't wait to show the red card and he looked like he relished it" An independant view that tells a story of the refs performance yesterday.
-
Some odd VAR decisions in the leicester game too.
Yes, the decision to book Wilson for diving was very iffy, a player can fall and it not be either a penalty or a dive. I thought he got the Tienemans one right, it looked bad but I think he was trying to pul!out of the challenge.
-
I suspect someone somewhere has had a very large bet on Palace to win one nil, and Villa to finnish with ten players.
-
All things considered i've come to the conclusion that VAR could become the worst thing to happen to the game in it's 140 odd year existence. It's fundementally changed the whole spirit of the game. But unfortunately i think it's here to stay.
-
I suspect someone somewhere has had a very large bet on Palace to win one nil, and Villa to finnish with ten players.
I think I know who. He's no Friend of ours.
-
Did the referee actually blow? The immediate actions of our players suggest that he didn’t.
It looks like a very easy cop out for the FA to claim this.
Although it is only a point and most likely won’t have any impact come the end of the season, it’s heaped immense pressure on us for the next game and possibly the one afterwards as well.
A point under the circumstances yesterday would have been massive and a tremendous confidence booster.
That bloke should never be let near a PL match again. It’s probably the worst refereeing decision I’ve ever seen.
-
If you are disappointed by yesterday’s decision that is exactly why we need VAR. We shouldn’t be ‘fucking it off’ we should be tweaking and improving it so ****** like Friend can’t keep ruining games in the future.
There will always be a bedding in period and as and when it has been sorted out the pain of this season will hopefully have been worth it.
-
If you are disappointed by yesterday’s decision that is exactly why we need VAR. We shouldn’t be ‘fucking it off’ we should be tweaking and improving it so c***s like Friend can’t keep ruining games in the future.
There will always be a bedding in period and as and when it has been sorted out the pain of this season will hopefully have been worth it.
The argument is that if the whistle was blown, you cannot fall back on VAR.
The ref was at fault 2 fold. Firstly for deeming it a dive and secondly blowing his whistle thus denying us the opportunity to use VAR which would have allowed the goal to stand.
This incident aside, VAR is becoming controversial and inconsistent every batch of fixtures that are played.
-
Did the referee actually blow?
Dunno but he definitely sucked.
-
You never see his hand go towards his mouth so he must have had the whistle already in his mouth ready to blow before play even developed.
-
If you are disappointed by yesterday’s decision that is exactly why we need VAR. We shouldn’t be ‘fucking it off’ we should be tweaking and improving it so c***s like Friend can’t keep ruining games in the future.
There will always be a bedding in period and as and when it has been sorted out the pain of this season will hopefully have been worth it.
The argument is that if the whistle was blown, you cannot fall back on VAR.
The ref was at fault 2 fold. Firstly for deeming it a dive and secondly blowing his whistle thus denying us the opportunity to use VAR which would have allowed the goal to stand.
This incident aside, VAR is becoming controversial and inconsistent every batch of fixtures that are played.
I agree. But refs will learn to start working with VAR and hopefully let situations like yesterday play out. Friend fucked up so badly yesterday VAR couldn’t step in. Hopefully in future it will be able to.
-
You never see his hand go towards his mouth so he must have had the whistle already in his mouth ready to blow before play even developed.
Loads of people are saying this since Linekar's throw away comment. You don't see him blow his whistle because from all angles that were broadcast, he's taken out of the shot for a second as the ball moves out to Lansbury, but he blows the whistle just as Lansbury is lining up the shot, which was pretty piss poor.
-
If you are disappointed by yesterday’s decision that is exactly why we need VAR. We shouldn’t be ‘fucking it off’ we should be tweaking and improving it so c***s like Friend can’t keep ruining games in the future.
There will always be a bedding in period and as and when it has been sorted out the pain of this season will hopefully have been worth it.
The argument is that if the whistle was blown, you cannot fall back on VAR.
The ref was at fault 2 fold. Firstly for deeming it a dive and secondly blowing his whistle thus denying us the opportunity to use VAR which would have allowed the goal to stand.
This incident aside, VAR is becoming controversial and inconsistent every batch of fixtures that are played.
I agree. But refs will learn to start working with VAR and hopefully let situations like yesterday play out. Friend fucked up so badly yesterday VAR couldn’t step in. Hopefully in future it will be able to.
Deliberately, IMHO.
-
You never see his hand go towards his mouth so he must have had the whistle already in his mouth ready to blow before play even developed.
Loads of people are saying this since Linekar's throw away comment. You don't see him blow his whistle because from all angles that were broadcast, he's taken out of the shot for a second as the ball moves out to Lansbury, but he blows the whistle just as Lansbury is lining up the shot, which was pretty piss poor.
Just a thought. If the whistle was blown for a dive, why couldn’t VAR look at it to determine if it was a penalty or a dive?
-
It did, and decided that the referee’s decision was correct.
-
It decided it wasn’t a clear and obvious error..
-
Yes, we can use VAR more effectively in an attempt to police Friend.
Or perhaps don't have shithouses like that on the elite level referee list in the first place. Put the money into better training. As others have pointed out, his band of admirers continues to grow and grow.
Yesterday's game wasn't a fiery encounter between two rivals, it didn't need that level of intervention. The best refs are still the ones you don't notice.
-
The best refs are still the ones who give us everything.
-
Yes, we can use VAR more effectively in an attempt to police Friend.
Or perhaps don't have shithouses like that on the elite level referee list in the first place. Put the money into better training. As others have pointed out, his band of admirers continues to grow and grow.
Yesterday's game wasn't a fiery encounter between two rivals, it didn't need that level of intervention. The best refs are still the ones you don't notice.
So true.
-
It decided it wasn’t a clear and obvious error..
Was it a penalty or not? It shouldn’t matter if it’s clear and/or obvious. VAR should be in place to assist unclear/non obvious decisions.
-
I actually think they're trying to have VAR delay games as little as possible as that was one of the big complaints during the women's word cup, but in doing so they're getting quite a few decisions wrong. I either want no VAR, or VAR getting decisions right even if it means numerous delays, this inbetween stuff at present is just pointless to me.
-
Just as VAR can penalise cheating, fouling ****** who play football, I would like VAR to penalise incompetent, wanker referees*who fuck up our days. ******!
*I know. It won't.
-
The ref in the Glasgow Derby today was superb.
-
I think you need two refs in the VAR centre for subjective decisions, that along with the referee on the pitch mans that these important and doubted decisions can be decided by the majority decision.
It could slow it down, but if we must have the system we have to do what is needed to make it worthwhile.
-
The ref in the Glasgow Derby today was superb.
I thought he was awful. Kept letting dangerous tackles go unpunished. McGregor and Jack both should have been sent off. You shouldn't apply different rules just because it's a derby. In any other match they'd have gone. Very lucky that no players were seriously injured.
-
AS others have already said ....Currently it's pointless. They've tied themselves up in knots about when it should and shouldn't intervene and it means it doesn't do what it was supposed to do in the first place , which is to stop travesties and miscarriages of justice like that.
It's not fit for purpose and currently it's making referees worse not better.
-
Kevin Friend
13h
I’m glad @CPFC praised my performance yesterday, & thanks for the free gifts from your club shop. #Palace #villa
-
Kevin Friend
13h
I’m glad @CPFC praised my performance yesterday, & thanks for the free gifts from your club shop. #Palace #villa
As believable as that is, its a parody account.
-
Dammit I wanted to see how many fell for it!
-
Killing the game and only 4 weeks in
-
VAR or no VAR, Friend would still have disallowed the goal...because he's incompetent.
-
It decided it wasn’t a clear and obvious error..
Was it a penalty or not? It shouldn’t matter if it’s clear and/or obvious. VAR should be in place to assist unclear/non obvious decisions.
So in effect var is sitting on the fence. Dean Smith should request clarification on the sequence of events.
Apparently var look at all goals now so if Friend had not judged it a dive and given a goal would var have intervened and disallowed the goal? Highly unlikely I'd say.
-
I think you need two refs in the VAR centre for subjective decisions, that along with the referee on the pitch mans that these important and doubted decisions can be decided by the majority decision.
It could slow it down, but if we must have the system we have to do what is needed to make it worthwhile.
Every VAR ref has an assistant
-
There's a whole bunch of problems here.
VAR can't review because the whistle went as Lansbury was shooting.
Diving or penalty is, in this case, being treated as a binary decision but it clearly isn't, there's plenty of cases where a player can go down in a tackle but not have dived or expect a foul, looking at the reaction of Jack that seems to be the case here. VAR shouldn't be having to decide if it was a dive or if it should be a penalty, was it a dive yes or no, is it a penalty yes or no, 2 separate decisions (and both no in my opinion). This wouldn't have given us a goal but it would remove the yellow card.
To play devils advocate it could be that Friend believed VAR wouldn't be allowed to disallow the goal because of a dive so felt he had to stop play. If that's the case then VAR as it stands isn't working because the whole point is that you let the play flow and then review once the ball goes dead.
For VAR to be accepted there has to be more transparency so the conversation between the ref and VAR needs to be on the tannoy. That's a big part of why the decisions in rugby and cricket are accepted without much argument by either side. In this case we may well have heard that the only option VAR had was to give a penalty and it decided there wasn't enough contact for that meaning everything else stays with the decisions of Friend. Doesn't make the decision any better and doesn't stop the goal being disallowed but it makes the VAR portion make sense and pins the blame firmly on the ref.
-
Excellent post, Paul and my thoughts exactly. The only way they are going to gain supporters' trust (by that i mean those in the ground), is to make the conversation audible and visible to everyone present. Until they do, people are naturally going to harbour conspiracy beliefs, as we did on Saturday. Additionally, the whole set up of who calls the shots needs reviewing too - Mike Riley isn't fit for purpose.
-
The absence of consistency is what's always been frustrating.
Would we have lost to Bournemouth if Billings had walked inside 40 minutes like he should have done? Trez deserved to be sent off, but Billings got away with 4 bookable offences.
So here we sit, with 3 points instead of 4, maybe 5 points because of gross incompetence directly impacting results. And where's VAR?
An atrocious system.
-
It wasn’t taken to VAR because apparently that twat of a referee blew his whistle before the ball hit the back of the net. VAR cannot be blamed in its current use due to the actions of an incompetent match official making up and enforcing his own version of the rules.
-
Dammit I wanted to see how many fell for it!
For what purpose?
-
Dammit I wanted to see how many fell for it!
For what purpose?
Shit gallows humour.
-
VAR=Very Annoying Referee and we seem to get plenty of those.
At present I see no point in it especially if a dickhead referee pre-empts its use by blowing his whistle as KF did Saturday.
I would respect it more if it was used to review a poor decision by a referee.
Friend's performance needs highlighting and punishing and the best way of doing that in a one off exercise, as a warning to all referees to do their job properly, would be for the authorities to award Villa 1 point whilst allowing palace to keep all 3 of theirs. After all players receive retrospective bans. I know this won't happen but something should!
Friend should certainly be made to apologise to the club and its fans publicly as his actions were public Saturday. If he did so his vanity would ensure he would never make that mistake again.
-
It wasn’t taken to VAR because apparently that twat of a referee blew his whistle before the ball hit the back of the net. VAR cannot be blamed in its current use due to the actions of an incompetent match official making up and enforcing his own version of the rules.
The whistle noise they showed on MOTD didn't sound like any referee's whistle I've ever heard, and as Gary Lineker pointed out, the ref didn't appear to move his hands from his sides at all in the footage. Maybe he already had his whistle in his mouth ready, who knows!
-
On the "was it a penalty" question I like a number on here didn't really feel Cahill catching Jack was a penalty but apparently Keith Hackett the former ref does. No consistency and I guess the only thing that is clear and obvious is that referees don't know what they are doing?
-
I have been out all morning and am wondering if anyone watched SSN? I ask because they usually have Dermot Gallagher on to discuss any contentious refereeing decisions that have occurred over the weekend. He's usually quite balanced and I'm wondering what was his take on it, providing he was on.
-
I have been out all morning and am wondering if anyone watched SSN? I ask because they usually have Dermot Gallagher on to discuss any contentious refereeing decisions that have occurred over the weekend. He's usually quite balanced and I'm wondering what was his take on it, providing he was on.
Im not sure even he had a clue , just watched it .
-
I've no idea if it was a penalty or not, to be honest I probably wouldn't have given it because even in replays I haven't seen anything to make me convinced it definitely was. I also think if there was a serious call for it then Jack would have reacted to it as he went down.
One thing is absolutely clear to me though, that you cannot blow for and book a player for diving when they haven't even made any indication that they even felt they were fouled.
-
I have been out all morning and am wondering if anyone watched SSN? I ask because they usually have Dermot Gallagher on to discuss any contentious refereeing decisions that have occurred over the weekend. He's usually quite balanced and I'm wondering what was his take on it, providing he was on.
Im not sure even he had a clue , just watched it .
Ta.
-
The absence of consistency is what's always been frustrating.
Would we have lost to Bournemouth if Billings had walked inside 40 minutes like he should have done? Trez deserved to be sent off, but Billings got away with 4 bookable offences.
So here we sit, with 3 points instead of 4, maybe 5 points because of gross incompetence directly impacting results. And where's VAR?
An atrocious system.
and their player pulled a Villa shirt back first half and didnt get booked and got a yellow second half so fairly he should have gone , the way he was booking Villa players .
-
This pic seems to show he has the whistle to his mouth
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EDcr6E6WsAE9aZZ?format=jpg&name=900x900)
-
That's quite clearly him eating from a tube of Smarties in his other hand.
-
I have been out all morning and am wondering if anyone watched SSN? I ask because they usually have Dermot Gallagher on to discuss any contentious refereeing decisions that have occurred over the weekend. He's usually quite balanced and I'm wondering what was his take on it, providing he was on.
Gallagher started off by defending VAR because it was not consulted due to the referee playing his whistle. He then went on to say that he didn’t think it was a dive, and it was a mistake by the referee. All 3 of them agreed that the goal should not have been disallowed.
-
This pic seems to show he has the whistle to his mouth
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EDcr6E6WsAE9aZZ?format=jpg&name=900x900)
Grealish already up, hadn't complained at all, and Lansbury just getting ready to pull the trigger. It's almost like Friend knew exactly what he was doing.
-
Meanwhile Cahill is still down holding his leg from a no contact dive.
-
The ref in the Glasgow Derby today was superb.
I thought he was awful. Kept letting dangerous tackles go unpunished.
And there you have it the dilemma of being a ref when two very reasonable fans call it like this.
-
This pic seems to show he has the whistle to his mouth
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EDcr6E6WsAE9aZZ?format=jpg&name=900x900)
Grealish already up, hadn't complained at all, and Lansbury just getting ready to pull the trigger. It's almost like Friend knew exactly what he was doing.
I think blowing up for a dive when the player has made a pass and the recipient is 'in his swing' is a new level of shithousery (and rules out any idea that palace players had stopped). I honestly can't think of a worse decision I've ever seen, not just because he got it wrong but because he seemed so determined to undermine the ability of VAR to dispute the decision.
-
If the governing bodies truly want VAR to work then let it make correct decisions irrespective of the referees whistle. Because if it’s not being used to actually give correct decisions then how is it an enhancement to the human only system we had before? If it sees an infraction or if it notices the referee and assistant missed something or our case blew the whistle too early that panel should be able to tell the referee that a mistake has been. If not it literally has no use at all.
-
This pic seems to show he has the whistle to his mouth
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EDcr6E6WsAE9aZZ?format=jpg&name=900x900)
Grealish already up, hadn't complained at all, and Lansbury just getting ready to pull the trigger. It's almost like Friend knew exactly what he was doing.
I quite agree, that photo clearly shows he was watching Lansbury - not Grealish; Zaha has his hand in the air saying not my fault he fell and Cahill is writhing on the ground from contact with the player who had the ball - begs the question(s) how was there a simulated dive if 2 x Palace players are admitting contact & why was the whistle blown just before the ball was struck by another player? Answer - if he had allowed the ball to be struck, then it would have had to go to VAR for a review on whether the goal should stand or be disallowed; he knew exactly what he was doing.
-
If the governing bodies truly want VAR to work then let it make correct decisions irrespective of the referees whistle. Because if it’s not being used to actually give correct decisions then how is it an enhancement to the human only system we had before? If it sees an infraction or if it notices the referee and assistant missed something or our case blew the whistle too early that panel should be able to tell the referee that a mistake has been. If not it literally has no use at all.
You quite simply can’t do that...the game would turn into an even greater farce than what it is now. Players are quite rightly brought up to play to the whistle, so any action further to a whistle is quite simply “not in play”. The Palace players could easily have argued that they stopped if the goal was awarded (even though it happened so quickly that would be impossible to confirm), so the crux of it is that referees must get their decisions correct or allow play to continue so it can be reviewed by VAR to get the right decision. It’s only when we have the likes of Friend running around the pitch like a little attention seeking Hitler making up their own rules that it all goes Pete Tong.
-
I have been out all morning and am wondering if anyone watched SSN? I ask because they usually have Dermot Gallagher on to discuss any contentious refereeing decisions that have occurred over the weekend. He's usually quite balanced and I'm wondering what was his take on it, providing he was on.
Hi Dave this is what was said.
Transcript of Source sky sports
INCIDENT: Henri Lansbury's goal is ruled out as the referee's whistle has already gone, so that Jack Grealish can be booked for simulation after going down under Gary Cahill's challenge. VAR does not give a penalty.
VERDICT: Wrong call, Grealish did not dive.
DERMOT SAYS:
"VAR was used partly on this. You have to go backwards on it. Did the referee blow the whistle before Lansbury hit the ball? He did, there's no doubt. So there's no way the goal could be given.
"You work backwards, was it a penalty, did Gary Cahill make a foul? The VAR looks at that and says no. I think they're right, it wasn't a foul, so you default back to the referee's decision which is that Jack Grealish simulated.
Whether you like it or not, VAR could not do anything about it. It all defaulted back to Kevin Friend.
"If the whistle hadn't gone, VAR would've checked whether the goal was legal, and the referee may well have said he felt there was a simulation, so I'm going to give that.
"They can check whether it's a penalty, but they cannot check simulation. The referee made his choice there, it's not the choice I would've made but he made it.
"There's three signs if we wait. Because the referee chose to make his decision when he hit the ground, that's the only thing you can look at.
"The referee's mindset is that he's gone over too easily, that he's trying to win a penalty. I thought it wasn't a dive. I thought Cahill has made contact."
Thank you for that, I appreciate it. Thank you to the other posters that replied also.
-
-
VAR in the Premier League
227 - Incidents checked by VAR
6 - On-field decisions changed
10 - Decisions that should have been overturned
Quelle surprise; the Establishment are trying to spin the outcomes of the experiment so far. These figures go nowhere near to describing the mess we've seen in just four weeks. Nice attempt at wallpapering over the cracks but we are not fooled.
VAR: Premier League referee chief Mike Riley admits four mistakes this season
Can anyone on this list spot an obvious error missing from this carefully selected list? Hmm? Anyone??
When pressed on why those mistakes were made, Riley added: "A combination of factors. That is the fascinating thing as this project evolves, we are constantly learning."
Then FFS do your learning away from the lives, careers and futures of the professional game, please. This is too important to act as a test-tube for you to 'learn' from. Such an irresponsible attitude is unforgiveable.
It's a mess at the moment; no-one has confidence in it because we can all see errors not being corrected. That was the whole point of introducing it. All we are treated to is more self-serving bullshit from the referees body propped-up by the PL telling us 'trust us to get it right in the long term'.
Is anyone else thinking that they are the last people we should trust? Kevin and his friends?
-
Could not agree more mate.
A bunch of self serving sanctimonious twats.
-
Mike Riley came out and backed Friend saying he got it right!
In my mind, that makes Riley an equally incompetent/cheat as Friend and also should never go near another pitch. Not even championship.
-
I assume by 'obvious error missing' you're referring to the Grealish dive/Lansbury goal.
On that basis lets repeat, VAR couldn't have done anything differently. The only choice they had to make was penalty yes or no, given no one even appealed they couldn't say it was an obvious error to not give the penalty so the on-field decision stays. The events after the 'incident' are irrelevant so "not a dive or a penalty so the goal stands" couldn't be an option because play had, technically, stopped before Lansbury took the shot.
Friend would know that the dive wouldn't have conveyed an advantage in the goal and therefore the goal couldn't be overruled because it was a dive so if he wanted to book Grealish he had blow the whistle before we scored.
The fault for this one lies entirely with the fucking abysmal decision of the on-field referee and no version of VAR would've seen us awarded that goal, VAR did nothing wrong.
The other incident we've had was where McGinn had a penalty shout denied against Tottenham. That one had a similar situation where there was a first challenge and then McGinn carried on and there was a challenge in the box. Again it was never a penalty so VAR got its review spot on (within it's remit). In both cases the issue is that there was a strong case for a free kick from the first challenges but the the games becoming stop-start (like in the Womens World Cup) meant the Premier League introduced a much more restricted version of VAR which doesn't allow the 'advantage', if the ref allows play to go on and then a 2nd incident occurs only the referee can take play back.
The short version, don't let Friend get away with being fucking useless by blaming VAR.
-
The short version, don't let Friend get away with being fucking useless by blaming VAR.
Accepted.
Words to live by.
-
Mike Riley was a god awful referee himself ,so its no surprise he thinks Friend made the correct decision
-
Where has Riley said Friend got it right? All i've seen is him saying there's been 4 VAR errors, which is very different to mentioning ref rights and wrongs.
-
I could've sworn there was something in an article saying he was happy with Friend's performance on the Monday after the game but I can't find it now.
-
Yes, said it right after the game.
-
I am certain i read Riley saying he thought Friend made the correct decision .I have tried to find where i read it but to no avail ,it was getting on for nearly a fortnight ago after all Anyway as far as i am concerned Riley was a a poor referee and Friend as most people have said got it wrong and made a terrible mistake and who knows it could have a big bearing come the end of the season
-
Riley said what Paul_e said.
It was terrible refereeing. Under the current system it was not a VAR failure. It should be a different system perhaps that could have overturned it, but once the whistle is blown oppo will just say they stopped playing. We’ve gone over this so many times.
-
How does VAR not give Liverpool a pen?
-
Literally just watched that this morning on MOTD. Incredible decision to give a penalty what are VAR doing
-
Literally just watched that this morning on MOTD. Incredible decision to give a penalty what are VAR doing
You literally watched it.
-
I say we take off and nuke the entire site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.
-
As much as I appreciated the cultural reference and chuckled (frankly most referees have looked like aliens to me for years) a serious point remains; how do we stop awful refereeing ruining games?
- It DOES matter when they make mistakes
- They DON’T even-out over a season
- It’s not good enough
We all deserve better. I’m pretty sure the clubs are as peed-off about the standard of refereeing as we are on the terraces. The players are as well, they have known for years what the numpties who administer the game on the pitch are like. The only people who force everyone else to suffer these awful performances week-in-week-out are the league administrators who support the referees organisation. They’re the ones we should put pressure on for change. They’re the ones who can make the difference.
Because the referees themselves sure as hell won’t, look at the mess they’re making of VAR so far.
-
Another VAR mess last night. Whilst it warms the heart to see Liverpool lose the penalty they conceded was a joke. The diving little bastard was going down long before he hit the defender's leg but because the ref gave it and it wasn't a "clear and obvious error" the penalty stands.
IFAB's obsession with avoiding "re-referreeing" matches is going to be the death of VAR. Where VAR works well, cricket and tennis, they have no qualms with overriding the onfield refs because the most important thing is getting the decision right. Cricket allows a bit of leeway for the inherent inaccuracies in the technology (ie umpire's call) but it's clearly explained - football isn't doing that, it's just implying the onfield ref is always right unless he's catastrophically wrong.
VAR is failing in it's sole objective - to cut down on debate over referreeing decisions - and if it can't do that, why would the watching world accept it's continued use?
-
I think the problem is more complex than that and comes down to trust. In other sports there is a greater degree of trust between officials, players and fans so when a marginal call goes with the ref it feels reasonable (outside of the moment, at the time it's very easy to get angry over it). In football that trust is missing, the most obvious evidence of it is that VAR happens in secret, any discussion or review is done in silence and the fans and players only see the aftermath of it. From the side of the officials I don't think they trust the technology to not undermine them and slow the game down too much and create problems by it becoming very stop-start so they're trying to take decisions out of the hands of VAR (Friend booking Jack being the best example of this).
In both cases putting the system onto speakers and having a live discussion that the fans can hear would go a long way to building that trust because the accountability would help fans and players understand the decisions but it would also help the officials realise that the anger directed to them is due to secrecy and inconsistency.
-
From the side of the officials I don't think they trust the technology to not undermine them
I'm always eager to listen to the reasoned, calm and objective points you make. But in the case above isn't that just another way of saying 'agree with the decision on the pitch whether it's right or wrong'?
If referees really do adopt that point of view then THEY are the problem, aren't they? Never accepting that you made a mistake is a fundamentally flawed stance because it is always wrong; humans make mistakes. It becomes terminal for them when we can see the pictures and watch the mistakes for ourselves.
-
From the side of the officials I don't think they trust the technology to not undermine them
I'm always eager to listen to the reasoned, calm and objective points you make. But in the case above isn't that just another way of saying 'agree with the decision on the pitch whether it's right or wrong'?
If referees really do adopt that point of view then THEY are the problem, aren't they? Never accepting that you made a mistake is a fundamentally flawed stance because it is always wrong; humans make mistakes. It becomes terminal for them when we can see the pictures and watch the mistakes for ourselves.
There's definitely an extent of that which is why the mindset of the officials has to be changed from seeing VAR as competition to seeing it as another tool to get the decision right. Imagine the game where assistant referees weren't a thing until suddenly being introduced to a game with wall-to-wall coverage as we have now. I suspect you'd have had similar issues with the ref trying to show 'who was boss' and ignoring flags or doing their best to make decisions before the assistant could step in.
Back to VAR I think that, by making the process more transparent and showing that it ensures correct decisions you'll see referees adapt, especially if it leads to fans being less hostile towards them. I just think the whole concept would work better if everyone understood it better. The arguments on here and more importantly on Social Media, show pretty clearly that the version of VAR that's in place just isn't understood very well.
-
From the side of the officials I don't think they trust the technology to not undermine them
I'm always eager to listen to the reasoned, calm and objective points you make. But in the case above isn't that just another way of saying 'agree with the decision on the pitch whether it's right or wrong'?
If referees really do adopt that point of view then THEY are the problem, aren't they? Never accepting that you made a mistake is a fundamentally flawed stance because it is always wrong; humans make mistakes. It becomes terminal for them when we can see the pictures and watch the mistakes for ourselves.
There's definitely an extent of that which is why the mindset of the officials has to be changed from seeing VAR as competition to seeing it as another tool to get the decision right. Imagine the game where assistant referees weren't a thing until suddenly being introduced to a game with wall-to-wall coverage as we have now. I suspect you'd have had similar issues with the ref trying to show 'who was boss' and ignoring flags or doing their best to make decisions before the assistant could step in.
Back to VAR I think that, by making the process more transparent and showing that it ensures correct decisions you'll see referees adapt, especially if it leads to fans being less hostile towards them. I just think the whole concept would work better if everyone understood it better. The arguments on here and more importantly on Social Media, show pretty clearly that the version of VAR that's in place just isn't understood very well.
Which bit of it don't you understand?
-
I just think the whole concept would work better if everyone understood it better.
Well I hate to disagree but I don't think the problem with referees and VAR at the moment is that WE are ignorant; it's that it fails to deliver fewer poor decisions.
-
Which bit of it don't you understand?
Nothing, but given the amount of people who wanted VAR to reward the Lansbury goal or who've complained about it other decisions I suspect there's a lot of people who don't understand it, which was my point.
I just think the whole concept would work better if everyone understood it better.
Well I hate to disagree but I don't think the problem with referees and VAR at the moment is that WE are ignorant; it's that it fails to deliver fewer poor decisions.
That's not what I'm saying. Whilst people are getting used to VAR I think being able to hear the conversations would make the process feel better and by being 'public' it would be harder for the officials to 'circle the wagons' and protect a bad a decision, which would force the ref in the middle to actually use the tool to ensure they get the decision right. That way VAR actually becomes protection for the ref because they have to present their thoughts on a incident live and have them confirmed, which should have exactly the effect you want of reducing the number of bad decisions.
-
And what is the point of VAR if at the end of the game we weren’t given a penalty for handball?
-
And what is the point of VAR if at the end of the game we weren’t given a penalty for handball?
My paid for, genuine video stopped at that moment. Please tell me it wasn’t another shite decision.
-
It could probably have been given but I wouldnt call this one a glaring mistake.
-
And what is the point of VAR if at the end of the game we weren’t given a penalty for handball?
Because the only people who thought it was a penalty were some Villa fans, and that's not how VAR works?
Just a guess mind you.
-
And what is the point of VAR if at the end of the game we weren’t given a penalty for handball?
I didn't think it was a penalty full stop. Nor the one when Jack kicked it against his own arm.
-
It could probably have been given but I wouldnt call this one a glaring mistake.
It's the sort that would've been given in the european cup. See some of the handballs that were given last season.
I think those awards were way too harsh and think for once with premier league and VAR they have got the template right.
-
And what is the point of VAR if at the end of the game we weren’t given a penalty for handball?
I didn't think it was a penalty full stop. Nor the one when Jack kicked it against his own arm.
Nor did I.
re: Jack's one, the rules now say explicitly that kicking the ball against your own hand isn't a penalty.
-
With the changes of rules regarding handball it was a penalty by the letter of the law. VAR only seems to be getting used for offside goals though so if the referee isn't going to give it, it's not going to get overturned. Referees too busy watching eachother's backs.
-
"I've seen them given".
That's what we used to say before VAR so what's the point?
Decision making in the game is as questionable as it ever was so I don't see what we have gained.
-
That's the frustration. If it's not going to be used then there's no point in having it.
-
It's gone now so it won't make a difference but that handball should have been given.
His arm moved towards the ball.
-
Just a query, as my understanding of the process and implementation of VAR is probably not very good, but is there particular reason that very little seems to be have been referred for a second look on the pitch side monitor?
Saw one in Granada vs. Barcelona on Saturday, which had some similarity to the one yesterday - cross came in and a player that went to block ended up unintentionally stopping the ball coming across the area with his arm (which was further away from his body that the Arsenal one to be fair). Only one player really appealed, but the referee was advised to check the monitor and subsequently have a penalty.
Admittedly, might have just been chance that I witnessed it in that one game, but just struck me as something that hasn’t happened much so far in the Premier League.
Is it different guidelines? Wanting to back referees initial decision more? Fan/Media pressure regarding decisions taking too long etc.?
-
I don't think we have the pitch side monitor in the Premier League. We do for FA Cup though, I think.
As I see it, it's like DRS where the presumption is umpires call and the bails are the size of a house, so its nigh on impossible for any decision to be overturned.
-
You have to question why bother having it when such an obvious penalty isn’t given and the VAR referees don’t have the bollocks to question the on field referee? Or is it only when their on the telly is it going to take place! Robbed again for the second time and those two points might be crucial. Fuck me! Even Danny Murphy thought it was a penalty.
-
The only time they seem happy to use var is when it wouldn't be considered a mistake by the officials. They're using it as a self serving tool to protect each others backs . They will give an offside where it's so tight no one could call out the officials. Even then it's completely fallable. If your giving offside for millimetres you have to be absolutely certain of the exact moment the ball leaves the passing players boot. And it can't. Thats impossible. Give the pen yesterday and you highlight the refs blatant mistake. And they aint gonna do that are they?
-
I don't think we have the pitch side monitor in the Premier League. We do for FA Cup though, I think.
As I see it, it's like DRS where the presumption is umpires call and the bails are the size of a house, so its nigh on impossible for any decision to be overturned.
This from BBC suggests that we do have them, but does go along with your interpretation of unlikelihood to overturn decisions:
“It is only if the replays show a different version of events to that described by the on-field referee that the VAR team will step in. The on-field referee will then decide whether to accept and act on the VAR official's view of the incident. This may involve the use of the pitch-side monitor, although the Premier League says this will be used sparingly, for incidents either not seen by the on-field ref or for those outside of their expected range.”
Seems a bit of a halfway house standpoint to take to me.
-
With the changes of rules regarding handball it was a penalty by the letter of the law.
Exactly.
It would have been a penalty under the laws used last season, too.
-
Danny Murphy rarely gives us much credit and even he said it was as blatant a penalty as you could ever see. So did Shearer. Compare it to the one awarded against Spurs in the CL final, where there was no movement towards the ball, it was kicked at him from about a yard or two away and anyway it was more on the shoulder than on the arm. That decision yesterday smacked of "not undermining one of our own".
I was in favour of VAR but I'm afraid it's worse than useless when operated by idiot refs backed by idiot authorities who are tampering with the rules to fit in with it, and who all seem to have a different set of criteria for when VAR should be applied. The penalty decision was a clear and obvious error in my view, and that of the MOTD pundits. That was meant to be the primary purpose of VAR. Instead we get goals disallowed for the tiniest margins of offside which are in no way "clear and obvious". It's fucking farcical.
I say get rid until they can decide on a proper way to use it, preferably by giving each team two chances to review and having an independent trained body of experts distinct from match day referees who make the VAR decisions.
-
I can’t wait til the ‘these things tend to even themselves out over the season’ horse shit actually kicks in. We’ll be flying.
-
I was on the fence, but the goal Tottenham had disallowed against Leicester was when I finally decided that I'm a Luddite. It was ridiculous.
Not using it in case it undermines our shrinking violet referees is utterly pathetic and needs to jumped on as loudly by the TV companies and managers who campaigned for VAR in the first place.
-
I thought VAR worked well in the World Cup. Probably because those people who were the VAR officials didn't give a shit about the referee on the pitch.
Here though, we have colleagues of the officials on the pitch having to call them out as being wrong, which just won't happen.
VAR needs a separate (independent) set of officials/experts/ex players(?) to oversee it. Maybe an ex referee (they don't need to be fit after all) and an ex player together so that they get the nuance of the game.
-
I do think it could be remedied, if the referee gets a VAR notification he HAS to go to the pitch side monitor. He then takes another look at whatever it was, then he stands by his original decision or he overturns it.
The final judgement call remains his to make, and everyone in the stadium can see what is happening. The only thing was, that it did take a bit too long in the world cup.
-
The way VAR is implemented in this country is bordering on masonic. It's a closed shop managed to protect arses and it won't change until the people responsible are dug out.
-
Watching Ref-watch on SSN for the first time - mostly absolute horse-shit and cringeworthy from Dermot Gallagher who’s just making it up as he goes along and frequently contradicts himself trying to blow smoke up the referees arses.
-
Pointless crock of shit, spoils the game and leads to just as many debatable decisions only with one eye on the dickheads in black whilst ''celebrating'' a goal waiting for someone in a room to make another arbitrary decision over if his elbow was offside.
-
VAR is nothing more than a glorified "arse-covering" operation. Anything to avoid exposing their mates on the field for horrendous decisions.
-
I hate the fact that a goal chalked off gives massive momentum to the other team.
-
When so many media, and so many ex pros have criticized two major VAR decisions that have gone against us in recent weeks you realize that something is very wrong with what ironically is meant to make the game officiated more accurately. These are multi million pound highly consequential decisions that can ultimately relegate a team. That’s not to say that we haven’t been the architect of our own problems but that is 2 more points we could have now. 2 very valuable points.
-
At what point can someone representing the club at senior level lodge a complaint of some kind? Or even ask other PL chairmen to meet with the people running this circus?
-
At what point can someone representing the club at senior level lodge a complaint of some kind? Or even ask other PL chairmen to meet with the people running this circus?
That's a very good question. I expect those sorts of discussions happen all the time BUT the current refereeing infrastructure and VAR regime is the one the clubs voted for! They effectively control the situation now by allowing this disastrous experiment to be run by companies owned by ex-referees and administered by the masonic glee club of current referees. Each individual club gets a vote at PL level to accept the regime they want in place. They have brought it on themselves.
That's what needs to change. The clubs are on the side of 'a fair and level playing field'. Same as us; we want and demand nothing more. The key point to grasp is that the clubs, organised through the PL itself, have been duped into beleiving that a system provided and administered solely by the referees themselves can work. It can't, it isn't. Self-policing does not and cannot work. Referees need to be guided and checked by someone else with a massive interest in the game but that cannot be the clubs because they don't trust one another.
It must be the fans. We want a fair game because that's the only way these horrendous mistakes which cost us all get eliminated. It must be us that provides the stable influence on them which flushes the system and helps it evolve as almost all other aspects of the game have evolved. Ther fans can rescue the situation by acting together in the best interests of the game. And what could be more necessary and valuable than a chance to produce a fair and level playing-field?
-
At what point can someone representing the club at senior level lodge a complaint of some kind? Or even ask other PL chairmen to meet with the people running this circus?
Not sure it quite constitutes exactly what you are asking, but I believe they had a meeting recently where it was at least partly discussed.
I think that was where Mike Reilly was claiming that VAR had only made four mistakes this season.
-
The standard of refereeing has been woeful in our 1st 6 games, even to the point of blatant bias (mr. friend). Even Sunday's ref had a shocker. He certainly did us no favours in the last 10 mins. Wasn't VAR supposed to address poor or contentious issues/decisions during games? Personally I've seen very little of this. We've been described as the unluckiest team in the league where decisions are concerned, but surely if VAR is being used correctly luck should have nothing to do with it. On Sunday's game we should have taken responsibility and seen out the game better ourselves, but as bad as we were at doing this, we could still have won the game if the pen shout was awarded (and we'd scored) and the free kick goal was chalked off for an infringement. Were these 2 decisions purely down to the ref or was VAR used? I genuinely don't know, but if VAR wasn't used what is the
f-cking point of it? It's okay getting support from people outside the club in regards to decisions that should have gone our way, but that doesn't redress the balance points wise. VAR should be doing this during games and clearly its not, so in my view is not fit for purpose. In the meanwhile refs will continue to be poor and get away with it.
-
VAR has been oversold, just like the "fit and proper persons" test. It won't fix everything but it will make some things more accurate. The offsides being looked at to the nth degree was agreed by the clubs and this is factual, you are offside or you aren't. It's less used on more subjective decisions eg penalties and handballs, unless it gives a view the ref has missed.
They have been bad at communicating how it is used.
Also I don't understand the handball rule anymore.
-
It's almost as if the more we scrutinise referees' performances and the more decisions we rewind and rewatch the more errors we reveal. I doubt refereeing standards are any worse than they've ever been, but I can see how it might look that way when every single decision is highlighted and debated. The only thing VAR seems to have achieved is ramping up the angst and fury.
VAR is like one of those UV lights that shows you all the bacteria on your pillow. None of it will kill you, you knew it was there and you've lived with it for years, but now you're able to examine it you can't stop and it's making you anxious. You can either lie awake stressing or accept that it'll never be perfect and get some sleep. Even the cleanest people have filthy pillows.
-
VAR is like one of those UV lights that shows you all the bacteria on your pillow. None of it will kill you, you knew it was there and you've lived with it for years, but now you're able to examine it you can't stop and it's making you anxious. You can either lie awake stressing or accept that it'll never be perfect and get some sleep. Even the cleanest people have filthy pillows.
I love the analogy so let's complete it;
'You can either lie awake stressing, go back to sleep and just accept the dirt or decide to clean your pillow at some point.' There. Those are the options. I'm choosing to do some cleaning.
-
VAR is like one of those UV lights that shows you all the bacteria on your pillow. None of it will kill you, you knew it was there and you've lived with it for years, but now you're able to examine it you can't stop and it's making you anxious. You can either lie awake stressing or accept that it'll never be perfect and get some sleep. Even the cleanest people have filthy pillows.
I love the analogy so let's complete it;
'You can either lie awake stressing, go back to sleep and just accept the dirt or decide to clean your pillow at some point.' There. Those are the options. I'm choosing to do some cleaning.
Clean till you're blue in the face Allan, you'll never get all the blemishes out while humans are involved.
-
Clean till you're blue in the face Allan, you'll never get all the blemishes out while humans are involved.
Agreed. But you will end up with a cleaner pillow to rest your head on each night :)
UTV
-
Quelle suprise!
Fans of beaten (often poor) teams, along with ex-players being paid handsomely to fill air time, criticising decisions with, or without, VAR? Surely not!? 😂
-
Clean till you're blue in the face Allan, you'll never get all the blemishes out while humans are involved.
Agreed. But you will end up with a cleaner pillow to rest your head on each night :)
UTV
Well you might, in time. How long depends on how clean it needs to be before the angst stops keeping you awake. In the meantime your boiler's on the blink and you've got some loose tiles on the roof...
-
Yep, we knew that.
-
I thought it was there also to stop cheating
There was the incident when one of their grounded players held on to Wesley's leg and whilst jiggling about slapped himself in the face and threw himself to the ground - blatantly cheating - nothing done
Then that piece of shit Sideshow Bob (cant be bothered to try to spell his name) waving the imaginary card at every opportunity as well as throwing himself down in the box when Heaton argued with him
And as for the handball - not sure what else can be said - I thought that if teams appealed instantly then the ref had a duty to ask for review. All our players claimed a pen but nothing even looked at
-
Is the referee allowed to ask VAR to take another look at something like in rugby? Or do they only contact him when they've overruled a decision?
-
As far as I can make out they can ask for a review but I'd be amazed if any of the c**ts in the premier league do any time soon.
-
Their penalty should have been retaken for encroachment.
-
VAR has been oversold, just like the "fit and proper persons" test. It won't fix everything but it will make some things more accurate. The offsides being looked at to the nth degree was agreed by the clubs and this is factual, you are offside or you aren't. It's less used on more subjective decisions eg penalties and handballs, unless it gives a view the ref has missed.
They have been bad at communicating how it is used.
Also I don't understand the handball rule anymore.
But the offsides are also causing a lot of controversy and are definitely not "factual" Theyr'e giving offside for millimetres but the system is not that accurate is it? To be certain of an offside you have to be certain of when the ball is played. If your giving offside for a tiny margin you have to be certain of the precise moment the ball left the passing players boot. It can not be that accurate. No way. All it's being used for is for officials to cover each others arses. It needs scrapping until it can be used properly and by impartially.
-
Seems like it just gives the officials a second opportunity to get a decision wrong.
-
A competition like the Carabao Cup should either have VAR all the way through or not have it at all. It will not be used until the semi finals.
-
Seems like it just gives the officials a second opportunity to get a decision wrong.
That's one of the best descriptions I have seen of this total farce.
The system operating in last year's World Cup wasn't perfect but felt like progress. This current incarnation hinders the game.
-
I agree, minor changes to speed the process along were all that was really needed, the neutered version they've implemented is a waste of time and just doesn't give the VAR system enough responsibility to have any effect.
-
A competition like the Carabao Cup should either have VAR all the way through or not have it at all. It will not be used until the semi finals.
This isn't correct, though your point still stands. VAR is used in all matches at Premier League grounds (or Wembley), regardless of the round.
-
Seems like it just gives the officials a second opportunity to get a decision wrong.
That's one of the best descriptions I have seen of this total farce.
The system operating in last year's World Cup wasn't perfect but felt like progress. This current incarnation hinders the game.
I seem to remember the refs going to a screen, looking at it for ages then still getting it wrong according to the panelists,commentators and everyman and his dog. It's a farce. Goal line technology is the only piece of tech that can not be argued with. It's precise its 100% accurate. Var should be used only as a retrospective training tool for helping refs or for clearing up any erroneous red cards either given by mistake or not given by mistake. Even then it will be open to interpretation.It simply isn't benefiting the match day experience for anyone and that makes it unfit for purpose. BIN VAR NOW.
-
I can't agree with that. Football is not special in terms of other sports. If it works there it can be made to work here but the administration - Premier League and Referees need to want it to. I don't sense they do at the moment
-
I enjoyed McGinns’s ‘fuck off VAR - it’s a goal’ celebration today.
Would have been nice to enjoy it for longer than 90 seconds mind.
-
I celebrated our actual goal at the kick off rather than when it went in.
-
I can't agree with that. Football is not special in terms of other sports. If it works there it can be made to work here but the administration - Premier League and Referees need to want it to. I don't sense they do at the moment
They've made a mockery of the principle of it, and the way it's being applied has 100% taken away from the enjoyment of the game. It's being used as a weapon rather than a tool so far, and that's shameful.
-
I had always been in favour of technology being introduced to help refs and get better decisions.
But the way they have decided to deploy this has been a disaster.
They should stop it and go away and experiment until they get it right.
Being able to celebrate a goal is one of the major reasons to attend a game for many but that enjoyment has been taken away.
-
I can't agree with that. Football is not special in terms of other sports. If it works there it can be made to work here but the administration - Premier League and Referees need to want it to. I don't sense they do at the moment
As a sport football is a lot more dynamic and fast paced than other sports that use tech. Cricket is simple. For example ball tracking can't fail. Tennis ditto. Rugby is closer in terms of the dynamics of the game and they're pretty good at getting it right. Football is different. Even when they do use var it's often still down to interpretation. Just look at the Grealish incident at Palace. The ref got that wrong and var was unable to correct it. Then theres offsides. They are giving offside for fractions when the rule specifies "when the ball is played" How can var tell the exact moment when it left the players foot. When it's so close there has to be an instruction like "unclear" It's just not working.
-
An offside should take no more than 15 seconds with VAR technology. It's the only thing that it gets consistently right but takes too long to make a decision. As we've found out, it's currently not much good for anything else.
-
An offside should take no more than 15 seconds with VAR technology. It's the only thing that it gets consistently right but takes too long to make a decision. As we've found out, it's currently not much good for anything else.
If they did add something like a "must be daylight between attacker and last defender" it would be even easier to see on a replay and even quicker.
Some of the ones it has given e.g. Sterling are just nonsense
-
On SSN yesterday they were showing goals from Serie A. In one game the Ref used the pitch side monitor before making his final decision.
Has anyone seen a Ref make use of this facility in the PL? If they have then I’ve missed it.
-
I mentioned the same having seen it used in La Liga.
I read something saying that referees have been discouraged from using it due to the longer delays it would cause.
You would think that they would be more open to this as it’s undermines the referee less due to leaving them with the final decision. Guessing they were anticipating a backlash from fans/media over the delays if they used it regularly.
-
I had always been in favour of technology being introduced to help refs and get better decisions.
But the way they have decided to deploy this has been a disaster.
They should stop it and go away and experiment until they get it right.
Being able to celebrate a goal is one of the major reasons to attend a game for many but that enjoyment has been taken away.
Very much with you on this, CL. I was staunchly in favour of video technology coming in and even up to the start of this season. But seeing what the Premier League has done with it... no. Nothing at all would be better than this piecemeal 'solution' being offered now, it's being used in all the wrong ways and isn't at all being implemented the way it should i.e. to support and correct the referee's decisions.
-
I had always been in favour of technology being introduced to help refs and get better decisions.
But the way they have decided to deploy this has been a disaster.
They should stop it and go away and experiment until they get it right.
Being able to celebrate a goal is one of the major reasons to attend a game for many but that enjoyment has been taken away.
I'd agree with this, the problem with VAR isn't about it getting decisions right or wrong, it's about the decisions that they're using it for and the choices available to the VAR official. It feels like the officials want it to fail right now.
-
Also how far back do you make the decision? One pass, two passes, five?
-
Which decisions you implement it for was always going to be one of the problems involved with bringing technology like VAR into football, given it doesn’t have the natural breaks like say cricket or tennis.
Smith mentioned about the two decisions before the first Burnley goal (throw in and free kick) being incorrect. Now, I personally would want every decision like that subject to technological review (and Smith wasn’t advocating it) but it is frustrating that, as I understand it, at the moment an offside twenty seconds before a goal would be looked at (to the finest margin) yet a incorrect throw in/corner/free kick decision ten or less before wouldn’t be subject to review.
-
Which decisions you implement it for was always going to be one of the problems involved with bringing technology like VAR into football, given it doesn’t have the natural breaks like say cricket or tennis.
Smith mentioned about the two decisions before the first Burnley goal (throw in and free kick) being incorrect. Now, I personally would want every decision like that subject to technological review (and Smith wasn’t advocating it) but it is frustrating that, as I understand it, at the moment an offside twenty seconds before a goal would be looked at (to the finest margin) yet a incorrect throw in/corner/free kick decision ten or less before wouldn’t be subject to review.
It just doesn't make any sense does it.
For me - and I'm not saying it's the best thing for the game - either you check everything or you check nothing.
I don't really fully grasp why it's not possible for a team of 3 (it's 3, right?) video analysts sitting in an off-site room with access to all possible camera angles and watching from different perspectives can't advise the referee in real-time that he's missed something. Whether the something is a foul throw or an offiside, someone being too close to a free-kick (or a wall), a dangerous foul, an off-the-ball-incident, etc. etc. shouldn't really make any bloody difference should it?
If there's been an infringement that the ref has missed but the video analysts have seen, it's a bit mental to then be telling them what they can and can't advise on, is it not?
It's all or nothing for me, you either let the ref get on with his job in full knowledge that some of these guys are just shite and should never be allowed near a football pitch - but you make your peace with that - or else we should be advocating that everything gets looked at in real-time and called back as soon as there is a stop in play if there's been an infringement.
This half-arsed approach is just resulting in a bigger mess than before as it's highlighting in stark relief every incorrect decision that gets made which can't be overruled by VAR for one or another ridiculous reason, which effectively makes the technology a very expensive waste of everybody's time.
-
I agree with that. We have the technology there to use and 3 people watching. A bit odd then that all it appears to be doing is offside more accurately than a linesman when its purpose is to highlight stuff the ref has missed and to right his wrongs. Or is it that it's applied very effectively in almost every other game rather than the ones that feature us?
-
I think looking at everything and them waiting for a break in play will cause even more issues. What if there is no stoppage for 5 minutes? What if another infringement requiring VAR happens during the interim? What happens if there is a red card offence in the interim but then you go back and VAR shows an earlier offence? And so on.
At the moment if it feels like the PL amongst others is in Beta testing mode for the rest of football and it will be something like version 6.3 before they get it right.
-
I think looking at everything and them waiting for a break in play will cause even more issues. What if there is no stoppage for 5 minutes? What if another infringement requiring VAR happens during the interim? What happens if there is a red card offence in the interim but then you go back and VAR shows an earlier offence? And so on.
At the moment if it feels like the PL amongst others is in Beta testing mode for the rest of football and it will be something like version 6.3 before they get it right.
You may be right, but in that case say it to the ref at the time - 'Hold up ref, you've missed a handball there'. Ref blows up and then makes a call as to whether he wants to check the screen himself to be sure, but in most cases he should be instructed to take the advice and make the call without a need to review.
-
I think looking at everything and them waiting for a break in play will cause even more issues. What if there is no stoppage for 5 minutes? What if another infringement requiring VAR happens during the interim? What happens if there is a red card offence in the interim but then you go back and VAR shows an earlier offence? And so on.
At the moment if it feels like the PL amongst others is in Beta testing mode for the rest of football and it will be something like version 6.3 before they get it right.
You may be right, but in that case say it to the ref at the time - 'Hold up ref, you've missed a handball there'. Ref blows up and then makes a call as to whether he wants to check the screen himself to be sure, but in most cases he should be instructed to take the advice and make the call without a need to review.
That's exactly how I'd go
-
So we've had the Grealish "dive", the Arsenal players in the wall, the handball that wasn't.
VAR is no different to the referees favouring the establishment. Its almost like a bullying tool. Bin it.
-
Officials having a blinder!
-
If the 'goal' isn't disallowed by the time the other team kicks off again, then the 'goal' should be awarded. Bloody stupid waiting for three whole minutes before the VAR squad get their act together.
-
If the 'goal' isn't disallowed by the time the other team kicks off again, then the 'goal' should be awarded. Bloody stupid waiting for three whole minutes before the VAR squad get their act together.
The whole thing is a nonsense. We're still getting controversial decisions. It got one right tonight in the MU v ARS game. Shocker from the linesman that var put right but they still missed a nailed on handball for a Yanited penalty. I think it's changed the game for the worst. Imagine a late late call like in our game v Burnley in a big local derby? Or if a team gets a last gasp goal (like us at Palace) and it means survival or at the other end a title decider? It will happen. Cue fucking pandemomeum. They're playing with fire imo. Get rid asap.
-
How wasn't that a Penalty for MU last night? It's far too inconsistent
-
I just think they should use the cricket or tennis model. Each team gets one “appeal” per game - if they get it right they keep it. Appeals only overturn the ref’s decision if it’s clearly wrong.
-
I just think they should use the cricket or tennis model. Each team gets one “appeal” per game - if they get it right they keep it. Appeals only overturn the ref’s decision if it’s clearly wrong.
Problem here is decisions in football are still open to interpretation a lot of the time. Cricket & tennis are much easier to clear up using technology. Last nights game was a good example. Same as us at Arsenal. Both were nailed on handballs therefore a penalty. Both occasions var failed to clear up a decision that the ref clearly got wrong. The system is deeply flawed in my view and unfit for purpose. If one of these clearly wrong decisions cost a club it's place in the Premier league would a rich owner be willing or able to challenge it in court? Just a thought
-
Can I ask one favour of those in charge at Villa Park?
Can we now dispense with having to listen to Alan Shearer telling us all about VAR on the big screen before the game?
It's not an FA requirement because Norwich didn't do it yesterday.
We all know what VAR is now.
-
Shocking mis-use of it in many games today. Not fit for purpose.
-
Shocking mis-use of it in many games today. Not fit for purpose.
From what I have seen and heard I would say it has been VAR's darkest day so far. I look forward to the MOTD verdicts on our game, the Wolves game and the Spurs game.
-
VAR needs to be suspended until next season. A complete (sensible) review needs to be carried out. A complete and utter shambles run by idiots.
-
Was ours today the first time it has gone against the referee?
-
I've watched it back three times now, and I still can't see what it was overruled for. If it's supposed to be used for 'clear and obvious errors' then that certainly wasn't one.
VAR is an absolute disgrace. I haven't seen a single instance of it doing anything right this season.
-
It’s a giant fun sponge, sucking all the joy out of celebrating goals. Scrap it.
-
I get that every set of fans think that the refs/VAR have it in for them etc but fuck me we really have been on the end of some pathetic decisions already this season.
-
I think it's now safe to assume that VAR will not disallow our winning goal.
-
I jumped up at my desk at work and fled forward like a bit of a twat when Targett got the winner, I quickly realised that I needed to get back to my screen asap and watch the replay carefully to be sure my outburst wasn't in vain. It shouldn't be like this.
-
At least do away with this ‘checking every goal’ cobblers, it’s a recipe for disallowing goals on really tenuous grounds, and it takes far too long. Refer goals to VAR if there’s some genuine doubt over them, or give each side two reviews a half, and a time limit for calling them.
-
it needs to be VAR like at the world cup - where the referee still has the final decision
-
I think it's now safe to assume that VAR will not disallow our winning goal.
Easy tiger, it's only 7.45.
-
I’ve still no idea why the goal was chalked off
-
It's the God-awful 'experts' analysing the VAR that's the problem not the system itself. They should mirror the rugby set-up and also allow us to hear the conversations between the ref and the visually- and hemispherically -challenged twats in Stockley Park.
-
I don’t think VAR is the problem, it’s the way it’s being applied. It really does need to be stopped for the rest of the season while thought is given as to how make best use of it. For me, the ref needs to be able to access a monitor at the side of the pitch when concern is raised.
-
Where I was sat, literally no one celebrated the second goal when the goal was in the net.
It’s ruining all the drama and immediacy.
-
Sorry lads, both of our goals have been ruled out, so we've lost 1-0.
-
Sorry lads, both of our goals have been ruled out, so we've lost 1-0.
Definitely NOT funny !
-
It's not VAR, it's the dickheads interpretation of it that's at fault. Given the general level of incompetence with refereeing we shouldn't be surprised.
I think Wesley's elbow touches the keepers jaw, but it's pathetic to say it caused the keeper to flap at the ball.
Who was in charge of the VAR today, Kevin Friend?
-
Martin Atkinson, I think.
-
I’ve never been so keen to see a kick-off.
-
VAR should only be used for binary decisions such as was the player offside or was the ball over the line. Subjective decisions should be left to the match official. It has totally damaged the dynamic of the game and let's the match referee abdicate responsibility. Hate it.
-
I don’t think VAR is the problem, it’s the way it’s being applied. It really does need to be stopped for the rest of the season while thought is given as to how make best use of it. For me, the ref needs to be able to access a monitor at the side of the pitch when concern is raised.
Well the monitors are there ready to be used but directive is disencouraging refs from doing it for whatever reason.
-
VAR should only be used for binary decisions such as was the player offside or was the ball over the line. Subjective decisions should be left to the match official. It has totally damaged the dynamic of the game and let's the match referee abdicate responsibility. Hate it.
It should be used for penalty incidents but they can't even get that right either, Man. City were denied a blatant one tonight yet Liverpool get that joke one in the last round. All because the ref either gave it or didn't so he must be supported at all costs.
-
VAR should only be used for binary decisions such as was the player offside or was the ball over the line. Subjective decisions should be left to the match official. It has totally damaged the dynamic of the game and let's the match referee abdicate responsibility. Hate it.
[I agree with this in principle. I thought the objective of VAR would be similar to introducing goal line technology which I think most of us agree has been a good thing. It is absolutely changing the dynamic of the players and the crowd and not in a good way.]
-
You only have to look at the players reactions.
Vrs Crystal Palace not one defender appealed for a Jack dive or against the goal. Cahill was holding his shin which proved there was contact on Jack.
Vrs Brighton, again, not one person appealed for a foul. The fact the keeper didn’t is enough for me.
How on earth var operator came to those two conclusions is beyond me.
I thought it might help, but, for me it’s becoming a massive hindrance, too much too soon.
I’m with bronte, use for offside and ball over line decisions, when they’ve got the hang of that put a bit more in.
-
It’s a giant fun sponge, sucking all the joy out of celebrating goals. Scrap it.
This.
It's ruining the game. Not being able to celebrate a goal anymore is about as bad as it gets.
I agree with everyone on here that is not technology that's the problem, it's the abysmal way it's being used. They're genuinely going to start putting people off watching football. If you can't celebrate a goal, what's the fucking point?
-
VAR should only be used for binary decisions such as was the player offside or was the ball over the line. Subjective decisions should be left to the match official. It has totally damaged the dynamic of the game and let's the match referee abdicate responsibility. Hate it.
Absolutely spot on.
It’s bad enough having one shit ref, today we had two.
-
I've had enough of it now. I want to shoot somebody, preferably Kevin Friend but anyone making a decision against us would do.
As mentioned above, there are just as many contentious decisions as there were previously. It has solved nothing.
Sometimes, they argue that they can see why the ref made a decision and they go along with it (regardless of whether it is the correct decision) and then other times (like today) they overrule the ref.
Another nail in the coffin for the paying customer as far as I'm concerned. I won't put up with this shit for long and many around me were saying the same thing.
-
VAR is sh€t and is ruining the game for the paying supporter in real time and we always seem to get sh€t refs.
-
I went for a piss just after i thought we'd we'd scored and heard loads of 'fuck var' mutterings so I had a feeling something was up. Not seen it back since but I didn't see a great deal wrong with it at the time. I hate it.
-
It's the God-awful 'experts' analysing the VAR that's the problem not the system itself. They should mirror the rugby set-up and also allow us to hear the conversations between the ref and the visually- and hemispherically -challenged twats in Stockley Park.
This is it for me, get the ref and TV official on comms and broadcast it in the ground and on TV, once we can hear what they're unhappy about it at least gives us something to watch for.
-
I could accept it ruling out our goal if it was getting pretty much every decision right but for example the amount of, what to me at least, have been blatant penalties that haven't been given this season makes it a farce.
-
Watching the rugby today, with the ref mic’d up etc....can the fans in the ground hear what’s happening? Guess not....but seems better than footballs approach.
I felt pretty deflated about going to the matches after the last couple of VAR incidents. I find myself doing very half arsed celebrations and waiting for the ref to put his hand to his hear. Shit isn’t it
-
I could accept it ruling out our goal if it was getting pretty much every decision right but for example the amount of, what to me at least, have been blatant penalties that haven't been given this season makes it a farce.
The one Watford didn’t get today is absolutely scandalous let alone the one McGinn won.
-
You only have to look at the players reactions.
Vrs Crystal Palace not one defender appealed for a Jack dive or against the goal. Cahill was holding his shin which proved there was contact on Jack.
Vrs Brighton, again, not one person appealed for a foul. The fact the keeper didn’t is enough for me.
How on earth var operator came to those two conclusions is beyond me.
I thought it might help, but, for me it’s becoming a massive hindrance, too much too soon.
I’m with bronte, use for offside and ball over line decisions, when they’ve got the hang of that put a bit more in.
The keeper was moaning half-heatedly before hand and then was more vocal after the fact. The push on the defender by Kane during the build up for their goal was even worse and was not even checked, only if Alli had handballed it. And being as they are very anal on calls that seem to involve Villa and not Spurs, they get away with it. For example Vertonghen's follow up trip on Delefou, No attempt at the ball and hooks the standing leg. Refs call decided even though he couldn't see the angle that the Camera was showing VAR. But then he can also literally pull the shorts down of the opposing player and not get penalised so I shouldn't be surprised.
-
It's the God-awful 'experts' analysing the VAR that's the problem not the system itself. They should mirror the rugby set-up and also allow us to hear the conversations between the ref and the visually- and hemispherically -challenged twats in Stockley Park.
This is it for me, get the ref and TV official on comms and broadcast it in the ground and on TV, once we can hear what they're unhappy about it at least gives us something to watch for.
It's only ever applied in a negative way, never a positive way. By which I mean it's used to take but never to give. It's done better in Europe and probably even the FA Cup last season (which wasn't perfect). There's too much at stake in the Premier League to be dicking about with something that hasn't been tried and tested.
-
I was in favour of it. I couldn't properly celebrate either goal today until the referee blew his whistle for the restart.
Sucked the fun out. Fuck VAR with a traffic cone.
-
We can start by removing that un-obligatory Alan Shearer bollocks on the screens before the kick off, it actually wound people up today and this was before ‘that’ incident.
-
It's the God-awful 'experts' analysing the VAR that's the problem not the system itself. They should mirror the rugby set-up and also allow us to hear the conversations between the ref and the visually- and hemispherically -challenged twats in Stockley Park.
This is it for me, get the ref and TV official on comms and broadcast it in the ground and on TV, once we can hear what they're unhappy about it at least gives us something to watch for.
Agree about the process not being clear Paul. Did the ref today ask the TV official to check the incident with the keeper or did the TV official intervene? For me, the latter scenario isn't right as the TV official should only really intervene if there is a clear infringement that the ref has missed.
If the TV official has given an opinion on something the the ref had clearly seen and not given as a foul then that's not a great precedent really.
-
I was in favour of it. I couldn't properly celebrate either goal today until the referee blew his whistle for the restart.
Sucked the fun out. Fuck VAR with a traffic cone.
I agree. Like our first real goal against Burnley today I was too tentative in my celebrations for Jack.s goal. There is something wrong when there is a bigger cheer for the opposition kicking off to restart than the original goal.
My take on it is that the ref should consult a screen at the side of the pitch as they did in the World Cup in Russia. The teats in Stockley are probably bored and looking for work thus jumping up with excitement when a goal is scored. Like traffic wardens with parking tickets I figure they have a bonus scheme for disallowed goals.
-
Just seen the Burnley one. Wow, he deliberately fouled Evans there didn't he?
-
I was in favour of it. I couldn't properly celebrate either goal today until the referee blew his whistle for the restart.
Sucked the fun out. Fuck VAR with a traffic cone.
Yes, it’s bollocks. It’s adding nothing other than a talking point for people who don’t go to games.
Fuck VAR.
-
I'd agree with that. I like the idea of VAR and I think a version of it which is implemented properly would benefit the game but this version seems designed to fail so they can tell people they tried before going back to the refs word being the end of it.
-
Farce in the Spurs game, VAR says no goal, ref gives it anyway. And another blatant pen not given.
-
Farce in the Spurs game, VAR says no goal, ref gives it anyway. And another blatant pen not given.
Like I mentioned earlier, why wasn't Kanes push looked at? Cleverly is motioning at that to the Ref and he never even asked for it. It was worse then what Wes did to the keeper, about that much time between the foul and the goal and yet not even reviewed at all.
-
Farce in the Spurs game, VAR says no goal, ref gives it anyway. And another blatant pen not given.
Listening to Phil Neville speaking on MOTD about how well VAR was used in the womens world cup made me realise that the refs in the premier league appear to be too arrogant to use it as much as they should.
-
The only decision VAR got totally correct today was against the Dingles it seems. So I think one in five?
-
The only decision VAR got totally correct today was against the Dingles it seems. So I think one in five?
Next week it might be one in ten. A statistic, a reminder of a world that doesn't care.
-
We can start by removing that un-obligatory Alan Shearer bollocks on the screens before the kick off, it actually wound people up today and this was before ‘that’ incident.
This. It needs stopping now. I actually didn't celebrate Jacks goal today as much as normal. I was almost waiting for it to be disallowed. The bigger cheer came at the resulting kick off. Fuck VAR. Massively.
-
There’s nothing wrong with VAR. However, there’s everything wrong with Mike Riley and his closed shop. It’s more bent than a six pound note, and these fuckers need digging out.
-
Just looked at the disallowed goal for the first time. Fuck me who are these dipsticks. Have they ever even watched football before.
-
There’s a comment from a dingle on the Express and Star website - “some players know how to use VAR to their advantage- Jack Grealish certainly does.” Come again? We have literally not benefited from a single VAR decision all season.
-
There’s nothing wrong with VAR. However, there’s everything wrong with Mike Riley and his closed shop. It’s more bent than a six pound note, and these fuckers need digging out.
I said exactly this at half time while everyone was venting.
It's a con. We're being conned.
-
Teams should have a challenge/review per half, like cricket.
-
Teams should have a challenge/review per half, like cricket.
That would create even more chaos. I say scrap VAR completely because it’s shit. We spent hours last night talking about a goal that was disallowed incorrectly and I thought VAR was supposed to put an end to all that.
-
That’s right, there’s no reason why VAR shouldn’t work in football but when you factor in the utterly incompetent officials coupled with a desire to look after their mates onfield it’s become a complete farce.
Job done you numpties.
-
I would like to know if the person who disallowed our goal yesterday was also in charge v Palace and Arsenal. We need some transparency on these mysterious nobs sitting in a room playing god.
-
Teams should have a challenge/review per half, like cricket.
That would create even more chaos. I say scrap VAR completely because it’s shit. We spent hours last night talking about a goal that was disallowed incorrectly and I thought VAR was supposed to put an end to all that.
I think there is a place for it, but the whole idea of of video technology in sport is to eradicate the 'howler' decisions. It needs to be far more lenient in allowing an advantage for the goal scorers.
I would like to see the off side rule change to the whole body being offside not just a part of it and it having to be a definite mistake by the ref to overturn a decision made on the field (not like yesterday).
-
It's just utterly, utterly shit. As others have said, it's supposed to reduce talking points, not create its own, as well as completely ruining the flow of the game.
-
Teams should have a challenge/review per half, like cricket.
That would create even more chaos. I say scrap VAR completely because it’s shit. We spent hours last night talking about a goal that was disallowed incorrectly and I thought VAR was supposed to put an end to all that.
I think there is a place for it, but the whole idea of of video technology in sport is to eradicate the 'howler' decisions. It needs to be far more lenient in allowing an advantage for the goal scorers.
I would like to see the off side rule change to the whole body being offside not just a part of it and it having to be a definite mistake by the ref to overturn a decision made on the field (not like yesterday).
But if a team could appeal, who would they appeal to? We're on the wrong end of the second decision, not the first.
-
Watching the rugby today, with the ref mic’d up etc....can the fans in the ground hear what’s happening? Guess not....but seems better than footballs approach.
I felt pretty deflated about going to the matches after the last couple of VAR incidents. I find myself doing very half arsed celebrations and waiting for the ref to put his hand to his hear. Shit isn’t it
Yes if the fans buy a radio thingy for a tenner. They can choose to listen to the referee or commentary.
-
I've seen the disallowed goal twice now and I still can't work out why it was chalked off. Wesley did jump in front of the keeper but the ball then went out wide and was played back in to Conor so the keeper was able to get back into place and make a save. Utterly farcical.
-
I've seen the disallowed goal twice now and I still can't work out why it was chalked off. Wesley did jump in front of the keeper but the ball then went out wide and was played back in to Conor so the keeper was able to get back into place and make a save. Utterly farcical.
It wasn’t exactly a clear and obvious error from the ref for the VAR guys to get involved.
-
I've seen the disallowed goal twice now and I still can't work out why it was chalked off. Wesley did jump in front of the keeper but the ball then went out wide and was played back in to Conor so the keeper was able to get back into place and make a save. Utterly farcical.
It wasn’t exactly a clear and obvious error from the ref for the VAR guys to get involved.
Yes. It's almost as if they are making up rules as they go along and taking the piss.
-
Exactly. It’s the kind of thing that could or could not be given and if the red blew up before the goal nobody would be taking about it. But if it’s a clear error by the ref I’m a monkey’s uncle.
-
I've seen the disallowed goal twice now and I still can't work out why it was chalked off. Wesley did jump in front of the keeper but the ball then went out wide and was played back in to Conor so the keeper was able to get back into place and make a save. Utterly farcical.
It wasn’t exactly a clear and obvious error from the ref for the VAR guys to get involved.
After yesterday, VAR should get involved with everything. Get involved with the foul and card given against Conor, which were blatantly incorrect. That was clear and obvious. Chalk off Brightons goal, as it wasn't a free kick in the first place.
I thought VP was extremely loud in its condemnation of VAR yesterday. Shame the powers that be won't be listening.
-
On top of making stupid decisions it is spoiling the experience for match going fans for the benefit of the TV companies who love the additional talking points for their pundits to analyse to the nth degree.
Scrap it.
-
Why wasn't their free kick that they scored from reviewed? Hourihane quite obviously wins the ball and there is no foul at all.
-
Why wasn't their free kick that they scored from reviewed? Hourihane quite obviously wins the ball and there is no foul at all.
No fan of VAR at all, but its for game changing decisions. The FK was in a fairly innocous area and we defended it abysmally.
Going down that route Brighton could easily ask for the blatant Targett foul on the edge of the box to be reviewed.
-
I've been a Villa fan for 45 years and Grealish's equaliser was the first time that I can remember not celebrating a Villa goal as it happened. I feel now that I can't trust anything I'm seeing. Celebrating after the kick off is really, really not the same but that's what VAR is reducing things to.
Maybe I have faulty recall but I cannot remember feeling robbed as I've left a game because of a bad refereeing decision but VAR is fundamentally affecting my enjoyment of watching a game.
It's wretched.
-
Had a quick look on a Brighton forum, North Stand Chat, and even they were saying the decision to rule out the goal was ridiculous. Seem a mostly decent bunch on there.
-
Its shit. You shouldn't have to wait until the game has restarted to celebrate a goal, but that is what it is coming to.
-
Why wasn't their free kick that they scored from reviewed? Hourihane quite obviously wins the ball and there is no foul at all.
No fan of VAR at all, but its for game changing decisions. The FK was in a fairly innocous area and we defended it abysmally.
Going down that route Brighton could easily ask for the blatant Targett foul on the edge of the box to be reviewed.
Which is fine because it would have been a fair and correct decision. Instead, we had a ridiculous booking against one of our players and Brighton were disadvantaged.
The problem is that VAR is creating more contentious talking points than it is solving disputes.
Yesterday alone, we saw around 3 astonishing decisions across 4 different games - Ours, Leicester, Spurs and even the Wolves offside was crazy even if technically correct. There are more wrong VAR calls than there are correct ones. Therefore, currently, VAR has made the game worse.
For it to work properly, there needs to be clear and concise guidelines/agreements drawn up on how it is to be implemented. Currently, there is no consistency and in our case yesterday, one man's opinion (on Wesley's challenge) overruled the referee's opinion on it. VAR should assist refs, not take decisions away from them unless it is something blatant that has been missed. This was the case with the Arsenal handball against us a few weeks ago and we begrudgingly accepted it. Yesterday, the exact opposite happened and we were the victims of somebody stepping in direct contrast to what happened at Arsenal.
I wonder how many managers are supportive of VAR at this point? Listening to Sean Dyche last night, he still seems to be, despite one of the most appalling VAR shouts thus far - Another one where one man's opinion on an incident overruled the ref's opinion.
The delays are also frustrating and people are now becoming less inclined to react to real live action and are more likely to wait for a VAR ruling. Wolves suffered from this yesterday because the margin was so close, as did we against Burnley a few weeks back.
There needs to be a meeting of all those involved in VAR. What could and should be a revolutionary improvement of the game is actually ruining it.
-
Let’s face it we hate VAR because every single decision has gone against us and cost us points
I wonder how we would feel if every decision had gone for us and we were sitting in the top 6
-
Had a quick look on a Brighton forum, North Stand Chat, and even they were saying the decision to rule out the goal was ridiculous. Seem a mostly decent bunch on there.
Yes - I've just been reading it. A good thread about Jack on there which makes a change from the bitter "Grealish is a diver" witch hunt nonsense that usually follows him tearing some team or other a new one.
The only thing I'd question is their opinion of Villa (which is that we will be down there at the end of the season) or that we are a one man team. Yesterday may have seemed like that but in most games this season, SJM has overshadowed Jack and others have also contributed more.
Brighton were very good and we were not at our best - Whether our performance was down to Brighton is debatable. I'm more inclined to think it was because too many players had an off day.
-
I just don't like it regardless. I can understand why it's been brought in but it's not really been for the better so far.
-
Yes we have been on the receiving end a fair bit, but it is just shit.
The game is worse to watch because of it.
-
Let’s face it we hate VAR because every single decision has gone against us and cost us points
I wonder how we would feel if every decision had gone for us and we were sitting in the top 6
Therein lies the problem.
If they can't get it right, or at least find consistency then what is the point in it? It is there to ensure the correct "decision" is made. Currently, it is selective as to when it is used, inconsistent and in some cases, one person's opinion against that of another as per the Wesley challenge. You could get 100 people to view that and I'd wager more than 50% would have seen nothing wrong with the challenge.
I suppose Leicester may be pro VAR after yesterday and I also recall them benefiting from a decision against Wolves in their opening game. By the end of the season though, I'm sure they will be victims of the lunacy that we've experienced.
VAR SHOULD be getting things right and we SHOULD be sitting top 6.
The point is that we aren't. Therefore VAR is not working. Of course we would be happy (as would every other club) if VAR actually worked in order to ensure fair play.
-
Let’s face it we hate VAR because every single decision has gone against us and cost us points
I wonder how we would feel if every decision had gone for us and we were sitting in the top 6
I still wouldn’t like it.
It’s causing delays and confusion and adding nothing to the game. If we have to have it then it should be for objective decisions only, offside or goal line decisions but if it was down to me we wouldn’t have it at all.
-
Let’s face it we hate VAR because every single decision has gone against us and cost us points
I wonder how we would feel if every decision had gone for us and we were sitting in the top 6
I still wouldn’t like it.
It’s causing delays and confusion and adding nothing to the game. If we have to have it then it should be for objective decisions only, offside or goal line decisions but if it was down to me we wouldn’t have it at all.
I tend to agree with you here
-
Hourihane scored just as i left my seat at half time. I met my mates for a beer only to be told it had been ruled out. Gutted. When Grealish scored i didn't even cheer as i thought it would be ruled out again. Totally spoilt it for me. I hate VAR. I don't think it adds anything to the game. It's killing the enjoyment of celebrating a goal. It has got to go.
-
Seems to me as it did in the World Cup VAR is trying to apply bureaucratic nth degree accuracy to a dynamic and fast moving game where the rules contain a lot of fuzzy logic.
Game changing decision? Impossible to quantify. Clear error? Same.
Before VAR I felt like fans had a good grasp of what a fair offside decision looked like. A goal where a player was roughly in line would not cause any consternation and refs mostly got it right but now you’ve got nerks poring over replays to see if there was a finger tip offside.
-
I'm surprised that after reviewing time and time again decisions so many are given wrong
The keeper yesterday was not in control of the ball so Wesley was fully entitled to jump up for it.
-
Offside used to be "daylight" between the defender and the forward didn't it. Not half a toe, as measured by some badly drawn lines.
As has been pointed out in the thread - it's coming down to one refs opinion vs another in too many instances.
-
It sucks. Football is supposed to be about entertainment and escapism.
It’s been replaced by VAR induced anxiety.
-
I was in favour of VAR but I'm currently against it as I think it's being used incorrectly. Has nothing to do with decisions going against us it's the fact that they are so often, imo, incorrect decisions. If Wesley had for example handled the ball and VAR chalked it off, fair enough. At least you can be confident that if the opposition score that way it will be chalked off. All VAR seems to be doing is chalking stuff off, often for things that aren't "clear and obvious", meanwhile it's not giving numerous nailed on penalties. So if it isn't getting blatant decisions right so often, what's the point of it, sides are still feeling aggrieved at obvious and poor decisions.
The delays were a pain in the WWC but at least it was pretty much always getting the decisions right even if it was for a toe nail being offside, in part because the refs would go to the monitors and weren't worried about over ruling their initial decision. I don't think there's been one case yet in the PL of a ref going to the monitor to have a second look.
-
Offside used to be "daylight" between the defender and the forward didn't it. Not half a toe, as measured by some badly drawn lines.
As has been pointed out in the thread - it's coming down to one refs opinion vs another in too many instances.
It hasn't been that for donkeys. However the benefit used to go to the attacker and having a part of a head or foot slightly forward seems to be going the other way.
-
I was in favour of VAR but I'm currently against it as I think it's being used incorrectly. Has nothing to do with decisions going against us it's the fact that they are so often, imo, incorrect decisions. If Wesley had for example handled the ball and VAR chalked it off, fair enough. At least you can be confident that if the opposition score that way it will be chalked off. All VAR seems to be doing is chalking stuff off, often for things that aren't "clear and obvious", meanwhile it's not giving numerous nailed on penalties. So if it isn't getting blatant decisions right so often, what's the point of it, sides are still feeling aggrieved at obvious and poor decisions.
The delays were a pain in the WWC but at least it was pretty much always getting the decisions right even if it was for a toe nail being offside, in part because the refs would go to the monitors and weren't worried about over ruling their initial decision. I don't think there's been one case yet in the PL of a ref going to the monitor to have a second look.
You're right, not one referee has used the pitchside monitors to review a decision this season. When you see some of the ridiculous decisions that are given, it makes me think it's a problem with referees not wanting to be proved wrong. The Wesley decision yesterday was incorrect and the decision not to give Watford a penalty yesterday was even more ridiculous. The referee should be ordered to use the pitchside monitors when it's so obviously wrong.
I don't object to VAR in principle but the "clear and obvious" criteria is being used very selectively and that has to stop.
-
Nail. On. Head.
Safe to say, VAR is here to stay but it’s current guise is dreadful. Either use it for clear and obvious (at which point it should be the ref making the decision by going to monitors and such like) or define it so it can only be for clear errors (offside, handball).
Our only complaint with VAR should be that it takes a bit of time (ala World Cup) or that on some few occasions goals get chalked off (ala augero goal v spurs in champs league). We shouldn’t be having conversations about the validity of the actual decision
-
Yesterday there in no way the infield Ref should have accepted reversal of his decision from remote Ref. It was subjective and as others have said he should have gone to the PSM and had a look himself. A clear and obviously VAR fail.
-
I've just watched MOD and saw the Wolves game, I know there have been law changes but after the goal for Wolves that was disallowed for offside, am I correct that that the referee allowed the game to re-start. I know for fact that once a game had been re-started after a goal has been scored, then that goal stood and nothing could be done about it. Can anyone tell me has this been changed?
-
Yesterday the Ref waited to kick off till VAR reached made a decision on “Wesley foul”. And for Jack’s equaliser most of us celebrated after BHA kicked off. So if you ask the audience the answer is once the ref has blown for KO it’s done.
-
I was for it but after yesterday and the selective VAR decisions and Deli Alli as well it's complete pants. The process is terrible.
-
I'm still in favour in principal, but fuck me they couldn't have made more of a pigs ear of the implementation if they tried.
-
As James Bond would say, "shocking, positively shocking".
-
Var favouring Man U there. Clear foul in the build up to the goal.
-
It was a foul IMO, a theatrical response undoubtedly but a foul nontheless.
-
I’d rather the odd bad decision than this crock of shite. It means you can’t celebrate a goal with any certainty. It’s going to kill the game.
-
Does the Prem have to have VAR? Or can they bin it off if they want?
-
Having the Rugby World Cup on shows how poor VAR is compared to TMO usage. No accountability or understanding of decision making in football.
-
There's absolutely no planet on which Wesley's "foul" was more of an offence than that one that just awarded a goal to Man U.
It seems that the rule is just to fuck over whichever team I want to win on any given occasion.
-
Does the Prem have to have VAR? Or can they bin it off if they want?
The likelihood of the PL admitting its a pile of shit is quite low.
-
VAR needs to be suspended until next summer. A shocking mess so far this season. It needs a complete review. Offsides shouldn't be decided by a toe nail!
-
Yesterday there in no way the infield Ref should have accepted reversal of his decision from remote Ref. It was subjective and as others have said he should have gone to the PSM and had a look himself. A clear and obviously VAR fail.
Sky commentators have just been discussing how they’ve been told that the on field ref will not be looking at the screen
-
Has a screen been used yet?
-
Having the Rugby World Cup on shows how poor VAR is compared to TMO usage. No accountability or understanding of decision making in football.
The rugby TMO isn’t perfect but there is clear teamwork between all three on field officials and the TMO.
The VAR people and refs need to seek advice from the likes of Graham Hughes, Wayne Barnes and Nigel Owens
-
Absolute shambles
I’d rather have just the one cock up from the ref and get on with it
The officials are obviously incapable of making it work as it was envisaged
Scrap it
-
Having the Rugby World Cup on shows how poor VAR is compared to TMO usage. No accountability or understanding of decision making in football.
The rugby TMO isn’t perfect but there is clear teamwork between all three on field officials and the TMO.
The VAR people and refs need to seek advice from the likes of Graham Hughes, Wayne Barnes and Nigel Owens
The referee and TMO being miked up and explaining the decision certainly helps. Not sure why football is so reticent to do the same.
-
Having the Rugby World Cup on shows how poor VAR is compared to TMO usage. No accountability or understanding of decision making in football.
The rugby TMO isn’t perfect but there is clear teamwork between all three on field officials and the TMO.
The VAR people and refs need to seek advice from the likes of Graham Hughes, Wayne Barnes and Nigel Owens
The referee and TMO being miked up and explaining the decision certainly helps. Not sure why football is so reticent to do the same.
I'd imagine anything picked up by a football refs mike is utterly unbroadcastable.
-
Having the Rugby World Cup on shows how poor VAR is compared to TMO usage. No accountability or understanding of decision making in football.
The rugby TMO isn’t perfect but there is clear teamwork between all three on field officials and the TMO.
The VAR people and refs need to seek advice from the likes of Graham Hughes, Wayne Barnes and Nigel Owens
The referee and TMO being miked up and explaining the decision certainly helps. Not sure why football is so reticent to do the same.
My take on that would be that the laws of the game being as wide open to interpretation as they are, the referee's would be leaving themselves wide open to ridicule more than they already are.
-
I’m hoping for a really controversial point in this game, so bad that it forces something to change with VAR. The only way change will happen is it one of the big boys get a shocker against them in a live game.
-
Has a screen been used yet?
I think they said on MOTD last night that the pitch side monitor hasn't been used in any game so far this season
-
Having the Rugby World Cup on shows how poor VAR is compared to TMO usage. No accountability or understanding of decision making in football.
The rugby TMO isn’t perfect but there is clear teamwork between all three on field officials and the TMO.
The VAR people and refs need to seek advice from the likes of Graham Hughes, Wayne Barnes and Nigel Owens
The referee and TMO being miked up and explaining the decision certainly helps. Not sure why football is so reticent to do the same.
My take on that would be that the laws of the game being as wide open to interpretation as they are, the referee's would be leaving themselves wide open to ridicule more than they already are.
That's largely true for rugby and cricket as well though and it gets used there. The benefit is that it gives the official to set out what they've seen and how they're judging it. You can still disagree but at least you know exactly what grounds you disagree on. VAR currently seems to be bizarre reviews of tight calls and no review where it's obviously needed.
-
Here's my take:
1. In a League competition good and bad decisions should even themselves out over the season. So in terms of overall fairness, over 38 games (46 for those lower league clubs) competition good and bad decisions - both for and against will even themselves out.
2.Top clubs are at the top because they are the best teams. You might say they get more penalties awarded than teams at the bottom, and that this is unfair.
3. The counter argument to this is that top clubs get into their opponent's boxes more often so their players are more likely to get tackled = more fouls = more penalties.
4. They are therefore being "rewarded" for being better at attacking.
5. Conversely, clubs at the bottom are more likely to concede penalties because they're defending in their boxes more often = more tackles made, corners and free kicks defended = more fouls/handball = more penalties given away.
Get rid of VAR - it serves absolutely no purpose at all to the fairness of league competition.
It's a monumental failure.
Now Cup competitions are a different matter entirely.......
-
I’m hoping for a really controversial point in this game, so bad that it forces something to change with VAR. The only way change will happen is it one of the big boys get a shocker against them in a live game.
I think you're right, imagine that Man City score our goal against Liverpool in a title decider and have it ruled out in similar circumstances.
-
Has a screen been used yet?
No.
It has been used a few times in the FA cup over last two seasons. Think a red card was overturned in one of the games last season and also penalties given or not.
-
In Rugby isn’t the responsibility with the Ref ?, he determines what question is asked and when to call it.
The complete abdication of responsibility by the ref is part of the problem.
-
I see Klippity is now moaning about VAR in his own unique way. ie, the ref would have blown for a foul, but VAR meant he didn't as he knew that would correct him, then it didn't because reasons. Didnt see him complaining when his player dived and VAR didn't overule it the other week.
-
I see Klippity is now moaning about VAR in his own unique way. ie, the ref would have blown for a foul, but VAR meant he didn't as he knew that would correct him, then it didn't because reasons. Didnt see him complaining when his player dived and VAR didn't overule it the other week.
This just adds to the lunacy of it all. He claims the protocol is to "let the game run" (which if true, did not happen for our goal v Palace). Surely if the ref sees a foul, he should blow? Otherwise, there is no point him being there.
-
I think, Like the moaning one beforehand, he is just looking for excuses on one they didn't win the match. I personally don't think the protocol is let it run at all, even after Friend decided to do that on the next match to eff us up even more. There also needs to be a set amount of time or passes or area from goal where the review shouldn't be needed in my eyes as well. To review a potential foul 20 yards inside the other half for chalking off a goal the other end is starting to push it as well. The really stupid thing though is that there was probably as much contact there as there was for the Liverpool pen the other week, yet as one was called foul and the other wasn't, then the ref's decision stands.
-
It’s fucking shit. It’s even worse than any bollocks ref.
-
If we must have it, don't allow secret refs locked in a room to decide, use the pitchside TV screen you cowards. Terrible addition to the game though.
-
Agreed. Pipe the replay onto the screen for the 4th official to decide pitch side to at least have some up front responsibility. At the moment VAR is just used to confirm shit decisions by their mates, give nonsensical handball decisions (Greek fella at Arseanal is blatant handball and not given, ball brushes hand of Man City player against Spurs and goal is disallowed - clearly intent and not given in the first, no intent and given in the second incident - utter trollope) and piss everyone off. They need to bin it, or make it actually overturn the shit decisions.
-
In Rugby isn’t the responsibility with the Ref ?, he determines what question is asked and when to call it.
The complete abdication of responsibility by the ref is part of the problem.
Isn't there an element of the TMO having a word in the refs ear when he's missed something serious?
-
In Rugby isn’t the responsibility with the Ref ?, he determines what question is asked and when to call it.
The complete abdication of responsibility by the ref is part of the problem.
Isn't there an element of the TMO having a word in the refs ear when he's missed something serious?
Yep. They don't do it much, just when they are pretty sure that the ref has missed something.
-
Get rid. As already mentioned, how they are using VAR is a complete farce. Until the Premier League and match officials agree to use it correctly and consistently in the right way then we’re much better off without it. VAR is a joke in its current format, and the decision makers in our game should all be suitably embarrassed.
-
For those of us who attend Premier League matches in the stadium VAR is ruining the major enjoyment – that of celebrating a goal by your team. Twice at Villa Park and once at Selhurst Park I have been jumping around only to be brought up short and, after a delay, a free kick taken by the defending team. On Saturday Hourihane’s screamer hit the back of the net, none of the Brighton players appealed (inc. their keeper), the ref thought it was OK and the teams headed for the centre circle only for someone miles away to rule it out. The loudest cheer now comes when the game is restarted with a kick off by the defending team.
As an aside I heard Andre Marriner speak and he said that refs don’t want their microphone broadcast because of their language.
-
So true Scratchins, you almost daren’t over celebrate until you are sure it won’t be chalked off. I still cannot understand saturday‘s latest VAR nonsense. I’ve watched the incident many times and cannot see where the clear and obvious error is. Perhaps the system will evolve but at the moment it’s hopelessly inaccurate.
-
In fairness. The handball rule has been changed so it’s any contact for an attacker (ala Mane) is handball but not the case for defenders. I don’t mind the Mane one and the lack of complaint shows the players didn’t either. As for the Sokratis one though.... if you don’t give that because it’s not clear and obvious (each to their own but I’d grudgingly accept) then you definitely can’t give the Wesley foul.
-
It seems so wrong, elongated and poor set up compared to rugby union TMO
-
In fairness. The handball rule has been changed so it’s any contact for an attacker (ala Mane) is handball but not the case for defenders. I don’t mind the Mane one and the lack of complaint shows the players didn’t either. As for the Sokratis one though.... if you don’t give that because it’s not clear and obvious (each to their own but I’d grudgingly accept) then you definitely can’t give the Wesley foul.
The appalling inconsistency is one of the problems. We've been told time and time again that it's a "high bar" for the off field VAR team to overrule the on field ref. So why was ours overruled, when it quite obviously wasn't a foul? And yet yesterday, a goal after a much more obvious foul wasn't chalked off. It's made to look even poorer by having the same two referees involved that bodged our game.
-
In fairness. The handball rule has been changed so it’s any contact for an attacker (ala Mane) is handball but not the case for defenders. I don’t mind the Mane one and the lack of complaint shows the players didn’t either. As for the Sokratis one though.... if you don’t give that because it’s not clear and obvious (each to their own but I’d grudgingly accept) then you definitely can’t give the Wesley foul.
The appalling inconsistency is one of the problems. We've been told time and time again that it's a "high bar" for the off field VAR team to overrule the on field ref. So why was ours overruled, when it quite obviously wasn't a foul? And yet yesterday, a goal after a much more obvious foul wasn't chalked off. It's made to look even poorer by having the same two referees involved that bodged our game.
It's incredibly poor at the moment. I'm still one of the few who believes in the principal of VAR, but it seems to be being implemented by morons.
-
I find it interesting that there isn't more noise coming from within clubs. It's clear that a majority of fans, even those who were in favour or on the fence in the summer, are now against the poor and at times indefensible use of the technology. Dean Smith among other managers has expressed frustration with it. I can only imagine that Purslow and other CEOs are just as annoyed by its inconsistency as the fans are.
I'd have thought it must be getting to the point that the clubs need to call a meeting to discuss the issue. They should, at the very least, ask the PL suspend the use of VAR until the many issues have demonstrably been ironed out.
-
In fairness. The handball rule has been changed so it’s any contact for an attacker (ala Mane) is handball but not the case for defenders. I don’t mind the Mane one and the lack of complaint shows the players didn’t either. As for the Sokratis one though.... if you don’t give that because it’s not clear and obvious (each to their own but I’d grudgingly accept) then you definitely can’t give the Wesley foul.
The appalling inconsistency is one of the problems. We've been told time and time again that it's a "high bar" for the off field VAR team to overrule the on field ref. So why was ours overruled, when it quite obviously wasn't a foul? And yet yesterday, a goal after a much more obvious foul wasn't chalked off. It's made to look even poorer by having the same two referees involved that bodged our game.
It's incredibly poor at the moment. I'm still one of the few who believes in the principal of VAR, but it seems to be being implemented by morons.
That's about where I am, I think a well implemented TV review system can be hugely beneficial but this is nothing like that.
-
I didn't realise until yesterday that there were monitors on the side of the pitch for ref's to look at. It's all a bit shambolic really isn't it?
-
Goal line technology is great, and has always seemingly worked as intended. I can even live with the reviews of offside decisions, as although they seem overly pernickety, at least it's a black and white decision. I'm in favour of anything that makes the game fairer, but the implementation of the rest of VAR is all wrong, and they're making as many crucial mistakes as an old fashioned human ref, with the added huge downside that the system comes with at a cost of ruining the flow and enjoyment of the game.
It should be halted as an experiment until they've sat down and thought things through a lot more thoroughly.
As a suggestion, the off field team could continue to look at offsides and handballs in the build up to a goal. Then each team gets one review per half over a contentious decision that leads to a goal. If they ask for a review, the ref then looks at the pitch side monitor with his team. if they're not sure after that, it then goes to the off field team. In our game on Saturday, I don't think Brighton would have even reviewed Conor's goal to be honest, and it would then rightly have stood.
-
I didn't realise until yesterday that there were monitors on the side of the pitch for ref's to look at. It's all a bit shambolic really isn't it?
Completely. Apparently they've never been used. They're the Goblin Teasmade of football technology.
-
I didn't realise until yesterday that there were monitors on the side of the pitch for ref's to look at. It's all a bit shambolic really isn't it?
Completely. Apparently they've never been used. They're the Goblin Teasmade of football technology.
Store alongside electronic voting.
-
Goal line technology is great, and has always seemingly worked as intended. I can even live with the reviews of offside decisions, as although they seem overly pernickety, at least it's a black and white decision. I'm in favour of anything that makes the game fairer, but the implementation of the rest of VAR is all wrong, and they're making as many crucial mistakes as an old fashioned human ref, with the added huge downside that the system comes with at a cost of ruining the flow and enjoyment of the game.
It should be halted as an experiment until they've sat down and thought things through a lot more thoroughly.
As a suggestion, the off field team could continue to look at offsides and handballs in the build up to a goal. Then each team gets one review per half over a contentious decision that leads to a goal. If they ask for a review, the ref then looks at the pitch side monitor with his team. if they're not sure after that, it then goes to the off field team. In our game on Saturday, I don't think Brighton would have even reviewed Conor's goal to be honest, and it would then rightly have stood.
I mostly agree but I’m not convinced by a review system, I still think that should be down to the ref but until they buy into the system wholeheartedly then I would stick with how you outline in your first paragraph.
-
You have to wonder, if that idiot Friend had let play continue at Palace, would VAR have helped us arrive at the correct decision? The way it's been going, the chances are that Friend would have been backed on the grounds that it wasn't "a clear and obvious mistake". What other area in life are mistakes not mistakes unless they are clear and obvious? A mistake is a mistake is a mistake, regardless of how clear and obvious it is.
We have to accept that it's here to stay so the best we can hope for is a complete review and dare I say it, a bit of common sense.
-
It's the fact that those monitors are there and going completely ignored that makes me worry that the Premier League is fully aware of how shit the experiment is and is happy to go along with it until they can say they tried but it was crap and abandon it. I'll admit that's verging into conspiracy theory territory but everyone can see the problems and yet nothing is being said to address them.
-
It's the fact that those monitors are there and going completely ignored that makes me worry that the Premier League is fully aware of how shit the experiment is and is happy to go along with it until they can say they tried but it was crap and abandon it. I'll admit that's verging into conspiracy theory territory but everyone can see the problems and yet nothing is being said to address them.
Who'd have thought that there'd be a situation where the people in charge plough on with something that's clearly not beneficial ;)
-
Who makes the decision then as to when a monitor has to be used?
Why have the thing there if you're not going to use it?
-
Who makes the decision then as to when a monitor has to be used?
Why have the thing there if you're not going to use it?
I assumed it was the ref who, as a body, seem determined for it to fail.
-
Who makes the decision then as to when a monitor has to be used?
Why have the thing there if you're not going to use it?
The TV commentator on Sky said that he'd been told by whomever's in charge of the refs, that monitors are not going to be used in the Premier League.
This contradicts what Dyche said he'd been told by the match referee for the Burnley game.
-
Who makes the decision then as to when a monitor has to be used?
Why have the thing there if you're not going to use it?
They're discussing that very point now on Sky sports News.
The refs have been instructed to use it sparingly because of the amount of time it would take. Which interprets to dont use is my guess.
-
Who makes the decision then as to when a monitor has to be used?
Why have the thing there if you're not going to use it?
They're discussing that very point now on Sky sports News.
The refs have been instructed to use it sparingly because of the amount of time it would take. Which interprets to dont use is my guess.
Only because they don't want to.
But just like 'clear and obvious', some of the wordings and guidelines are playing right into the referees' hands, leaving it nice and ambiguous so they ultimately do whatever they like with it. And I'm including the likes of Martin Atkinson sitting in the VAR room, covering his mates' arses.
-
Watching the Grealish highlights on the other thread makes it clear how ludicrous ruling out our first goal was.
If there was a foul by Wes in the build-up (which I'd argue there wasn't), once the referee hasn't given it then the play continues. The actual goal comes a good 6 or 7 seconds after the challenge on the goalkeeper, by which time he is fully set to try and make the save. At what point do you say the foul is no longer relevant?
-
Watching the Grealish highlights on the other thread makes it clear how ludicrous ruling out our first goal was.
If there was a foul by Wes in the build-up (which I'd argue there wasn't), once the referee hasn't given it then the play continues. The actual goal comes a good 6 or 7 seconds after the challenge on the goalkeeper, by which time he is fully set to try and make the save. At what point do you say the foul is no longer relevant?
Made even worse by the fact that they score from a free kick that was actually a perfectly executed tackle.
-
Watching the Grealish highlights on the other thread makes it clear how ludicrous ruling out our first goal was.
If there was a foul by Wes in the build-up (which I'd argue there wasn't), once the referee hasn't given it then the play continues. The actual goal comes a good 6 or 7 seconds after the challenge on the goalkeeper, by which time he is fully set to try and make the save. At what point do you say the foul is no longer relevant?
Made even worse by the fact that they score from a free kick that was actually a perfectly executed tackle.
That was even more galling for me. What a beautiful tackle. Conor really got shafted by both referee and VAR on Saturday.
-
I really don't like this VAR I think it's basically shite.
-
I really don't like this VAR I think it's basically shite.
After very careful consideration, I'll second that
-
The technology is fine, the useless punter using it is the problem.
Even worse than our decisions on saturday - Watford. Clear trip on Deulofeu in the area, reviewed but no penalty (VAR has yet to give a penalty when not given by the ref in the premier league). At the end Ali's goal comes off his arm, its reviewed and no goal per VAR but the ref overrules and gives it anyway.
2 issues:
1. the people using VAR are too afraid to overrule the on pitch ref (re the penalty).
2. even for no subjective decisions the VAR reviewer isn't applying the rules. Man City had a goal ruled out earlier this season as the ball inadvertently brushed someones arma nd were told that if a goal is scored and the ball hits the hand it must be disallowed. This was contradicted on saturday.
-
Re: Use of pitch-side screens. I have never seen a ref called over to one and not agree with the TMO's decision, so it's just a rubber stamp and therefore not a cure for the dreadful shit that VAR has become. I was in favour previously.
-
Dermot Gallager on ref watch (Sky) has said it was the correct decision - foul by Wesley. I watched it several times. Yeah, strictly there's a small amout of contact, but bloody hell if that's a foul we might as well all give up.
-
Dermot Gallager on ref watch (Sky) has said it was the correct decision - foul by Wesley. I watched it several times. Yeah, strictly there's a small amout of contact, but bloody hell if that's a foul we might as well all give up.
Even in retirement they protect their own.
-
Dermot Gallager on ref watch (Sky) has said it was the correct decision - foul by Wesley. I watched it several times. Yeah, strictly there's a small amout of contact, but bloody hell if that's a foul we might as well all give up.
Dermot once again is just sticking up for his pals and is talking bollocks. There was no foul on the keeper when Hourihane scored. It was nonsense.
-
I did't actually see it on sky, just read the written article. But it's hilarious when all the pundits and presenter look at him in amazment when he defends some of these decisions. Doesn't he realise what a tool he looks??
-
Did Gallagher also say why if it was a foul (which is wrong) why the ref didn't blow for it at the time? Incompetent ref and incompetent var!
-
If the ball had fell to Conor when Wesley jumped then I could have just about understood it, but it went out wide then came back in.
-
Dermot Gallager on ref watch (Sky) has said it was the correct decision - foul by Wesley. I watched it several times. Yeah, strictly there's a small amout of contact, but bloody hell if that's a foul we might as well all give up.
No foul at all, none of their players claimed for it either. VAR cancelling that goal is a vote of no confidence in the referee on this pitch in my view. Crap decision as very, very little contact, certainly not enough to put the keep off. Perfectly good goal. Old boys network strikes again.
-
It's the VAR assistants - they are batsh*t crazy and shouldn't be allowed to officiate at all. Watford should rightly be fuming. Apparently Manure got away with a VAR review worse than our 'foul'. What they've really done is add another level of inconsistency in because it's still humans making a judgement call.
-
Dermot gallagher says the Manu goal was ok because the ref decided no foul and it's not VARs job to look for fouls, then goes on to say ours was a foul on the keeper and correct?
-
The technology is fine, the useless punter using it is the problem.
Even worse than our decisions on saturday - Watford. Clear trip on Deulofeu in the area, reviewed but no penalty (VAR has yet to give a penalty when not given by the ref in the premier league). At the end Ali's goal comes off his arm, its reviewed and no goal per VAR but the ref overrules and gives it anyway.
2 issues:
1. the people using VAR are too afraid to overrule the on pitch ref (re the penalty).
2. even for no subjective decisions the VAR reviewer isn't applying the rules. Man City had a goal ruled out earlier this season as the ball inadvertently brushed someones arma nd were told that if a goal is scored and the ball hits the hand it must be disallowed. This was contradicted on saturday.
VAR Said goal, person in charge of the board pressed the wrong button and was not "overruled" by the ref. Still another nail though and the stupidness of the Watford penalty was that from the angle the review was carried out, it was obvious it was one. The ref didn't have the advantage of the angle and the slow motion of the replay so if it was given rightly as a penalty, it wouldn't have been a blot on his instant decision at all.
-
Dermot gallagher says the Manu goal was ok because the ref decided no foul and it's not VARs job to look for fouls, then goes on to say ours was a foul on the keeper and correct?
I only saw him talking about the Man Utd goal and he said if the ref on the pitch didn’t see it as a foul then the VAR ref wouldn’t need to overrule him. In which case our goal should stand. They’re making it up as they go along, it’s shit!
-
VAR isn't inconsistent, it's the opinions of the referees that are inconsistent. If anything, VAR has helped to highlight how shite they are at their jobs. PGMOL needs to be cleared out, I think some of the leaders in the organisation may feel they have too much power over the game and it needs to stop.
-
Dermot Gallagher is a wanker. That is all.
-
VAR isn't inconsistent, it's the opinions of the referees that are inconsistent. If anything, VAR has helped to highlight how shite they are at their jobs. PGMOL needs to be cleared out, I think some of the leaders in the organisation may feel they have too much power over the game and it needs to stop.
I agree Stu, there just doesn't seem to be any accountability whatsoever. It used to be that when a ref had a stinker, they'd pop up at a division or so lower for their next match. The next match but one after Kevin Friend cheated us, he was reffing Man U v Arsenal.
-
Dermot gallagher says the Manu goal was ok because the ref decided no foul and it's not VARs job to look for fouls, then goes on to say ours was a foul on the keeper and correct?
I believe it was the same referee who called the 'foul' on the Brighton keeper that let the Man United goal stand. Remarkably inconsitent.
-
Dermot gallagher says the Manu goal was ok because the ref decided no foul and it's not VARs job to look for fouls, then goes on to say ours was a foul on the keeper and correct?
I only saw him talking about the Man Utd goal and he said if the ref on the pitch didn’t see it as a foul then the VAR ref wouldn’t need to overrule him. In which case our goal should stand. They’re making it up as they go along, it’s shit!
I believe what he was saying is that the ref saw the foul/challenge in the Man u game and waved play on. So VAR couldn’t assess it. Whereas in the Villa game the ref made no such gesture and therefore missed the incident. That was my interpretation
-
Dermot gallagher says the Manu goal was ok because the ref decided no foul and it's not VARs job to look for fouls, then goes on to say ours was a foul on the keeper and correct?
I only saw him talking about the Man Utd goal and he said if the ref on the pitch didn’t see it as a foul then the VAR ref wouldn’t need to overrule him. In which case our goal should stand. They’re making it up as they go along, it’s shit!
I believe what he was saying is that the ref saw the foul/challenge in the Man u game and waved play on. So VAR couldn’t assess it. Whereas in the Villa game the ref made no such gesture and therefore missed the incident. That was my interpretation
Which kinda begs the question, wtf was he looking at, then?
-
It seems so wrong, elongated and poor set up compared to rugby union TMO
I think football as a sport is really incompatible with the technology. Cricket and rugby both have natural breaks but the whole idea of football is it flows more or less continuously.
-
One of the perfect uses for VAR should have been giving the Watford pen, I can fully understand the ref not being able to see the fouls in that challenge as unless he was damn lucky the players would be blocking his view of the of it s that's where VAR comes in. Except of course VAR gives no pen. What's the fucking point if it doesn't give something as blatant as that.
-
It seems so wrong, elongated and poor set up compared to rugby union TMO
I think football as a sport is really incompatible with the technology. Cricket and rugby both have natural breaks but the whole idea of football is it flows more or less continuously.
It's not even the natural breaks as the fact that so much in football is a matter of opinion rather than fact.
-
Dermot gallagher says the Manu goal was ok because the ref decided no foul and it's not VARs job to look for fouls, then goes on to say ours was a foul on the keeper and correct?
I only saw him talking about the Man Utd goal and he said if the ref on the pitch didn’t see it as a foul then the VAR ref wouldn’t need to overrule him. In which case our goal should stand. They’re making it up as they go along, it’s shit!
I believe what he was saying is that the ref saw the foul/challenge in the Man u game and waved play on. So VAR couldn’t assess it. Whereas in the Villa game the ref made no such gesture and therefore missed the incident. That was my interpretation
I’m not sure if he waved play on, I think he said Atkinson was in a good position to see the challenge and decided it wasn’t a foul, which is exactly what happened in our game.
-
Dermot gallagher says the Manu goal was ok because the ref decided no foul and it's not VARs job to look for fouls, then goes on to say ours was a foul on the keeper and correct?
I only saw him talking about the Man Utd goal and he said if the ref on the pitch didn’t see it as a foul then the VAR ref wouldn’t need to overrule him. In which case our goal should stand. They’re making it up as they go along, it’s shit!
I believe what he was saying is that the ref saw the foul/challenge in the Man u game and waved play on. So VAR couldn’t assess it. Whereas in the Villa game the ref made no such gesture and therefore missed the incident. That was my interpretation
I’m not sure if he waved play on, I think he said Atkinson was in a good position to see the challenge and decided it wasn’t a foul, which is exactly what happened in our game.
Quote “Martin waves it away and once he does this it’s out of VARs hands”
-
Fair enough I only saw the clip on the news. I’d still argue the ref in our game saw the Wesley incident and didn’t give a foul and had a good view so I don’t see why another ref’s opinion should hold any more weight
-
It’s like rules for pool in certain pubs. They are making it up as they go along. So... if something is waved play on, no matter if is a clear and obvious error, it can’t go to VAR??
-
They’ve basically made up several caveats to the VAR rules to justify incorrect decisions and make excuses. This whole “VAR can’t be involved after a referee has made a decision“ is nonsense especially when VAR is supposed to correct “clear and obvious mistakes” by match officials which is the whole point of having VAR in the first place! The only thing they are consistent in is their inconsistency and pathetic incompetence.
-
Can I suggest that all VAR's at Stockley Park immediately undergo a thorough eye examination at Specsavers?
-
Sort of defeats the point if the ref has “seen” it!
-
Somehow the Cabal called the PGMOL has got control over officiating and is a self serving organization with obvious Conflicts of Interest.
VAR has just exacerbated the jobs worth stupidity of this for maximum profit and protectionist behavior.
It’s a classic Who Guards the Guards or Quis custodiet ipsos custodies.?
-
I’m another who contrasted the Rugby Saturday morning on TV to the footy Saturday afternoon.
Ruby: ref says he’s a bit uncertain about a couple of passes (crowd hear exactly his concerns, I presume on the PA, I know there is the option to pay to hear the ref for the whole match somehow/sometimes).
So the crowd know the uncertainty. VAR man selects and plays the two passes in question on the Big Screen so ref and *everyone* gets the same opportunity to review, with VAR man adding, for him both passes were fine. Ref on the pitch however -retaining authority- says, no, for him the 2nd looks a fwd pass and takes the big decision to disallow the try, everyone knows what the concern is, what the evidence is, what the decision is and why.
Contrast that to silent confusion and mystery, with the decision taken away from the man in charge, and lack of awareness as to when a decision is made. We don’t even know when the decision is made to be able to celebrate or not.
One key point that seems to be lost in the Ref on the pitch losing control of the decision, is that he has had an additional angle that cameras didn’t. His judgment should be supplemented by evidence (best angle/s available provided quickly to him). He simply has more data as he has his initial impression.
Not working at all at the moment, maybe it will in time, but as well as it’s execution it’s choice of application needs sorting too.
Embarrassing atm.
-
I don't like VAR.I don't like the whole principle and i don't believe it's as accurate as they'd have us believe when it comes to offsides given for tiny margins. It takes much more away from the game than it provides. I actually didn't celebrate Jack's goal as i thought it would be ruled out and i'd only just put myself through that particular mangle so it ruined the joy of celebration for myself and many others.The elephant in the room is the referees cartel. They are just using it to cover each others backs and now a few arrogant self serving twunts are holding all the power over the beautiful game. Their behaviour is a bit like they have been given the powers of life or death in the Colusseum akin to "The Emperor" and they're revelling in it. I would just bin it but if we must have it then i suggest the clubs insist on it being suspended. New referrees can be invited to join the ranks (after having their eyesight tested) and these could be trained up to use the system properly by an overseeing body of Premier league club officials, ex referees, ex players and League officials. Stringent codes put in place and each new referee to pass a test put in place to prove their competence. If this takes a year for instance then so be it. What's the rush? Once you have enough referees trained up to use the system properly boot out all the current clique and start again with a system designed and implemented by the right people.
-
It seems so wrong, elongated and poor set up compared to rugby union TMO
I think football as a sport is really incompatible with the technology. Cricket and rugby both have natural breaks but the whole idea of football is it flows more or less continuously.
I don't buy that.
Cricket, yes, but rugby doesn't have any more breaks than football. There are plenty of occasions the ball is in play for several minutes in rugby, whereas you'd be hard pushed to find the ball in play for more than 60 seconds in most football matches.
VAR could work but the absolute shambles we're currently witnessing is down to the amateur way it's being implemented.
-
Agree with The Edge. Spot on.
-
VAR should be used to determine if a ball crosses the line. Everything else needs to be a challenge from the manager. They get max 2 per game and would be limited to things like challenging offsides that led to goals or penalty claims either way. After that it’s things like violent play that should be left to a 4th official if the ref/assts have missed it. These incredibly narrow offsides and marginal infractions are killing the game.
-
Maybe this isn't as haphazard as it looks.
Fans and pundits have been calling for video technology to help officials for years - probably much to the officials chagrin. Now they're taking the opportunity to make it as unworkable as possible.
Ask most fans now if they want VAR or a return to the previous way of operating with the ref calling the shots and I'm sure most will go for the latter.
-
To those suggesting a finite number of coach's appeals, there's no way a manager/coach can have a decent view of any decision, contentious or otherwise, that happens more than 30 yards from our dugout. You can't see anything from down there. People four rows back in the bottom of the Trinity can see more.
I honestly don't get why our managers don't watch at least the first half from the Directors' box.
-
It seems so wrong, elongated and poor set up compared to rugby union TMO
I think football as a sport is really incompatible with the technology. Cricket and rugby both have natural breaks but the whole idea of football is it flows more or less continuously.
I don't buy that.
Cricket, yes, but rugby doesn't have any more breaks than football. There are plenty of occasions the ball is in play for several minutes in rugby, whereas you'd be hard pushed to find the ball in play for more than 60 seconds in most football matches.
VAR could work but the absolute shambles we're currently witnessing is down to the amateur way it's being implemented.
I see what you mean but in rugby the ref is integral to the game, constantly involved when the ball is in play, and has to pull play up frequently, whereas in football they only get involved in infringements, so it seems less jarring to have wait around for a TMO decision.
I dunno, there may be an element just being used to it in that setting and it having been integrated better - but it seems to me like the only way for VAR to be properly integrated in football is for the game to change in lots of subtle but important ways.
-
The difference is that in rugby and cricket the officials wanted it as a tool to help them. In football they see it as a tool to replace them. Until that changes it stands no chance of being the system the game needs.
I do thijk rugby and football are more similar than many think though, in terms of the tempo of the game. You'll get teams who slow things down and play for lineouts and scrums, but that's not dissimilar to how Pulis plays, for example.
-
It's also a slight myth to say that TMO doesn't interrupt the flow of a rugby game. It's just that this is now accepted as part and parcel of the game, because it does correct the ref and it does result in fairer decisions.
But that requires both the refs on the field and the TMO to have integrity. Too often this season we've seen bonkers subjective refereeing decisions go against us, and even if you think that was incompetence rather than bias or malice, you must then accept that there is a lack of integrity in Stockley Park where VAR has invariably failed to overturn the poor decisions of the referees. The behaviour of referees has a bang of 'all for one and one for all' off it, which you just wouldn't get in rugby officiating.
-
I think you're spot on that the us and them mentality is a big part of the problem, hence the infuriating closing of ranks by the refs when they get it wrong. But then in fairness that’s also born of cultural differences between football vs rugby around respect for / behaviour towards the ref.
You can blame football refs for their mistakes but not their siege mentality.
-
You can blame football refs for their mistakes but not their siege mentality.
Yep. Another one here agreeing with the stance that paul_e and others have got to with VAR. The refs are the problem.
While I agree with almost all that themossman says I'd disagree with that last point; what their mentality indicates is that they do NOT have the best interests of the game at heart, only their own. With such a major element of the game at risk now (fairness, an even playing field) and with such a risky experiment being conducted and abused by them I CAN blame them for not taking this opportunity to do the right thing.
Yep. I blame them for being insular, blinkered, venal, egocentric cockwombles who deserve to be consigned to the nether reaches of hell for what they are doing to our game. With any luck the clubs, through their ownership of the PL, will take this chance to cut them down to useful size. For all our sakes.
-
It's also a slight myth to say that TMO doesn't interrupt the flow of a rugby game. It's just that this is now accepted as part and parcel of the game, because it does correct the ref and it does result in fairer decisions.
But that requires both the refs on the field and the TMO to have integrity. Too often this season we've seen bonkers subjective refereeing decisions go against us, and even if you think that was incompetence rather than bias or malice, you must then accept that there is a lack of integrity in Stockley Park where VAR has invariably failed to overturn the poor decisions of the referees. The behaviour of referees has a bang of 'all for one and one for all' off it, which you just wouldn't get in rugby officiating.
Yep, the whole thing of not being able to celebrate a goal applies to tries in rugby, the difference is that it's clear why it's being checked and the fans are able to see and hear the process. A short delay that results in the correct decision and where the delay is easily understood is fine, this smoke and mirrors version of VAR offers nothing like that. Decisions are still wrong and the whole process happens in secret, on TV you have commentators guessing at what might be happening and in the ground you have nothing but a wait for an answer on the screen.
I think a big part of the problem is a lack of understanding of the need for VAR (from authorities) getting more decisions right, on the surface, looks to be the aim but what is actually needed is transparency on the reasons for a decision. I guarantee every single person who has watched football in the ground has an example of a decision that pissed them off at the time but when they saw the highlights later they realise it was actually the right decision, it happens all the time.
In the era of modern professional sport fans have access to huge amounts of footage and can see every incident for themselves from multiple angles. That has given rise to fans being able to easily spot mistakes from officials. By using tech rugby and cricket (also Tennis and many other sports) have shown they care about these mistakes. On the other hand football, currently, is burying it's head in the sand and refusing to acknowledge the mistakes exist.
Final point, there is a difference in respect for referees but that's not helped by the lack of trust fans have towards referees. Rugby isn't immune to fans losing trust in refs (look at the opinions towards Romain Poite and Ben Skeen in this world cup) but it's on an individual basis, in football almost all fans think that almost all refs are fucking shit and it will take a lot of work to turn that around.
-
The other difference with rugby is that a try depends on the ball being grounded, which is quite often hard for the referee to see properly if there's 4 or 5 players on top of the person trying to score the try. With football, that isn't the case and goal-line technology has easily eradicated the question of whether the ball has crossed the line or not. On Saturday, Conor had clearly lashed the ball into the net. The referee rightly gave the goal, and nobody was complaining about it. For VAR to then overrule it, was both wrong, and also against the spirit of the so-called "high bar".
-
in football almost all fans think that almost all refs are fucking shit and it will take a lot of work to turn that around.
Yes but that's why it's worth doing. The game as a whole will benefit enormously.
-
The other difference with rugby is that a try depends on the ball being grounded, which is quite often hard for the referee to see properly if there's 4 or 5 players on top of the person trying to score the try. With football, that isn't the case and goal-line technology has easily eradicated the question of whether the ball has crossed the line or not. On Saturday, Conor had clearly lashed the ball into the net. The referee rightly gave the goal, and nobody was complaining about it. For VAR to then overrule it, was both wrong, and also against the spirit of the so-called "high bar".
I'd guess the equivalent though is something like the Grealish booking at Palace, all 3 decisions (penalty, dive or nothing) were possible there and it's hard, on a single viewing, to know what was correct. If the system was setup properly play could've carried on until after Lansbury scored and then a quick review could've decided if there 'was any reason not to award the goal' and they'd make a call on it. You can use similar logic for handball leading to a goal. Rugby and cricket both handle the grey area well with rugby centred of the nature of the question ("try: yes or no?" vs "any reason not to award the try?") and Cricket using umpire's call.
You could easily apply both in football, give a margin of error for offside (so the flag is the on-field decision and that decision has to be clearly demonstrated as wrong outside a margin of error for the tech) and for other offences the ref can say "I'm thinking goal/no goal because of {reason}, can you prove me wrong?". So in the example you gave, "I'm giving the goal because I don't think there's a foul on the keeper, can you show conclusive evidence of foul play by the striker?" and then the VAR has to show that the decision of the ref was wrong. With all of that happening on open comms, even if we disagree with the end result, the reasons for changing the decision are clear.
-
Yes but that's why it's worth doing. The game as a whole will benefit enormously.
Completely agree, that's what I was getting at. This should be an opportunity for refs to improve their reputation with the fans, but the shocking implementation we have has actually gone the other way and I can't think of a time in my experience where refs were less trustworthy (as a collective).
-
‘Soccer is not about justice. It’s a drama – and criminally wrong decisions against you are part and parcel of that.’
Pete Davies
-
‘Soccer is not about justice. It’s a drama – and criminally wrong decisions against you are part and parcel of that.’
Pete Davies
The issue is that those decisions can now have such a massive impact (hundreds of millions of them) that it's harder than before to chalk it off as 'part of the charm of the game'.
-
in football almost all fans think that almost all refs are fucking shit and it will take a lot of work to turn that around.
Yes but that's why it's worth doing. The game as a whole will benefit enormously.
I know you misattributed that quote to me instead of paul_e by accident but just wanted to point it out!
Find it hard to disagree with what paul_e or Risso have said above, for what it's worth.
-
I don't get that VAR doesn't work in football because there aren't as many breaks. Surely when a goal is scored - and if there is any area of concern from the on field ref or VAR the ref can take time to look at the play back and make the right decision. What baffles me is by giving the goal on Saturday the ref is clearly comfortable with Wesley's challenge and can only therefore be corrected if it is clear and obvious. I've only seen the same angle where his arm is in the air and in the area of the keeper but with no obvious meaningful contact. To be that is not not clear and obvious and certainly not as clear and obvious as the contact on Origi
-
I don't get that VAR doesn't work in football because there aren't as many breaks. Surely when a goal is scored - and if there is any area of concern from the on field ref or VAR the ref can take time to look at the play back and make the right decision. What baffles me is by giving the goal on Saturday the ref is clearly comfortable with Wesley's challenge and can only therefore be corrected if it is clear and obvious. I've only seen the same angle where his arm is in the air and in the area of the keeper but with no obvious meaningful contact. To be that is not not clear and obvious and certainly not as clear and obvious as the contact on Origi
Yes, given how VAR has operated to date, it was a truly remarkable decision and I'm surprised there hasn't been more press on it.
-
I don't get that VAR doesn't work in football because there aren't as many breaks. Surely when a goal is scored - and if there is any area of concern from the on field ref or VAR the ref can take time to look at the play back and make the right decision. What baffles me is by giving the goal on Saturday the ref is clearly comfortable with Wesley's challenge and can only therefore be corrected if it is clear and obvious. I've only seen the same angle where his arm is in the air and in the area of the keeper but with no obvious meaningful contact. To be that is not not clear and obvious and certainly not as clear and obvious as the contact on Origi
Yes, given how VAR has operated to date, it was a truly remarkable decision and I'm surprised there hasn't been more press on it.
Even more ridiculous is that it was the same man that gave both decisions.
-
On Saturday, Conor had clearly lashed the ball into the net. The referee rightly gave the goal, and nobody was complaining about it. For VAR to then overrule it, was both wrong, and also against the spirit of the so-called "high bar".
Utterly shit decision.
I hope someone cranks up the voltage in the headsets at Stockley Park next week if the numpty who chalked that one off feels like getting involved again.
As an aside, it was interesting (shit) to see Kevin Fiend officiating a Premier League match after his performance at Selhurst in the next round of fixtures.
I can get why they wouldn't hang him out to try and comment on his performance in public straight after. But he should have been getting League One fixtures for a few weeks after that after a totally dreadful 90 minutes. Instead it was business as usual. No accountability, nada.
-
On Saturday, Conor had clearly lashed the ball into the net. The referee rightly gave the goal, and nobody was complaining about it. For VAR to then overrule it, was both wrong, and also against the spirit of the so-called "high bar".
Utterly shit decision.
I hope someone cranks up the voltage in the headsets at Stockley Park next week if the numpty who chalked that one off feels like getting involved again.
As an aside, it was interesting (shit) to see Kevin Fiend officiating a Premier League match after his performance at Selhurst in the next round of fixtures.
I can get why they wouldn't hang him out to try and comment on his performance in public straight after. But he should have been getting League One fixtures for a few weeks after that after a totally dreadful 90 minutes. Instead it was business as usual. No accountability, nada.
I agree and said the same thing recently. The week after that, he was rewarded with a "big" game, Manu v Arsenal.
-
On Saturday, Conor had clearly lashed the ball into the net. The referee rightly gave the goal, and nobody was complaining about it. For VAR to then overrule it, was both wrong, and also against the spirit of the so-called "high bar".
Utterly shit decision.
I hope someone cranks up the voltage in the headsets at Stockley Park next week if the numpty who chalked that one off feels like getting involved again.
As an aside, it was interesting (shit) to see Kevin Fiend officiating a Premier League match after his performance at Selhurst in the next round of fixtures.
I can get why they wouldn't hang him out to try and comment on his performance in public straight after. But he should have been getting League One fixtures for a few weeks after that after a totally dreadful 90 minutes. Instead it was business as usual. No accountability, nada.
I agree and said the same thing recently. The week after that, he was rewarded with a "big" game, Manu v Arsenal.
And wasn't he praised in that game for allowing play to go on so VAR could then be called into account to check in the build up to a goal?
-
You can blame football refs for their mistakes but not their siege mentality.
Yep. Another one here agreeing with the stance that paul_e and others have got to with VAR. The refs are the problem.
While I agree with almost all that themossman says I'd disagree with that last point; what their mentality indicates is that they do NOT have the best interests of the game at heart, only their own. With such a major element of the game at risk now (fairness, an even playing field) and with such a risky experiment being conducted and abused by them I CAN blame them for not taking this opportunity to do the right thing.
Yep. I blame them for being insular, blinkered, venal, egocentric cockwombles who deserve to be consigned to the nether reaches of hell for what they are doing to our game. With any luck the clubs, through their ownership of the PL, will take this chance to cut them down to useful size. For all our sakes.
What a load of condescending sanctimonious horseshit.
-
You can blame football refs for their mistakes but not their siege mentality.
Yep. Another one here agreeing with the stance that paul_e and others have got to with VAR. The refs are the problem.
While I agree with almost all that themossman says I'd disagree with that last point; what their mentality indicates is that they do NOT have the best interests of the game at heart, only their own. With such a major element of the game at risk now (fairness, an even playing field) and with such a risky experiment being conducted and abused by them I CAN blame them for not taking this opportunity to do the right thing.
Yep. I blame them for being insular, blinkered, venal, egocentric cockwombles who deserve to be consigned to the nether reaches of hell for what they are doing to our game. With any luck the clubs, through their ownership of the PL, will take this chance to cut them down to useful size. For all our sakes.
What a load of condescending sanctimonious horseshit.
Hear hear. Missed this earlier. Utter bollocks and completely unhelpful.
-
Whilst the tone is a bit excessive I'm not sure AllanW is wrong. I wanted VAR a a means to eradicate what looked like clear and obvious bias, whether conscious or unconscious, towards certain teams, or utter incompetence (see Thierry Henry double handball against Ireland). But I've come to the conclusion it's a decent tool applied by self-serving morons.
There still seems to be a lot of subjective decisions going in favour of teams like Spuds and Arsenal, and against teams like us. The bias has just changed location or been rubber stamped by a crony. So there is absolutely no point to it from that perspective, it just gets in the way.
I'd hoped it would give consistency of decisions - but it's applied massively inconsistently, just as on-field refs apply the laws inconsistently. So again no point to it, it just gets in the way.
And I'm struggling to see why Gallagher says the fact the Man Yoo ref waved play on takes it out of VAR's hands, whereas our ref signalling a goal doesn't. Similarly Friend giving a foul for Jack's dive takes VAR out of the equation, whereas if he lets play run and gives the goal, VAR could still have disallowed it. So some decisions can be corrected, but not others? It makes no sense and it's utter bullshit. Gallagher just makes himself a laughing stock by trying to explain and defend it.
The application is so bad that, like others, I can only conclude that the PGMOL people are doing it deliberately to undermine it and get shot of it.
-
My response to his post has got nothing to do with VAR, it's the aspersions he's casting on people he knows nothing about and about a profession I would respectfully suggest he knows even less. Make your observations and give your opinions by all means but using that tone as Chinchilla rightly says, does nothing to help.
-
And I'm struggling to see why Gallagher says the fact the Man Yoo ref waved play on takes it out of VAR's hands, whereas our ref signalling a goal doesn't.
Dean Smith mentioned in his interview today that our goal on Saturday was overruled by what would be considered the senior referee in charge of VAR whereas the exact same pairing (Atkinson and Coote) with the roles reversed for the Liverpool/Man United game left the decision with the on field referee.
He also made an interesting point about how VAR is being used quite negatively in his opinion i.e almost exclusively to rule goals out rather than give penalties etc.
-
‘Soccer is not about justice. It’s a drama – and criminally wrong decisions against you are part and parcel of that.’
Pete Davies
The issue is that those decisions can now have such a massive impact (hundreds of millions of them) that it's harder than before to chalk it off as 'part of the charm of the game'.
That's not the game's fault. Pump all the billions you want into it, it'll always only be 11 people kicking a bag of wind around a field. Much like paying someone millions a year rather than a few tens of thousands won't make them a better player, so football will never be more than the most important of life's unimportant things.
Does anybody on here actually think that decisions regarding the Villa are more important now than they were thirty years ago primarily because there's more money involved?
-
We don't win that game on Saturday (to go with the missed points due to duff decisions already this season), and we end up get relegated by the narrowest of margins then, aye.
We've already had a taste of the fun and games associated with a big club going down vis a vis financial unfair play. I'm in no rush to repeat that anytime soon.
-
Has any team ever been relegated as a result of season-long refereeing decisions?
-
I'm not Rainman so I can't recite every single crap decision across every single game that resulted in a team going down.
But Bolton a few years back had a goal not given towards the end of the season (the ball had crossed the line) which did for them.
I have never really been an advocate of 'these things even themselves over the course of a season.' That relies on a perfect balance of ineptitude. There is even less scope for that sort of thinking now with the stakes so high.
-
Has any team ever been relegated as a result of season-long refereeing decisions?
Bolton for definite, Cardiff would have a strong claim as well.
-
Has any team ever been relegated as a result of season-long refereeing decisions?
Bolton for definite, Cardiff would have a strong claim as well.
that'll be the Bolton that were days away from being wound-up just a few years later. That's why it matters that the game does what it can to get this right.
Does anybody on here actually think that decisions regarding the Villa are more important now than they were thirty years ago primarily because there's more money involved?
Possibly not but there are 2 big differences. The first is that clubs were rarely in so much trouble if they were relegated at the time:
(https://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2016/02/20/22/3167EF3100000578-0-image-a-32_1456008078518.jpg)
It'a a few years out of date but that sums the problem up nicely.
The 2nd difference is that we can do something about it now, 30 years ago we couldn't so the question itself is moot.
-
Has any team ever been relegated as a result of season-long refereeing decisions?
Bolton for definite, Cardiff would have a strong claim as well.
They didn't suffer season-long refereeing errors though, just a relatively tiny number of them - relative, that is, to the massive amount of footballing clangers their players made on the field across the whole season. That's the only thing that definitely did for them and all relegated sides, not a couple of dodgy refereeing calls.
-
Also, it's not relegation but a shocking decision to not give Vidic a red card almost certainly cost us a trophy a few years back, I'd say that game alone works as a pretty big incentive for fans to push for officials to be better.
-
And I'm not sure you can blame one bad ref for Bolton nearly going bust either.
-
I'm happy with any football "injustice" ever never being righted. It will make not a jot of a difference to my life. I do hear you people that do, but blimey, football club supporting can be stressful as it is without piling that worry on the top. If you want to try to level the playing field, getting behind salary caps and drafts will do more than fretting over VAR ever will.
-
I'm happy with any football "injustice" ever never being righted. It will make not a jot of a difference to my life. I do hear you people that do, but blimey, football club supporting can be stressful as it is without piling that worry on the top. If you want to try to level the playing field, getting behind salary caps and drafts will do more than fretting over VAR ever will.
Or we could do all 3?
And I'm not sure you can blame one bad ref for Bolton nearly going bust either.
So the loss of revenue from relegation had no impact and you can say, 100%, that bad decisions had no impact on their relegation?
-
I'm happy with any football "injustice" ever never being righted. It will make not a jot of a difference to my life. I do hear you people that do, but blimey, football club supporting can be stressful as it is without piling that worry on the top. If you want to try to level the playing field, getting behind salary caps and drafts will do more than fretting over VAR ever will.
Well VAR is here now and not working so people are going to debate it. If a salary cap was introduced people would be talking about that as well, especially if it wasn't working.
-
Has any team ever been relegated as a result of season-long refereeing decisions?
Bolton for definite, Cardiff would have a strong claim as well.
They didn't suffer season-long refereeing errors though, just a relatively tiny number of them - relative, that is, to the massive amount of footballing clangers their players made on the field across the whole season. That's the only thing that definitely did for them and all relegated sides, not a couple of dodgy refereeing calls.
Those bad decisions obviously cost teams, it's daft to think otherwise. There'll be a bunch of sides this season in the bottom 6-8 that are all much of a muchness, if one of them has a bunch more bad decisions go against them then that can be the difference between staying up or going down and had nothing to do with playing ability.
-
I'm happy with any football "injustice" ever never being righted. It will make not a jot of a difference to my life. I do hear you people that do, but blimey, football club supporting can be stressful as it is without piling that worry on the top. If you want to try to level the playing field, getting behind salary caps and drafts will do more than fretting over VAR ever will.
Well VAR is here now and not working so people are going to debate it. If a salary cap was introduced people would be talking about that as well, especially if it wasn't working.
I'm going to call it now; VAR will never work in football in a way that improves the experience. Never.
-
I wont say it will never work, but in its present form it's an unmitigated disaster
-
The World Cup version seemed to work well 95 per cent of the time.
I also don't get why the ref on the field on Saturday - having a clear view of Hourihane's goal- has to be overruled by a penarse in Stockley Park. Keeper didn't appeal for the foul, none of their lot did. But the lad miles away starts applying his own set of rules.
-
Another point about the Atkinson/Coote combination, from what I understand they seem to be matching officials with one more experienced and one less experienced ref pairing up. Isn't Atkinson the "senior partner" and on both occasions it was his version of events that he held sway, overruling Coote for our goal but not being overruled by Coote when he was ref. Doesn't seem right to me.
-
Another point about the Atkinson/Coote combination, from what I understand they seem to be matching officials with one more experienced and one less experienced ref pairing up. Isn't Atkinson the "senior partner" and on both occasions it was his version of events that he held sway, overruling Coote for our goal but not being overruled by Coote when he was ref. Doesn't seem right to me.
Of course it was Atkinson who bottled sending off Billings against Bournemouth as well so he’s ahead of Friend in fucking us over this season so far.
-
The World Cup version seemed to work well 95 per cent of the time.
I also don't get why the ref on the field on Saturday - having a clear view of Hourihane's goal- has to be overruled by a penarse in Stockley Park. Keeper didn't appeal for the foul, none of their lot did. But the lad miles away starts applying his own set of rules.
I said previously on here that i firmly believe that the referees are the main problem with var. They are using it as a way of covering up for each other. I can't think of a decision where the ref has made a whopper and Stockley Park have overturned it and hung one of their own out to dry. They only change a decision when it would be hard to criticise the match officials eg: offside by half an eyelash. I don't like var one bit but i do understand that time moves on and technology is going to be used whether we like it or not. My proposal is a radical one. Suspend var. Run a programme of extensive training which would be organised and ran by representatives from the clubs, former refs and relevant bodies. Invite new referees who would have no baggage or loyalties to get in the way of implementing the system properly. Once fully trained replace all the existing refs. Fresh start and fully trained to use the new technology correctly in the way it was supposed to be used in the first place. Start afresh in 2020/2021 season.
-
VAR should be used to determine if a ball crosses the line. Everything else needs to be a challenge from the manager. They get max 2 per game and would be limited to things like challenging offsides that led to goals or penalty claims either way. After that it’s things like violent play that should be left to a 4th official if the ref/assts have missed it. These incredibly narrow offsides and marginal infractions are killing the game.
We already have the technology for the ball crossing the line - thankifully without the disaster that is VAR.
For everything else, it should be down to the refs at the stadium. Bin VAR immedately.
I don't accept this "well it's here now, so let's just make the best of it" line - if enough people shout about it, then it won't be ignored. Remember the uproar about the 39th game etc?
-
Always think of Craig David’s rewind song when I hear VAR.
V-A-R
When the crowd shouts goal
Reject it
-
Sooner or later the you would hope that the penny will drop with the Premier League itself. The success of their "brand" and all the billions it rakes in is surely based on the excitement of the English game, and its attacking nature compared to the more tactical Italian and Spanish leagues. You would think that all the chalked off goals and poor decisions are going down just as badly with worldwide viewers in places like Asia etc?
-
Sooner or later the you would hope that the penny will drop with the Premier League itself. The success of their "brand" and all the billions it rakes in is surely based on the excitement of the English game, and its attacking nature compared to the more tactical Italian and Spanish leagues. You would think that all the chalked off goals and poor decisions are going down just as badly with worldwide viewers in places like Asia etc?
Absolutely. When a player scores a worldie which gets beamed across the whole planet these days it gets billions of fans talking about it. A piece of dazzling skill unites the footballing world in appreciating such genius. In who's best interests would it be to dissallow such a goal because someones toenail strayed offside during the build up? It's utterly ludicrous and will slowly kill the game if we stand by and let it. In my humble opinion.
-
I don’t often post on here these days, but my god VAR is enough to wake me from my silent slumber and post. There is something so spontaneous and joyous as a football fan of celebrating a goal, think of the times that Villa Park erupted in joy in a derby or a famous European night and then imagine these great moments being wiped off the scoresheet by the faceless individual sitting in the gods with a TV monitor in front of him/her. I really don’t want to descend into hyperbole but unless something is done about this and quickly, then being a fan will not be the same.
I bumped into an Ajax fan in the gym this morning and inevitably got talking about the VAR, he had been in the Cruijff Arena last night to witness an Ajax goal wiped off the slate due to a matter of millimetres. Having heard the eruption when they scored I asked him what it was like to then find out almost 40 seconds later that it was scrapped from the record book? His reaction I fear could end up being the new norm “Next time I’ll look at the referee first and check for a VAR review before I celebrate a goal.”
-
"The strangulated celebration will become a hallmark of the game in the years to come, no more "limbs" and "scenes" as the realisation that the goal might be ruled out after a certain time. Once it is given that magic moment has gone, it's just beyond awful. The whole game revolves around that moment of unbridled joy, overwhelming emotion, an eruption of relief and celebration and it has been reduced to a calm, dispassionate reading of events leading to a precise outcome that may be correct but is utterly joyless. Stripping the game of that emotion is stripping the game of it's very soul, it's why we watch and take part, the unpredictable rollercoaster will have it's dips flattened out and it's peaks reduced."
I posted the above back in July and it sadly appears to be emerging as one of the biggest drawbacks of VAR.
I was working last Saturday and as I saw the injury time goal come through on Twitter my first thought was "please don't let it be ruled out by VAR". That's just a really shit way to react to such a moment.
-
Away at Palace?
-
Away at Palace?
Didn't go to VAR .
I believe only 2 VAR decisions have occurred that could have been overturned
It may not have gone to VAR, but it's all part of the global VAR fuck up in my view.
-
Away at Palace?
Didn't go to VAR .
I believe only 2 VAR decisions have occurred that could have been overturned
It may not have gone to VAR, but it's all part of the global VAR fuck up in my view.
100% mate.
-
Yep, that twat Friend blew the whistle, knowing full well it couldn't then go to VAR.
-
VAR two points, shit refs (Palace, Arsenal handball) arguably two points. We'd be fifth.
-
Definitely think VAR should have been involved at Palace and Arsenal (at least 2 decisions) and should have given decisions our way.
-
Clearly a penalty at Arsenal, no question.
-
Definitely think VAR should have been involved at Palace and Arsenal (at least 2 decisions) and should have given decisions our way.
Wasn’t it widely reported that although it couldn’t go to VAR because of Kevin Fraud, the VAR rep said the decision of dive would have stood as there wasn’t a clear and obvious error.
-
My feelings about VAR regarding Villa:
1. Palace - The ref blew up so VAR could not be implemented.
2. Arsenal - Applying the letter of the law and following protocol, no clear and obvious errors (I accept that VAR could have intervened several times but also accept the "clear and obvioius" protocol.
3. Burnley - Offside, no question.
4. Brighton - Appalling decision.
My biggest gripe is the incompetence of Friend at Palace rather than VAR. The Brighton goal did not affect our league placing so I'm more relaxed about that one (albeit appalling decision).
We don't get relegated this season and next time we're in control of a game like we were at Arsenal, we won't have to rely on VAR - We will go for the jugular and see the game out more comfortably.
-
If he genuinely thought is was a dive he had to blow as VAR wouldn't have disallowed the goal for a dive in any review. It doesn't look at dives apart from in something like a penalty incident, so could say "no pen as there was no foul" but not say "no pen and book the player for diving". It's one of its many flaws imo.
And the clear and obvious thing really bugs me, a toenail offside isn't 'clear and obvious' imo, but they disallow goals for that, but then doesn't intervene for things like the encroachment with the Arsenal penalty which was clearer on a replay than some of the offsides are.
-
I was in favour of VAR but the version the PL has gone with is crap.
-
So was VAR right or wrong today...Sterling off or On? And was he interfering with Heatons view?
-
Fuck you VAR, and the horse you rode in on.
-
So was VAR right or wrong today...Sterling off or On? And was he interfering with Heatons view?
Yes he was. Seems to be the opinion across various other media also.
-
I was in favour of VAR but the version the PL has gone with is crap.
VAR isn't the issue, it's the inconsistent and largely incompetent refs that are reviewing. It's highlighted how crap they are if anything. Refs need to start explaining their decisions and owning up to inconsistent application of rules. They're too opaque and hold too much power over the game.
-
I was in favour of VAR but the version the PL has gone with is crap.
VAR isn't the issue, it's the inconsistent and largely incompetent refs that are reviewing. It's highlighted how crap they are if anything. Refs need to start explaining their decisions and owning up to inconsistent application of rules. They're too opaque and hold too much power over the game.
They need to start doing interviews after the match like the 18-23 year olds who actually play the game. You’ll throw kids into the media gauntlet but these potato head referees face no consequences for clear errors.
-
So was VAR right or wrong today...Sterling off or On? And was he interfering with Heatons view?
He was off because Silva touched the ball.
So yet again VAR was wrong, and to rub salt in to the wound the Premier League are reviewing the decision the award the goal to De Bruyne, which would prove VAR was wrong.
It really is an enormous clusterfuck.
-
What about our penalty decision, was that correct?
Looked a foul but I was only watching on my tablet.
-
So was VAR right or wrong today...Sterling off or On? And was he interfering with Heatons view?
He was off because Silva touched the ball.
So yet again VAR was wrong, and to rub salt in to the wound the Premier League are reviewing the decision the award the goal to De Bruyne, which would prove VAR was wrong.
It really is an enormous clusterfuck.
How much input does the on pitch referee have On the VAR check?
Reason being that the channel I was watching showed a conversation between Silva and the referee, I think when the teams were walking back getting ready to kick off (certainly before the VAR check had finished), where they talking about him touching (or possibly not I guess) the ball.
-
It’s just really poorly managed and applied. It’s like they’ve rolled it out without any thought to the parameters around it. Dreadful.
-
Get rid.
-
Variable Atrocious Ridiculous
-
The reason for. It was to improve the accuracy of decision making, but as every one can see it is not fulfilling the stated objective.
So until it can be proven to meet that objective it should be scrapped.
On top of that it is taking much more away from the enjoyment than it adds.
In simple terms it is not fit for purpose.
-
The reason for. It was to improve the accuracy of decision making, but as every one can see it is not fulfilling the stated objective.
So until it can be proven to meet that objective it should be scrapped.
On top of that it is taking much more away from the enjoyment than it adds.
In simple terms it is not fit for purpose.
The referees that review are not fit for purpose. Never held accountable for clear bad decisions. It's PGMOL that needs to be sorted. They're awful.
-
The reason for. It was to improve the accuracy of decision making, but as every one can see it is not fulfilling the stated objective.
So until it can be proven to meet that objective it should be scrapped.
On top of that it is taking much more away from the enjoyment than it adds.
In simple terms it is not fit for purpose.
VAR in principle is a good idea, but not in the hands of corrupt imbeciles
-
All VAR has done so far is highlight how incompetent the officials truly are, and how they desperately try to cover themselves after continually making errors.
-
You'll all be happy to know that this goal has been given to Silva which confirms that we've been fucked again by VAR as Sterling is offside and interfering with the GK's vision if just being offside wasn't wrong enough
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EH0BcnCXYAAHy2S?format=jpg&name=4096x4096)
-
There will be an excuse, it’s because it’s a 12:30 kick off in a month with the letter R in the name and it’s raining.
-
I'd rather be shouting the referee needs spectacles than what we have now.
Fuck VAR. The only reason I'm not bothered today is that City were so much better than us.
I
-
You can tell how incompetent those overseeing VAR are by how long it takes to get even a clear cut decision right.
-
All VAR has done so far is highlight how incompetent the officials truly are, and how they desperately try to cover themselves after continually making errors.
Yep. But I disagree that they try to cover themselves. There is no accountability for them. Refs were successful years ago in having the media behind them bleating about how hard their job is and how unfair it is to hold them to account for bad decisions. VAR lands and nothing has changed, apart from we can more clearly see now than ever that they just cannot do the job properly.
-
I think we all accept officials can't get every decision right, they don't in any sport. And that's where having a VAR should come in, it's there to assist the referee, and yet somehow even with replays some McGrath awful mistakes are being made on a regular basis.
-
There will be an excuse, it’s because it’s a 12:30 kick off in a month with the letter R in the name and it’s raining.
Are you getting mixed up with the UK mussel season?
-
I think we all accept officials can't get every decision right, they don't in any sport. And that's where having a VAR should come in, it's there to assist the referee, and yet somehow even with replays some McGrath awful mistakes are being made on a regular basis.
Rugby yet again showed how to use technology today when in the England semi the on field refreree gave a try but then had an honest conversation with the TMO in order to make the right decision without any concern about being found to have got the decision wrong.
The whole set up with VAR seems to be to find an excuse to "prove" the on field ref was right, even when it's bloody obvious he's not!
-
Totally messing the game I love up. Ditch it now.
-
Rugby yet again showed how to use technology today when in the England semi the on field refreree gave a try but then had an honest conversation with the TMO in order to make the right decision without any concern about being found to have got the decision wrong.
That disallowed try bollocks with the scrum and the ball moving - how the fuck can they say whose hand/arm it was though? Nothing decisive there. I felt like they were looking for ways to keep NZ in the match the whole time and not let England run away and embarrass them.
It is totally fucked in football though. Because as has been said on here many times, if you give a great tool to someone who is incompetent, they'll still make the wrong decision.
-
Var was supposed to improve the game, unfortunately the way it is being used is only showing up how incompetent our onfield/off-field referees are. The game is being ruined by it!
One referee was bad enough in any game but to now have two is like p-ssing against the wind.
F-ck var and the incompetent refs trying to implement it!
-
I hate it.
-
The penalty that Brighton were awarded yesterday was unbelievable and it they are giving penalties for minimal accidental contact then they will be giving loads more it would seem. They did get one right though, which was the Hudson-Odoi dive, but Dyche then bangs on about how diving should be eradicated from the game and selects Rodriguez to start up front.
-
The Brighton penalty again highlights the inconsistency. It was less clear and obvious than other appeals (even Jack at Palace was more of a foul). Potentially, VAR can be good but when a subjective decision is made by a bloke in the studio, overriding the bloke on the field, it is not being used correctly. Things aren't helped by Dermot Gallagher going on TV each week claiming that the right decision was made.
-
The Brighton penalty again highlights the inconsistency. It was less clear and obvious than other appeals (even Jack at Palace was more of a foul). Potentially, VAR can be good but when a subjective decision is made by a bloke in the studio, overriding the bloke on the field, it is not being used correctly. Things aren't helped by Dermot Gallagher going on TV each week claiming that the right decision was made.
How did that pompous little twunt get that gig? He's being paid handsomely by Sky to represent the referees cartel and they treat him like some kind of overlord.
-
Dermot Gallagher will never, ever contradict a referee’s decision. He’s basically Mike Riley’s media gimp.
-
Will we ever get a VAR decision to go in our favour? Seems to be a weekly occurrence that we're on the end of a wrong decision. David Silva claimed he touched the ball in for their second yesterday which meant Sterling was offside and clearly impeded Heaton's vision. A shambles the whole thing. Suspend it immediately. It needs a complete review.
-
(https://i.ibb.co/4tTD2PR/717-EB082-95-E4-4508-99-A5-CDA6657731-D9.png) (https://ibb.co/4tTD2PR)
Villa fans waiting for a VAR decision to go their way
-
Quite ridiculous really that VAR has come in to rectify mistakes and it's ended up making mistakes itself.
-
The decision to overrule the penalty for Hudson Odoi is particularly interesting.
As the match was shown, I watched again and again and saw no contact from the player who seemed to trip him. He withdrew his leg and Odoi still went down. No penalty - dive - booking.
It was right on the very last replay they showed that I noticed a possible shove in the back by Matty Lowton. Now I can’t unsee it. You can never really tell the impact of a push - how hard they were pushed, how it affected their balance at that precise moment of contact, from a slow motion replay, but to me, now I have seen it - that IS a push - at a level I have definitely ‘seen em given’ many times.
I think that they looked at it again and again but were looking at the wrong thing!
Human error is human error no matter how many times they look at it.
-
edit double post
-
It's been brought in to help referees and it does. It gives them something to hide behind.
Now instead of criticising the on field official we have to hope for the patronage of some mysterious TV viewer.
It's utter crap.
Bring back the way they did it in Russia please.
-
It's been brought in to help referees and it does. It gives them something to hide behind.
Now instead of criticising the on field official we have to hope for the patronage of some mysterious TV viewer.
It's utter crap.
Bring back the way they did it in Russia please.
You mean exiling it to Siberia?
-
It's been brought in to help referees and it does. It gives them something to hide behind.
Now instead of criticising the on field official we have to hope for the patronage of some mysterious TV viewer.
It's utter crap.
Bring back the way they did it in Russia please.
You mean exiling it to Siberia?
Scrapping it entirely would be nice, but it won't happen. So at least default to the least worst version we've seen.
-
Even when they were checking a couple of our decisions yesterday (which you just knew would not come to anything anyway), it was just a pain in the arse waiting for their decision. It really is cack.
-
Even when they were checking a couple of our decisions yesterday (which you just knew would not come to anything anyway), it was just a pain in the arse waiting for their decision. It really is cack.
It was one thing that both us and the Man City fans agreed on.
-
Richard Keyes calls 'VAR' , 'VR' because he says in Premier league there is no assistant but just a video ref. So the term is VR.
What I wonder is what goes on in stockley park?!
Like instead of watching monitors are they playing Rubix cubes , messing around on phone ,or doing Sudoku baiscaly engaged in hard word or numerical puzzles to pass 90 mins and then like some lax CCTV security guard just press a button to acknowledge they received a call. And make decisions for 'fun'
-
*and when I say Lax cctv security i don't necessarily mean Los Angeles international airport .
They do an okay job
-
Will we ever get a VAR decision to go in our favour? Seems to be a weekly occurrence that we're on the end of a wrong decision. David Silva claimed he touched the ball in for their second yesterday which meant Sterling was offside and clearly impeded Heaton's vision. A shambles the whole thing. Suspend it immediately. It needs a complete review.
Yestetday it was very difficult to tell if Silva had touched the ball so i can forgive the var officials for not disallowing that City goal. However it's totally unforgivable what the referree subsequently did. Sliva unaware that what he was saying should have seen it ruled out, clearly says to the official "it's my goal because i got a touch on it" So why on earth did the ref not relay that information and rule the goal out as Silva's admission meant that Sterling was offside? Shockingly bad all round. The club should be asking questions at the highest level.
-
As a one off yesterday's decision was by far not the worst for us or other teams. Hate the delays, the fact that the VRs are constantly backing the referees even when blatantly wrong and when they give a penalty it is completely the wrong decision. Its embarrassing, ruining the game not much more to say.
-
My understanding is that the Premier League has implemented their “version” of VAR which includes the refs not checking the monitors provided at the side of the pitch. Surely if VAR is to work then it needs to be implemented consistently around the world. We need all refs to be on the same page and the same rules to be applied regardless of what country they are in, so for the PL to have different rules is a farce in itself.
-
Odd how it’s gone from absolutely no penalties given that the on pitch referee has missed before this weekend into overruling them left, right and centre yesterday and today. I think there have been four penalties given by VAR this weekend (Crystal Palace, Man United x2 and Brighton). That includes completely overruling the ref who had booked Zaha for diving instead (VAR also reversed the Chelsea penalty decision against the on field referee).
Wonder if that’s been a conscious decision to get more involved?
-
Odd how it’s gone from absolutely no penalties given that the on pitch referee has missed before this weekend into overruling them left, right and centre yesterday and today. I think there have been four penalties given by VAR this weekend (Crystal Palace, Man United x2 and Brighton). That includes completely overruling the ref who had booked Zaha for diving instead (VAR also reversed the Chelsea penalty decision against the on field referee).
Wonder if that’s been a conscious decision to get more involved?
Oh joy. Even greater scope for them to fuck with our games however they please.
-
How is the first Liverpool goal today any different to our disallowed goal against Palace?! Firmino did actually dive (Grealish didn’t) and the ball falls to Henderson to score. Not a sniff of the ref blowing for a dive and no intervention by VAR. One rule for some, and another for others. Consistent at being inconsistent.
-
Another VAR clusterfuck at The Emirates denied Arsenal 3 points.
The thing is absolutely pathetic. As games get to the 'business end' next spring, I can see it really kicking off with fans, as confusion and tempers boil over.
-
Man Utd gifted a penalty by VAR after overruling Atwell who didn’t award the penalty. Rashford missed the penalty that shouldn’t have been given in the first place.
Man Utd gifted a second penalty by VAR after overruling Atwell who didn’t award the penalty for what looks like a non-handball on the edge of the area. Martial missed the penalty that shouldn’t have been given in the first place.
Was the VAR official a Man Utd fan by any chance?
edit: ...and OGS claims both should be retaken as the keeper moved off the line, and not checked by VAR.
-
For me this is easily the worst ‘innovation’ in the game ever. I would maintain that it should never have been used for anything but factual goal line decisions. Subjective is nonsense & the use of slo mo replays makes everything look worse than it was.
All it has achieved is that instead of arguing about the incompetence of one referee we now argue about incompetence of two who are in cahoots to protect each other rather than get the right decisions.
It is a hapless system until they can or will show & explain the outcomes to those in the stadium - we also need to hear the conversations betw ref & VAR because whilst they are secret you have to ask is that because they are corrupt or is it because they don’t have confidence that they would sound more stupid than they look? There was an occurrence at the Women’s World Cup where France were struggling as tournament hosts they then get the worst penalty decision I have ever seen via VAR & no one will ever persuade me that the ref wasn’t being told what to do to ensure hosts progressed.
They’ve gone all in on this garbage system but do you ever hear of them trying to recruit younger referees who are fit and able to keep up with the game? How many players fail to make the grade every year? making it financially an option to stay in the game & fast tracking them would mean games aren’t all refereed by 40 odd yr old fat men breathing out their arses like Moss or Friend.
Switch the crap tech off until the users are able to use it
-
That first Manure penalty especially was a joke, how they give that having turned down some of the blatant ones earlier in the season is crazy.
And also proof they are making it up as they go along, the big thing about the Grealish 'dive' was that VAR will not do anything about dives apart from pen/no pen so the ref had to blow if he thought there was a dive. And then VAR overturns a pen given by the onfield ref and the player is booked for diving, something a few weeks ago that VAR couldn't do.
-
For me this is easily the worst ‘innovation’ in the game ever. I would maintain that it should never have been used for anything but factual goal line decisions. Subjective is nonsense & the use of slo mo replays makes everything look worse than it was.
All it has achieved is that instead of arguing about the incompetence of one referee we now argue about incompetence of two who are in cahoots to protect each other rather than get the right decisions.
It is a hapless system until they can or will show & explain the outcomes to those in the stadium - we also need to hear the conversations betw ref & VAR because whilst they are secret you have to ask is that because they are corrupt or is it because they don’t have confidence that they would sound more stupid than they look? There was an occurrence at the Women’s World Cup where France were struggling as tournament hosts they then get the worst penalty decision I have ever seen via VAR & no one will ever persuade me that the ref wasn’t being told what to do to ensure hosts progressed.
They’ve gone all in on this garbage system but do you ever hear of them trying to recruit younger referees who are fit and able to keep up with the game? How many players fail to make the grade every year? making it financially an option to stay in the game & fast tracking them would mean games aren’t all refereed by 40 odd yr old fat men breathing out their arses like Moss or Friend.
Switch the crap tech off until the users are able to use it
Totally agree. I've been making the exact same points ever since i witnessed var in action. (or inaction as was the case for us at Palace)
-
Referees didn’t want it in the first place and I get the feeling they are conspiring to make it that hated that it gets dropped.
-
Can VAR be dropped in this country? Or can UEFA enforce it stays?
-
It’s just being used so badly. The mandate is clear and obvious and it’s just not being used in that way at all.
-
It’s just being used so badly. The mandate is clear and obvious and it’s just not being used in that way at all.
Which begs the question. Do the refs want a system that puts them under greater scrutiny and highlights their faults, or are they deliberately screwing it up? They were a joke on Saturday at our game. Admittedly it was difficult to confirm if Silva touched the ball or not but when the player clears up the controversy by TELLING the ref "i touched the ball" then the ref has got to rule it out as Sterling was offside. Why didn't he do that? Was it deliberate? Was it him covering for Stockley Park? Or does the ref not know the rules?
-
That Man U penalty against Norwich was utterly ridiculous.
-
How is the first Liverpool goal today any different to our disallowed goal against Palace?! Firmino did actually dive (Grealish didn’t) and the ball falls to Henderson to score. Not a sniff of the ref blowing for a dive and no intervention by VAR. One rule for some, and another for others. Consistent at being inconsistent.
Everyone knows the decision against us was a fuck up. Would you rather the fucked up again for Liverpool just for consistency?
-
This weekend's VAR catastrophe reminds me of when Lambert was getting stick for shit results using crap long ball football, so he went on a training course/jolly to Germany, and came back and got shit results playing a crap version of tiki-taka. The VAR team have obviously being getting pelters for not overturning penalty appeals, so now they've gone the other way and are giving penalties out for next to nothing. It is without any shadow of a doubt, an absolute omnishambles.
-
I was convinced it would be a crock of shit before it was introduced at the World Cup, and it has proven to be exactly that (although it was less ridiculous then).
I maintain, if it can't be replicated at the lowest level of the game, it shouldn't be in at the top. I'd be happy to chuck the goaline tech out as well as a point of principle, although I'd concede it works. But it was the thin end of the wedge.
A marked out pitch, a goal at either end, a referee and two linesmaen, 22 players and a ball. That's all it needs, and why it became the sport it is. Everything else can fuck off.
-
I maintain, if it can't be replicated at the lowest level of the game, it shouldn't be in at the top. I'd be happy to chuck the goaline tech out as well as a point of principle, although I'd concede it works. But it was the thin end of the wedge.
I would more or less agree with that - although would understand it only applying at a professional level.
With goal line technology at least the answers is definitive. I could maybe get on board with offside calls being reviewed if the technology with better (quicker) and they cleared the rules up to that end.
But some many of the other calls are far too subjective - Hourihanes goal against Brighton being a prime example wouldn’t be overruled every time I don’t believe. And the inconsistency with when/where it can be used - what happens if City scores for the free kick for Jacks foul on Sterling for example?
Also the lack of thought give to the impact on match going fans in particular is a disgrace. The minimal/non existent communication, emotional reaction to goals etc is one of the strongest reason against it for me. I am sure that it sadly not the game with the decision makers sadly.
-
It worked OK in the world Cup as the ref normally tended to get the final say. He wondered over to this little screen, had a look and said yay or nay. He was still in control of the game.
The Man Utd game, the ref didn't give a pen because it wasn't one, he was overruled by some chap sitting miles away so he then gave a pen and booked a player for a foul he did not even see. VAR needs putting back in its box and returning to where it came from, or to put it more bluntly, fuck it off.
-
I was convinced it would be a crock of shit before it was introduced at the World Cup, and it has proven to be exactly that (although it was less ridiculous then).
I maintain, if it can't be replicated at the lowest level of the game, it shouldn't be in at the top. I'd be happy to chuck the goaline tech out as well as a point of principle, although I'd concede it works. But it was the thin end of the wedge.
A marked out pitch, a goal at either end, a referee and two linesmaen, 22 players and a ball. That's all it needs, and why it became the sport it is. Everything else can fuck off.
I agree with all of this.
-
Maybe wrongly but I still believe it should be possible to get VAR to work but for me the only person concluding a "clear and obvious" error has been made should be the person who made that decision. They are the best people to look at the scenario which they made a decision on and decide do they see something they could see before to make them change their mind. Letting someone else do it who has very little feel for the pace and mood of the game makes it completely subjective.
-
For fucks sake, just look t how it work sin rugby and follow that. Anyone would think football is corrupt...
-
For fucks sake, just look t how it work sin rugby and follow that. Anyone would think football is corrupt...
I know the games are different, but why the hell can't the ref have a sensible conversation with the VAR official is just beyond me (with the assistance of a video screen in each corner of the ground). On Saturday it would have been "he's told me he touched the ball, so on the basis we think he's touched it, what is your decision re offside?"
It's so fucking simple yet they refuse to do it, probably as they don't want to be open for critisism when their deliberations are public and possibly because of all the scaremogering about slowing the game down. Anybody would think morons are in charge.
-
This weekend's VAR catastrophe reminds me of when Lambert was getting stick for shit results using crap long ball football, so he went on a training course/jolly to Germany, and came back and got shit results playing a crap version of tiki-taka. The VAR team have obviously being getting pelters for not overturning penalty appeals, so now they've gone the other way and are giving penalties out for next to nothing. It is without any shadow of a doubt, an absolute omnishambles.
what are you on about? He brought back with him the backwards goal kick. Truly innovative
-
For fucks sake, just look t how it work sin rugby and follow that. Anyone would think football is corrupt...
I know the games are different, but why the hell can't the ref have a sensible conversation with the VAR official is just beyond me (with the assistance of a video screen in each corner of the ground). On Saturday it would have been "he's told me he touched the ball, so on the basis we think he's touched it, what is your decision re offside?"
It's so fucking simple yet they refuse to do it, probably as they don't want to be open for critisism when their deliberations are public and possibly because of all the scaremogering about slowing the game down. Anybody would think morons are in charge.
Because the FA and Pl have handed over the responsibility for controlling VAR to a commercial enterprise who’s prime motivation is protecting that enterprise and its members.
-
The most astounding things about VAR are a) how many decisions they still get completely wrong despite looking at it from every angel and at every speed, and b) how inconsistent the decisions still are. It really shows how shit the standard of refereeing is, and VAR will never work if the officials are useless.
I can just picture the briefing to refs before the weekend - "we're getting stick for not giving blatant penalties the ref has missed, so just to prove them wrong give loads of pens this weekend lads. That'll shut them up." The fucking numpties.
At least justice was eventually done with those two farcical awards for ManYew.
-
Officials for the Liverpool game
Ref: Jonathan Moss
Assistants: Daniel Cook and Eddie Smart
VAR: Martin Atkinson
-
VAR will turn this into a completely non contact sanitised load of shite.
If that is a penalty in the Brighton / Everton game, then we may as well all go home. Brighton got it because their player rolled around like he'd broken a bone. If he'd have just carried on without a fuss, nothing would have happened.
It's encouraging the cheats. It's pissing me off no end.
Get rid if it until then can find a system that works.
-
Var, in theory , is a good idea.
In practice, you have refs watching a screen just looking after their mates. As these mates include Mason, Attwell, Atkinson and Kevin F*cking Friend -who will take their turn in front of the screens as the season goes on- you've got no f*cking chance of the desired outcome.
If you had more than half-a-dozen decent refs in the Prem, that would be a good start. With the twats we're stuck with, what has happened has been oh, so predictable!!
-
So nice to be free of VAR in tonight's match. I'd much rather watch matches without it. Ruining the enjoyment for me.
-
Fuck var. Just have the ref adjudicate on his own decision and I think all will be good.
-
So nice to be free of VAR in tonight's match. I'd much rather watch matches without it. Ruining the enjoyment for me.
Absolutely brilliant tonight. When we scored, after a quick glance at the linesman, we could jump around celebrating a certain goal, happy days
-
So much better tonight with that rubbish tuned off. Even though it was almost certainly a foul on Luiz in the lead up to their goal, so what? I'd rather have a goal given against us than the shambles that it is VAR ruin the entire game.
-
I said it was a foul leading up to their goal as well. Other than that, VAR wasn't missed at all.
-
VAR or no VAR, how was that Wolves goal allowed to stand?
-
VAR or no VAR, how was that Wolves goal allowed to stand?
Foul on Doug and the scorer looked offside. I didn't realise that he's got a touch, I thought that Steer just fumbled the shot.
-
I was always under the impression that VAR was to identify
Dangerous foul play potentially missed by referee in real time
Off the ball incidents of foul play etc
Cheating / play acting
Cases of mistaken identity
And in borderline cases - Offside
Not to
View every single goal
To actually advise the ref of basic fouls during real time
To slow the game down and suck all the fun out of it
-
VAR or no VAR, how was that Wolves goal allowed to stand?
No idea, but if that had been a league game, all that would have happened is that the Wolves fans would have celebrated, there'd then have been a three minute delay while they checked it, and it being Aston Villa the goal would have stood. Obviously if we'd scored it, it would have then been ruled out for both the foul and the offside and it being a bit nippy out.
-
VAR or no VAR, how was that Wolves goal allowed to stand?
No idea, but if that had been a league game, all that would have happened is that the Wolves fans would have celebrated, there'd then have been a three minute delay while they checked it, and it being Aston Villa the goal would have stood. Obviously if we'd scored it, it would have then been ruled out for both the foul and the offside and it being a bit nippy out.
From where I was, middle trinity above the tunnel it looked like a clean tackle, just sloppy play.
And he looked onside too.
-
In cricket the umpire refers a decision with "a soft signal" i.e. the decision the umpire would have given without support from technology. The tech then has to be able to fundamentally prove that decision is incorrect for it to be changed.
-
I've tried to be positive about today's game on the pre-match thread, however regarding the refs today and the manipulated piece of technology they pretend to use, I have no confidence at all that today's game will be officiated correctly, especially as we are playing one of the "media darlings". 11 vs 13 plus the selective use of technology is going to make it very difficult for us. That said UTV as always!!
-
I've tried to be positive about today's game on the pre-match thread, however regarding the refs today and the manipulated piece of technology they pretend to use, I have no confidence at all that today's game will be officiated correctly, especially as we are playing one of the "media darlings". 11 vs 13 plus the selective use of technology is going to make it very difficult for us. That said UTV as always!!
VAR will absolutely go in Liverpool's favour today, not a single doubt. We all know it.
-
I've tried to be positive about today's game on the pre-match thread, however regarding the refs today and the manipulated piece of technology they pretend to use, I have no confidence at all that today's game will be officiated correctly, especially as we are playing one of the "media darlings". 11 vs 13 plus the selective use of technology is going to make it very difficult for us. That said UTV as always!!
VAR will absolutely go in Liverpool's favour today, not a single doubt. We all know it.
Especially with that dick face Moss in charge.
But imagine how wonderful it will be if it goes in our favour; Klopp moaning after suffering their first defeat in god knows how many games. We're due something positive from VAR.
Could today be the day.
-
I admire your optimism.
You're off your rocker, but most admired.
😊
-
I admire your optimism.
You're off your rocker, but most admired.
😊
Haha.
It's the sake I've had this afternoon, mate.
-
I'll be having plenty of that later too, but probably of the 'fuck' variety.
-
I'll be having plenty of that later too, but probably of the 'fuck' variety.
I'll be drowning in both no doubt, pal.
-
Shambles
-
I was actually quite understated with our goal as I thought VAR would be called upon ☹️ that’s what it’s come to, and for their late goals, nothing at all!!
-
In bed he first half the linesman put his flag up for a blatant offside even that was checked. What’s the point of linesman when we have secret refs
-
How long was the VAR check for our goal from the time the ball went in? 2 minutes? 3? How can a simple cross followed by a finish require 3 minutes of checking for offside?
Total farce. When fans who have a decision go their way are chanting 'Fuck VAR' then you know you have an issue.
-
Really needs to go, very muted goal celebrations today.
It’s sucking the life out of the atmosphere and that will have an impact on the TV experience, which is all these fuckers care about
Fuck VAR
-
Just to add some balance, Firmino's 'offside' goal was ridiculous aswell, why is the linesman flagging in that situation? I was under the impression that they were to leave the flag down in those situations and send it to VAR.
Also, I dont know if it was because of my dodgy stream but it looked like VAR checked to see if Manes dive was the correct decision, yet we were told after the Palace debacle that VAR couldnt intefere in these circumstances. Its being interpreted as they go along.
-
Seen a couple of stills of VAR calls this afternoon. Our goal, for me it's the right decision because benefit of doubt should go to attacker but not consistent with other offside calls I've seen, e.g. England in nations league, Conor v Burnley.
In terms of their disallowed goal, it's an absolute shocker. Clearly onside. I mean, fuck 'em and all that but what's the point if it doesn't overturn stuff like that?
-
I just don't understand how they can watch technology working so well in both cricket and rugby, where the VAR/TMO talks through his rationale and everyone in the stadium watches it on the screen (in rugby at least) and think it's a better idea to keep everyone in the stadium in football in the dark.
It's a fucking shambles, is killing the game, and when the biggest concern is the competence and integrity of the referees, having their mates back them up in a secretive room with zero oversight or explanation is hardly going to endear the process to anyone.
-
It's simply ruining the game. Today was beyond pathetic.
The disgraceful dive by Mane gets properly dealt with by the ref, then the screen shows VAR is checking for a penalty.
We now don't announce the goalscorer until after the kick off.
I chanted FUCK VAR along with everyone else, even after Firminios goal was confirmed as offside. I hate it with a passion.
-
Are they obliged to show that Alan Shearer clip before the game? it puts me in a bad mood before the games even started!
-
I just don't understand how they can watch technology working so well in both cricket and rugby, where the VAR/TMO talks through his rationale and everyone in the stadium watches it on the screen (in rugby at least) and think it's a better idea to keep everyone in the stadium in football in the dark.
The cynic in me says it will happen in football when they have a signed a sponsorship deal or deals. Goal check sponsored by spec savers. Red card check sponsored by Virgin Money. Etc. We all know it’s coming
-
The disgraceful dive by Mane gets properly dealt with by the ref, then the screen shows VAR is checking for a penalty.
This was hilarious. Moss had booked him and VAR intervened. They do need to get a grip.
-
Are they obliged to show that Alan Shearer clip before the game? it puts me in a bad mood before the games even started!
Me too. Norwich didn't show it the other week. Maybe today it was for the tourists in half and half scarves.
-
I’d love someone to explain to me why Var stepped in to check the Mane booking was correct and it wasn’t a penalty , after ref blew to stop play . Was that not the exact same situation as at Palace when Jack was booked , and apparently there was no mandate for var to check for a penalty then as , um , the referee blew to stop play ? No consistency at all as far as I can see
-
It seems to me that they change the criteria every week. It’s a joke.
-
It totally ruined the first half. Not being able to celebrate a goal until 2 minutes after it's scored is just nonsense.
-
I just don't understand how they can watch technology working so well in both cricket and rugby, where the VAR/TMO talks through his rationale and everyone in the stadium watches it on the screen (in rugby at least) and think it's a better idea to keep everyone in the stadium in football in the dark.
The cynic in me says it will happen in football when they have a signed a sponsorship deal or deals. Goal check sponsored by spec savers. Red card check sponsored by Virgin Money. Etc. We all know it’s coming
Yep 100% that is what VAR has been brought in for.
Itll improve the game my arse , itll just be another cash stream once its established.
-
Could see there was a real attempt on MOTD to avoid the mention of VAR - pity there grovelling to the Premiership was ruined by Frank Lampard's comments.
No doubt they will start editing out mangers comments in future regarding our favourite subject.
-
I just don't understand how they can watch technology working so well in both cricket and rugby, where the VAR/TMO talks through his rationale and everyone in the stadium watches it on the screen (in rugby at least) and think it's a better idea to keep everyone in the stadium in football in the dark.
Imagine showing a replay of why our goal against Brighton was disallowed, in a relegation/title decider? Or more accurately, imagine trying to stop the ensuing riot?
-
Surely it helped us yesterday as they was barely anything in the Firmino "goal." I'd have given that personally as I generally dislike seeing those sorts of ones called for offside, was same when Spurs had one chalked off at Leicester. We will get one offside like that at some stage in the season.
-
I just don't understand how they can watch technology working so well in both cricket and rugby, where the VAR/TMO talks through his rationale and everyone in the stadium watches it on the screen (in rugby at least) and think it's a better idea to keep everyone in the stadium in football in the dark.
Imagine showing a replay of why our goal against Brighton was disallowed, in a relegation/title decider? Or more accurately, imagine trying to stop the ensuing riot?
Dave, you're normally the first to get pissed off when the authorities treat the fans as animals. And some fans already think the refs are cheating us and don't riot so what's the difference?
Treat us like adults and you never know, people might behave like adults. If fans can't control themselves because they think we've been cheated by a video ref then they should rightfully get banned from attending.
-
The ref was a bloody joke yesterday. Does he consult with VAR before he ties his shoelaces?
-
I'm still convinced that making a mockery of it is just a way to numb supporters to VAR so that it can be used to make sure the right team doesn't lose in certain matches.
-
3 minutes worth of replays at Goodison Park to try to determine wether there was a handball or not 😴😴😴
-
3 minutes worth of replays at Goodison Park to try to determine wether there was a handball or not 😴😴😴
Was there?
-
3 minutes worth of replays at Goodison Park to try to determine wether there was a handball or not 😴😴😴
Was there?
It certainly took a while and in my opinion they still got the decision wrong.
-
Surely it helped us yesterday as they was barely anything in the Firmino "goal." I'd have given that personally as I generally dislike seeing those sorts of ones called for offside, was same when Spurs had one chalked off at Leicester. We will get one offside like that at some stage in the season.
I think it was Mings and Engels that were either side of Trezeguet. If either of them had got onto the end of the cross and scored, it would have been ruled out.
For me Firmino's was a goal too. It's daft that they go down to the millimetre. There should be some margin of error - there is in cricket when they're working out whether the ball is going on to hit the stumps. I preferred it when they had the rule about daylight.
-
3 minutes worth of replays at Goodison Park to try to determine wether there was a handball or not 😴😴😴
Was there?
It certainly took a while and in my opinion they still got the decision wrong.
Agreed if you’re going to analyse every handball Why would you have your hands that high up
-
"Daylight" would make no difference to VAR, though. It would just move the point at which you work out whether or not someone's offside by millimetres from in front of them to behind.
They've dug themselves into a hole imo by not sticking to the "clear and obvious error" mantra.
-
Absolutely. They're treating offsides as a binary decision, assuming the technology is millimetre accurate, which it clearly isn't as there's a ref in a room drawing lines!
As mentioned, cricket get this and factor it in. It works so why the fuck have the football authorities decided to ignore what works elsewhere!
-
I just don't understand how they can watch technology working so well in both cricket and rugby, where the VAR/TMO talks through his rationale and everyone in the stadium watches it on the screen (in rugby at least) and think it's a better idea to keep everyone in the stadium in football in the dark.
Imagine showing a replay of why our goal against Brighton was disallowed, in a relegation/title decider? Or more accurately, imagine trying to stop the ensuing riot?
Dave, you're normally the first to get pissed off when the authorities treat the fans as animals. And some fans already think the refs are cheating us and don't riot so what's the difference?
Treat us like adults and you never know, people might behave like adults. If fans can't control themselves because they think we've been cheated by a video ref then they should rightfully get banned from attending.
Look at the Taking Kids thread.
-
I just don't understand how they can watch technology working so well in both cricket and rugby, where the VAR/TMO talks through his rationale and everyone in the stadium watches it on the screen (in rugby at least) and think it's a better idea to keep everyone in the stadium in football in the dark.
Imagine showing a replay of why our goal against Brighton was disallowed, in a relegation/title decider? Or more accurately, imagine trying to stop the ensuing riot?
Dave, you're normally the first to get pissed off when the authorities treat the fans as animals. And some fans already think the refs are cheating us and don't riot so what's the difference?
Treat us like adults and you never know, people might behave like adults. If fans can't control themselves because they think we've been cheated by a video ref then they should rightfully get banned from attending.
Look at the Taking Kids thread.
I have, and unless I've missed it there's no mention of anyone rioting because a decision went the wrong way.
-
Look how we reacted at Palace.
-
'We'?! A handful of twats you mean? If we want to base policy on the lowest common denominator let's bring fences back.
Like I said before, treat fans like adults and you may be surprised to find they behave like adults.
-
I thought VAR would be good in preventing the obvious mistakes that refs make because they are human and because they aren't always well placed (plus some of them seem to be crap) but it has been an unmitigated disaster. It ruins the game without even getting decisions right. Look at that Watford player that got hacked down twice by a Spurs defender and no penalty given. You could see his boot curled around the players shin. As the author of the Taking Kids thread, I agree with Dave, if a video like that was shown at a full stadium on the last day of the season it would be a riot. Imagine Tyrone had hacked down a Blues player in the 95th minute at The Sty (I know... they're never coming up, its just an example) and no penalty resulted in them being relegated. If I was a steward, I'd take off my High Vis and go home (after kicking Jack, obviously.)
-
But as has been pointed out, a bunch of knobs kicked off at Palace without the video. Why would it be any worse with a video?
But on the plus side, the 99.9% of rational fans would at least understand why the VAR check is taking so long and understand the basis for the ultimate decision.
-
Why wouldn’t the refs want the crowd to hear their discussion about a decision if they have nothing to hide? All this secrecy only adds to the many conspiracy theories currently in circulation, and it’s not a surprise.
-
Surely it helped us yesterday as they was barely anything in the Firmino "goal."
But it didn't. On pitch officials made the decision VAR check would have only helped Liverpool.
-
Well I’m convinced that VAR missed 3 penalties in that Everton Spurs match.
-
It’s ruining the game get shot
-
Well I’m convinced that VAR missed 3 penalties in that Everton Spurs match.
VAR has missed more penalties than JPA, and that’s saying something.
-
The injury for Gomez is a horrible one but I find the red for Son very harsh, it was a foul and a yellow imo. PGMOL have said the severity of the injury played a part in the decision to give a red which is bonkers imo.
-
I agree red was harsh.
I had actually assumed Son had been booked for his laughable dive 10 minutes before (was nearly as bad as Mane's) so thought it was a second yellow.
-
VAR won't improve radically until they have competent refs on the pitch AND behind the screens -something I can't see happening anytime soon.
-
Every weekend you think it can't possibly be as bad as the one before, yet every week they actually make worse decisions. They must genuinely be trying to nobble it, it can be the only explanation for the unremitting shitness of the experiment.
-
Every weekend you think it can't possibly be as bad as the one before, yet every week they actually make worse decisions. They must genuinely be trying to nobble it, it can be the only explanation for the unremitting shitness of the experiment.
Exactly. I’ve gone from firmly in favour to sack the lot.
-
Think Risso is right, did the referees even want it brought in ? The Precious tw*ts were scared it would undermine them or diminish their authority weren't they?
-
Every weekend you think it can't possibly be as bad as the one before, yet every week they actually make worse decisions. They must genuinely be trying to nobble it, it can be the only explanation for the unremitting shitness of the experiment.
I’ve thought the same for a few weeks. They think it undermines them so are doing their utmost to make it fail. Twenty first century luddites.
-
Officials for Wolves game.
Referee: Anthony Taylor.
Assistants: Gary Beswick, Adam Nunn.
Fourth official: David Coote.
VAR: Chris Kavanagh.
Assistant VAR: Sian Massey-Ellis.
-
One thing to be said for VAR - it's fantastic for referee job creation! Does it really take two of them to make decisions as mind boggling as they do?!
Before long there'll be more refs than players!
-
Pantomime cast in order of appearance.
Referee: Anthony Taylor.
Assistants: Gary Beswick, Adam Nunn.
Fourth official: David Coote.
VAR: Chris Kavanagh.
Assistant VAR: Sian Massey-Ellis.
-
One thing to be said for VAR - it's fantastic for referee job creation! Does it really take two of them to make decisions as mind boggling as they do?!
Before long there'll be more refs than players!
For the last game of the season there will be 4 officials at 10 games and 10 sets of VAR officials. There are 19 Premier League refs. They already call them up from the Championship then on down the food chain.
-
It’s about to get worse, with managers pressing for 3 VAR appeals per game.
Can you just imagine it?
-
That's what should happen, take it out of the hands of officials to decide what gets reviewed. That cheating c*** wouldn't have been able to prevent our goal at Palace, then.
I'd maybe go for one per half and an extra one for extra time then an extra one for penalties, rather than three each, but it would seem a step in the right direction.
-
I think that might be a better system to use you know like they do in Tennis where you get 2 challenges per set.
Instead of VAR checking every single decision, the manager gets maybe 1 challenge per half to use VAR. Every other decision is what the referee in the middle says like the good old days. If the manager uses VAR wrongly to have an offside decision checked, then 5 minutes later the ref misses a stonewall penalty but nothing can be done because the 1 VAR has already been used on an offside then tough.
-
That's what should happen, take it out of the hands of officials to decide what gets reviewed. That cheating c*** wouldn't have been able to prevent our goal at Palace, then.
I'd maybe go for one per half and an extra one for extra time then an extra one for penalties, rather than three each, but it would seem a step in the right direction.
My concern is managers would use them to disrupt the game, it would become a tactical weapon. Maybe one and if it was a correct appeal they still have it.
There is usually only one big incident.per match.
-
Fully implement VAR correctly or fully fuck it off. There is no way this half arsed version should have been introduced to the game. The match referees and VAR officials need to be fully trained, all aspects of the technology used (ie the pitch side screens), and clear rules that state when it should be used. The rules of the game also need to be updated to remove so many of the grey areas that remain to be subjective (if it’s subjective then the final call has to be with the ref using the pitch side screen).
-
That's what should happen, take it out of the hands of officials to decide what gets reviewed. That cheating c*** wouldn't have been able to prevent our goal at Palace, then.
I'd maybe go for one per half and an extra one for extra time then an extra one for penalties, rather than three each, but it would seem a step in the right direction.
My concern is managers would use them to disrupt the game, it would become a tactical weapon. Maybe one and if it was a correct appeal they still have it.
There is usually only one big incident.per match.
I think if you limit the number of appeals/reviews/challenges (call it what you like) it would cause less description than at present where you struggle to celebrate any goals. And they would be so valuable that I can't see bosses using them tactically. You'd be a bit daft to ask for a review of a throw in to slow down the opposition's momentum then find yourself powerless to query a massively dodgy game-changing decision later in the game.
-
I think that might be a better system to use you know like they do in Tennis where you get 2 challenges per set.
Instead of VAR checking every single decision, the manager gets maybe 1 challenge per half to use VAR. Every other decision is what the referee in the middle says like the good old days. If the manager uses VAR wrongly to have an offside decision checked, then 5 minutes later the ref misses a stonewall penalty but nothing can be done because the 1 VAR has already been used on an offside then tough.
I think the 2/3 challenges idea would be even worse than the fuckfest we have now. Lets say a manager thinks his team should of been awarded a pen so he appeals and it goes to var. Can you really see them overturning the original decision thus taking the managers side over their chum? It's already being run as an excersise in arse covering.It will cause carnage and you'll be seeing a regular 10/15 minutes extra time being held up on the board. All these suggestions are just a case of re-organising the deck chairs on the Titanic. The officials don't want it and are deliberately sabotaging it in my opinion. The fans don't want it. It's ruining the unbridled joy we get when celebrating a goal which is the single biggest reason for bringing us back in our droves every week. It takes away so much more than it gives. Stop this madness now. Kick it out.
-
Fully implement VAR correctly or fully fuck it off. There is no way this half arsed version should have been introduced to the game. The match referees and VAR officials need to be fully trained, all aspects of the technology used (ie the pitch side screens), and clear rules that state when it should be used. The rules of the game also need to be updated to remove so many of the grey areas that remain to be subjective (if it’s subjective then the final call has to be with the ref using the pitch side screen).
Exactly.
-
There's no way any manager or player should ever have the right to send anything to VAR. Many of them barely know the rules of the game and all of them are utterly, unapologetically biased. Why would I want the game delayed to tickle their egos or give vent to their peeves.
-
Managers dont know the rules?
-
Just have the VAR person, inform the referee when he's possibly missed something.
Referee HAS to go and double check. Referee watches replay, makes final decision.
It is nowhere near as hard as they're making it look.
-
Managers dont know the rules?
In terms of being able to ref the game, correct. Ask a ref. Actually, ask a manager and they'll tell you the same.
-
Just have the VAR person, inform the referee when he's possibly missed something.
Referee HAS to go and double check. Referee watches replay, makes final decision.
It is nowhere near as hard as they're making it look.
Which is what happened in the World Cup.
-
Just have the VAR person, inform the referee when he's possibly missed something.
Referee HAS to go and double check. Referee watches replay, makes final decision.
It is nowhere near as hard as they're making it look.
Which is what happened in the World Cup.
Yep, if it's here to stay then for now we may as well use the least worst version of it.
-
Just have the VAR person, inform the referee when he's possibly missed something.
Referee HAS to go and double check. Referee watches replay, makes final decision.
It is nowhere near as hard as they're making it look.
Which is what happened in the World Cup.
And then if the ref still isn't sure, he can ask the VAR team to have another look, at which point the "clear and obvious error" rule could apply.
-
Just have the VAR person, inform the referee when he's possibly missed something.
Referee HAS to go and double check. Referee watches replay, makes final decision.
It is nowhere near as hard as they're making it look.
Which is what happened in the World Cup.
During which there were about six penalties a game. I know I'm a miserable luddite but can't they just scrap the entire thing so we can get back to celebrating goals again?
-
Just have the VAR person, inform the referee when he's possibly missed something.
Referee HAS to go and double check. Referee watches replay, makes final decision.
It is nowhere near as hard as they're making it look.
Which is what happened in the World Cup.
During which there were about six penalties a game. I know I'm a miserable luddite but can't they just scrap the entire thing so we can get back to celebrating goals again?
I don't think you're being a luddite. Just because it's new technology and they've decided to use it doesn't make it right. Someone invented the Stylophone once.That got binned once everyone realised it wasn't "the future" it was actually a load of crap.
-
Maybe it's just because England benefitted, but I kind of liked blatant grappling in the box actually being penalised in the World Cup. There were more penalties than usual but that did seem to diminish as the tournament progressed.
-
Using "luddite" would imply one railing against new technology. It's not, it's barely one step removed from someone operating a vcr with a frame advance button.
-
How many mistakes per game were happening to make this shite worth it? It's made the game worse, not better.
-
I prefer using the word Luddite in its historical rather than derogatory context. We should be smashing up the video screens at Stockley Park simply because they represent a challenge to our way of life as we know it.
(And I say that as someone who was initially in favour of VAR.)
-
So Atkinson was going to give a yellow, VAR said give a red, and now it's overturned.
Tottenham forward Son Heung-min's red card for his tackle on Andre Gomes has been overturned by the Football Association.
-
Just have the VAR person, inform the referee when he's possibly missed something.
Referee HAS to go and double check. Referee watches replay, makes final decision.
It is nowhere near as hard as they're making it look.
Which is what happened in the World Cup.
During which there were about six penalties a game. I know I'm a miserable luddite but can't they just scrap the entire thing so we can get back to celebrating goals again?
I don't think you're being a luddite. Just because it's new technology and they've decided to use it doesn't make it right. Someone invented the Stylophone once.That got binned once everyone realised it wasn't "the future" it was actually a load of crap.
Was that the one Rolf Harris invented or did he just advertise it?
-
Just have the VAR person, inform the referee when he's possibly missed something.
Referee HAS to go and double check. Referee watches replay, makes final decision.
It is nowhere near as hard as they're making it look.
Which is what happened in the World Cup.
During which there were about six penalties a game. I know I'm a miserable luddite but can't they just scrap the entire thing so we can get back to celebrating goals again?
I don't think you're being a luddite. Just because it's new technology and they've decided to use it doesn't make it right. Someone invented the Stylophone once.That got binned once everyone realised it wasn't "the future" it was actually a load of crap.
Was that the one Rolf Harris invented or did he just advertise it?
I believe he invented it. I didn't want to give him credit for obvious reasons 😉
-
I remember getting one for Xmas, it wasn’t great.
-
He did great service to the hardboard manufacturing industry by inventing the wobble (woggle?) board. If you could not master playing it you could re roof a rabbit hutch with it.
-
I remember getting one for Xmas, it wasn’t great.
Yeah me too. Mid 70's i reckon? I was the envy of my brothers for about 10 minutes then the novelty wore off. Think i swapped it for an etch-a-sketch or a compendium of games.
-
Rolf Harris didn't invent the Stylophone. He played it on some of his irritating novelty tunes, but he didn't invent it.
-
Rolf Harris didn't invent the Stylophone. He played it on some of his irritating novelty tunes, but he didn't invent it.
I could play a mean Danny Boy on my Stylophone
-
I never had a Stylophone but I remember an uncle of mine having one. If I remember right didn't they make a big one and a mini one?
-
From today's newspaper
The Premier League has acknowledged that the video assistant referee's decision to award a penalty against Everton in their game at Brighton was incorrect. … The Premier League has privately admitted an error was made on the advice of video referee Lee Mason.
Hands up, everyone who is surprised that VAR is unreliable. Okay, so that's none of us then.
-
That's one of the problems of VAR in a nut shell...in most cases, the decision still remains to be the opinion of one man who isn't even at the game, so they may as well leave these kind of decisions to the match referee and insist that he goes to the touchline to watch the replays.
-
From today's newspaper
The Premier League has acknowledged that the video assistant referee's decision to award a penalty against Everton in their game at Brighton was incorrect. … The Premier League has privately admitted an error was made on the advice of video referee Lee Mason.
Hands up, everyone who is surprised that VAR is unreliable. Okay, so that's none of us then.
Which paper?
-
From today's newspaper
The Premier League has acknowledged that the video assistant referee's decision to award a penalty against Everton in their game at Brighton was incorrect. … The Premier League has privately admitted an error was made on the advice of video referee Lee Mason.
Hands up, everyone who is surprised that VAR is unreliable. Okay, so that's none of us then.
Which paper?
Daily Telegraph
-
Anybody just seen the farce at the Spuds game? Sheffield Utd equalise from a move down the right and it's been disallowed by VAR for offside by what looked like a toe nail in a phase of play that took place about 20 seconds before the goal. Decision was made about 3 minutes after the ball went in the net. It's getting farcical now, you daren't celebrate a goal any more.
-
It's all about getting the decisions right isn't it?
Football wanted it, football got it. Suck it up.
-
I searched "sheff utd spurs var" looking for a replay. Not much love for it there! Is that right, FOUR minutes to reach a decision?
Edit. Just seen devilla's post.
-
"Football wanted it".
Well I didn't, and it's an absolute farce.
-
Unbelievable!
How is this offside? (https://twitter.com/SheffieldUnited/status/1193203615583875073/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1193203615583875073&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fs9e.github.io%2Fiframe%2F2%2Ftwitter.min.html%231193203615583875073)
-
Unbelievable!
How is this offside? (https://twitter.com/SheffieldUnited/status/1193203615583875073/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1193203615583875073&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fs9e.github.io%2Fiframe%2F2%2Ftwitter.min.html%231193203615583875073)
The bloke playing the pass must be really naturally talented to overcome all the drawbacks of the size and shape of those feet.
-
Le Tissier was defending VAR offside decisions earlier on SSN on the basis that it’s the only consistent part of VAR as the same rules apply to all teams rather than match officials bottling big decisions. The problem is that the offside rules under VAR are a complete farce and need to be reviewed and updated.
-
"Football wanted it".
Well I didn't, and it's an absolute farce.
I do have a "serves you right" feeling about this. The endless berating of officials, refusal to accept decisions, impatience, hypocrisy and selective vision from managers and pundits lead to this. It was not needed and has had a negative effect on the game. VAR is like Brexit. Impossible to deliver what it promises.
-
As far as I’m aware it seems to be working with minimum fuss in 28 other countries.
-
Of all the foul play Laws, it's the only one that's binary, it's just always had problems with its human implementation and enforcement, which telly now magnifies, and treats like a dog with a bone. If you want something for offsides, it has to be along the lines of Hawkeye. Which could come in the next few years, I reckon. Impartial definitive automated decision delivered near-instantaneously to the referee, similarly to goal line decisions now. Just need some geniuses to get to work on those "interfering with play" algorithms.
Or massively loosen a rewritten Law.
-
As far as I’m aware it seems to be working with minimum fuss in 28 other countries.
Valencia-Granada game there was four minute delay between goal being scored and kicking off again. Goal was given in the end.
I simply can't believe refs aren't going to the monitors to have a look. If you're having a three minute delay on fractional offside you really should.
-
As far as I’m aware it seems to be working with minimum fuss in 28 other countries.
A quick bit of googling suggests it's as popular amongst match-going fans around the world as it is here. Including this goal scored during half time in Germany
-
I take it back then...VAR is a fuck up of international proportions.
-
I have watched various games and incidents today. I have no idea how they could have determined that the Sheff Utd goal was offside.
There were blatant and obvious penalties not given and still the pitch side screen has been deemed by the refs to be for aesthetic purposes only.
There are various clubs now singing fuck VAR and I can only hope that the protests grow to the extent that they do something about it.
-
VAR by its very definition was brought in to be an ASSISTANT to the referee much in the same way as the two assistants running the lines. It was introduced to provide another perspective to decisions the referee might not have seen, or missed by his on field assistants. But ultimately in the end the match referee needs to be the one making the final call. What has happened since the World Cup where with the aid of pitch side monitors it worked really well, is that VAR has taken over the duties of the match referee which was never its original intent. It has lost immense credibility. Put the power back in the hands of the match referee to help make calls that he missed. If the call on the pitch was a penalty, VAR should be used as a way of determining if something clear and obvious should overturn the decision. And use the monitors with a set time limit. And for me better still only employ it on a manager challenge. They get 2 a game, and like in the NFL, if they get the first one wrong they lose the second.
I don't disagree with the principal of VAR but it's a disaster right now.
-
This really cannot continue. It seems that every weekend there are laughable/lamentable mistakes being made with this current process being implemented. I sincerely hope that someone demands a full explanation from Mike Riley before too long.
-
VAR by its very definition was brought in to be an ASSISTANT to the referee much in the same way as the two assistants running the lines. It was introduced to provide another perspective to decisions the referee might not have seen, or missed by his on field assistants. But ultimately in the end the match referee needs to be the one making the final call. What has happened since the World Cup where with the aid of pitch side monitors it worked really well, is that VAR has taken over the duties of the match referee which was never its original intent. It has lost immense credibility. Put the power back in the hands of the match referee to help make calls that he missed. If the call on the pitch was a penalty, VAR should be used as a way of determining if something clear and obvious should overturn the decision. And use the monitors with a set time limit. And for me better still only employ it on a manager challenge. They get 2 a game, and like in the NFL, if they get the first one wrong they lose the second.
I don't disagree with the principal of VAR but it's a disaster right now.
This
-
Unbelievable!
How is this offside? (https://twitter.com/SheffieldUnited/status/1193203615583875073/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1193203615583875073&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fs9e.github.io%2Fiframe%2F2%2Ftwitter.min.html%231193203615583875073)
Incredible, surely the Spurs player's shoulder is more forward than the Sheffield player's toe.
-
As far as I’m aware it seems to be working with minimum fuss in 28 other countries.
A quick bit of googling suggests it's as popular amongst match-going fans around the world as it is here. Including this goal scored during half time in Germany
At least the ref looked at the monitor, they seem incapable of doing that over here.
-
Unbelievable!
How is this offside? (https://twitter.com/SheffieldUnited/status/1193203615583875073/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1193203615583875073&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fs9e.github.io%2Fiframe%2F2%2Ftwitter.min.html%231193203615583875073)
Is the answer ‘because its against media darlings Spurs’ ?
-
Unbelievable!
How is this offside? (https://twitter.com/SheffieldUnited/status/1193203615583875073/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1193203615583875073&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fs9e.github.io%2Fiframe%2F2%2Ftwitter.min.html%231193203615583875073)
Incredible, surely the Spurs player's shoulder is more forward than the Sheffield player's toe.
Surely we want to see more goals in the game. I would personally change the rule from next season to there having to be clear daylight between the attacker and defender to be ruled out as offside. The whole knee, shoulder etc being offside is too complicated and it's taking too long for decisions to be made.
If part of the attacker's body is on-side then they should be given the benefit of the doubt.
-
The line goes through the defender's head, they aren't filling me with confidence about how accurate they are.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EI8f12EWkAAkDcN?format=jpg&name=4096x4096)
-
Unbelievable!
How is this offside? (https://twitter.com/SheffieldUnited/status/1193203615583875073/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1193203615583875073&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fs9e.github.io%2Fiframe%2F2%2Ftwitter.min.html%231193203615583875073)
Incredible, surely the Spurs player's shoulder is more forward than the Sheffield player's toe.
They seem to have drawn the line to the Spurs player's knee, ignoring the fact that his shoulder is further forward and also ahead of the attacking player's foot. Ludicrous.
-
Will VAR rear its ugly head later against Wolverlona? I fucking hope not. Football is stressful enough as it is.
-
Will VAR rear its ugly head later against Wolverlona? I fucking hope not. Football is stressful enough as it is.
I'm sure it will if we score mate.
-
Regarding the offside rule. I believe it should be changed in line with the ball going out if play rule. Any part of the ball on the white line, and it's still in play. Apply this to offside. Mark the centre of the defenders body. Draw the line from that point. Any part of the strikers body that is touching or behind that line is onside. Any marginal decisions should always go to the attacking team. Could this work.
-
It's all about getting the decisions right isn't it?
Football wanted it, football got it. Suck it up.
Or continue to rightly call it out when it's ruining the game and disallowing goals for ridiculous off sides?
-
As far as I’m aware it seems to be working with minimum fuss in 28 other countries.
A quick bit of googling suggests it's as popular amongst match-going fans around the world as it is here. Including this goal scored during half time in Germany
At least the ref looked at the monitor, they seem incapable of doing that over here.
I've seen a few people moan about this but not sure what we would get out of it. Surely that just means it would take even longer to get a decision?
-
I was watching MOTD earlier and even some players seem reluctant to celebrate now. The Newcastle player who scored the diving header was looking round just after he scored expecting it to go to VAR and the chap who scored Sheff Utd's equaliser didn't celebrate either.
-
The line goes through the defender's head, they aren't filling me with confidence about how accurate they are.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EI8f12EWkAAkDcN?format=jpg&name=4096x4096)
Somebody onTwitter pointed out that a body part which was deemed fit for Dele Alli to score with 3 weeks ago, the shoulder, for reasons unknown isn't playing the attacker onside here.
-
The line goes through the defender's head, they aren't filling me with confidence about how accurate they are.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EI8f12EWkAAkDcN?format=jpg&name=4096x4096)
I was watching this live and they kept doing the thing with the lines and it is remarkable that they ruled it offside.
-
The line goes through the defender's head, they aren't filling me with confidence about how accurate they are.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EI8f12EWkAAkDcN?format=jpg&name=4096x4096)
I was watching this live and they kept doing the thing with the lines and it is remarkable that they ruled it offside.
Sorry to bring physics into it, but isn’t there a parallax problem here? The line goes along the floor, so anything on the floor is judged properly. But the defender’s head and shoulder is a distance (1.4 to 1.8m?) above the floor. Because the line isn’t square to the camera, it will make the defender’s head and shoulder look further forward than they are in reality. In other words the camera angle makes it look like the defender is playing the attacker on side, when in reality he isn’t.
It’s the sort of problem that image processing can deal with, but can’t show in a convincing photo.
By the way, this isn’t a defence of VAR, I hate the way it stifles the spontaneity of the game with a passion.
-
By the way, this isn’t a defence of VAR
Sounds like one to me, pinko.
-
By the way, this isn’t a defence of VAR
Sounds like one to me, pinko.
Hahaha! Caught red handed
-
Did the handball in the liverpool box lead directly to the goal at the other end??
-
Did the handball in the liverpool box lead directly to the goal at the other end??
Yep. And there you have it. Var still comes down to opinions. It's useless and needs to be scrapped asap. It's ruining the game, i really don't understand how people still find it a valuable asset to the game.
-
Ref watch on SSN is cringey as fuck. Rolling Dermot Gallagher out every week tieing himself into knots, car crash TV.
-
Ref watch on SSN is cringey as fuck. Rolling Dermot Gallagher out every week tieing himself into knots, car crash TV.
Absolutely bollocks he just backs up his mates and blah blah blah
-
25 minutes analysis, he argued with himself about 4 times.
-
At least we didn't get bummed by this farcical, ref ego massaging bollocks this week and just got a good old shooing like the old days.
-
The line goes through the defender's head, they aren't filling me with confidence about how accurate they are.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EI8f12EWkAAkDcN?format=jpg&name=4096x4096)
I was watching this live and they kept doing the thing with the lines and it is remarkable that they ruled it offside.
Sorry to bring physics into it, but isn’t there a parallax problem here? The line goes along the floor, so anything on the floor is judged properly. But the defender’s head and shoulder is a distance (1.4 to 1.8m?) above the floor. Because the line isn’t square to the camera, it will make the defender’s head and shoulder look further forward than they are in reality. In other words the camera angle makes it look like the defender is playing the attacker on side, when in reality he isn’t.
It’s the sort of problem that image processing can deal with, but can’t show in a convincing photo.
By the way, this isn’t a defence of VAR, I hate the way it stifles the spontaneity of the game with a passion.
Do they take into account that pitches aren't flat due to drainage and that there's the curvature of the Earth to take deal with ?
Maybe VAR is one place that Flat-Earthers have gained control :)
-
The refs need to go over and watch the monitor footage. That is what the female refs were doing at the Women's World Cup and VAR seemed to work far more smoothly in that tournament than it has in the men's game. Apparently Mike Riley who is in charge of the refs was against that but has backed down due to all the media criticism. I think having the refs review the monitor footage will be a step in the right direction.
-
The refs need to go over and watch the monitor footage. That is what the female refs were doing at the Women's World Cup and VAR seemed to work far more smoothly in that tournament than it has in the men's game. Apparently Mike Riley who is in charge of the refs was against that but has backed down due to all the media criticism. I think having the refs review the monitor footage will be a step in the right direction.
Booting var into touch would be the right direction.
-
Anyone seen Dermot Gallagher's latest pathetic attempt to support that decision at the weekend? Painful viewing, you can tell that even he's not convincing himself.
-
The refs need to go over and watch the monitor footage. That is what the female refs were doing at the Women's World Cup and VAR seemed to work far more smoothly in that tournament than it has in the men's game. Apparently Mike Riley who is in charge of the refs was against that but has backed down due to all the media criticism. I think having the refs review the monitor footage will be a step in the right direction.
Apparently the suits have told refs to try not to use the monitors as it 'disrupts the flow of the game' as if VAR isn't doing that anyway.
-
Between Dermot Gallacher and now Neil Swarbrick (On 5Live this afternoon), I think we're being taken for mugs.
Just wait until this farce costs trophies, relegation etc.
-
Between Dermot Gallacher and now Neil Swarbrick (On 5Live this afternoon), I think we're being taken for mugs.
Just wait until this farce costs trophies, relegation etc.
You'd expect Swarbrick to try to defend himself, but his self delusion is monumental:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/50380641
7/10 so far? It's absolutely dreadful, every single weekend, and is getting worse. The worst thing is the appalling lack of consistency.
-
One thing I’ve not seen mentioned about yesterday’s VAR decision (on the handball), was that it led to a goal. Surely that should have been chalked off, like the Man City (v Spyrs) goal was earlier in the season?
-
No, because I wanted Man City to win.
Basically VAR is out to get me personally. Pissing me off is the only thing it has been consistent in.
-
Apparently the refs have now decided to make more use of the pitch side monitor because only the on field ref understands the "atmosphere" of the game.
Which I think is code for "you'll never get a penalty at Anfield"!
-
One thing I’ve not seen mentioned about yesterday’s VAR decision (on the handball), was that it led to a goal. Surely that should have been chalked off, like the Man City (v Spyrs) goal was earlier in the season?
They mentioned it on MOTD2. Whilst they agreed it should have been a penalty to Man City for the handball, I think it was Shearer who suggested that it would have been toxic (or something like that) to disallow the goal and award a penalty instead.
Edit: “bedlam” is how Shearer described it.
-
Between Dermot Gallacher and now Neil Swarbrick (On 5Live this afternoon), I think we're being taken for mugs.
Just wait until this farce costs trophies, relegation etc.
You'd expect Swarbrick to try to defend himself, but his self delusion is monumental:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/50380641
7/10 so far? It's absolutely dreadful, every single weekend, and is getting worse. The worst thing is the appalling lack of consistency.
Listen to him, pompous little prat. He said on TS earlier that "var is here to stay & people will have to give them time to perfect it" Says who? It's not down to the referees it's down to the football governing bodies whether it's here to stay or not. The arrogance of them these days is laughable. They seem to think the crowds and the TV companies are there to watch them! Apparently ours is the last league to implement it. One year behind all other associations so they could get it right! And they spent the whole year travelling the globe on a massive all expenses jolly to observe. Fuck me.
-
It seems to me, standing back and half closing your eyes, the referees are clinging to their power to arbitrate. The laughable reference to only they understanding the "atmosphere" of a game is a weasel way of saying that they demand the right to be partisan. A free kick in the outfield is a free kick is a free kick. A free kick in a penalty area is a penalty but it might directly affect the outcome of the game so referees assume the right to arbitrate. That is de facto bias.
What we have with VAR is machines partly running games. It used to work perfectly ( because errors we accepted as part of the game) when humans ran the games. VAR can only work when it runs every bit of the game robotically. The mixture of technolgy and human judgement is an attempt to grow oranges on an apple tree. The hybrid system we have currently is a Norwegian Blue parrot.
-
... What we have with VAR is machines partly running games. It used to work perfectly ( because errors we accepted as part of the game) when humans ran the games. VAR can only work when it runs every bit of the game robotically. The mixture of technolgy and human judgement is an attempt to grow oranges on an apple tree. The hybrid system we have currently is a Norwegian Blue parrot.
Disagree, Brian.
The technology is providing humans with more 'data' to make decisions. The problem now is that the human foibles are being exposed and the previously-undisclosed dilemma of the ref making judgement-calls is being laid bare (Think Dowd at Wembley in 2010 for an example of a ref who admitted to bringing his judgement into what was a binary and b&w decision).
Additionally, the frailty of the laws is also being exposed - when is a handball a freekick / penalty vs contact with a body part that makes no difference to the play? Can a player be offisde if a toe-nail crosses a computer-generated line?
I have no problem with the technology: I have a problem with its application and with the concept that referees should judge whether to apply the rules or not, and these are the issues that needs to be addressed by the game's administrators.
-
I believe you can't have some technology. All in or not at all. If Cambridge scientists can programme a piece of wood slime to draw a full colour map of the Tokyo underground, as they can, robotic scanning of every move of every player in a game of football has to be a serious consideration.
-
I believe you can't have some technology. All in or not at all.
Agree Brian.
Type 'Kevin Friend, Leicester' into the command prompt of the attack helicopter.
Make the technology work for us.
-
I believe you can't have some technology. All in or not at all. If Cambridge scientists can programme a piece of wood slime to draw a full colour map of the Tokyo underground, as they can, robotic scanning of every move of every player in a game of football has to be a serious consideration.
You can I suppose because it worked in the World Cup. We had some technology (the pitch side monitor) but the ref had the final say. Why that hasn't happened so far this season is a bit of a mystery.
-
Surely Swarthick forgot to add the minus sign before the 7. Who on earth does he think he's kidding, this spin would embarrass a politician. Just as idiotic as Gallagher trying to justify the unjustifiable with a straight face. It's an unmitigated fuck up so far and every man, woman and their dogs know it.
The ""atmosphere" line is pure Dowdism - I reserve the right to not give a foul in case I upset the ManYew/'The Mighty Reds YNWA' plastic fans or Sky.
We have to make the man on the pitch make the ultimate decision and that means using the pitch side monitor. The VAR should only be advising there might be something to look at. That way they remain answerable for their decisions but can't hide behind a mate/subordinate/superior backing them up or bailing them out. We'd also hopefully remove excuses for "atmosphere" (bottler) decisions made in the heat of the moment.
-
Surely Swarthick forgot to add the minus sign before the 7. Who on earth does he think he's kidding, this spin would embarrass a politician. Just as idiotic as Gallagher trying to justify the unjustifiable with a straight face. It's an unmitigated fuck up so far and every man, woman and their dogs know it.
The ""atmosphere" line is pure Dowdism - I reserve the right to not give a foul in case I upset the ManYew/'The Mighty Reds YNWA' plastic fans or Sky.
We have to make the man on the pitch make the ultimate decision and that means using the pitch side monitor. The VAR should only be advising there might be something to look at. That way they remain answerable for their decisions but can't hide behind a mate/subordinate/superior backing them up or bailing them out. We'd also hopefully remove excuses for "atmosphere" (bottler) decisions made in the heat of the moment.
Yes, it's unbeliavable. In what other billion pound industry would you get away with such a half-arsed way of introducing a radical new system?
-
I believe you can't have some technology. All in or not at all.
Agree Brian.
Type 'Kevin Friend, Leicester' into the command prompt of the attack helicopter.
Make the technology work for us.
👏👏👏
-
Apparently there is a meeting planned this week of the PL with the referees to discuss how var is being implemented. Top of the agenda is the issue of them not using pitch side monitors. Every other league in Europe has been using them. What i find astounding is that we are a quarter of the way into the season and this is only being discussed now. Therefore the Premier League with all it's might and financial clout appear to have just sat back and given the refs carte blanche.
-
Surely Swarthick forgot to add the minus sign before the 7. Who on earth does he think he's kidding, this spin would embarrass a politician. Just as idiotic as Gallagher trying to justify the unjustifiable with a straight face. It's an unmitigated fuck up so far and every man, woman and their dogs know it.
The ""atmosphere" line is pure Dowdism - I reserve the right to not give a foul in case I upset the ManYew/'The Mighty Reds YNWA' plastic fans or Sky.
We have to make the man on the pitch make the ultimate decision and that means using the pitch side monitor. The VAR should only be advising there might be something to look at. That way they remain answerable for their decisions but can't hide behind a mate/subordinate/superior backing them up or bailing them out. We'd also hopefully remove excuses for "atmosphere" (bottler) decisions made in the heat of the moment.
Yes, it's unbeliavable. In what other billion pound industry would you get away with such a half-arsed way of introducing a radical new system?
Have you had any dealings with HMRC 😜
-
It won’t happen but football people in this high profile forum need to say it’s not working and lets scrap it before anymore damage is caused to our game
-
High profile forum ie H&V?? 😀
-
Yes indeed. In the recent past we have been quoted in the top end broadsheet newspapers.
-
Imagine driven from pressure from the premiership teams they decide to shelve it for a season and iron out the issues (A serious consideration IMHO) I guarantee the very next game a Manager / Coach etc will scream blue murder if they feel a decision has gone against them with out it.
We have opened Pandoras box with this im afraid
-
Anyone hear Purslow on the radio earlier? The PL big wigs have had a meeting with Riley’s lot and made it clear how pissed off they are and want changes in speed of decision making, communication to the fans and videos of the incidents being looked at. Christian comes across so well it must be said. Glad he’s our CEO.
-
The big point was about the spontaneity of celebration, which is the heart of the game, being killed.
-
Anyone hear Purslow on the radio earlier? The PL big wigs have had a meeting with Riley’s lot and made it clear how pissed off they are and want changes in speed of decision making, communication to the fans and videos of the incidents being looked at. Christian comes across so well it must be said. Glad he’s our CEO.
Hopefully referees being told to use pitchside monitors as well.
-
The big point was about the spontaneity of celebration, which is the heart of the game, being killed.
It's the number one reason why i believe var will ultimitely fail. I am also of the opinion that it's been deliberately sabotaged by the referees. The game belongs to the clubs and the fans not the bloody refs. They should be held responsible for this current fuckfest. What's to stop the PL setting up a kind of refereeing training centre? Train up some new guys to a high standard and get rid of the current crop? After all not one was adjudged good enough for the last world cup.
-
Anyone hear Purslow on the radio earlier? The PL big wigs have had a meeting with Riley’s lot and made it clear how pissed off they are and want changes in speed of decision making, communication to the fans and videos of the incidents being looked at. Christian comes across so well it must be said. Glad he’s our CEO.
Hopefully referees being told to use pitchside monitors as well.
They have issued a statement saying that they will continue to use the monitors "sparingly"
-
Never ceases to amaze how often blinkered idiots get handed the controls to something. But Football has a long history of it.
-
It's supposed to be clear and obvious. What was so fucking clear and obvious about Sheffield United's disallowed goal last week.
-
It was clear and obvious that it was scored against Spurs.
-
It was clear and obvious that it was scored against Spurs.
Very good.
-
If they are to continue with VAR, I like the idea of limiting the decision making time to say something like 30 seconds.
So the Sheffield United goal would have stood, because they wouldn't have time to bring up all the lines and micro check the details.
Id prefer not to have it at all, but if are going to be subjected to it perhaps that would speed up the process plus it would fit in with the clear and obvious agenda.
-
The big point was about the spontaneity of celebration, which is the heart of the game, being killed.
It's the number one reason why i believe var will ultimitely fail. I am also of the opinion that it's been deliberately sabotaged by the referees. The game belongs to the clubs and the fans not the bloody refs. They should be held responsible for this current fuckfest. What's to stop the PL setting up a kind of refereeing training centre? Train up some new guys to a high standard and get rid of the current crop? After all not one was adjudged good enough for the last world cup.
Oh, VAR Will not 'fail' - the genie is out of the bottle, and VAR will prevail - the issue is in what format the technology will ultimately be used. As I said on the previous page, the problem is with its application and - perhaps more importantly - with the concept that referees should judge whether to apply the rules or not: I think our Friend deliberately blew his whistle at CP in order not to have to go through a VAR Appeal, and that judgement call makes me very cynical. My cynicism was deepened against Liverpool, when VAR checked for a penalty after having already booked Mane for diving (how weird was that?!).
-
The big point was about the spontaneity of celebration, which is the heart of the game, being killed.
It's the number one reason why i believe var will ultimitely fail. I am also of the opinion that it's been deliberately sabotaged by the referees. The game belongs to the clubs and the fans not the bloody refs. They should be held responsible for this current fuckfest. What's to stop the PL setting up a kind of refereeing training centre? Train up some new guys to a high standard and get rid of the current crop? After all not one was adjudged good enough for the last world cup.
Oh, VAR Will not 'fail' - the genie is out of the bottle, and VAR will prevail - the issue is in what format the technology will ultimately be used. As I said on the previous page, the problem is with its application and - perhaps more importantly - with the concept that referees should judge whether to apply the rules or not: I think our Friend deliberately blew his whistle at CP in order not to have to go through a VAR Appeal, and that judgement call makes me very cynical. My cynicism was deepened against Liverpool, when VAR checked for a penalty after having already booked Mane for diving (how weird was that?!).
Maybe it can survive but it will have to be very different to the crap we're seeing at the moment. As London Villan said above ^^ it's ruining the spontaneity of celebrating a goal which is the very essence of going to a match. That has got to stop. Come the business end of the season and var costs a club a title or a cup or is responsible for relegating someone, there could be ructions. The shit could hit the fan big time then who knows what would happen?
-
Is there anyone on here, or anyone who has spoken to another football fan, who would currently give VAR 7/10? I think this clearly demonstrates how out of touch these tw*ts really are.
Thanks to the poster for pointing out that Jack is booked for diving, so can't be checked on VAR, while Mane is booked for diving, and the decision is duly checked by VAR.
Two completely different approaches to identical situations. it would be nice to put it down to both refs being horrendously shite/corrupt, but the system is as bad as they are -some achievement!!
After Sunday, I would clone Michael Oliver and Andrew Taylor repeatedly until shite refs are driven out of the game. Pawson isn't too bad, either. Who was the ref who covered the home game against Millwall last season? He was very good.
Anyone else think of any refs who would make the quality cut?
-
I was reluctant to post this as I expect to be shot down in flames but it has been nagging at me. At the Liverpool game I was on the front row of Trinity Middle right behind the ref assistant when he flagged Firmino offside. He looked well off and around me fans were wondering what VAR was checking. I suspect that the freeze frame was before the ball was played and before he moved offside.
-
I was reluctant to post this as I expect to be shot down in flames but it has been nagging at me. At the Liverpool game I was on the front row of Trinity Middle right behind the ref assistant when he flagged Firmino offside. He looked well off and around me fans were wondering what VAR was checking. I suspect that the freeze frame was before the ball was played and before he moved offside.
That hits the nail on the head for me. The offside rule is as follows "if a attacking player is deemed to be in front of the last defender WHEN THE BALL IS PLAYED he will be judged to be offside" How can they give a player offside for the width of his boot leather when they can't tell the precise moment the ball leaves the pasding players boot? It simply can't be that accurate. It's total nonsense and i'm waiting for a club to challenge this when a goal is disallowed for such a fine margin which costs that club dearly.
-
I was reluctant to post this as I expect to be shot down in flames but it has been nagging at me. At the Liverpool game I was on the front row of Trinity Middle right behind the ref assistant when he flagged Firmino offside. He looked well off and around me fans were wondering what VAR was checking. I suspect that the freeze frame was before the ball was played and before he moved offside.
That hits the nail on the head for me. The offside rule is as follows "if an attacking player is deemed to be in front of the last defender WHEN THE BALL IS PLAYED he will be judged to be offside" How can they give a player offside for the width of his boot leather when they can't tell the precise moment the ball leaves the pasding players boot? It simply can't be that accurate. It's total nonsense and i'm waiting for a club to challenge this when a goal is disallowed for such a fine margin which costs that club dearly.
-
Is there anyone on here, or anyone who has spoken to another football fan, who would currently give VAR 7/10? I think this clearly demonstrates how out of touch these tw*ts really are.
Thanks to the poster for pointing out that Jack is booked for diving, so can't be checked on VAR, while Mane is booked for diving, and the decision is duly checked by VAR.
Two completely different approaches to identical situations. it would be nice to put it down to both refs being horrendously shite/corrupt, but the system is as bad as they are -some achievement!!
After Sunday, I would clone Michael Oliver and Andrew Taylor repeatedly until shite refs are driven out of the game. Pawson isn't too bad, either. Who was the ref who covered the home game against Millwall last season? He was very good.
Anyone else think of any refs who would make the quality cut?
I would advocate a referees college where they could recruit younger and fitter therefore more suitable people for the job. They could be trained to a high standard before replacing the ones we currently use.
-
I was reluctant to post this as I expect to be shot down in flames but it has been nagging at me. At the Liverpool game I was on the front row of Trinity Middle right behind the ref assistant when he flagged Firmino offside. He looked well off and around me fans were wondering what VAR was checking. I suspect that the freeze frame was before the ball was played and before he moved offside.
That hits the nail on the head for me. The offside rule is as follows "if a attacking player is deemed to be in front of the last defender WHEN THE BALL IS PLAYED he will be judged to be offside" How can they give a player offside for the width of his boot leather when they can't tell the precise moment the ball leaves the pasding players boot? It simply can't be that accurate. It's total nonsense and i'm waiting for a club to challenge this when a goal is disallowed for such a fine margin which costs that club dearly.
I agree if they are downto millimeters they are in to split seconds and there is no way they can be absolutely certain.
Because they have said offside has to be based on fact and not obvious error they ave fucked themselves completely. Idiots
-
I was reluctant to post this as I expect to be shot down in flames but it has been nagging at me. At the Liverpool game I was on the front row of Trinity Middle right behind the ref assistant when he flagged Firmino offside. He looked well off and around me fans were wondering what VAR was checking. I suspect that the freeze frame was before the ball was played and before he moved offside.
That hits the nail on the head for me. The offside rule is as follows "if a attacking player is deemed to be in front of the last defender WHEN THE BALL IS PLAYED he will be judged to be offside" How can they give a player offside for the width of his boot leather when they can't tell the precise moment the ball leaves the pasding players boot? It simply can't be that accurate. It's total nonsense and i'm waiting for a club to challenge this when a goal is disallowed for such a fine margin which costs that club dearly.
I agree if they are downto millimeters they are in to split seconds and there is no way they can be absolutely certain.
Because they have said offside has to be based on fact and not obvious error they ave fucked themselves completely. Idiots
I've had this debate with a few var lovers but for some reason they can't or won't accept the point. They churn out offside is offside even if it is a millimetre. When i say to them if you're giving offside for millimetres you have to be certain of the precise moment the ball leaves the passing players boot they switch off or say i'm being pedantic. But i'm not. I'm really not.
-
You can learn a lot from studying Villa's goal at Wolves. Shot over the line or not? Check on the watch and correct decision made within about five seconds -surely the model for delivering VAR decisions? Not the rubbish we get now!
-
You can learn a lot from studying Villa's goal at Wolves. Shot over the line or not? Check on the watch and correct decision made within about five seconds -surely the model for delivering VAR decisions? Not the rubbish we get now!
I agree. But to achieve that you would need Laser/sensor technology to map every millimetre of the entire length of the pitch. Doable but at what cost?
-
You can learn a lot from studying Villa's goal at Wolves. Shot over the line or not? Check on the watch and correct decision made within about five seconds -surely the model for delivering VAR decisions? Not the rubbish we get now!
I agree. But to achieve that you would need Laser/sensor technology to map every millimetre of the entire length of the pitch. Doable but at what cost?
That system is perfect for matter of fact decisions, but the issue with VAR is the subjective ones. One mans foul is another mans good tackle, this is the fundamental problem with VAR, you can't turn a matter of opinion into a matter of fact no matter how hard you try. VAR was fatally flawed from the start, but the clamour to introduce it, under the cloak of "getting decisions correct" ignored this. And here we are.
-
You can learn a lot from studying Villa's goal at Wolves. Shot over the line or not? Check on the watch and correct decision made within about five seconds -surely the model for delivering VAR decisions? Not the rubbish we get now!
I agree. But to achieve that you would need Laser/sensor technology to map every millimetre of the entire length of the pitch. Doable but at what cost?
That system is perfect for matter of fact decisions, but the issue with VAR is the subjective ones. One mans foul is another mans good tackle, this is the fundamental problem with VAR, you can't turn a matter of opinion into a matter of fact no matter how hard you try. VAR was fatally flawed from the start, but the clamour to introduce it, under the cloak of "getting decisions correct" ignored this. And here we are.
The clamour to introduce it based on "the technology is there, why don't we use it?" We've gone from 3 blokes, two with a flag, one with a whistle and goal line technology. The assumption that the technology is there is akin to the Wright Brother's first flight and a week later wanting to know why they haven't landed on the moon. It's going to take time.
-
Does anyone refer to their telly at home as 'technology'? There is no technology involved for anything other than goal line, it's still just a bloke watching the telly.
-
You can learn a lot from studying Villa's goal at Wolves. Shot over the line or not? Check on the watch and correct decision made within about five seconds -surely the model for delivering VAR decisions? Not the rubbish we get now!
I agree. But to achieve that you would need Laser/sensor technology to map every millimetre of the entire length of the pitch. Doable but at what cost?
That system is perfect for matter of fact decisions, but the issue with VAR is the subjective ones. One mans foul is another mans good tackle, this is the fundamental problem with VAR, you can't turn a matter of opinion into a matter of fact no matter how hard you try. VAR was fatally flawed from the start, but the clamour to introduce it, under the cloak of "getting decisions correct" ignored this. And here we are.
The clamour to introduce it based on "the technology is there, why don't we use it?" We've gone from 3 blokes, two with a flag, one with a whistle and goal line technology. The assumption that the technology is there is akin to the Wright Brother's first flight and a week later wanting to know why they haven't landed on the moon. It's going to take time.
In terms of offside the tech isn't there but it will be soon. In the rugby world cup they were, for some games, using camera tech (called Volumetric Video Capture) which allows them to build a full 3d model of the match and replay at multiple speeds for any angle - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XNEAkIWMD64 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XNEAkIWMD64) - this is an example of the footage it gives.
However World Rugby are (from what I've been told by a very good source) already asking for future applications around this, specifically to help manage the offside line. The goal would be that every breakdown would have a 'capture' of the exact time stamp when the ball is lifted and then timematch that to an overhead shot giving the exact position of every player.
That is how you can use technology to manage offsides in football as well, maybe even keep the linesman involved by having them press a button to ask for a review (as they raise the flag). From there if you can get the images being generated within 10-15 seconds and judged via AI then you have a genuinely workable technological solution that's on par with goal line tech.
VAR as it stands shouldn't be used for offsides other than extreme circumstances (if a guy is a couple of yards off and it somehow gets missed). VAR, in it's current format, should mainly be about fouls and dives right now, where the angle for the ref can make something hard to spot but other angles can quickly show {lack of} contact. In most cases the game stops for the players to all have a moan at the ref anyway so you're not slowing game down at that point. I'm ok with it enforcing the handball laws as well but only if they're understood consistently by the people making the decisions. Earlier in the season I don't think that was the case so we saw some fairly controversial handball decisions.
-
You can learn a lot from studying Villa's goal at Wolves. Shot over the line or not? Check on the watch and correct decision made within about five seconds -surely the model for delivering VAR decisions? Not the rubbish we get now!
I agree. But to achieve that you would need Laser/sensor technology to map every millimetre of the entire length of the pitch. Doable but at what cost?
That system is perfect for matter of fact decisions, but the issue with VAR is the subjective ones. One mans foul is another mans good tackle, this is the fundamental problem with VAR, you can't turn a matter of opinion into a matter of fact no matter how hard you try. VAR was fatally flawed from the start, but the clamour to introduce it, under the cloak of "getting decisions correct" ignored this. And here we are.
The clamour to introduce it based on "the technology is there, why don't we use it?" We've gone from 3 blokes, two with a flag, one with a whistle and goal line technology. The assumption that the technology is there is akin to the Wright Brother's first flight and a week later wanting to know why they haven't landed on the moon. It's going to take time.
Nothing wrong with the technology, in your analogy it's a spaceship well capable of a moon landing, the problem is they are still using monkeys and dogs as astronauts
-
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/50517096
So they've started to admit that var has got things wrong, but why stop at 4?
In its current state the system is a sham.
-
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/50517096
So they've started to admit that var has got things wrong, but why stop at 4?
In its current state the system is a sham.
Four my arse, they're getting more than that wrong every single weekend. What about our goal v Brighton for a start?
-
Absolutely laughable.
-
That's only one type of error as well. There are numerous others where they've failed to overturn clear errors as well. Like the penalty we didn't get at Arsenal and that joke of a decision at Palace.
-
Four errors?!
If Conor Hourihanes goal against Brighton had been for Man City against Liverpool, we'd never have heard the end of it.
It was an absolutely horrendous decision and could have cost us points, luckily, it didn't.
When they scrapped that goal, and that voice said "VAR complete", I started to question the point in going to games anymore.
-
"Four Errors" The previous day!
Not over the weekend or the season!
-
VAR Friend and Liverpool cheat again.
-
VAR Friend and Liverpool cheat again.
It was correctly disallowed.
-
VAR Friend and Liverpool cheat again.
It was correctly disallowed.
Lovers throws himself to the ground and no where near the cross.
-
VAR Friend and Liverpool cheat again.
It was correctly disallowed.
Lovers throws himself to the ground and no where near the cross.
It was a clear push in the back.
-
Lovren was miles away from the ball, though. Surely that's a goal?
-
Lovren was miles away from the ball, though. Surely that's a goal?
Lovren I s a cynical cheating twat, always has been, Ayew I think without doubt touches him and he throws himself to the floor. He gets away with it.
-
VAR has been rushed in early to help Liverpool win the Premier League.
-
VAR has been rushed in early to help Liverpool win the Premier League.
Exactly
-
Lovren was miles away from the ball, though. Surely that's a goal?
That’s an argument. But then why does Ayew push him that blatantly? That’s going to be called every time. I hate Liverpool and Friend as we all know is a massive cock. And the decision took too long yet again but that’s a foul in the box. I don’t think it’s that controversial relative to many of the VAR calls we’ve seen this season.
-
Lovren was miles away from the ball, though. Surely that's a goal?
That’s an argument. But then why does Ayew push him that blatantly? That’s going to be called every time. I hate Liverpool and Friend as we all know is a massive cock. And the decision took too long yet again but that’s a foul in the box. I don’t think it’s that controversial relative to many of the VAR calls we’ve seen this season.
There was contact, but are they going to check every corner when a goal has been scored ?
Because if they did every goal would be disallowed because there is allways contact at Corners, it’s only because of Lovrens theatrics does this get chalked off.
-
It wasn’t just contact. You’re making it out to be something incidental which it wasn’t. It was clear push in the back. Those are going to be called. We’d be rightly furious if it happened to us.
-
Whatever
-
Whatever
How very mature of you.
-
It wasn’t just contact. You’re making it out to be something incidental which it wasn’t. It was clear push in the back. Those are going to be called. We’d be rightly furious if it happened to us.
Well let's take it to the "n"th degree - which is what they seem to be using VAR for - would he have made a clearance header if he wasn't fouled?
Much the same principal as a player is not offside if he doesn't interfere with play, it has no bearing on the end result being a goal or a missed chance and we can debate all day if it had have been a Liverpool goal, would it have gone to VAR.
VAR should be there to make difficult decisions whereby the ref is undecided, not to check on things they have missed, (the corner analogy is spot on) - the Ref is in charge of the game, not VAR
-
It wasn’t just contact. You’re making it out to be something incidental which it wasn’t. It was clear push in the back. Those are going to be called. We’d be rightly furious if it happened to us.
Well let's take it to the "n"th degree - which is what they seem to be using VAR for - would he have made a clearance header if he wasn't fouled?
Much the same principal as a player is not offside if he doesn't interfere with play, it has no bearing on the end result being a goal or a missed chance and we can debate all day if it had have been a Liverpool goal, would it have gone to VAR.
VAR should be there to make difficult decisions whereby the ref is undecided, not to check on things they have missed, (the corner analogy is spot on) - the Ref is in charge of the game, not VAR
Thank you.
-
It was a foul in the box. Had it not led to a goal it still would have been a foul in the box. The fact that it led to a goal shouldn’t change the fact that it was a foul and we’ve all seen them given at corners.
-
Another outrageous decision to chalk off Sterlings late goal for Man City.
Luckily for them it didn't matter as they still won.
Absolute farce that people are sat there making these abysmal decisions.
-
Becoming the norm now, a soulless, android decision which isn't clear and obvious.
-
Truly pathetic. Surely VAR wasn’t introduced to rule out non-offside offside goals like that.
-
It was a foul in the box. Had it not led to a goal it still would have been a foul in the box. The fact that it led to a goal shouldn’t change the fact that it was a foul and we’ve all seen them given at corners.
But did VAR show how he was pushed? Did Ayew stumble, was he himself pushed, or tripped into the other player? Or was he all alone and did it deliberately? Or did the player that was pushed stop running or back into Ayew?
None of which was examined on VAR and more importantly was not noticed by the Ref during his view of the incident, where do you start/stop VAR examining every alleged incident that the referee did not deem necessary?
VAR is not the referee, yet it is being used for that purpose - not what it is supposed to be instigated for. Why bother having a referee at all if you can just video the whole game and make all decisions based on video evidence alone, with the man in black announcing each and every video decision?
The use of this technology is deeply flawed and appears to still be in trial/UAT version, nowhere near the finished article and it surprises me that they chose to trial this technology in such a high stakes league at this early stage of its' development.
-
Referees have embraced VAR believing that it would enhance their status but in fact it has seriously diminished it. Time was when games were supervised by human judgement alone that the best referees were highly regarded in the game for their personal sporting talent. They too were elite sportsmen/women. VAR has reduced them to whistle blowers.
Simplistically I picture football pre technology as an analogue watch. A product of immense skill but occasionally at fault. VAR is a digital watch accurate to a thousandth of a second but totally lacking intrinsic aesthetic value.
-
They really need to sort out the offside stuff. I don't think anyone in their right mind believes a millimetre offside is against the rules. I think someone said it on here first and I've repeated it a load of times since and no-one disagrees; flip it on its head and make any part of the attacker's body level with the defender onside. There will be controversies where someone's toenail keeps them on but to my mind it's far better than perfectly good goals being chalked off.
-
I'm here again repeating myself ad-nauseum. But here goes. Var has done nothing to improve the game. It's ruining the match day experience. Fans of all clubs turn up week after week for one reason. To celebrate a goal. It has reduced us to looking at a giant screen now to see if var is checking it. It has got to be binned. Just wait till the end of the season when a club scores a vital goal to avoid relegation/ win the league/ win the cup etc etc. There will be riots.
-
Going back to that Brighton game, we won the game but we didn't score until the last kick of the game. That disallowed goal might have put us in the bottom three now.
-
VAR has been rushed in early to help Liverpool win the Premier League.
was thinking this yesterday . . They are the jammiest team this season.
-
I'm here again repeating myself ad-nauseum. But here goes. Var has done nothing to improve the game. It's ruining the match day experience. Fans of all clubs turn up week after week for one reason. To celebrate a goal. It's has reduced us to looking at a giant screen now to see if var is checking it. It has got to be binned. Just wait till the end of the season when a club scores a vital goal to avoid relegation/ win the league/ win the cup etc etc. There will be riots.
Completely agree but sadly the TV deal revenue means those of who go to matches have become secondary when VAR gives Sky etc something additional to analyse and discuss to help fill their air time. So I reckon we’re stuck with it.
-
Much as I hate VAR, it astounds me that it couldn't have ruled out Southampton's first goal yesterday. Quick free kick was taken with the ball still moving. One replay was all it would have taken to get the right decision. Rules say that VAR can't get involved.
They'll spend ten minutes working out if your armpit hair was ahead of the defender's bum fluff, but not something simple like that.
-
I'm here again repeating myself ad-nauseum. But here goes. Var has done nothing to improve the game. It's ruining the match day experience. Fans of all clubs turn up week after week for one reason. To celebrate a goal. It's has reduced us to looking at a giant screen now to see if var is checking it. It has got to be binned. Just wait till the end of the season when a club scores a vital goal to avoid relegation/ win the league/ win the cup etc etc. There will be riots.
Agree with this and mentioned it a few weeks ago. Something really ugly will kick off towards the end of the season and at several grounds. Fans are already seething at games and it will get worse.
-
Much as I hate VAR, it astounds me that it couldn't have ruled out Southampton's first goal yesterday. Quick free kick was taken with the ball still moving. One replay was all it would have taken to get the right decision. Rules say that VAR can't get involved.
They'll spend ten minutes working out if your armpit hair was ahead of the defender's bum fluff, but not something simple like that.
That would have been extremely harsh too as the ball was touched down and barely moving. That kind of decision would be similar to and justify these millimetre offsides.
I’ve repeatedly said it before, but some old rules of the game (including offside) have to be updated and clearly defined if new technology is introduced as they simply aren’t compatible. As an example, I would agree with the comments about reversing the offside to being any part of the body being level is onside and they have to find an agreed line to work from as a toe, knee or armpit simply isn’t good or consistent enough.
-
I'm here again repeating myself ad-nauseum. But here goes. Var has done nothing to improve the game. It's ruining the match day experience. Fans of all clubs turn up week after week for one reason. To celebrate a goal. It has reduced us to looking at a giant screen now to see if var is checking it. It has got to be binned. Just wait till the end of the season when a club scores a vital goal to avoid relegation/ win the league/ win the cup etc etc. There will be riots.
Completely agree but sadly the TV deal revenue means those of who go to matches have become secondary when VAR gives Sky etc something additional to analyse and discuss to help fill their air time. So I reckon we’re stuck with it.
-
One thing struck me after our game against Liverpool which highlighted the inconsistencies with VAR. We were given a free kick and Sane got booked for diving. VAR then checked whether he dived or should have had a penalty. At our game against Palace we were told VAR couldn't be used to check whether Jack had in fact dived or should have had a penalty because Friend had blown his whistle. What's the difference?
-
One thing struck me after our game against Liverpool which highlighted the inconsistencies with VAR. We were given a free kick and Sane got booked for diving. VAR then checked whether he dived or should have had a penalty. At our game against Palace we were told VAR couldn't be used to check whether Jack had in fact dived or should have had a penalty because Friend had blown his whistle. What's the difference?
One was Liverpool. The other was Aston Villa.
-
One thing struck me after our game against Liverpool which highlighted the inconsistencies with VAR. We were given a free kick and Sane got booked for diving. VAR then checked whether he dived or should have had a penalty. At our game against Palace we were told VAR couldn't be used to check whether Jack had in fact dived or should have had a penalty because Friend had blown his whistle. What's the difference?
Exactly. Arsenal scored at Old Trafford after the linesman had flagged and the referee blown. The striker tamely put the ball in the net out of habit I guess, he assumed he was off. Then they check, he's onside and they give a goal. But the ref had blown. We were told after Palace that VAR couldn't get involved.
As mentioned above, when this costs someone a cup, or relegates someone, there's going to be major trouble.
-
One thing struck me after our game against Liverpool which highlighted the inconsistencies with VAR. We were given a free kick and Sane got booked for diving. VAR then checked whether he dived or should have had a penalty. At our game against Palace we were told VAR couldn't be used to check whether Jack had in fact dived or should have had a penalty because Friend had blown his whistle. What's the difference?
No, that's not what happened at Palace. VAR were checking if it was a penalty, that's it. They decided there wasn't enough evidence to give a penalty so the on-field decision to give a dive was upheld. What they couldn't have done was let play go, let us score and then go back to check if it was a dive. If he wanted to give a booking for the dive he had to stop play, which is why he blew as Lansbury was shooting.
-
what was the game yesterday where the referee requested VAR intervention when players suddenly surrounded him after an incident at the other end. This simply will not end well.
-
what was the game yesterday where the referee requested VAR intervention when players suddenly surrounded him after an incident at the other end. This simply will not end well.
Watford v Burnley, penalty to Burnley, correct call
-
Would have been a similar situation to the Liverpool vs Man City game if Watford had scored on the counter. If a goal had been scored would they have pulled back play and award a penalty instead? They must be consistent regardless of the size of the club, league position and scoreline at the time of the incidents.
-
Not needed tonight thankfully but its killing the instinctive celebrations by the players and fans. El-Ghazi, Mings and the fans seemed to be waiting for VAR to check the 2nd, the celebrations were tame. Its slightly depressing that is how things are going.
-
Not needed tonight thankfully but its killing the instinctive celebrations by the players and fans. El-Ghazi, Mings and the fans seemed to be waiting for VAR to check the 2nd, the celebrations were tame. Its slightly depressing that is how things are going.
I think they'd have been a bit nervous for that one even without VAR, it did seem like there was too much space between him and defenders but it was just bad defending rather than offside.
-
Not needed tonight thankfully but its killing the instinctive celebrations by the players and fans. El-Ghazi, Mings and the fans seemed to be waiting for VAR to check the 2nd, the celebrations were tame. Its slightly depressing that is how things are going.
Definitely, I celebrated more when Newcastle restarted the game after the 2nd goal, the referee even appeared to stop for a moment on the walk back to the centre circle as if VAR had got involved.
-
Not needed tonight thankfully but its killing the instinctive celebrations by the players and fans. El-Ghazi, Mings and the fans seemed to be waiting for VAR to check the 2nd, the celebrations were tame. Its slightly depressing that is how things are going.
Definitely, I celebrated more when Newcastle restarted the game after the 2nd goal, the referee even appeared to stop for a moment on the walk back to the centre circle as if VAR had got involved.
Doesn't VAR have to check every goal? I thought that was one of the bugbears - where a goal is scored and everyone is happy with it think they still have to wait for it to be reviewed.
-
Not needed tonight thankfully but its killing the instinctive celebrations by the players and fans. El-Ghazi, Mings and the fans seemed to be waiting for VAR to check the 2nd, the celebrations were tame. Its slightly depressing that is how things are going.
Definitely, I celebrated more when Newcastle restarted the game after the 2nd goal, the referee even appeared to stop for a moment on the walk back to the centre circle as if VAR had got involved.
Doesn't VAR have to check every goal? I thought that was one of the bugbears - where a goal is scored and everyone is happy with it think they still have to wait for it to be reviewed.
I watched the replay of the goal on the big screen just before the restart before enjoying the warm glow of scoring. It’s just not the same anymore and celebrations will tempered somewhat. That’s progress
-
Not needed tonight thankfully but its killing the instinctive celebrations by the players and fans. El-Ghazi, Mings and the fans seemed to be waiting for VAR to check the 2nd, the celebrations were tame. Its slightly depressing that is how things are going.
Definitely, I celebrated more when Newcastle restarted the game after the 2nd goal, the referee even appeared to stop for a moment on the walk back to the centre circle as if VAR had got involved.
Doesn't VAR have to check every goal? I thought that was one of the bugbears - where a goal is scored and everyone is happy with it think they still have to wait for it to be reviewed.
Yes every goal is VAR checked,so the instantaneous celebration of a goal has been taken away.
Which is a total disgrace.
-
Officials for Manure game
Referee: Craig Pawson
Assistants: Ian Hussin, Darren Cann
Fourth official: Anthony Taylor
VAR: Kevin hello darkness my old Friend
Assistant VAR: Matthew Wilkes
Chelsea
Referee: Chris Kavanagh
Assistants: Daniel Cook, Sian Massey-Ellis
Fourth official: Darren England
VAR: David Coote
Assistant VAR: Nick Hopton
-
Don’t know if anyone is watching the Madrid - PSG game ? Paris go through, round the keeper, foul. Ref reds the keeper and goes to VAR to see if it was in or out of the area, then decides he missed a foul on the half way line three feet in front of him. Cancels red card.
Quite funny
-
There was an incident in a Bundesliga game the other day. Not too sure which one. Something like the ball was crossed, hit the ref in the back then rebounded to a player who struck it and scored a quality goal. Ref went to VAR to see what happened. Not sure of the outcome. Will try and find out.
-
There was an incident in a Bundesliga game the other day. Not too sure which one. Something like the ball was crossed, hit the ref in the back then rebounded to a player who struck it and scored a quality goal. Ref went to VAR to see what happened. Not sure of the outcome. Will try and find out.
They changed the rules over the Summer to say that where a goal is scored as a result of hitting the ref it gets disallowed.
Did anyone see the "goal" Levandovski had ruled out the other night? Absolute beauty of a finish ruled out because there was an apparent handball in the build up which was impossible to actually see on replays and was completely unintentional even if it actually happened.
Fuck VAR!
What I've learnt from this entire sham is that I don't actually want games to be "fair" if "fair" means rigidly enforcing rules to the point it makes the game less enjoyable.
-
Play should have been stopped once the ball struck the referee I think.
-
Still needs to be scrapped. Can’t celebrate goals - what’s the point....
-
Mings
"I thought I was onside for my goal, but I didn’t want to celebrate just in case. I got back into position.
Told that he had missed a chance to celebrate a goal at Old Trafford, he added: "Yeah and my first Premier League goal. I would have dedicated the goal to Benik Afobe's daughter had I been able to celebrate."
-
He might not be playing at the top of his game but he’s such a good bloke is Mings. Terrible And very sad thing to have happened to Afobe’s child.
-
He might not be playing at the top of his game but he’s such a good bloke is Mings. Terrible And very sad thing to have happened to Afobe’s child.
Terrible thing for Afobe and his wife. Life just 'aint fair sometimes. Damo's daughter's friends child too. Horrible. Wrong thread I know.
-
Think the ‘I don’t know’ non celebration shrug we have seen from El Ghazi and Mings in the previously two games can be added to the list of reasons that VAR is negatively impacting the game.
-
Danny Murphy talks sense about Villa for once https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=474638919832220
-
Danny Murphy talks sense about Villa for once https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=474638919832220
Spot on from Murphy (can't believe I'm saying that)
Look at the Villa Vlogs from the game and you'll see how right he is.
-
He still looks like a gremlin though.
-
No one has mentioned our disallowed goal due to Jacks trailing walking leg being a few inches offside. Jack and the last defender are basically level with his trailing leg a fraction of a second behind as they walk towards our goal. The linesman incorrectly flagged for a different reason (according to the live commentary), and this is another example of how offside decisions in the VAR age are being poorly implemented.
-
No one has mentioned our disallowed goal due to Jacks trailing walking leg being a few inches offside. Jack and the last defender are basically level with his trailing leg a fraction of a second behind as they walk towards our goal. The linesman incorrectly flagged for a different reason (according to the live commentary), and this is another example of how offside decisions in the VAR age are being poorly implemented.
He was offside and the Lino said Grealish (lip reading)
-
Indeed. I can't believe that as Grealish was looking across the line to make sure he was onside, he didn't remember where his trailing foot was. How much a week, and he can't even do that?
-
No one has mentioned our disallowed goal due to Jacks trailing walking leg being a few inches offside. Jack and the last defender are basically level with his trailing leg a fraction of a second behind as they walk towards our goal. The linesman incorrectly flagged for a different reason (according to the live commentary), and this is another example of how offside decisions in the VAR age are being poorly implemented.
But didn't VAR effectively work in our favour in this instance. If there had been no VAR the ref would, on the linesman flagging, probably have blown for offside. But because of VAR he let play continue and then reviewed. OK it was offside in the end, but VAR, and a good decision by ref., put us within 2" of going 2 - 0 up.
-
It's getting ridiculous this VAR get rid of the bloody thing I mean look at Tyrone Mings goal brilliant Volley and Tyrone wanted to dedicate his goal to Benik Afobe for the terrible loss of his daughter and he couldn't which makes me so mad about this VAR.
-
No one has mentioned our disallowed goal due to Jacks trailing walking leg being a few inches offside. Jack and the last defender are basically level with his trailing leg a fraction of a second behind as they walk towards our goal. The linesman incorrectly flagged for a different reason (according to the live commentary), and this is another example of how offside decisions in the VAR age are being poorly implemented.
But didn't VAR effectively work in our favour in this instance. If there had been no VAR the ref would, on the linesman flagging, probably have blown for offside. But because of VAR he let play continue and then reviewed. OK it was offside in the end, but VAR, and a good decision by ref., put us within 2" of going 2 - 0 up.
I have no idea tbh. There are several rules that are being applied so inconsistently with contradictory outcomes that it seems they change their minds to justify the decisions made by on field match officials or to protect the VAR official. It’s almost as if they are making it up as they go along.
-
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/premier-league-clubs-anger-over-mike-rileys-handling-of-var-dxzf0v0bs?ni-statuscode=acsaz-307
Concerned club officials are to talk to Richard Masters, newly confirmed as the Premier League chief executive, about Mike Riley’s handling of VAR which has descended into a global embarrassment for the image-conscious league. Some want Riley dismissed, and a less pedagogical official appointed general manager of the Professional Game Match Officials Limited which oversees VAR at Stockley Park.
“He is actually a bit thick,” said one leading club official of Riley. “Like a bad schoolteacher. He is the root of the Premier League problem.’’
Clubs voted to bring in VAR but their discontent with Riley’s application of technology mounts through every round of games where goals are chalked off through fractional offsides, from heels to armpits. There are doubts in certain quarters over whether the technology, and line-drawing by a technician, can be totally accurate anyway. More profess frustration at delays in an English game that always prided itself on uninterrupted flow, and that attackers should be favoured anyway.
They point out that the Premier League’s attraction around the world, and allure to wealthy broadcasters, is based substantially on breath-taking attacking and spectacular goals, which many consider is being undermined by Riley’s hunt for fractional offsides. As one official confided, Riley is developing a reputation as “The Goal-Killer”, anathema for the Premier League’s desire to be the “Big Show”, the No 1 entertainment.
Wolves, Sheffield United and Norwich City have been particularly hard done with goals ruled out. Norwich fans now sell T-shirts decrying VAR. Molineux and Bramall Lane regularly ring out to “F*** VAR” and “it’s not football any more”. All clubs have a tale of woe or two. The Footballer of the Year, Raheem Sterling of Manchester City, tweets “happy to improve my VAR overruled goals record” when another of his efforts is ruled out. Even Liverpool, widely considered by opposing fans as beneficiaries of VAR, saw a Sadio Mané header against Watford ruled out for a stray armpit.
Aston Villa’s captain, Jack Grealish, had a magnificent header ruled out against Burnley for the trailing heel of Wesley, who was not involved in the move. The decision by PGMOL, especially when they revealed pictures of their drawn lines, triggered much derision. Players don’t know whether to celebrate or not. The atmosphere in grounds turns toxic, with groaning and goading following overturned decisions.
Riley, 55, who was appointed a Fifa official and worked at Euro 2004 during his years as a Premier League referee, has lost touch with what the game is about, about what players, managers, fans and owners want, and is causing excessive problems for his beleaguered men in the middle.
It’s gone from being a joke to doing damage to the credibility of the league. So certain clubs are turning to Masters to call Riley to account, to control the offside-hunters at Stockley Park and, if he won’t, then dismiss him. Along with addressing the rise of racism within grounds, making Riley see sense, or sacking him, will be the first big test of Masters’ reign.
Masters is respected by the clubs following his calm stewarding of the organisation during the troubled search for Richard Scudamore’s successor. Two candidates were appointed but never started, leaving Masters, the managing director, as interim chief executive, a role eventually made permanent last month.
It will be pointed out to Masters, not that he probably needs reminding, that the original intention of technology was helping overturn “clear and obvious” errors and that is being overlooked with almost a mission to seek out the fractional, mainly with offside. Everyone accepts the offside law needs overhauling. Ifab plans a confab. The Liverpool manager, Jürgen Klopp, talks of being encouraged to hear Uefa discussing widening the margin of error on offside, favouring the attacking side, as it should be. Riley has taken the pursuit too far, with more than 20 goals ruled out already. Alternative “without VAR” league tables abound.
The Premier League pointed out that, “A player is in an offside position if: any part of the head, body or feet is in the opponents’ half (excluding the halfway line) and any part of the head, body or feet is nearer to the opponents’ goal line than both the ball and the second-last opponent.’’ Its argument is that there is no room for subjectivity on offside and it can’t be subject to “clear and obvious” because it is a factual decision and that is what has been applied in the Premier League this season, and any change to that would have to come from Ifab. There is an acceptance within the organisation that the technology cannot be 100 per cent accurate because of camera frame rates. At the Premier League’s last shareholders’ meeting, Riley “accepted improvement is required”.
Riley has also come under fierce criticism for referees not consulting pitch-side monitors. England’s few elite referees are encouraged to use the monitors when overseeing Uefa matches. “I hope Fifa insist he [Riley] is binned for flagrantly ignoring directive on field-ref use of monitor,” added one club official.
The concerned club officials want to wrest control of games back from Stockley Park, restoring the authority of the actual match official who is at risk of simply becoming a messenger boy for PGMOL. These club officials are fed up at seeing their league, so successful in many years, certainly the most popular worldwide, being laughed at by so many.
The frustration is that all the focus and fury around VAR is taking away from the sight of one of the great sides of the modern era, the European and world champions Liverpool, playing such unbelievable football. The Premier League is now associated with being killjoys, a forensic mission to rule out goals led by Mike Riley. Masters has a big call to make.
-
When you have Burnley fans joining in with "it's not football any more" after a decision has gone their way then you know something is seriously wrong. I posted the Villa on Tour video from yesterday and there was virtually no celebration when Wes scored, you're seeing more and more goals scored where players and fans don't celebrate. There is no point to the game if the most important part of a game is being killed. I was in favour of VAR but the version we have is is fucking shit.
-
It’s not a big call at all, it’s piss easy. Do it and save the game from this utter chaos
-
Being as Richard Masters is a Villa fan, I hope he shares our frustrations. Not sure he's going to sack Riley so early into his role though.
-
In the ground you normally don’t have any idea what’s going on, you need to find out afterwards what the decision was and why. All it’s doing is making people angry.
-
There's a big difference in looking for reasons to disallow a goal and seeing an obvious foul handball etc that needs to be overturned.
With the offsides, as soon as your zooming in and drawing lines everywhere like it's a photo finish of the 100 metre final you're beyond parody.
I think the Russians at the World Cup had the least crap version (which wasn't great) our lot have somehow made it even worse.
-
How easy it should be
https://twitter.com/GMS__Football/status/1211676152739385350
-
Ruining the game we love - not because its either right or wrong, but because it has become such a distraction that fans cant celebrate goals for 1-2 mins in many cases and, I would argue its often being over-used for the most ridiculous "fractional" decisions.
And it's so easy to fix - look at Rugby Union which, is also a fast moving contact sport. The PL management is an abominable