collapse collapse

Please donate to help keep this site going.

       * *  Out Soon  * *  

February 19, 2021, 02:28:51 PM by dave.woodhall | Views: 1281 | Comments: 16

September 13th, 1986...
February 17, 2021, 12:18:32 AM by dave.woodhall | Views: 464 | Comments: 2

Thereís certainly a number of ...
February 09, 2021, 10:15:27 PM by dave.woodhall | Views: 861 | Comments: 3

This empty wish was a thread o...
February 03, 2021, 02:11:06 AM by dave.woodhall | Views: 1380 | Comments: 17

Nineteen games gone and we're ...
February 02, 2021, 06:53:05 PM by dave.woodhall | Views: 488 | Comments: 0

In normal times, either at Vil...

Follow us on...

Author Topic: VAR  (Read 138298 times)

Offline Small Rodent

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 8762
  • Location: Streatham
  • GM : 18.08.2021
Re: VAR
« Reply #1905 on: January 22, 2021, 09:41:25 AM »
If this is such an obvious ruling to all the experts, why I have I never seen it before in a game?

Offline TelfordVilla

  • Member
  • Posts: 522
Re: VAR
« Reply #1906 on: January 22, 2021, 10:01:27 AM »
Nothing has changed with the offside rule. They got it wrong pure and simple.

Offline The Edge

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4073
  • Location: Birmingham
  • GM : 02.08.2021
Re: VAR
« Reply #1907 on: January 22, 2021, 10:22:53 AM »
Nothing has changed with the offside rule. They got it wrong pure and simple.
And they were able to weasel their way out of it because they surreptitiously inserted little nuances into the rule book to allow them to screw things up and yet still be able wriggle off the hook. Player's didn't know, ex-referees didn't know, managers didn't know. It seems only those on top of the ivory tower knew about the latest rule alterations. How many more little nuggets lie hidden in the small print of the ever increasing rule book?

Offline Smithy

  • Member
  • Posts: 4323
  • Location: Windsor, Royal Berkshire, la de da
  • GM : 11.07.2015
Re: VAR
« Reply #1908 on: January 22, 2021, 10:48:54 AM »
If this is such an obvious ruling to all the experts, why I have I never seen it before in a game?

It's actually worse than that.  If the decision in our game WAS the correct one, then it means forwards in matches across the country are regularly being incorrectly called offside for coming back to make a challenge, and yet, not ONCE have I ever seen the attacking team complain about it being legal in the laws of the game.

Not once.

Offline Ad@m

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 10113
  • GM : 07.03.2021
Re: VAR
« Reply #1909 on: January 30, 2021, 11:14:12 PM »
I know it's gone our way tonight, but Ings' goal being disallowed because the end of his sleeve was allegedly offside is another absolute VAR nonsense.

And as for spending, sorry, wasting two minutes of everyone's life pissing about with Matty Cash - if the VAR room needs to see the replay 20 times, it's pretty clearly not a clear and obvious error.

I live in hope that one day they'll work out how to do VAR properly.

Offline Ian.

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 8720
  • Location: Back home in the Shire
  • GM : 11.09.2021
Re: VAR
« Reply #1910 on: January 30, 2021, 11:28:52 PM »
Itís ridiculous, Ings whole body is onside except his shoulder and arm. Surely you have to look at the position of his bloody feet. Itís fucking football.

Good for us for a change but itís interpretations of it are nonsense. Everyone involved needs talking too by someone who knows the game.

Offline Meanwood Villa

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 3918
  • GM : PCM
Re: VAR
« Reply #1911 on: January 30, 2021, 11:49:43 PM »
I feel like I have to be consistent, absolutely ludicrous that Ings "goal" was offside. The millimetres offside decisions piss me off the most yet they're the ones people (including Dean) say are black and white. No way he has gained an unfair advantage from his shirt sleeve being marginally ahead of Cash's arse. Ridiculous. They have to change how they interpret these, be it thicker lines (as I think they're doing in Netherlands?) or my favoured approach of making any part level onside.

In terms of the non penalty. Think it can go either way. One of those where we were probably a bit lucky but had plenty we've been on wrong side of this season. Far more relaxed about those because I think you can argue it either way.

Offline olaftab

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 31139
  • Location: Castle Bromwich
  • GM : 28.04.2021
Re: VAR
« Reply #1912 on: January 31, 2021, 12:22:15 AM »
Itís ridiculous, Ings whole body is onside except his shoulder and arm. Surely you have to look at the position of his bloody feet. Itís fucking football.

Good for us for a change but itís interpretations of it are nonsense. Everyone involved needs talking too by someone who knows the game.
Ings was judged to be offside by the Assistant Referee. VAR only confirmed on field decision.

Offline wittonwarrior

  • Member
  • Posts: 3753
  • Age: 60
  • Location: County Bootle
Re: VAR
« Reply #1913 on: January 31, 2021, 12:49:21 AM »
VAR somehow should be changed to make it up as they go along

Offline Ian.

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 8720
  • Location: Back home in the Shire
  • GM : 11.09.2021
Re: VAR
« Reply #1914 on: January 31, 2021, 12:53:46 AM »
Itís ridiculous, Ings whole body is onside except his shoulder and arm. Surely you have to look at the position of his bloody feet. Itís fucking football.

Good for us for a change but itís interpretations of it are nonsense. Everyone involved needs talking too by someone who knows the game.
Ings was judged to be offside by the Assistant Referee. VAR only confirmed on field decision.
I see that and it was surprising to see a flag go up. Surely though when they reviewed it on VAR they could see Ings is not gaining an advantage. Itís no worse than what happened to us on a fair few occasions now so Iím obviously glad for once it went our way. Itís still crap though.

Online OzVilla

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 7261
  • Location: Sunshine Coast, Australia
  • GM : 15.08.2021
Re: VAR
« Reply #1915 on: January 31, 2021, 01:10:35 AM »
Basically level, as we knew it, is no longer onside. I cannot stand these VAR offside even if tonight went for us. Needs changing.

Offline wittonwarrior

  • Member
  • Posts: 3753
  • Age: 60
  • Location: County Bootle
Re: VAR
« Reply #1916 on: January 31, 2021, 06:29:36 AM »
A few things from yesterday

1.the obvious one. The Southampton equaliser yesterday and ollie's one at West ham   who are VAR trying to protect both should have been given

2.owing down incidents - distorts things. Irrespective of whether the ball hit cash's body first there was no way he could have moved his arm away in time.  As soon as you slow things down it looks as if he does have time

VAR is the best protector of a referee but more incorrect decisions appear to being made than ever

Offline London Villan

  • Member
  • Posts: 7107
  • Location: Brum
  • GM : 27.05.2019
Re: VAR
« Reply #1917 on: January 31, 2021, 07:30:51 AM »
30cm lines. If they overlap not offside, if they donít then offside. That should give daylight between players.
« Last Edit: January 31, 2021, 08:18:43 AM by London Villan »

Offline lovejoy

  • Member
  • Posts: 6228
  • Location: Haywards Heath
Re: VAR
« Reply #1918 on: January 31, 2021, 07:35:17 AM »
VAR is basically being used as a buffer so the players canít moan at the ref as the decision was made ďby them upstairsĒ.
Also is clear and obvious even a thing with VAR anymore, initially it was but clearly itís not being used as such anymore.

Offline Goldenballs

  • Member
  • Posts: 37
Re: VAR
« Reply #1919 on: January 31, 2021, 07:38:46 AM »
The freeze frame I saw they used to draw the lines, the image of the players foot kicking the ball was a blurred mess, they've got no way of knowing which frame to use.  Correct decision using the mess of rules they've concocted, but never offside in real life football.

 


SimplePortal 2.3.6 © 2008-2014, SimplePortal