As the season draws to what is I believe a satisfactory end for Aston Villa, I sincerely hope that the referee's association will look thoroughly at their decisions throughout the year and ask themselves what they MUST do better to enable VAR to do what it was intended to - make decisions fair and unbiased.Offside. To be honest although we have had a number of toenail decisions go against us I do feel that by and large this has been pretty evenly applied. It will always be flawed in that it is restricted by the challenge of choosing the exact frame when the ball is released but I think most sides have had goals chalked off for those marginal decisions (I was surprised West Hams was awarded the other night though) The only change I think I would make is to have the decision purely isolated around the foot. Trying to determine whether a shoulder or arse is beyond the foot just adds an extra layer of complexity so stick to the feet and if in doubt give the advantage to the striker.Clear and Obvious Errors.It's a simple enough statement but this is where I see the problems lie. Offside is offside but their are a number of decisions which rely on interpretation and therefore VAR tend to not overule the on field referee in these cases. On balance that appears the fair and reasonable approach except this year Villa have found to their cost that not all referees interpret scenarios in the same way and usually that means not Villas way. Others will have more but the obvious one for me are:-1. Where a foul is committed in the penalty area does prior contact with the ball mitigate the offence and if so how significant does that contact need to be? I am thinking here Villa v Brighton. Trez turns the ball inside, Solly March sticks out a leg and gets a feint touch on the ball before his studs catch Trez's shin and he goes down (theatrically I know) VAR examine it and recommend the ref views it. Michael Oliver does so and signals no penalty as he "got the ball". A week later Brighton play Liverpool and a pool defender does the same thing gets a touch on the ball but folks Wellbeck. Verdict penalty. Which is it?2. Where a ball hits a defenders hand in the area, what constitutes an "unnatural position" and how do you assess when a player can't get out of the way? Here I offer as an example of Cash ve Man City. Cash is running back to block the cross and his arm is swinging as a natural part of running. The ball clearly hits that arm and the penalty is given. For me no complaints in insolation but then against Man United Greenwood's jumps with his arms above his head (to me arms to shoulder height for leverage is normal) a blocks Volleyball style the flick on from Luiz a ball going goalwards (but not into the goal). Verdict No Penalty. I accept Greenwood was nearer but the act of raising your arms over your head make contact with the ball more likely. So handball or not which is it?3. Does it matter if the ball is running out of play and cannot be stopped by either player. I give you Kane at Villa Park where he realises he can't get a cross/shot in and so steps into Cash's attempt to block the shot. Penalty supported later by Dermot Gallagher because if the foul I committed whilst the ball is in play its a penalty. Except on Wednesday when Loris bring Oli down Craig Pawson appears to think that the fact the ball was going out means it is not a penalty. Again which is it?Referee's need to be absolutely clear and consistent about these and no doubt other scenarios. If they are then VAR can intervene and call out where a "clear and obvious error" has been made instead of being reluctant to do so for fear of undermining the onfield referee.VAR was supposed to avoid the accepted tendency for referee's to favour the "bigger" clubs but this year - and not just with us - it has clearly failed to do so. Do I think they will look at issues like this and try and do something? If I'm honest no, because they think they are right, but unlike before we can now all look accurately at all of those inconsistencies and see their failings. For me the 14 clubs outside the Super 6 need to gather all their examples like above and present them to the league and referee's referee's demand a change in approach and outcome.I wait with bated breath
The law states that if Aston Villa are attacking and it's going out of play - no penalty, but if Aston Villa are defending and the ball is going out, then it's definitely a penalty, and significant consideration then needs to be given as to whether or not to send off the Aston Villa player involved (in both cases).
Could someone with a better knowledge of the laws please clarify whether it makes any difference if the ball is going out of play or not. What does the law state?Thanks
I've given VAR a long time to settle down and i'm afraid it's still utter arse.
Quote from: Clive W on May 21, 2021, 08:42:38 AMCould someone with a better knowledge of the laws please clarify whether it makes any difference if the ball is going out of play or not. What does the law state?ThanksUnless it has been changed and I've missed it; which wouldn't surprise me, the law is that once the ball has been kicked-off and travelled the distance of its own circumference, it is deemed to be in play until it has wholly crossed the whole of any boundary lines, a goal has been scored or, in the opinion of the referee an infringement of any law that results in a free-kick. That's how it used to be anyway.Quote from: Clive W on May 21, 2021, 08:42:38 AMCould someone with a better knowledge of the laws please clarify whether it makes any difference if the ball is going out of play or not. What does the law state?ThanksCheck out Law 9 Ball In And Out Of Play on the FA website under Laws and Rules. It's fairly brief and should answer things for you. Sorry but I don't know how to do links on a tablet, waiting for eight-year-old grandson to show me.
My view is VAR is doing exactly what it was intended to do . Shift the criticism and reputational damage from the referees to a computer and faceless interpreters. Now they're just shoulder shrugging plebs who can go "not me guv" when before the ire of the players and fans were directed at them for the rest of the game and the media crucified them the next day.. Now the flack is directed at some bloke hundreds of miles away who doesn't give a fuck if he's given a homer decision or helped ManU to another penalty award.. The whole clear and obvious error line is also utter bollocks. Who decides that? I've seen obvious errors ignored, and non-obvious errors penalised. The whole thing has made me less likely to watch football than the likes of Gould, Wilkinson, Graham and co managed with long-ball in the 80's
Quote from: sickbeggar on May 21, 2021, 09:06:26 AMI've given VAR a long time to settle down and i'm afraid it's still utter arse. Yes. You and everyone else if the percentages at the front of this thread are any indication. They started off slightly against and have only moved more and more definitively against since, to the point now where more than 3 out of every four people think that VAR is cack. Three more people getting off the fence and it would be '4 in every 5 people'. How many pints of beer do you think a company would sell if 3 in every 4 of their customers told them they thought it tasted llike sewage?When will the managing boards of Premier League member clubs decide this is nowhere near good enough? They had a chance during the season to address it (it was an item on their PL meeting agenda) and bottled it. Maybe they didn't want to change the system during a season. But that's not an issue now; use the off-season to grasp the nettle and get rid of this inefficient, damaging, unequal and unfair set of meretricous grifters and commit to giving their audience a level playing field. Is a fair chance on the playing field too much to ask?