VAR

[Smithy]

If Cash makes that exact same challenge by the corner flag, do you think the ref gives a free-kick or a throw-in?  I think it's a throw-in 90% of the time.  Maybe more.

You can tell by Konsa's reaction that he's confident it will get overturned because he saw the obvious touch by Cash right in front of him.  It's going to be a bit of a shock for some players if this is how they're going to treat Pens from here on in.  The problem, of course, is that "clear and obvious error" is now even more subjective.  As is the referee's initial decision.  So you're introducing even more uncertainty into a process that was explicitly designed to reduce it.

I know they've done it to speed up the game, which is a good thing, but honestly, I think it will be less than a month before there is a BIG goal either given or denied because of this new way of letting the on-field decision stand as "the error wasn't obvious enough".  If it's consistent all season, fine - we'll hopefully benefit as much as it costs us - but I also think we're lucky it didn't cost us yesterday.

There will be matches decided on decisions like this, where it's a wrong decision, but not "wrong enough", and that's when the whole thing will crumble down.  Fingers crossed it costs of one of our rivals for the title...

[Risso]

It wasn't even consistent yesterday though. Everton were awarded a penalty that was then overturned. Absolutely no "ref's call" there.

[Somniloquism]

Unfortunately as with everything, the consistency from one VAR person to the next on whether they would abide by refs call is also going to be questionable. However the Everton pen decision was overruled because the defender never touched the player, instead DCL trod on Dunks trailing foot. In real time it did look like he took him out. If Cash's touch had been enough to push the ball away from Soucek to a Villa player then we might have got the review. However all our players just stopped so it made it easier to deduce he could have recovered the ball first if not tangled.

[Goldenballs]

The screen didn't even work at the Everton game, did it? So VAR told him to reverse it. It was the correct decision in the end, DCL trod on him then went down like a sack of shit.

[Somniloquism]

There is a second screen on the ground in case of failure. You can see the assistant retrieve it afterwards.

[Nunkin1965]

I thought at the time it was a ridiculous decision and thought VAR was there for such things.
If they are just going with refs decision then scrap VAR on pens and just use it for offside.
It didn't cost us in the end but easily could have.

[dalians umbrella]

I will point out the obvious that offsides are absolute with the only "subjective" bit on if an offside player who didn't touch the ball but was interfering with if near the keeper.

I know what you are saying, but before VAR, there was a widely-accepted degree of subjectivity regarding offside where you would regularly hear the phrase "he's about level" from pundits and fans. There were no big toes offside.

[garyellis]

When I listened to the explanation of how VAR is going to work this season and enhance the attending fan’s experience I thought how is that going to work?
Simple answer is it will not work.
A complete shambles for me so scrap it.

[pablo_picasso]

They have taken something that is so convoluted that it is barely usable & asked the question, "how can we fuck this up even more?"

And voila!

Yesterdays bullshit...

If they don't want VAR to undermine the referee, then it is pointless & needs to be removed altogether.

Although you can almost guarantee that if that pen was at one of the media & marketing favourite six, then it would have definitely been overturned.

[The Edge]

I will point out the obvious that offsides are absolute with the only "subjective" bit on if an offside player who didn't touch the ball but was interfering with if near the keeper.

I know what you are saying, but before VAR, there was a widely-accepted degree of subjectivity regarding offside where you would regularly hear the phrase "he's about level" from pundits and fans. There were no big toes offside.

Offsides can never "absolute" until they can say for certain when the ball leaves the passing players boot. The semi-automated system was supposed to address that problem but of course it's not ready yet thanks to the plonkers in charge. No doubt it will be implemented just in time to be used in favour of the red shite.

[Smithy]

It wasn't even consistent yesterday though. Everton were awarded a penalty that was then overturned. Absolutely no "ref's call" there.

For me, it comes down to whether the ref "saw" what VAR saw.  If he tells VAR, "I don't think he touched the ball", then I think he's sent to the screen by VAR to reveiew the extent of Cash's touch.  If he says, "think he got a small touch but still took him out", they're not interfering.   Same with Everton, I think if the ref believes DCL was kicked, VAR will tell him "no, he stood on the defender".

If they released these conversations after the game it would make so much of the controversy go away.

[baddowvillans]

Surely if Cash is first to the ball and Souchek then clatters into him it's a free kick to Villa?

In the case of Oli at Palace Gueri gets a touch on the ball but takes Oli out in the same movement so a penalty.

[Accent Guy]

If they scrapped VAR we would have to totally change our defensive strategy as the high line would be exposed time and time again, with no VAR to rule them offside.

It would be worse for us than literally any other club and by some distance, if we were to get rid of VAR.

[Risso]

The automated offsides should make that side a bit more bearable though. I don't like the idea of it, but allowing for the margin of error regarding when it leaves somebody's foot, at least it's mostly dealing in facts (apart from the subjective "interfering with play"). But the reviewing of ref's decisions including penalties is a right bag of shite, and for all the meetings etc they have, and new ideas, the feeling remains that they're very much making it up as they go along.

[Accent Guy]

But even then, allowing a margin of error means that those tight calls that our high line times inch perfect, will now go in favour of the attacker. It just seems that we are going to have to have a rethink about the way we defend counter attacks, given the rule changes seem to favour attackers more.