VAR Discussion thread

Agent Coulson

The BBC saying that Oliver took it on himself to go over to the pitch side monitor and the FA have said they didn't instruct refs to use it.


Fair play to Oliver again proving he is the best in England hopefully he doesn't get punished by his boss.

~Rebel~

Agent Coulson wrote: »

The BBC saying that Oliver took it on himself to go over to the pitch side monitor and the FA have said they didn't instruct refs to use it.


Fair play to Oliver again proving he is the best in England hopefully he doesn't get punished by his boss.

Hopefully that's the seal broken in English football now, and others might start doing it. It's just common sense like.

Guy:Incognito

That bottom picture looks like its lifted from fifa 20

.G.

It's not an fa cup specific thing. It just hasn't happened in the premier league. Oliver didn't see the incident and when that happens, regardless of competition, the ref will go to the monitor.

Fitz*

It's no surprise that it's the younger generation of referees willing to use the monitor.

I wouldn't think that Atkinson, Moss, Mason or Dean would be willing to use it and help them. They don't want to give the impression that they might have got something wrong.

https://twitter.com/RichardAmofa/status/1216080061389996042?s=19

noodler

Thought it was a yellow at least tbh. Surprised sky commentary didn't dwell on it and big it up in the same way they did when they mistakenly fingered Gomez for an alleged foul on Moura.

citytillidie

50 / 50 ball Robertson got there 1st won the ball what’s he to do after winning the ball? We are told all the time that it’s a contact sport.

Shocking tackle, especially after losing control of the ball then lunging in with studs at that speed

Straight red

.G.

Lol

VAR, I agree

noodler

When one of those "teams who have benefited from VAR" tables is done, with Liverpool be judged to have benefited from the VAR decision not to award a handball against Henderson?

Or does it only count if VAR overturn an infield decision?

Just, it'd be crazy of it was the former given how spurious the Hendo handball check was.

RasTa

https://twitter.com/RockyKlopp/status/1216118005953892353

That's a straight red for any player, cmon now.

noodler

Clearly an accident.


The gap between him getting the ball and the contact is so minimal.

I still expected a VAR review though. Surprised zero came of it.

Doesn't change the fact that there is absolutely no consistency from game to game. Doesn't matter who's playing

That challenge was dreadful and should have been reviewed and carded and it wasn't

Why was it not looked at this time is the question? Remove the ambiguity out of it by at least indicating on the screens that it was reviewed (or maybe it was)

What's the point in the earpiece in the refs ear if this isn't going to happen

citytillidie

noodler wrote: »

Clearly an accident.


The gap between him getting the ball and the contact is so minimal.

I still expected a VAR review though. Surprised zero came of it.

Here is the thing, I don’t think it could be reviewed as no free kick was awarded, and it was not in an attacking penalty area. VAR can not award free kicks just pens, but can look to see if there was a foul in the lead up to a goal hence it was able to look at the incident in the Utd Liverpool game

fullstop

citytillidie wrote: »

Here is the thing, I don’t think it could be reviewed as no free kick was awarded, and it was not in an attacking penalty area. VAR can not award free kicks just pens, but can look to see if there was a foul in the lead up to a goal hence it was able to look at the incident in the Utd Liverpool game

I think it can still be reviewed as a possible red card offence. If you look at the still/picture where Robertson’s boot makes contact with the defenders leg, then you could argue there was something in it, but if you watch the video, most people can see that there’s nothing in it, unless they are very biased.

TitianGerm

fullstop wrote: »

I think it can still be reviewed as a possible red card offence. If you look at the still/picture where Robertson’s boot makes contact with the defenders leg, then you could argue there was something in it, but if you watch the video, most people can see that there’s nothing in it, unless they are very biased.

I'm nearly sure the commentators said it was reviewed but no action warranted.

Roanmore

TitianGerm wrote: »

I'm nearly sure the commentators said it was reviewed but no action warranted.

Said it on MOTD last night I think, was reviewed.

RasTa

fullstop wrote: »

I think it can still be reviewed as a possible red card offence. If you look at the still/picture where Robertson’s boot makes contact with the defenders leg, then you could argue there was something in it, but if you watch the video, most people can see that there’s nothing in it, unless they are very biased.

lol, if that was Mane or Salah on the end of that you'd be in tears.

Even worse in real time

https://twitter.com/JacobSpoonley/status/1216312200303763457

RasTa

RasTa wrote: »

lol, if that was Mane or Salah on the end of that you'd be in tears.

Most people can see there is something in it, unless they are very biased

fullstop

RasTa wrote: »

lol, if that was Mane or Salah on the end of that you'd be in tears.

Why would I give a bollix if they were on the end of it? I don’t support Liverpool. The only ‘lol’ is yourself and mick trying to argue it was a red. To be expected though, I suppose.

TitianGerm

https://twitter.com/GaryLineker/status/1216153746964733952?s=19

Lineker talking some sense.

RasTa

fullstop wrote: »

Why would I give a bollix if they were on the end of it? I don’t support Liverpool. The only ‘lol’ is yourself and mick trying to argue it was a red. To be expected though, I suppose.

Well whatever team you support, it's a red all day long. Can't tackle like that in football anymore, even if you win the ball.

TitianGerm wrote: »

https://twitter.com/GaryLineker/status/1216153746964733952?s=19

Lineker talking some sense.

Don't mind him, Mills said Arsenal one wasn't a red either. These lads still see football the way they used to play, as does David Moyes.

.G.

Yeah the pros, the ref at the time and the VAR are wrong lads, haven't a clue them fellas, some lad in the Internet is where it's at.

Best shut the forum down lads, unless we side with Gary Linekar then there is no point in discussion

RasTa

.G. wrote: »

Yeah the pros, the ref at the time and the VAR are wrong lads, haven't a clue them fellas, some lad in the Internet is where it's at.

That's it, the pros have spoken. Can't be disagreeing with them.

Once Paul Merson says so then nobody can disagree. VAR is always right.

.G.

Sound, glad you finally saw sense. Frankly I don't care what the pros said, the ref at the time and the VAR are both in agreement that it wasn't even a foul. Sorry you're wrong but not surprised either

This isn't RAWK lads, you are are going to get different opinions on a multiple team forum, regardless of whether you like them or not :P

How's about this one?
Didn't even get a look in either but sure hey, he got the ball

https://twitter.com/umpire_ke/status/1216005026826637312?s=19

.G.

Exactly, differing opinions, mine and a lot of others, including crucially those put in charge of the match differ to yours. I'd say those lads opinions are more relevant than yours or mine but you're welcome to carry on being incorrect.

noodler

Aurier's leg literally wasn't there when Robinson decides to go for it. Aurier's leg literally takes the space where the ball was the split second after Robertson touches it.


It wasn't actually a tackle in so much as it was a loose ball both went for.

I'm glad it was reviewed (if MoTD are correct) but I was certainly fearful at the time there'd be a card.of some sort.

Tom Mann Centuria

.G. wrote: »

Exactly, differing opinions, mine and a lot of others, including crucially those put in charge of the match differ to yours. I'd say those lads opinions are more relevant than yours or mine but you're welcome to carry on being incorrect.

So, why is VAR of any use if differing opinions are still a thing. I thought VAR was to end uncertainty, it was to end the grey area.

Of course it doesn't, it just adds tedious delays to games up and down the country, and rather than pundits discussing contentious on field decisions, they discuss off field decisions.

niallo27

At the time I thought it was nothing but looking at it I wouldn't have complained too much if a red was given, it could have been very nasty.

.G.

Tom Mann Centuria wrote: »

So, why is VAR of any use if differing opinions are still a thing. I thought VAR was to end uncertainty, it was to end the grey area.

Of course it doesn't, it just adds tedious delays to games up and down the country, and rather than pundits discussing contentious on field decisions, they discuss off field decisions.

Hardly VARs fault that is it. Var gets things right, if it's an objective decision there can be no argument yet there always is. Nothing will change that and we'll always have the subjective things to have differing opinions on.

Pundits are paid to talk about the game. If Var removes talking points they'll talk about it instead. You only need to look at the embarrassment of grown adults saying things like LiVARpool to see that. Differing opinions will always occur and var is the new kid in the block for lads so it's the focus now.

Tom Mann Centuria

.G. wrote: »

Hardly VARs fault that is it. Var gets things right, if it's an objective decision there can be no argument yet there always is. Nothing will change that and we'll always have the subjective things to have differing opinions on.

Pundits are paid to talk about the game. If Var removes talking points they'll talk about it instead. You only need to look at the embarrassment of grown adults saying things like LiVARpool to see that. Differing opinions will always occur and var is the new kid in the block for lads so it's the focus now.

You think in this case VAR got it right, plenty don't. How is that any better than what we had pre VAR?

Guy:Incognito

Tom Mann Centuria wrote: »

You think in this case VAR got it right, plenty don't. How is that any better than what we had pre VAR?

Because, whether you think the decision is right or not is irrelevant. The ref has looked at it in real time, as it was before VAR, then a 2nd ref has looked at it with replays. Both are happy the decision is right. You cant ask more than that.

A ref cant see everything in real time and anything marginal is then guesswork. if you have 20 witnesses to an incident (anything, not necessarily football) and there will be multiple differences in what they saw and different accounts of it. Ask them all a couple of days later and you could probably write 10 completely different stories from it.

Lads sitting at home would argue a player straight out punching another player wasnt a red at times.

.G.

Tom Mann Centuria wrote: »

You think in this case VAR got it right, plenty don't. How is that any better than what we had pre VAR?

Its subjective, there is no definitive decision to be made that can't be questioned. The ref ruled on it at the time and VAR didn't see an issue with his decision, that's as definite as these subjective things can get.

Refs opinion is all that matters and if he makes an absolute haims of it the VAR can correct him. He didn't though hence why no action taken. Genuinely the only people I've seen have an issue with that decision are opposition fans so pretty standard stuff.

VAR for me is there to right the obvious wrongs, the objective things and even when it does people still moan, generally because they don't like the application of the law and take it out on VAR when it's not the problem. People will always moan, what we are moaning about is different now to last season but doesn't mean those decisions they don't like are incorrect, it just means people will always be moaning. Last season we could moan and often we'd be right to as the decision can be proven to be wrong, that's not the case now, objective decisions are all called the same way regardless of team and outcome, subjective things will always be open to interpretation. Not sure what VAR can do about that. I'm happy enough it gets far more right now then the refs by themselves did.

Tom Mann Centuria

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Because, whether you think the decision is right or not is irrelevant. The ref has looked at it in real time, as it was before VAR, then a 2nd ref has looked at it with replays. Both are happy the decision is right. You cant ask more than that.

So the second ref was all you needed to be happy? Two people reviewing a decision is your sweet spot. That's fine, but plenty of people aren't happy with those two people's opinion. Let's have 3, then maybe a 4th to confirm, then............


VAR is meant to be definitive. It isn't. By any means.

niallo27

Tom Mann Centuria wrote: »

So the second ref was all you needed to be happy? Two people reviewing a decision is your sweet spot. That's fine, but plenty of people aren't happy with those two people's opinion. Let's have 3, then maybe a 4th to confirm, then............


VAR is meant to be definitive. It isn't. By any means.

Would you be happy if the ref was to go to the monitor and review the incident with all the angles available.

Tom Mann Centuria

niallo27 wrote: »

Would you be happy if the ref was to go to the monitor and review the incident with all the angles available.

Personally, I think it'd be preferable to what we have now, but honestly, I think VAR is ruining the game for people who actually go to games, with delays, with the immediacy of the game gone and I'd take imperfect, ref fck ups, over this.

citytillidie

Palace fans at the weekend brought in banners to say no to VAR by the end of the game they were cheering it as it help send off an Arsenal player :pac:

The Nal

The main thing for me is the destroying of the "goal" and the celebrations. Firminho at the weekend had to stand there like a tit to see if his perfectly good goal was going to be allowed.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Tom Mann Centuria wrote: »

So the second ref was all you needed to be happy? Two people reviewing a decision is your sweet spot. That's fine, but plenty of people aren't happy with those two people's opinion. Let's have 3, then maybe a 4th to confirm, then............


VAR is meant to be definitive. It isn't. By any means.

VAR will never be definitive. Case in point: there's discussions about all sorts of things even after we've all seen it several times..

Red cards are a classic example - what's a red for me won't be a red for you and vice versa. No systems going to give you a definitive answer when there's room for opinion.

Fitz*

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

VAR will never be definitive. Case in point: there's discussions about all sorts of things even after we've all seen it several times..

Red cards are a classic example - what's a red for me won't be a red for you and vice versa. No systems going to give you a definitive answer when there's room for opinion.

To be fair, the offside rule this season has been the most consistently applied rule for every single team on every single goal. Same with the handball rule. It's probably the first ever season that no team can complain that they goals scored against them that should have been offside, or rivals getting all these offside or handball goals.

2 examples that is being definitive.

It's the red cards & fouls that are still subjective, I agree.

dfx-

Robertson isn't a red card in a month of Mondays.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

VAR will never be definitive. Case in point: there's discussions about all sorts of things even after we've all seen it several times..

Red cards are a classic example - what's a red for me won't be a red for you and vice versa. No systems going to give you a definitive answer when there's room for opinion.

but people are clamouring for and demanding only the correct decision - that's why people are ok with the stupid offside decisions because as long as the decision is correct, that's all that matters despite all evidence that it is stupid.

This one at the weekend. Serie A prepetual crying babies Inter get away with another. Lautaro Martinez. No review from VAR

https://www.news1.news/2020/01/lautaro-martinez-sensational-foul-on-toloi-the-var-lets-play-video.html

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

dfx- wrote: »

Robertson isn't a red card in a month of Mondays.



but people are clamouring for and demanding only the correct decision - that's why people are ok with the stupid offside decisions because as long as the decision is correct, that's all that matters despite all evidence that it is stupid.

Agreed - as I said earlier, I disagree with the rule but it is consistent.

Idiocy from the referee there causing a problem for himself.

joe_99

VAR checked for an accidental hand ball by Firmino tonight before awarding the penalty for the foul on Origi. To me that proves that Man City couldn't get a penalty for the Trent handball earlier in the season as Silva had handled it.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

joe_99 wrote: »

VAR checked for an accidental hand ball by Firmino tonight before awarding the penalty for the foul on Origi. To me that proves that Man City couldn't get a penalty for the Trent handball earlier in the season as Silva had handled it.

I thought that was already widely accepted to not be a penalty in the city game?