General Premier League Thread 2019-20 #Mod Notes First post [Updated 24/07/20]

Guy:Incognito

Did he not go right around the back of the post with that?

Presumably the VAR lads looks at it too and dont just rely on the computer to beep?

EDIT. Thats 100% a goal. WTF

ERG89

dfx- wrote: »

The one chant over and over again, in this case "Villa Villa", is even more annoying than usual

Chelsea should be safe in those circumstances

Esse85

He's a mile over the line.

Nunu

Oh dear

irelandrover

That looked over. Crowd even cheered as they thought it was over

~Rebel~

Yeah, that ones very suspect!

Is VAR not active here?

Fitz*

Think the referee needs new batteries for his watch.

Ball clearly over the line but the watch doesn't buzz so he can't give the goal. Some farce now.

TitianGerm

Does the refs watch not buzz when the ball crosses the line?

Esse85

Keeper error, shock horror.

Absolutely dreadful half of ball. Villa's only tactic is play it long every time, it's atrocious to watch.

ERG89

~Rebel~ wrote: »

Yeah, that ones very suspect!

Is VAR not active here?

Well the league had goal line technology well before VAR was in place. I swear they haven't turned it on with a decision like that

~Rebel~

FitzShane wrote: »

Think the referee needs new batteries for his watch.

Ball clearly over the line but the watch doesn't buzz so he can't give the goal. Some farce now.

Whatever about the watch not buzzing, it's brutal out of VAR not to get him to hang on for a sec while they look.

No sign of the usual Hawkeye animation on Sky that we'd always have seen by now either... wonder why...

ERG89 wrote: »

Well the league had goal line technology well before VAR was in place. I swear they haven't turned it on with a decision like that

Yeah, like there was obviously a problem with the goal line tech - but VAR should have been a redundancy in that case.

For neither to pick it up is disastrous stuff.

Tippex

100% a goal that cannot see how the tech didn’t call that (someone forget to power on the sensors)?

Esse85

~Rebel~ wrote: »

Yeah, that ones very suspect!

Is VAR not active here?

You'd imagine VAR don't want to get involved because the technology is already there for that e.g. Refs watch should vibrate.

murpho999

~Rebel~ wrote: »

Yeah, that ones very suspect!

Is VAR not active here?

No that's not a VAR thing but a goal line decision system.

I wonder if it got tricked as the ball went behind vert tight to the post.

Where are the sensors? Could it be a weakness in the system?

Guy:Incognito

Esse85 wrote: »

You'd imagine VAR don't want to get involved because the technology is already there for that e.g. Refs watch should vibrate.

Surely they have to allow for technology glitching though. The cameras clearly show its a goal, he had the ball around the back of the post (and in to the side netting at one stage)

fyfe79

Is there some kind of rule that if the ball is continually in touch with the post (as it looked there) then it's not a goal? Kind of the opposite to rugby, where if you touch the base of the post with the ball then it's a try?

ACitizenErased

https://twitter.com/SportsJOEdotie/status/1273311788063490048?s=20

JPA

~Rebel~ wrote: »

Yeah, that ones very suspect!

Is VAR not active here?

It seems to be 100% based on the Hawkeye technology, no VAR involvement.

thelad95

I kind of feel like because he held it against the post, the technology might not have picked it up, or there could be a tiny smidgen of the ball that didn't cross the line. The angle Sky are showing it from is completely inconclusive.

I guess given that they already have goal line technology it falls outside the scope of VAR

~Rebel~

murpho999 wrote: »

No that's not a VAR thing but a goal line decision system.

I wonder if it got tricked as the ball went behind vert tight to the post.

Where are the sensors? Could it be a weakness in the system?

Yeah, I know Var and Goal Line Tech are separate - but it seems insane to just not bother using VAR as a redundancy?! Like, is redundancy not the entire point of VAR?

Fitz*

~Rebel~ wrote: »

Whatever about the watch not buzzing, it's brutal out of VAR not to get him to hang on for a sec while they look.

No sign of the usual Hawkeye animation on Sky that we'd always have seen by now either... wonder why...




Yeah, like there was obviously a problem with the goal line tech - but VAR should have been a redundancy in that case.

For neither to pick it up is disastrous stuff.

Yep was just saying that to one of the lads, the fact they haven't shown that computer image yet suggests to me that the system might not be turned on!

martyos121

Do they not test the goal-line tech before kickoff in every match? You’d think it’d be an obvious pre-match check to carry out. Very odd occurrence that.

thelad95

FitzShane wrote: »

Yep was just saying that to one of the lads, the fact they haven't shown that computer image yet suggests to me that the system might not be turned on!

If that's the case, the whole integrity of this match is gone out the window, that was even more blatant than Roy Carroll's famous moment against Spurs. So much so in fact that if goal line technology didn't exist, it would have been waved by the linesman as a goal without a doubt.

dirkmeister

I could be completely wrong but I thought they weren’t using VAR for the rest of the season.

TitianGerm

ACitizenErased wrote: »

https://twitter.com/SportsJOEdotie/status/1273311788063490048?s=20

That's nearly as bad as the Carrol one years ago against Spurs.

fyfe79

thelad95 wrote: »

I kind of feel like because he held it against the post, the technology might not have picked it up, or there could be a tiny smidgen of the ball that didn't cross the line. The angle Sky are showing it from is completely inconclusive.

I guess given that they already have goal line technology it falls outside the scope of VAR

Possibly - the keeper effectively rolled it around the post. Maybe if it's deemed to be in touch with the post, even when behind the line, then it's not a goal?

More than likely a glitch/blunder, though!

Guy:Incognito

dirkmeister wrote: »

I could be completely wrong but I thought they weren’t using VAR for the rest of the season.

Commentators said at the start its in use.

JPA

dirkmeister wrote: »

I could be completely wrong but I thought they weren’t using VAR for the rest of the season.

Where'd you get that out of?

Tippex

Sky have just said VAR could have got involved

super_furry

Still nothing from Hawkeye. They usually have those images up seconds after.

dirkmeister

JPA wrote: »

Where'd you get that out of?

Thought I’d read it somewhere.

Ah not to worry.

~Rebel~

Sky just clarified that VAR could have overruled - but just didn't.

So that's two simultanuous but distinct disasters from your reffing systems. Christ.

flazio

Hawkeye has given up a false "Níl"

j8wk2feszrnpao

~Rebel~ wrote: »

Yeah, I know Var and Goal Line Tech are separate - but it seems insane to just not bother using VAR as a redundancy?! Like, is redundancy not the entire point of VAR?

But VAR is “ruining football”. :P

Not sure of the protocols, but this is why VAR is needed. It also won’t be 100% accurate, but it gets more right than wrong.

Guy:Incognito

~Rebel~ wrote: »

Sky just clarified that VAR could have overruled - but just didn't.

So that's two simultanuous but distinct disasters from your reffing systems. Christ.

As well as Michael Oliver giving it the full "computer says no" . Between him and the linesman , surely they should have at least asked the question.

uncleoswald

thelad95 wrote: »

I kind of feel like because he held it against the post, the technology might not have picked it up, or there could be a tiny smidgen of the ball that didn't cross the line. The angle Sky are showing it from is completely inconclusive.

I guess given that they already have goal line technology it falls outside the scope of VAR

Possibly when touching the post it's 00000.1% on the line, but it isn't always touching the post. He brings it to the post from a position further behind the line.

Mushy

Jesus its great to have the pl back. Couldn't even last a full half without an officiating howler

adox

Maybe it has to be 2 metres over the line.

murpho999

dirkmeister wrote: »

I could be completely wrong but I thought they weren’t using VAR for the rest of the season.

Why would they not use VAR for rest of the season?

j8wk2feszrnpao

murpho999 wrote: »

Why would they not use VAR for rest of the season?

There was talk of not using it to speed up games, but that didn’t happen.

~Rebel~

uncleoswald wrote: »

Possibly when touching the post it's 00000.1% on the line, but it isn't always touching the post. He brings it to the post from a position further behind the line.

Yeah, there's definitely a moment where it's further behind and he shoves himself into the back of the post.

Serious sickner for Sheff U... hope they don't spend halftime fixating on it now and lose focus.

ctrl-alt-delete

The system is now working and should be working in the second half....

Dear me.

Seems it is not just the players out of practice

Guy:Incognito

"the system is now working"

Well thats grand, if the thing that hasnt happened in living memory , happens twice in the same game, itll work out the 2nd time.


and now theyre saying it buzzed in the dressing room, so just have to wait 20 mins after an incident to see does it buzz. Maybe stop for a cup of tea?

~Rebel~

Any chance of Villa walking it into their own net, no? :pac:

j8wk2feszrnpao

Hawkeye got it wrong. Might be the first time it’s happened. They don’t need to over fixate on this.

Reganio 2

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

As well as Michael Oliver giving it the full "computer says no" . Between him and the linesman , surely they should have at least asked the question.

Cant blame him at all. Technology that hasn't failed in 2 seasons, plus var in his ear no one said anything. No way you can blame him.

Tippex

Holy **** if that is true that it showed a goal in the refs room what happens there?

whiskeyman

adox wrote: »

Maybe it has to be 2 metres over the line.

Genuine lol!!!

So good football is back!!

Guy:Incognito

munstermagic11 wrote: »

Hawkeye got it wrong. Might be the first time it’s happened. They don’t need to over fixate on this.

Hawkeye didnt just get it wrong, its yet another breakdown in officiating. VAR should have checked it and the officials on the pitch should have asked to check it. Instead everyone just shrugged and assumed hawkeye couldn't get it wrong.


Anyway, what exactly are the VAR lads doing if not replaying things like that, watching porn?

~Rebel~

Reganio 2 wrote: »

Cant blame him at all. Technology that hasn't failed in 2 seasons, plus var in his ear no one said anything. No way you can blame him.

It's funny actually - I bet if neither backup system existed, he'd have given a goal

But when two separate and distinct redundancies both suggest no goal by their inaction, you're bound to go with that. VAR has more to answer for to be honest I think... Goal Line Tech is just sensors, which can of course malfunction, VAR is lads sitting watching a screen and seemingly just not paying any attention.