VAR - Time To Go

Originally Posted by avocado

The simple and obvious rule is to look at the part of the ball that is touching the ground. In or out? Forget this 0.01% was hanging over the line garbage. Same with offside. Toenails shouldn’t count. Pick a central part of the body and that rules every time. Belly buttons are us.

You will still get people complaining. Like you do with close offsides. Look at the rashford one, two different angles showing daylight in one and none in the other.

The simple thing would be to extend goal line tech all around the pitch and take it out the referees hands

Originally Posted by Bunker Buster

Goal.line tech, rest can £#%&! off.....

That offside today with its own name call for Jenas to shout about.... subjective offside it's still a collective of people deciding their opinion to affect a game .....

They are wrong, loads of times...

It's not football, it's not happening up and down the country on fields every week pulling in 100's of kids and adults....

I prefer under 11's football before the preamier league MOST weekends....

Pretty much this. Got a Leicester City mate and he says best thing about the Championship is no var.

Days gone by you'd fume about a bad offside decision but it was part of the game and gave you something to complain about. Always told myself it would even itself out over a season.

https://x.com/trollfootball/status/1720884124678750583?s=46&t=46osAsCMaSbh7vgQsN2lEQ

Originally Posted by Sparky***

Well it's out done itself tonight at St James Park (peace and blessings be upon it)

Bruno Guimares gets away with this off the ball

https://x.com/FootballReprt/status/1...530393105?s=20


then this is deemed to be in
https://x.com/SparkyMate/status/1720...086514132?s=20

That ball might still be in play. I saw that bald cretin on Sky citing this exact reason.

But the Hojlund goal, which was exactly the same, was ruled out. They definitely knew that time.

It's an absolute piss take.

(Bald cretin is Dermot Gallagher - not sparky for clarification)

Originally Posted by atticusgrinch

That ball might still be in play. I saw that bald cretin on Sky citing this exact reason.

But the Hojlund goal, which was exactly the same, was ruled out. They definitely knew that time.

It's an absolute piss take.

(Bald cretin is Dermot Gallagher - not sparky for clarification)

my spot on post from september:

Originally Posted by larry

hawkeye birds eye view would prove it was in, but that technology isn't available so var shouldn't have overruled. the freeze-frame provided was not from the perfect angle as seen when comparing the angle of the goal frame versus that of the goal line.

a dangerous precedent when they are aware they don't have the technology available to change these tight decisions with 100% certainty but still choose to do so.

oh wow the dangerous precedent was ignored can you believe it?

As already pointed out, it was used much more sensibly to begin with.

Maybe there might be something in giving each side a certain number of "challenges" in a game, as with cricket?

https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/67372283

But it was unanimous in its view that Havertz should have been sent off for his first-half tackle on Longstaff.

It also decided by a 3-2 majority that Guimaraes should have been shown a red card for striking Jorginho with an outstretched arm.

The assistant to the video refs have had a look and two out of five thought elbowing a bloke from behind in the head deliberatly wasn't worthy of a red card. At this point we should probably get rid of any and all referees.

Originally Posted by Chris Quayd

https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/67372283

But it was unanimous in its view that Havertz should have been sent off for his first-half tackle on Longstaff.

It also decided by a 3-2 majority that Guimaraes should have been shown a red card for striking Jorginho with an outstretched arm.

The assistant to the video refs have had a look and two out of five thought elbowing a bloke from behind in the head deliberatly wasn't worthy of a red card. At this point we should probably get rid of any and all referees*.

*Football

Originally Posted by red in cumbria

As already pointed out, it was used much more sensibly to begin with.

Maybe there might be something in giving each side a certain number of "challenges" in a game, as with cricket?

I was about to post something similar about each team having, say, three appeals per game. Obviously if your appeal is successful then you still have three. Part of the problem with this is that ultimately the final decisions would be down to incompetent referees and subjective PGMOL.

Technology works in rugby, cricket and tennis, but all of these have better officials.

My biggest issue with it, though it’s all a mess, is the VAR stopping the game to give a decision when the ref hasn’t. The penalty against city, the sending off last night. The city one was ridiculous, it was like the ones on var had to get city a goal some way before half time.

The whole thing is a disgrace. It’s open to so much abuse and the potential for criminal activity, it isn’t worth having.

Originally Posted by Chris Quayd

https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/67372283

But it was unanimous in its view that Havertz should have been sent off for his first-half tackle on Longstaff.

It also decided by a 3-2 majority that Guimaraes should have been shown a red card for striking Jorginho with an outstretched arm.

The assistant to the video refs have had a look and two out of five thought elbowing a bloke from behind in the head deliberatly wasn't worthy of a red card. At this point we should probably get rid of any and all referees.

The panel isn’t made up of referees:

The independent panel has five members, made up of three former players and/or coaches, plus one representative each from the Premier League and PGMOL.

Suspect the 3 majority were the players/coaches. PGMOL will protect their own and Premier League will protect the “brand”.

Originally Posted by avocado

The panel isn’t made up of referees:

The independent panel has five members, made up of three former players and/or coaches, plus one representative each from the Premier League and PGMOL.

Suspect the 3 majority were the players/coaches. PGMOL will protect their own and Premier League will protect the “brand”.

Why?

What the £#%&! do they bring to the party

Originally Posted by red red robbo

Why?

What the £#%&! do they bring to the party

The reassuring gloss of a narrow majority vote to make the decisions everyone can see to be wrong appear difficult and subjective.

Originally Posted by red red robbo

Why?

What the £#%&! do they bring to the party

Please see my final sentence.

And it’s hardly “independent” of the EPL or PGMOL

https://youtu.be/vQMLiE_sy-4?si=uN6yUvXWnW96fWY9

Originally Posted by armchair

https://youtu.be/vQMLiE_sy-4?si=uN6yUvXWnW96fWY9

It’s not all bad then

Originally Posted by armchair

https://youtu.be/vQMLiE_sy-4?si=uN6yUvXWnW96fWY9

Scousers or not, that’s ridiculous

Just seen that goal on twitter and can’t for the life of me figure out why it’s chalked off. Anyone?

Originally Posted by Dacter

Scousers or not, that’s ridiculous

https://twitter.com/NOT_MOTD/status/1722737151626858566?t=3IukGwAy-zOF6NTr4NWwoQ&s=19

There are some glaring blind spots with VAR, and at the same time it's lowered the bar for what can be offside, a red card or a handball while remaining ridiculously inconsistent. Before VAR would either of the handballs on Wednesday night been given (whether by the ref or VAR). And if they weren't given then would anybody really be kicking off about them after the game? I don't think so personally. Maybe the second one because his arm was in an odd position, but it's still a bit harsh for what a handball should be given for imo.

And now referees seem to lean on it a bit more than they should. One of the problems with VAR is that it cannot pull back play just for fouls or bookings. Not that I think it should, but it means if anything goes to review then it's either no punishment or maximum punishment. That should work fine for things like penalties and offsides, but for things like bookings then it just can't work properly.

The Rashford incident was a bit clumsy but accidental, and should've been a yellow card and a foul. But because the referee missed it and VAR told him to go over to the monitors, there's only the choice of doing nothing or sending him off. At that point there was no option for the correct middle ground of a yellow card. Effectively Rashford and the team were punished more harshly than they should've been because the officials on the pitch missed it the first time round, and the outcome from the VAR review is limited.

But then players can intentionally elbow other players in the head and it should be a straight red initially. But then VAR reviews it and it's judged to be perfectly fine.