Quantcast
VAR shit show 19/20 - Page 20 - FF - Football Forum - The Liverpool Way Jump to content
блядь

VAR shit show 19/20

Recommended Posts

Before VAR weren’t linos and refs told to give the benefit of the doubt to the attacker where offsides were very tight? Did that get ditched? If not, even with VAR that offside is too close to call and should have been allowed in line with previous ‘benefit of the doubt’ scenarios.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Watch episode 1 of ‘Exhibit A’ on Netflix. Exposes how video evidence can be flawed and lead to incorrect conclusions, decisions and injustices. All it would have taken is for a competent ref to have glanced at the initial freeze frame and it would have been “GTFO - goal, all day long” - but then the VAR technicians start manipulating the stills.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Le Duan said:

Before VAR weren’t linos and refs told to give the benefit of the doubt to the attacker where offsides were very tight? Did that get ditched? If not, even with VAR that offside is too close to call and should have been allowed in line with previous ‘benefit of the doubt’ scenarios.

That was the case. But this year they've said it all goes on "computer says no goal", it doesn't matter how close it is. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 09/08/2019 at 12:56, Trumo said:

The amount of time taken to reach a decision is one of the things people have most problems with when it comes to VAR. It can be several minutes in some cases, and a lot of people (mostly inside the stadium) won't know why. Usually, the ref is talking via his earpiece to the 4th official and the VAR officials. After a while, the ref will come over to the pitchside monitor to view the incident for himself. I think the ref should be coming over to the pitchside monitor the moment he is informed that there is a VAR review, not having a discussion and THEN coming over to the sidelines. I see no reason why he cannot be communicating with the other officials as well as reviewing the footage at the same time.

 

I still stand by the above, and cannot understand why they do not do this. Pitchside monitors are regularly checked by referees on the continent, but here they've made a point of not doing it at all. We've even had former referees suggesting that VAR officials with less refereeing experience than the man in the middle don't want to overrule a decision even if replays show that decision to be incorrect, so in effect the officials are disregarding things that could so easily be corrected. Some people have suggested that they are deliberately making a hash of things so the whole VAR experiment is binned next year. How do any of the English officials' criteria for VAR use improve the quality of decision making? Answer: they don't.

 

On 09/08/2019 at 13:03, sir roger said:

I said in the other VAR thread that there should be no pitchside monitors , all decisions should come from the VAR crew thus eliminating the waste of time & the influence of the referee's ego.

 

 

Well, they aren't using the pitchside monitors and instead have simply doubled-down on the wrongness to protect the referee's authority. If they don't treat a fuck-up as a fuck-up, then the stats will show that the referees are getting an awful lot correct when the amount of discussion over obvious 'WTF?' moments suggests the opposite.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, thegreatelephant said:

 

give Bobby time- probably the only thing he hasn't attempted. yet

Heh, be great if he scored one off his pit this weekend. Preferably no-look too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The ref didn’t give handball today. VAR backed his decision. 

If the ref had given a pen then VAR would have backed him. 

 

Whats the point of VAR when the refs are simply using it to protect themselves. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Jennings said:

The ref didn’t give handball today. VAR backed his decision. 

If the ref had given a pen then VAR would have backed him. 

 

Whats the point of VAR when the refs are simply using it to protect themselves. 

I genuinely didn't understand what the fuck they were saying on motd. Something about because it wasn't a goal for city, the Silva handball was taken out of the decision on Trent, so it wasn't handball because it wasn't handball. Except it was handball if you don't count the Silva handball before it. It's like they tie themselves up in as many knots as is possible. If they had just said it wasn't handball by Trent because of the handball by silva that preceded it, it would be all finished with, instead it's like they're doing all they can to make things controversial. 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Barry Wom said:

I genuinely didn't understand what the fuck they were saying on motd. Something about because it wasn't a goal for city, the Silva handball was taken out of the decision on Trent, so it wasn't handball because it wasn't handball. Except it was handball if you don't count the Silva handball before it. It's like they tie themselves up in as many knots as is possible. If they had just said it wasn't handball by Trent because of the handball by silva that preceded it, it would be all finished with, instead it's like they're doing all they can to make things controversial. 

That was the statement from the pgmol or whatever they're called on it i think. Sounds like total nonsense

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PGMOL have said that Silva's handball prior to the ball hitting Trent's arm had no bearing on the decision to discount it as a handball against Trent. Penalties have been given for a lot less than that this season. This is another case of PGMOL fudging their own reasoning for the decisions given on the pitch and following VAR reviews. Why discount Silva's initial (unintentional) handball? Sadio's own unintentional handball in the Man Utd game was enough for the officials to disallow a goal and give a free kick against him, so - assuming they can actually apply their own rules consistently - that should have been the key factor in this incident too, with the Trent follow-up being the secondary (thus rendered unimportant) factor.

 

Yet again the referees are not using the pitchside monitors, even though PGMOL and Riley have only this week suggested that they can if they see fit. My view has always been for the referee to go to the pitchside monitor when either he or the VAR official feels an incident needs reviewing. The referee should be in discussions with the VAR official so they can both talk about what's happened while simultaneously viewing the incident, instead of the referee relying on the word and viewpoint of the VAR official.

 

It's worth repeating, but the technology is not the problem. The problem is the way it's being used.

 

EDIT: Barry's put the point across more simply than I have!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, KMD7 said:

That was the statement from the pgmol or whatever they're called on it i think. Sounds like total nonsense

Yeah, I realised that. I'm just saying I don't understand what the fuck they're on about! 

6 minutes ago, Trumo said:

PGMOL have said that Silva's handball prior to the ball hitting Trent's arm had no bearing on the decision to discount it as a handball against Trent. Penalties have been given for a lot less than that this season. This is another case of PGMOL fudging their own reasoning for the decisions given on the pitch and following VAR reviews. Why discount Silva's initial (unintentional) handball? Sadio's own unintentional handball in the Man Utd game was enough for the officials to disallow a goal and give a free kick against him, so - assuming they can actually apply their own rules consistently - that should have been the key factor in this incident too, with the Trent follow-up being the secondary (thus rendered unimportant) factor.

 

Yet again the referees are not using the pitchside monitors, even though PGMOL and Riley have only this week suggested that they can if they see fit. My view has always been for the referee to go to the pitchside monitor when either he or the VAR official feels an incident needs reviewing. The referee should be in discussions with the VAR official so they can both talk about what's happened while simultaneously viewing the incident, instead of the referee relying on the word and viewpoint of the VAR official.

 

It's worth repeating, but the technology is not the problem. The problem is the way it's being used.

 

EDIT: Barry's put the point across more simply than I have!

Oliver didn't need to watch it on telly though, he had probably the best view in the ground of the incident. I would feel absolutely certain he didn't give the handball because the handball from Silva completely wrong footed Trent (and aguero too for that matter), so he deemed it unintentional. There was absolutely nothing Oliver could have seen on the monitors that he didn't see in real time. His position was spot on - as it was throughout the game too to be fair. He was a cunt of a referee when they had him reffing these games when he was about 12. But he's developed into the only ref who's near competent in the league. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yesterday was confusing. Had city scored from their attack that lead to the Penalty row it wouldn't have counted due to them handling first.  They can apparently win a penalty from that attack and score though. 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh how they all laughed last week when Firmino's goal was disallowed... 

 

Fuck em we'll get decisions that go against us and City will get ones that they shouldn't have got it's the way it is

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We've broken VAR! The first time its slow and clumsy nature has been highlighted by a team scoring while they were dawdling over their telly screens at Stockley Park over a decision at the other end. Fuck it off now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, littletedwest said:

Yesterday was confusing. Had city scored from their attack that lead to the Penalty row it wouldn't have counted due to them handling first.  They can apparently win a penalty from that attack and score though. 

 

 

Can they though?

 

In his press conference, Chrome Dome was sarcastically telling reporters to ask the "Big Bosses" for an explanation.

 

I actually reckon an official explanation of what the thought process was would be interesting.

 

Trouble is, there probably isn't an explanation.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, skaro said:

 

Can they though?

 

In his press conference, Chrome Dome was sarcastically telling reporters to ask the "Big Bosses" for an explanation.

 

I actually reckon an official explanation of what the thought process was would be interesting.

 

Trouble is, there probably isn't an explanation.

 

 

Some real stopped clock stuff here, but aside from Nicol being a little harsh on Trent's ability to move his arm away, there are some good points raised here which highlight the idiocy of the rules as they stand, especially Robson's point at the end. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, A_S said:

Some real stopped clock stuff here, but aside from Nicol being a little harsh on Trent's ability to move his arm away, there are some good points raised here which highlight the idiocy of the rules as they stand, especially Robson's point at the end. 

 

If you look at that still you see can 4 players excluding Bernardo. All 4 have their right arm in the exact same position, thats a natural position for anyone suddenly having to halt their running direction due to an unexpected ricochet of an arm. It's 100% not a penalty. The only controversy is whether Trent's handball created a goal scoring opportunity for us. 95 yards from City's goal would suggest it didn't but a simple pass later and Mane running 40 yards and suddenly it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure where I read it, think it was from 'Lee' on here. Officials could be fucking up deliberately in attempt to get VAR fucked off. The poor little darlings probably don't like the added scrutiny they are under. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, No2 said:

If you look at that still you see can 4 players excluding Bernardo. All 4 have their right arm in the exact same position, thats a natural position for anyone suddenly having to halt their running direction due to an unexpected ricochet of an arm. It's 100% not a penalty. The only controversy is whether Trent's handball created a goal scoring opportunity for us. 95 yards from City's goal would suggest it didn't but a simple pass later and Mane running 40 yards and suddenly it is.

It can't be involved in our goal. Forgetting the distance, they cleared the ball from the initial cross and created a new phase of play. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, No2 said:

If you look at that still you see can 4 players excluding Bernardo. All 4 have their right arm in the exact same position, thats a natural position for anyone suddenly having to halt their running direction due to an unexpected ricochet of an arm. It's 100% not a penalty. The only controversy is whether Trent's handball created a goal scoring opportunity for us. 95 yards from City's goal would suggest it didn't but a simple pass later and Mane running 40 yards and suddenly it is.

And that's exactly it. By simply applying the 'logic' of the current rules to this particular scenario, you end up tying yourself in knots. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×