Jump to content
  • Sign up for free and receive a month's subscription

    You are viewing this page as a guest. That means you are either a member who has not logged in, or you have not yet registered with us. Signing up for an account only takes a minute and it means you will no longer see this annoying box! It will also allow you to get involved with our friendly(ish!) community and take part in the discussions on our forums. And because we're feeling generous, if you sign up for a free account we will give you a month's free trial access to our subscriber only content with no obligation to commit. Register an account and then send a private message to @dave u and he'll hook you up with a subscription.

VAR shit show 19/20


Davelfc
 Share

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, SlugTrail said:

Absolutely pointless even having it. Supposed to be for clear and obvious errors by the ref. Not giving us a penalty for a bear hug on Matip I would say is an error, a big one. Yet they didnt even step in.

 

If they are not going to do anything with VAR then bin it off.

To be honest I think it's best leaving those for the ref.  The ball was in play and the ref/lino could clearly see it.  They were wrong, obviously, but it shite reffing not a failure of VAR (for a change).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Article in the Mirror about the Matip penalty saying that Marriner decided not to consult VAR , surely he has no say in the matter ?

 

Annoyed as well that Peter Walton says in the article  ' Down at the Kop end , yes I would have given it ' what the fuck has the Kop end got to do with the most blatant decision ever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Peter Walton was on the BT show when he said that, and he was clearly joking.

 

The whole method with VAR is that a lot of it comes down to Ref discretion so they control the flow of the game, it's the right way to do it in my mind.  But at the moment the balance is fucked, they've been trained for years to not make a decision they don't have to and VAR has made them even worse at it because they are thinking they have a safety net.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, sir roger said:

Article in the Mirror about the Matip penalty saying that Marriner decided not to consult VAR , surely he has no say in the matter ?

 

Annoyed as well that Peter Walton says in the article  ' Down at the Kop end , yes I would have given it ' what the fuck has the Kop end got to do with the most blatant decision ever.

I didn't think var was in control of the refs at all? I thought var looked at stuff regardless. How else is the goal city had ruled out against spurs explained? The ref couldn't have asked for that as nobody in the ground thought it was an issue. 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Scratch that. I’m wrong. It is supposed to automatically review ‘clear and obvious errors’ in four situations - one of which is penalties. I can only assume they didn’t think it was a clear and obvious error. In which case, it’s next to useless.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Isn't the problem less with VAR and more that the referees are fucking shit? How's Marriner not give that without the need to possibly bring VAR into the equation? He had a clear view of it and unless the rules have been binned they're supposed to award fouls/penalties for wrestling manoeuvres in the box.

 

IMO the clear and obvious error rule is another grey area, almost a stitch-up, to allow referees on the pitch to carry on making the same mistakes they always do and not get pulled up on them. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We are still at 0-0, thankfully. VAR has not had any impact on our games, yet. A team judged to be unlucky with decisions before VAR and so far no benefit. A large part of that is that VAR seems to be a sort of paper tiger when it comes to actually dealing with refereeing. The Premier League should have concentrated on consistency before they attempted this though. 

 

It has taken two points from city though, so there is that. 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, skend04 said:

Isn't the problem less with VAR and more that the referees are fucking shit? How's Marriner not give that without the need to possibly bring VAR into the equation? He had a clear view of it and unless the rules have been binned they're supposed to award fouls/penalties for wrestling manoeuvres in the box.

 

IMO the clear and obvious error rule is another grey area, almost a stitch-up, to allow referees on the pitch to carry on making the same mistakes they always do and not get pulled up on them. 

Out of rep. Spot on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Jairzinho said:

Kill it with fire.

 

It'll never work in the Premier League because those in charge of using it are either absolutely fucking shit at their jobs or complete cowards.

 

 

Spot on. I'd say more of point a and a healthy dose of point b.

The world cup summed up the 'quality' of English refs and no matter how much technology you give them,being shit is always going to stop any benefit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, skend04 said:

Isn't the problem less with VAR and more that the referees are fucking shit? How's Marriner not give that without the need to possibly bring VAR into the equation? He had a clear view of it and unless the rules have been binned they're supposed to award fouls/penalties for wrestling manoeuvres in the box.

 

IMO the clear and obvious error rule is another grey area, almost a stitch-up, to allow referees on the pitch to carry on making the same mistakes they always do and not get pulled up on them. 

The thing is, refs will always make mistakes. The whole point of var I thought was to get more decisions right. So when the ref fucks up and the whole world is stratching their head because they've seen it on telly, a whole bunch of refs sat in stockley park can watch the telly and get it right. Except it seems to me they're not interested in that, they're just interested in making headlines. It's why they ruled out the city goal v spurs (thanks) and can ignore the penalty claim yesterday. One of those two decisions is easy to make. The outcome of both decisions were headline makers. They made the choices that made headlines in both cases. Just look at Ian Wright's reaction on motd last night. It's a fucking complete shambles and worse than it was before. I'd have forgotten about that pen yesterday if it wasn't for var. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Pistonbroke
8 hours ago, Pidge said:

Peter Walton was on the BT show when he said that, and he was clearly joking.

 

The whole method with VAR is that a lot of it comes down to Ref discretion so they control the flow of the game, it's the right way to do it in my mind.  But at the moment the balance is fucked, they've been trained for years to not make a decision they don't have to and VAR has made them even worse at it because they are thinking they have a safety net.

 

This all day long, the same thing happens in Cricket. What bugs me are the way they rely more on VAR to pick up on offside decisions. If a team then goes on to win a corner from an offside decision not being flagged which they then score from it makes a mockery of the rules. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Anubis said:

Scratch that. I’m wrong. It is supposed to automatically review ‘clear and obvious errors’ in four situations - one of which is penalties. I can only assume they didn’t think it was a clear and obvious error. In which case, it’s next to useless.

Yes, it seems that the threshold for "clear and obvious" in penalty decisions is extremely high now when it wasn't before. It seems to me that it pretty much has to be a blatant refereeing mistake though I'm still unsure as to what that could possibly be as, as far as I'm aware, it hasn't happened yet? Or has it? Has there been a penalty given/overturned by VAR in the PL this season?

 

The ex-ref they had on the match yesterday used the term "subjective decision" when he tried to offer an explanation as to why VAR hadn't intervened on the Matip foul. I think that's the first time I've heard that term used in a VAR context. So he's essentially saying (and it's backed up by all the other decisions that I've seen) that VAR will only intervene in a situation where the foul isn't a subjective decision? Which is going to be pretty much never. So basically the current situation is that the penalty rule hasn't really changed despite VAR. The refs are still giving/not giving the penalties. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Barry Wom said:

The thing is, refs will always make mistakes. The whole point of var I thought was to get more decisions right. So when the ref fucks up and the whole world is stratching their head because they've seen it on telly, a whole bunch of refs sat in stockley park can watch the telly and get it right. Except it seems to me they're not interested in that, they're just interested in making headlines. It's why they ruled out the city goal v spurs (thanks) and can ignore the penalty claim yesterday. One of those two decisions is easy to make. The outcome of both decisions were headline makers. They made the choices that made headlines in both cases. Just look at Ian Wright's reaction on motd last night. It's a fucking complete shambles and worse than it was before. I'd have forgotten about that pen yesterday if it wasn't for var. 

Every goal is checked for an infringement. If the ball hits a player's hand in the box and a goal results, it's automatically disallowed. It's as simple as that. There's no decision to make. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is what Riley had to say on the first four weeks before our game yesterday. So you’d have thought they’d be paying attention.

 

 

Riley highlighted two missed penalties - one for West Ham and one for Manchester City, a Newcastle goal which should have been disallowed for handball and a failure to hand Leicester City’s Youri Tielemans a red card for a stamp as the quartet of failure.

‘We accept that there were four occasions where the VAR didn’t intervene and where, if they had, there would be a better understanding of the role VAR plays,’ he said.

‘One was a judgement decision. Another was a process mistake. On the two others we were trying to protect the high bar and not disrupt the flow of the game. 

'But on these two occasions the judgement was that while we want to keep that high bar existing, they were clear and obvious errors and the VAR could have advised the referee of that.’   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the point is that with Matip still winning the header the referee has to decide whether he was impeded to the point of not being able to do what he was trying to.  Obviously the ref got that wrong, but they can't have felt it was clear and obvious since the ref (and lino) clearly saw it and decided no foul.

 

Generally it's intervened when something has been missed, it hasn't directly contradicted a ref before (in the prem at least).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, DimReaper said:

Every goal is checked for an infringement. If the ball hits a player's hand in the box and a goal results, it's automatically disallowed. It's as simple as that. There's no decision to make. 

There's been other handballs this season that weren't high profile last minute winners and they let them go. There's was deffo one in the last round of games. Maybe 2 . It's not automatic, they're still making subjective decisions. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Barry Wom said:

Yes. I'll be honest I can't recall the games, but was highlighted on motd or motd2 last time around..

I looked it up - it was in the Newcastle/Watford game. The thing is though - that was a mistake. The disallowed goal in the City game was the correct decision under the rules. 

 

"Re the #NUFC goal v #WatfordFC today. Have had it confirmed that VAR did simply miss the handball in build up to Schär’s goal & it should have been ruled out. Too late now obviously, but reminder VAR not immune from human error."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, DimReaper said:

I looked it up - it was in the Newcastle/Watford game. The thing is though - that was a mistake. The disallowed goal in the City game was the correct decision under the rules. 

 

"Re the #NUFC goal v #WatfordFC today. Have had it confirmed that VAR did simply miss the handball in build up to Schär’s goal & it should have been ruled out. Too late now obviously, but reminder VAR not immune from human error."

It was a clear handball, much more clear then the city one. If they've missed that we might as well turn it off. "We never saw anything gov " might wash for you, personally I just think it's an excuse for a ref in a room making a subjective decision and being caught out. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Barry Wom said:

It was a clear handball, much more clear then the city one. If they've missed that we might as well turn it off. "We never saw anything gov " might wash for you, personally I just think it's an excuse for a ref in a room making a subjective decision and being caught out. 

Fair enough. The bottom line is that the rule is clear - all handballs in the box should result in a goal being disallowed, so the City decision was correct. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...