VAR (PL introduction 2019)

[PannickAtTheDisco]

If he was excellent why did he not check the Willian pen/dive. Could only have been arrogance.

because the VAR agreed with him.

For me, it needs to be more clearly defined i.e. a clear re-signal given to tell the live crowd that the on-field decision stands. The refs having audible mics would clear it up instantly at home.

The issue I see is if Scott gives the decision as was and books Willian, then the VAR says go and take a look. Scott has a look but decides it's not a dive as there was contact, but not enough contact to really justify a penalty, then as far as I'm aware he can't rescind the yellow unless he gives the penalty, which is problematic. There are plenty of incidents which aren't dives but are "just get up and get on with it" calls.

My concern is that the VAR can't outright overrule the referee, which means that incidents like Zaha against us will still be given.

 

[CityStu]

because the VAR agreed with him.

For me, it needs to be more clearly defined i.e. a clear re-signal given to tell the live crowd that the on-field decision stands. The refs having audible mics would clear it up instantly at home.

The issue I see is if Scott gives the decision as was and books Willian, then the VAR says go and take a look. Scott has a look but decides it's not a dive as there was contact, but not enough contact to really justify a penalty, then as far as I'm aware he can't rescind the yellow unless he gives the penalty, which is problematic. There are plenty of incidents which aren't dives but are "just get up and get on with it" calls.

My concern is that the VAR can't outright overrule the referee, which means that incidents like Zaha against us will still be given.

VAR can overrule the referee (or at least tell him to re-watch an incident) if the referee has made a clear and obvious error. I assume the VAR in the Willian dive incident thought that the actual referee had made a valid interpretation of the situation, even if the VAR disagreed with him.

 

[PannickAtTheDisco]

VAR can overrule the referee (or at least tell him to re-watch an incident) if the referee has made a clear and obvious error. I assume the VAR in the Willian dive incident thought that the actual referee had made a valid interpretation of the situation, even if the VAR disagreed with him.

he can't tell him to overturn his decision, so it won't stop the likes of Moss giving a penalty just because he wants or needs to. So the system, though it would have immense benefits, is ultimately useless.

 

[BerkshireBlue]

I watched the game last night and it only strengthened my opinion that VAR is shite and will ruin the game as a spectator sport.
I don't wanna watch the referee, listening to another referee and doing little signals

So you watched a game expecting VAR to be shite and then find reasons to back up your already biased claim. I hope you're not a scientist although you could be a politician

 

[blueinsa]

I've no doubt when used correctly it's a huge aid but last night gave everyone the biggest insight into its weakness and that is you are still reliant on officials both on the pitch and in the studio being absolutely honest and impartial.

Why wasnt the Willian penalty claim not reviewed?

If they think its not worthy then var is dead in the water before it even started as far as im concerned and we might as well go back to how it was before.

 

[Machiavelli]

If he was excellent why did he not check the Willian pen/dive. Could only have been arrogance.

VAR agreed, the commentary team stated as much.

 

[Dave Ewing's Back 'eader]

The whole business with VAR is that it should be mandatory on the ref to consult in the event of a goal, a booking, a sending off and a pen. The trouble arises if the ref decides that there is no infringement and the game carries on, oblivious to the millions who have seen it from their armchairs and who know that the ref got it wrong. If this state of affairs continues after the introduction of VAR, then it would tell us what many have suspected over the years!

 

[blueinsa]

The whole business with VAR is that it should be mandatory on the ref to consult in the event of a goal, a booking, a sending off and a pen. The trouble arises if the ref decides that there is no infringement and the game carries on, oblivious to the millions who have seen it from their armchairs and who know that the ref got it wrong. If this state of affairs continues after the introduction of VAR, then it would tell us what many have suspected over the years!

As per usual i agree entirely mate.

 

[Blue Til Death]

The whole business with VAR is that it should be mandatory on the ref to consult in the event of a goal, a booking, a sending off and a pen. The trouble arises if the ref decides that there is no infringement and the game carries on, oblivious to the millions who have seen it from their armchairs and who know that the ref got it wrong. If this state of affairs continues after the introduction of VAR, then it would tell us what many have suspected over the years!

Agreed, which is why I am against it unless this criteria is standard..! It becomes a pointless tool if the ref refuses to use it based on his observations..!

 

[aguero93:20]

The whole business with VAR is that it should be mandatory on the ref to consult in the event of a goal, a booking, a sending off and a pen. The trouble arises if the ref decides that there is no infringement and the game carries on, oblivious to the millions who have seen it from their armchairs and who know that the ref got it wrong. If this state of affairs continues after the introduction of VAR, then it would tell us what many have suspected over the years!

It is mandatory for sendings off, penalties, offside calls and goals. The VAR agreed with the referee that Willian was going down without the contact.