You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
World Cup VAR
- Thread starter stonerblue
- Start date
BlueAnorak
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 31 Oct 2010
- Messages
- 30,175
Touched the ball without dispossessing him. Tripped the player. Penalty.Clean him out? Come on.
It's like the other fan/pundit falacy about offside. Offside is measured at the moment the attacker touches the ball in a pass movement - Not when the ball leaves his foot. That is why the "offside" pass to Silva against Arsenal last November was allowed - offside in that movement was incredibly marginal at the point Sterling's foot contacts the ball to make the pass. The TV video freeze frames the pass when the ball has left Sterling's foot which is 100% wrong. This sort of incorrect analysis annoys the feck out of me week after week. They're paid for doing this job and keep getting it wrong!
Last edited:
Touched the ball without dispossessing him. Tripped the player. Penalty.
You and I have a different definition of the term clean him out. That's all.
Whether it was a pen or not is a matter of opinion, not really worth discussing.
BlueAnorak
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 31 Oct 2010
- Messages
- 30,175
You and I have a different definition of the term clean him out. That's all.
Whether it was a pen or not is a matter of opinion, not really worth discussing.
Far enough, but If the VAR ref had not given that as a penalty he would have got demerit points. A totally correct decision by VAR.
Like I said, i'm not really interested in debating a subjective decision. I accept those think it was a pen, and those that think it wasn't.Far enough, but If the VAR ref had not given that as a penalty he would have got demerit points. A totally correct decision by VAR.
Barcon
Well-Known Member
Seemed to work there.
BlueAnorak
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 31 Oct 2010
- Messages
- 30,175
But in this instance it's not subjective. By the laws of the game and FIFA referee guidence it's a foul.Like I said, i'm not really interested in debating a subjective decision. I accept those think it was a pen, and those that think it wasn't.
sirrmattmoo
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 25 Apr 2017
- Messages
- 278
I’m loving var tbh. Worked correctly on every penalty so far, removing a lot of human error
SamBlue
Well-Known Member
VAR does work, tS in meltdown! Great miss Peru though! :)
BlueHammer85
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 13 Oct 2010
- Messages
- 40,986
Brilliant use again. Once again a team would
Have been robbed of a penalty.
Have been robbed of a penalty.
Good decision, but if the ball had gone out and Denmark took it quickly (as they would) it would have been play on right?
I think the rules state "VAR has until the next time the game restarts to intervene"
Which I disagree with. If a mistake has been made it should be corrected, even if a free kick or throw in has been taken.I think the rules state "VAR has until the next time the game restarts to intervene"
PannickAtTheDisco
Well-Known Member
Which I disagree with. If a mistake has been made it should be corrected, even if a free kick or throw in has been taken.
I think they would tell the referee to hold the play if they're genuinely looking at something.
Argentina one earlier (which I didn't think was a pen) was one where play was allowed to restart and that was that.I think they would tell the referee to hold the play if they're genuinely looking at something.
I just think if you're going to correct key decisions correct them. Don't introduce loopholes and get outs where things don't get properly looked at.
In that Peru pen play was stopped maybe 10 seconds after it happened. If the ball had gone out and quickly restarted and then the review happened I don't see why that's such a bad thing.
kaz7
Well-Known Member
Not read the last few pages but it seems to be working ok and fast,it won't get 100% but if it gets 90% correct why would you not want it? we have been on the end of so many bad calls,i'm in,the prem need to bring it in off their own bats or it looks very dodgy that some clubs vote against,it'll never get in if it's down to a vote every time
Not read the last few pages but it seems to be working ok and fast,it won't get 100% but if it gets 90% correct why would you not want it? we have been on the end of so many bad calls,i'm in,the prem need to bring it in off their own bats or it looks very dodgy that some clubs vote against,it'll never get in if it's down to a vote every time
Correct and if they had it in the champions league games and especially the one against the dippers we would of gone on and won that game I have no doubt.
kaz7
Well-Known Member
I agree we would,if it continues like this in the world cup it is going to look well dodgy if we don't get it here and in the CL,there is way too much money in the game to rely on humans especially our useless lotCorrect and if they had it in the champions league games and especially the one against the dippers we would of gone on and won that game I have no doubt.
peter.evans
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 4 Oct 2012
- Messages
- 1,834
Correct and if they had it in the champions league games and especially the one against the dippers we would of gone on and won that game I have no doubt.
But this goes back to the whole issue of what those against VAR are saying. I have said all along that VAR can only be used for offside and where an incident takes place ie was the foul inside or out of the box. The dipper game is a perfect example. The incidents that cost us were the offsides two away and one at home for which they could use VAR because there is no subjectivity it is black and white. The Sterling penalty claim was subjective and not a stone wall pen so VAR is a complete waste of space in that situation. If you consider today' games two of the three pens given could easily be argued that VAR got it wrong and it also got it wrong by not giving Argentina what for me was a 100 oef cent pen ! Yes there will be the odd one that is clear and obvious like the Peru one but bloody hell the ref should gave got that right in the first place. 80 per cent of pens and those not gjven are not clear and obvious and we are just swapping refs making mistakes for machines and ruining games with horrendous delays.
inchy14
Well-Known Member
It surely cannot be beyond the wit of contemporary man to devise a system, like Hawkeye, or goal-line technology, to deal effectively and efficiently with offside.
Probably but I don’t see how it could cope with players not interfering for example, they’d look offside to AI but technically they wouldn’t be.