World Cup VAR

[BlueHammer85]

it's given multiple correct decisions already....???? Improving dramatically in it's infancy, loads of incorrect decisions.

the old system is a disgrace....

Agree

 

[Deleted member 77198]

SWP said it was a clear penalty so you and everyone else must be wrong.

First offence counts first

 

[SWP's back]

SWP said it was a clear penalty so you and everyone else must be wrong.

Hyperbole much fatty?

 

[BlueHammer85]

Hyperbole much fatty?

Ha. Ok. Can you give me one pundit or media comment that agrees with you that it was a ‘clear penalty’ ?

 

[Bluearmy]

You used the penalty as a case in point. A decision he’d already to referred to as being one of the uses of VAR.

The problem with VAR is that it is being used subjectively. You may say that more decisions are now correct but there’s zero bloody use in that if they all end up favouring one team. Let’s say it’s a helter skelter game and four decisions are wrong in real time, if the VAR only picks up on the two for side A and neither of side B’s then it just ruins the game and result even further. Just like last night when Tunisia get a soft penalty, VAR does fuck all as it’s not ‘a clear and obvious mistake’ and then Kane is denied two stone wall penalties and VAR sits back and does a superb impression of a chocolate fire Guard.

The technology is there, it’s just not being implemented correctly.

I used the Egypt penalty AND multiple other instances, so he was clearly not completely justified. That was my point..

I don't disagree with you that the process needs further improvement. And if it was to continuously favour one team, then thats not good obviously. but in its infancy and a learning curve for all involved. In a year it will have likely to have improved further, over where we are today.

 

[SWP's back]

yeah, seems to need looking at that...

Should have been referred to the ref. If he thought it was both wrestling then fair enough.

Nah you both don’t exist according to the thick hammer. Only me thinks it’s a pen, oh and:











https://twitter.com/mphiliseni/status/1009166082698072065?s=21

I could go on Mark, my quick searched showed over 3,500 results. Clearly not just me. If you can’t see it’s a pen then I understand why you’ve failed to see other things happening right under your nose.

 

[BlueHammer85]

I used the Egypt penalty AND multiple other instances, so he was clearly not completely justified. That was my point..

I don't disagree with you that the process needs further improvement. And if it was to continuously favour one team, then thats not good obviously. but in its infancy and a learning curve for all involved. In a year it will have likely to have improved further, over where we are today.

Exactly. Fans have zero patience.

 

[BlueHammer85]

Nah you both don’t exist according to the thick hammer. Only me thinks it’s a pen, oh and:











https://twitter.com/mphiliseni/status/1009166082698072065?s=21

I could go on Mark, my quick searched showed over 3,500 results. Clearly not just me. If you can’t see it’s a pen then I understand why you’ve failed to see other things happening right under your nose.

F*ck me. Twitter brigade. Course you’ll find hotheads like yourself on there. How about my actual post asking for pundits or media analysis agreeing with you ?

 

[moomba]

no need. My point was he thinks hes been completely justified that var is no use for subjective decisions, when there's been loads of examples of VAR correcting incorrect subjective decisions such as the Egypt, Peru and France incidents plus several others, that while subjective, VAR has corrected obvious mistakes.

If it's a subjective decision it's not a correct or incorrect one, just one you agree or disagree with.

FWIW I have no problem with VAR being used and a ref making a subjective decision I disagree with. I'm just not liking the ones the ref doesn't get to see again.

 

[Bluearmy]

If it's a subjective decision it's not a correct or incorrect one, just one you agree or disagree with.

FWIW I have no problem with VAR being used and a ref making a subjective decision I disagree with. I'm just not liking the ones the ref doesn't get to see again.

i disagree, it's given correct decisions in the Egypt, France, Sweden and peru games to name a few for me, but appreciate others see it differently.

 

[SebastianBlue]

Nah you both don’t exist according to the thick hammer. Only me thinks it’s a pen, oh and:











https://twitter.com/mphiliseni/status/1009166082698072065?s=21

I could go on Mark, my quick searched showed over 3,500 results. Clearly not just me. If you can’t see it’s a pen then I understand why you’ve failed to see other things happening right under your nose.

It was most definitely a penalty. How could anyone argue that Walker’s was a penalty whilst that was not?

As many of us have said for some time now: VAR itself is a great idea—the problem is in the implementation/enforcement (just like “reasonable” laws and regulations).

The current implementation, especially for this WC, is deeply flawed. It has lead to some good calls that would have otherwise been missed (or ignored), but the consistency between what is and is not reviewed is a huge issue. There is also still far too much discretion given to the referee and the VAR team. Numerous violations have been ignored, even when it seems VAR is reviewing them, and others have been explained away based on dubious reasoning.

I am actually firmly in the ‘VAR is good for the game’ camp, but with a very large caveat: the referee and the VAR team cannot have the freedom to pick and chose what is reviewed or relayed to the officiating team, and the entire officiating team should be mic’ed for transparency.

Even the commentators and pundits have become frustrated with the lack of consistency when handling incidents.

VAR has quite a long way to go, as testified by many of the matches in this WC, including tonight’s Russian Cinderella story.

 

[BlueHammer85]

It was most definitely a penalty. How could anyone argue that Walker’s was a penalty whilst that was not?

As many of us have said for some time now: VAR itself is a great idea—the problem is in the implementation/enforcement (just like “reasonable” laws and regulations).

The current implementation, especially for this WC, is deeply flawed. It has lead to some good calls that would have otherwise been missed (or ignored), but the consistency between what is and is not reviewed is a huge issue. There is also still far too much discretion given to the referee and the VAR team. Numerous violations have been ignored, even when it seems VAR is reviewing them, and others have been explained away based on dubious reasoning.

I am actually firmly in the ‘VAR is good for the game’ camp, but with a very large caveat: the referee and the VAR team cannot have the freedom to pick and chose what is reviewed or relayed to the officiating team, and the entire officiating team should be mic’ed for transparency.

Even the commentators and pundits have become frustrated with the lack of consistency when handling incidents.

VAR has quite a long way to go, as testified by many of the matches in this WC, including tonight’s Russian Cinderella story.

Aside from you agreeing that’s a penalty just because Walkers was given I agree with your post.

I personally think they made a mistake bringing VAR into this tournament in its infancy - but applaud them for trying still. Long way to go but massive improvement on a Ref guessing

 

[Ban-jani]

You used the penalty as a case in point. A decision he’d already to referred to as being one of the uses of VAR.

The problem with VAR is that it is being used subjectively. You may say that more decisions are now correct but there’s zero bloody use in that if they all end up favouring one team. Let’s say it’s a helter skelter game and four decisions are wrong in real time, if the VAR only picks up on the two for side A and neither of side B’s then it just ruins the game and result even further. Just like last night when Tunisia get a soft penalty, VAR does fuck all as it’s not ‘a clear and obvious mistake’ and then Kane is denied two stone wall penalties and VAR sits back and does a superb impression of a chocolate fire Guard.

The technology is there, it’s just not being implemented correctly.

This is my feeling.

They apparently said it was looked at but it couldn’t have been, there’s no debate if Kane was fouled or not, he was cleared rugby tackled.

 

[SebastianBlue]

Aside from you agreeing that’s a penalty just because Walkers was given I agree with your post.

I personally think they made a mistake bringing VAR into this tournament in its infancy - but applaud them for trying still. Long way to go but massive improvement on a Ref guessing

I didn’t, though. I said it was a penalty and then said I couldn’t understand how anyone could argue the Walker incident was a penalty but the Egypt incident was not. The latter statement is not a qualifier, only an additional comparison. I think it is a penalty separate from any other incident but the case for it is strengthened by other penalty decisions (again, harking back to my droning on about consistency and how VAR is meant to significantly improve that, yet is not in this particular tournament).

Otherwise, fair enough. I also think they made a mistake to try to implement it with such loose guidelines—although, I am sure they thought they were ironclad (everyone has a plan until they’re punched in the face and all that).

 

[BerkshireBlue]

it's given multiple correct decisions already....???? Improving dramatically in it's infancy, loads of incorrect decisions.

the old system is a disgrace.... And not fit for purpose anymore

I was going for ironic, probably badly. I want VAR in it's been a great success in the WC so far

 

[cleavers]

I want VAR in it's been a great success in the WC so far

It really hasn't, its been a success in some decisions, but sadly a complete failure in others. That is not an improvement, its just another fudge (or fix).

It will only really work when the decisions reviewed are completely transparent, so everyone knows what is being reviewed, why its being reviewed, and so the players and fans know what is actually being discussed.

I'd like to see it work, but as it is now, its frustrating at best.

 

[slicky202]

It would be mint if VAR was just used to stop teams wrestling from corners and free kicks. Might actually get some goals scored from corners at last. Also what if a penalty v decision is looked at and the player that went down wasn't touched, there should be a yellow card dishes out.

 

[citytilllidie]

In Russia v Egypt, 2 examples of new VAR rules had me confused.

1. Egypt pen.
The ref gives a free kick, outside the box.
All of the Egyptian players do the charades thing, demanding review, so all clutching at straws.
We, at home get to see that the initial grab is outside the box, Salah continues into the box, with big dive and multiple roll overs. (Shoulder appears to be healed, so there goes the 'unfit' bollocks).
Ref holds hand to ear, so instructions coming, then points to spot.
Salah, dusts himself down to score and change the dynamic of the game, Egypt now back in it.

With such an important decision, Why did that ref not go to the screen at the half way line to review his call and possibly explain his thought that the initial foul was outside the box?
He then could have called the penalty himself, and if that had happened, no problem, his decision.
I don't actually know if the first foul is the free kick position, but the way it happened, with some unknown making the decision, left it open to corrupt call.

2. Egypt corner.
With Egypt now tails up, they're piling on the pressure against a now floundering Russia.
A ball gets played to the far post, Salah looks marginally off-side.
Linesman, as now instructed, (another thing appeared to be thought of the day before the tournament), doesn't call the off-side, letting play continue.
In tussle, the ball comes off the defender, giving Egypt a threatening corner and potential 3-2 with 15 mins. on the clock.
So, Why did that linesman not inform the ref that Salah may have been off-side there and to review?

I suppose the upshot is that they've introduced VAR, stuck some lads in a TV trailer and 'let's see how it goes'.
There doesn't appear to be an actual uniform protocol for the decision making, or to make the ref review.
So, in that penalty situation, that ref has been told, 'you've fucked up, that's a pen'. God knows what's then going through his head.
You've also then got a liner thinking, ' fuckin' 'ell, I hope these don't score from this corner'!

Just saying.

 

[Bigga]

In Russia v Egypt, 2 examples of new VAR rules had me confused.

1. Egypt pen.
The ref gives a free kick, outside the box.
All of the Egyptian players do the charades thing, demanding review, so all clutching at straws.
We, at home get to see that the initial grab is outside the box, Salah continues into the box, with big dive and multiple roll overs. (Shoulder appears to be healed, so there goes the 'unfit' bollocks).
Ref holds hand to ear, so instructions coming, then points to spot.
Salah, dusts himself down to score and change the dynamic of the game, Egypt now back in it.

With such an important decision, Why did that ref not go to the screen at the half way line to review his call and possibly explain his thought that the initial foul was outside the box?
He then could have called the penalty himself, and if that had happened, no problem, his decision.
I don't actually know if the first foul is the free kick position, but the way it happened, with some unknown making the decision, left it open to corrupt call.

So.. Let me address this point as sooo many people are confused about contact and penalties. Yes, the application of the law differs entirely. We don't have the consistency we should.

With that noted, it seems the law about contact is that a pen can be given if the contact persists going into the penalty box, regardless of 'initial contact'. A lot of contact stops marginally before the box, but anything on the line or over could/ should be regarded as a pen. But these things are 'subjective' for each ref!

As I missed the 'incident' regarding Salah, I couldn't give you a definitive opinion on it, myself.

 

[Bluearmy]

It was most definitely a penalty. How could anyone argue that Walker’s was a penalty whilst that was not?

As many of us have said for some time now: VAR itself is a great idea—the problem is in the implementation/enforcement (just like “reasonable” laws and regulations).

The current implementation, especially for this WC, is deeply flawed. It has lead to some good calls that would have otherwise been missed (or ignored), but the consistency between what is and is not reviewed is a huge issue. There is also still far too much discretion given to the referee and the VAR team. Numerous violations have been ignored, even when it seems VAR is reviewing them, and others have been explained away based on dubious reasoning.

I am actually firmly in the ‘VAR is good for the game’ camp, but with a very large caveat: the referee and the VAR team cannot have the freedom to pick and chose what is reviewed or relayed to the officiating team, and the entire officiating team should be mic’ed for transparency.

Even the commentators and pundits have become frustrated with the lack of consistency when handling incidents.

VAR has quite a long way to go, as testified by many of the matches in this WC, including tonight’s Russian Cinderella story.

agree with most of that....