Trevor Morley's Tache
Well-Known Member
So this is where VAR can and will be use corruptly.the differnce is that ALL goals will be reviewed according to VAR rules/implementation to check whether they should stand. Whether you like it or not the ball came off laportes hand and by thr new rules that is hand ball and the goal was correctly ruled offside.......the rule its self you can question but as the rule stands it was the correct decision.
fouls - they will only look at it and then over rule if they think the ref has made a major mistake...no matter what you or i think (Ithat the ref made a mistake) the VAR officials didnt think he did....the ref indcated that he hadnt got word from VAR that it was a penalty
what people are failing to grasp is that VAR works at different levels depending on what the situation is:
1. ALL goals will be reviewed - no matter what
2. VAR will judge on offisdes (because it can see what the naked eye cannt in real life and its a black or white decision).
3 .Fouls/potential fouls are for the ref and will only be over turned if the VAR officials believ the ref has either not seen it or has made a huge mistake - now this is where there is a human error/grey area....different people will see different incidents in different ways......most people thought it was a foul by Lamela on Rodri (including me) - however the ref didnt think it was and the VAR officials agreed with it - do I agree with the decision, NO I dont, but thats irrelevant.
Neville said what actually needs to happen here:
"If I was the referees back in Stockley Park, I'd be happy with the fact they've got the disallowed goal right but the first one [Erik Lamela on Rodri for a penalty in the first half], I think the officials at Stockley Park have to be stronger. I know that they've said it has to be clear and obvious to overrule the on-field referee, but for me that is clear and obvious.
"They've got to have the nerve and the courage to say, no, that is a penalty. We've not quite seen that yet. It's something I felt that day I went to Stockley Park with Jamie Carragher to get an understanding of what VAR was going to be. I felt that they weren't keen on overruling the referee on the pitch, which is right, but they have to overrule decisions like that.
However in this case the ref on the pitch and the VAR ref clearly agreed....the issue is what is deemed a foul and what isnt and that is always, alwyas open for debate
Offside as you say, is not black and white. If the view of the pass is obscured, then the VAR officials are making a judgement call as to whether or not the attacker was offside or not at the very point the pass was made. Given the speed some players run at we are not talking millimetres of error, more like meters. So there is one instance conscious/unconscious bias can be an effect in the outcome of a decision.
In the instance of the third goal that never was, it was the defenders actions (drag back) which caused Laport's arm to be in the position where he made contact with the ball. The ball also hit the defenders arm practically simultaneously, but apparently that's ok even though his action of pulling back Laport's arm was not accidental. At the least it should have been a foul against Spurs. Even with my blue tinted spec's off, I can see that kind of decision going the other way for another team this season in the PL.
VAR should take away any doubt, but unfortunately it adds ANOTHER LAYER OF (UNACCOUNTABLE) SUBJECTIVITY TO THE APPLICATION OF THE LAWS OF THE GAME.