Var debate 2019/20

Bellamy's Caddy said:
I must admit I was amazed when I found out that Mike Riley was in charge of this. He was inept, spineless referee. Like you say, it's hardly a surprise our officials are so poor if he's one of the men at the top!
Click to expand...
Exactly the qualities needed to carry out the wishes of those who employed him.
 
caseball said:
Why is everybody ignoring the most obvious evidence yet that something is rotten. Spurs' goal.

There's a clear handball by the scorer before he scores. All goals are, we're told, checked by the VAR. Goals given by the onfield ref have been disallowed by the VAR for handball this season. So, the principle has been established and the ref can be overruled on this. One goal was previously allowed to stand after an obvious handball by the scorer and Riley issued a statement confirming that the goal should not have been allowed to stand but the VAR did not see it. Yet the goal on Saturday was allowed to stand by the VAR.

Something stinks there and there's no getting away from it.
Click to expand...

They were so sure that would be disallowed that the big screens said "decision: no goal"
 
As much as Dermot is a complete cûnt, he does here from ref watch explain exactly why I think it was correct that the goal stood for the scum:


DERMOT SAYS: "What I need to explain is that this isn't a VAR decision, it's Martin Atkinson's decision. When it goes in the net, VAR asks whether it was offside, no, was there a handball, no, was there a foul in the build-up - and the referee is the closest person to it.

"He says no, there was a vote this morning with 50,000 people voting, about half said yes, half said no, so the VAR can't call it clear and obvious and go against the referee. I did think it was a foul, though.

"Martin waved it away, and once he does that it's out of the VAR's hands. It's such a subjective decision, such a controversial decision, someone says yes, someone says no, they can't go with it."
 
Rammy Blue said:
He says no, there was a vote this morning with 50,000 people voting, about half said yes, half said no
Click to expand...
So we're basing refereeing decisions on sky sports Twitter polls now? Good news for the dippers and rags, they love a Twitter poll.
 
cleavers said:
You seem to badly missing the point that both var decisions were correct, origi was "touched" then dived, like a diving c**t, the ref played on because he thought he was a diving c**t, var didn't over rule because it wasn't a clear and obvious mistake (ref and var decided he was probably a diving c**t - moral here don't be a diving c**t).

On the other, under current rules (which I don't necessarily agree with), mane handled it accidentally, but as a result "controlled" it, and then scored, and it was disallowed according to current ref guidance, just as we (and others) have had disallowed, so a bit of consistency for a change.
Click to expand...

Apart from the Dele Ali inconsistency ;-)
 
The refs not looking at the monitors is plain daft for a start, not over ruling some of the pens or not, is even dafter... The whole thing stinks and has been rendered completely useless by the way it's being used rather than the system itself... Fuck it off, go away and watch a few rugby games then come back with their system ......... TMO not VAR is the way forward ....
 
Psychedelic Casual said:
I’m not fussed about the pitch-side monitor issue.



VAR should be foolproof. But it’s being used foolishly at the moment.

We should also all be able to hear every discussion between the on-pitch officials and the VAR. They’re mic’d up; so use the mics for transparency of what’s being said and done.
Click to expand...


In a nutshell.

What are they so frightened of ? If the conversation between the two parties involved can be clearly heard before a conclusion is arrived at , fans can surely accept a " reasoned " explanation for the decision arrived at.

As it is , it smacks of arrogance, fear of being shown to be wrong / incompetent , or far worse ie fucking corrupt and fixing the outcomes of games.

As football supporters we deserve the process to be transparent .
 
Last edited:
Rammy Blue said:
But this is the problem, remember that ALL goals are checked by VAR. However, imo, the “foul” was an incident that shouldn’t have been under scrutiny as it was subjective - if Atkinson for example had not had a direct view of it then fair enough, but he had a clear view and therefore his decision should have stood and not been looked at.
Click to expand...

It wasn't subjective tho.... It was clear as day. Atkinson didn't have a great view (a United player half blocked him along with Origi, who was in front of where the referee viewed the incident from), so will let him off for missing it. But from behind its clear as day!! This is exactly what VAR should be used for... A clear error that VAR picked up. It worked perfectly apart from the VAR officials at Stockley Park being scared to undermine the referee by changing an incorrect decision... Same issue as KDB, Watford incident at Tottenham, Dele Alli, etc etc etc....
 
Last edited:
Rolee said:
Yep, the biggest failing is lack of pitchside monitors. I know it slows the game but it's far better than the current situation where the VAR ref is reluctant to undermine their colleague.
Click to expand...

There actually are pitch side monitors, but they are instructed not to use them and haven't to date.. Yes this is really the current situation!!
 
Rammy Blue said:
As much as Dermot is a complete cûnt, he does here from ref watch explain exactly why I think it was correct that the goal stood for the scum:


DERMOT SAYS: "What I need to explain is that this isn't a VAR decision, it's Martin Atkinson's decision. When it goes in the net, VAR asks whether it was offside, no, was there a handball, no, was there a foul in the build-up - and the referee is the closest person to it.

"He says no, there was a vote this morning with 50,000 people voting, about half said yes, half said no, so the VAR can't call it clear and obvious and go against the referee. I did think it was a foul, though.

"Martin waved it away, and once he does that it's out of the VAR's hands. It's such a subjective decision, such a controversial decision, someone says yes, someone says no, they can't go with it."
Click to expand...

This infuriates me... forget the vote, 50% of plastic Rag fans voted a goal. 50% of plastic Bin Dippers fans voted no goal. VAR should be used for when a ref misses an obvious decision, which this was. Under VAR's own rules, this should have fallen under the "was there a foul in the build up"?? Answer = 100% yes. So it should have been disallowed. I see you have omitted that after Dermot said this, he then said in his opinion it was a clear foul!! He's not objective, he's part of the problem!!
 
Refs 100% correct so far,according to PIGMAL,So good that less than a year ago not one was selected for the World Cup.I,ll drink what they are drinking.
 
Bluearmy said:
This infuriates me... forget the vote, 50% of plastic Rag fans voted a goal. 50% of plastic Bin Dippers fans voted no goal. VAR should be used for when a ref misses an obvious decision, which this was. Under VAR's own rules, this should have fallen under the "was there a foul in the build up"?? Answer = 100% yes. So it should have been disallowed. I see you have omitted that after Dermot said this, he then said in his opinion it was a clear foul!! He's not objective, he's part of the problem!!
Click to expand...
Rodders was fouled in the build up to a goal the other week,var is not there for that,the ref has to take some decisions
 
Bluearmy said:
It wasn't subjective tho.... It was clear as day. Atkinson didn't have a great view (a United player half blocked him along with Origi, who was in front of where the referee viewed the incident from), so will let him off for missing it. But from behind its clear as day!! This is exactly what VAR should be used for... A clear error that VAR picked up. It worked perfectly apart from the VAR officials at Stockley Park being scared to undermine the referee by changing an incorrect decision... Same issue as KDB, Watford incident at Tottenham, Dele Alli, etc etc etc....
Click to expand...
It should have given as a foul all day long but I don’t care because we have had loads of shithouse decisions . And two weeks ago he hey we’re cheering VAR when they got that penalty so ha ha ha
 
Bluearmy said:
This infuriates me... forget the vote, 50% of plastic Rag fans voted a goal. 50% of plastic Bin Dippers fans voted no goal. VAR should be used for when a ref misses an obvious decision, which this was. Under VAR's own rules, this should have fallen under the "was there a foul in the build up"?? Answer = 100% yes. So it should have been disallowed. I see you have omitted that after Dermot said this, he then said in his opinion it was a clear foul!! He's not objective, he's part of the problem!!
Click to expand...
What the fuck you on about? My post was a straight copy from the sky sports website you loon, and quite clearly has the bit where Dermot says he thought it was a foul.

Jeez.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top