VAR thread 2022/23

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ric
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Alan Harper's Tash said:
You are now using the words that commentators use. If they replaced told to go to the screen to advised to take another look to see the other camera angles of the incident.

As I suggested before, if more decisions were sent to the monitor and the ref had the final say, I think most people would be happier.
Click to expand...
Sure. Let's interrupt the flow of the game even more to compensate for the poor standards of refereeing.

Or... how about maybe... I don't know... IMPROVE THE STANDARDS OF REFEREEING???
 
Trevor Morley's Tache said:
Sure. Let's interrupt the flow of the game even more to compensate for the poor standards of refereeing.

Or... how about maybe... I don't know... IMPROVE THE STANDARDS OF REFEREEING???
Click to expand...
To how you want it? Is that why it’s annoying you?

Pretty much everybody barring a few city fans were happy with the outcome of the decision as it made the correct decision in most peoples’ eyes.

What we are trying to debate is why it was deemed clear and obvious.

I would surmise that the take away from this would be that the referee was too hasty with the red card and that a yellow should have been shown, rather than how clear clear is.
 
Part of me thinks if the ref gave a yellow instead of a red to Tripper and then was called to look at it again on VAR it would of been changed to red.

I think VAR intervening yesterday made the ref second guess himself cause to me that challenge on KDB was dangerous.

Plus I am not a fan of this notion of "Well it didn't cause an injury therefore it's alright" is that what it takes for it to be red. I guess it's alright to challenge knee high cause the tackler didn't cause serious injury do me a favour.
 
Last edited:
It's a subjective issue. A decision made in a split second. My immediate thought was that it wasn't a red. The referee's immediate thought was that it was a red.
Ask 10 VAR referees and a thousand fans and you'll get split opinions. The assessment of any challenge is subjective.

Decisions should be left with the match referee and their assistants. If they're not in charge of the game, they may as well not be there.

Personally, I think VAR is a farce that has ruined the game, introduced purely to give TV pundits something usually remarkably unnewsworthy to talk about.

Today's newspaper, tomorrow's chip paper. Leave it in the past and move on.
 
half & half derby scarf said:
City players seemed to be suggesting that Almiron's goal was handball but VAR just checked the offside and nothing else. Haven't seen a still frame or slo mo to determine what part of his body it hit. Strange that those types of VAR decisions get studied in detail for other teams (in red).
Click to expand...

VAR are constantly checking everything. Of course they checked for handball. They like everyone else watching on TV would have seen it clearly wasn’t handball after one quick replay.
 
My opinion on yesterday was a penalty for Newcastle, what was Stones thinking of. To me the Trippier tackle was a red but as some have said a tackle is always subjective. However, why does VAR now show the ref still images of the incident??? How does this improve VAR
 
If those operating VAR were to do the job correctly Wilfred Zaha would be sent off every game. Just watching the highlights on MotD he spent more time on the ground than the grass did. Every bloody time someone tackled him down he went, no attempt to remain upright and continue play. Mirror image of the Ladyboy and that other diving non-entity at the rags.
 
richardtheref said:
My opinion on yesterday was a penalty for Newcastle, what was Stones thinking of. To me the Trippier tackle was a red but as some have said a tackle is always subjective. However, why does VAR now show the ref still images of the incident??? How does this improve VAR
Click to expand...
Richard, because of what you are, a qualified ref, I value your opinion but if you are confused heaven help us.
If var choose which image to show the ref it is open to manipulation.
 
richardtheref said:
My opinion on yesterday was a penalty for Newcastle, what was Stones thinking of. To me the Trippier tackle was a red but as some have said a tackle is always subjective. However, why does VAR now show the ref still images of the incident??? How does this improve VAR
Click to expand...
have you ever played actual football?
 
I don't understand it. He jumps off the ground, studs are up near Kevs knee. How is it not a red?

If that is Rodri on Saint-Maximin hes off and we all know it.
 
I don't see any path for VAR to improve, unless;

  • They do away with any TV influence, including having 2-way comm's with the TV operators/broadcast studio.
  • They make all communications relating to VAR decisions public during the game and available for teams to review post match.
  • They appoint an INDEPENDENT body to oversee and audit their processes.
The fact they are reluctant to do any of this is ringing alarm bells for me.

And just a point on the 'clear & obvious discussion above. This is from the PL's own website:

"What qualifies as a “clear and obvious error”? ​

In testing, there was no unanimity. Different VARs came up with different outcomes.

But the VAR should not be asking, "Do I think it's right or wrong?" The question is, "Is what the match officials have done a clear and obvious error?"

There is a very high bar for that intervention".

'Very high bar'?

REALLY???
 
Need to get rid of the whole clear and obvious bullshit. Adds extra subjectivity to decisions when I thought the whole point of VAR was to reduce subjectivity
 
richardtheref said:
My opinion on yesterday was a penalty for Newcastle, what was Stones thinking of. To me the Trippier tackle was a red but as some have said a tackle is always subjective. However, why does VAR now show the ref still images of the incident??? How does this improve VAR
Click to expand...

My understanding is ( and it’s a while since I read it, so I’m open to being corrected ) that unless they are trying to establish if there was actual contact or not, which clearly wasn’t the case here, that the review should only be watched at real time and not slow motion, never mind stills.
 
Trevor Morley's Tache said:
I don't see any path for VAR to improve, unless;

  • They do away with any TV influence, including having 2-way comm's with the TV operators/broadcast studio.
  • They make all communications relating to VAR decisions public during the game and available for teams to review post match.
  • They appoint an INDEPENDENT body to oversee and audit their processes.
The fact they are reluctant to do any of this is ringing alarm bells for me.

And just a point on the 'clear & obvious discussion above. This is from the PL's own website:

"What qualifies as a “clear and obvious error”? ​

In testing, there was no unanimity. Different VARs came up with different outcomes.

But the VAR should not be asking, "Do I think it's right or wrong?" The question is, "Is what the match officials have done a clear and obvious error?"

There is a very high bar for that intervention".

'Very high bar'?

REALLY???
Click to expand...
Exactly. This was the point I was making earlier - no way could the VAR officials have come to the 'clear and obvious error' conclusion if they had adhered to their own rules. The fact that they ignored their own rules means their integrity is, rightly, called into question.
 
Eds said:
And to remind all the doubters about what is a red card offence:

SERIOUS FOUL PLAY

A tackle or challenge that endangers the safety of an opponent or uses excessive force or brutality must be sanctioned as serious foul play.
Any player who lunges at an opponent in challenging for the ball from the front, from the side or from behind using one or both legs, with excessive force or endangers the safety of an opponent is guilty of serious foul play.

I would say that Trippier lunged at KDB, both feet were off the ground and being out of control was endangering the safety of the player. The challenge doesn't have to have excessive force.
Click to expand...
To be fair though - the above is a bit bias, I think you will find if you read the bit in the rules below that you conveniently missed out you will spot the problem.
The actual FULL rule is as follows : -

A tackle or challenge that endangers the safety of an opponent or uses excessive force or brutality must be sanctioned as serious foul play.
Any player who lunges at an opponent in challenging for the ball from the front, from the side or from behind using one or both legs, with excessive force or endangers the safety of an opponent is guilty of serious foul play.
Note - in the situation where a dominant team the Premier League do not want to win as it affects the brand are in danger of already running away with the League early on, at the expense of media darlings, the VAR official has a right to overrule anything he or she fancies
 
That wasn't a red yesterday. The still image makes it look really bad and if you were using just that it would be a red but in reality it was just a cynical challenge to stop a break.
If a red wasn't given at first, I doubt many would have been saying it should have been a red.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top