VAR thread 2022/23

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ric
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
halfcenturyup said:
Didn't see the game, but were either of the off-side "goals" what you would call "clear and obvious" or were they mm or cm offside? Put it this way, if they had been allowed, would there have been outrage at the poor decision? Honest question. I don't know.

And I am not sure VAR not doing anything can be described as a good night for VAR. If the referee got the calls right, surely it was a good night for the referee?
Click to expand...

The VAR did do something. He advised the referee to disallow two goals that had been given as goals on the field.

The Nunez one was certainly close to the naked eye. But a pretty easy VAR decision.

bcca620024a3d05ca55fa305e714e997.jpg


The Brentford one was different, in that the guy was clearly yards offside. The issue was whether there had been a touch by Mee. The linesman didn’t see the touch and the guy would have been onside without it. Once the VAR had established Mee had got a feint but clear touch on the ball, it was the easiest decision ever.

68e675052dcf615db1ac5987e7769144.jpg



Also nobody in The Premier League is ever millimetres offside anymore. There’s a tolerance level. If you look at the image for the Nunez offside, although it’s not a very clear photo, you’ll see there’s is a red line for the forward and a blue line for the defender, with a bit of green between them. If those two lines overlap at all, even if the red line is further forward, then the tolerance rule is applied and he’s onside.
 
halfcenturyup said:
So let's have a look at the three seasons pre- and post-VAR.

Pre: 8, 3 and 7 penalties
Post: 5, 6 and 8 penalties

Actually one more post-VAR than pre-.

You are using this year to date, which as far as I can tell is 0 penalties, to try to justify a point when it is just an outlier due to other factors, probably due to the fact they are crap this year.

You don't need to do it. I think most reasonable people would agree that the availability of VAR has led to a reduction in play-acting and trying to con the ref, as we saw very clearly, I think, at the world cup.

But this whole discussion started because the feeling was that, if someone trod on Salah's foot when he was running in the box at Anfield, he would get a penalty. Let's see if that happens and, if it does, what the result is.
Click to expand...

Fairly balanced reply - cheers
 
Stephen230 said:
The VAR did do something. He advised the referee to disallow two goals that had been given as goals on the field.

The Nunez one was certainly close to the naked eye. But a pretty easy VAR decision.

bcca620024a3d05ca55fa305e714e997.jpg


The Brentford one was different, in that the guy was clearly yards offside. The issue was whether there had been a touch by Mee. The linesman didn’t see the touch and the guy would have been onside without it. Once the VAR had established Mee had got a feint but clear touch on the ball, it was the easiest decision ever.

Also nobody in The Premier League is ever millimetres offside anymore. There’s a tolerance level. If you look at the image for the Nunez offside, although it’s not a very clear photo, you’ll see there’s is a red line for the forward and a blue line for the defender, with a bit of green between them. If those two lines overlap at all, even if the red line is further forward, then the tolerance rule is applied and he’s onside.
Click to expand...

Was always going to improve given time - some wouldn’t allow any time for it too

It’s refreshing this season so many correct onsides/offsides are being given
 
BlueHammer85 said:
Fairly balanced reply - cheers
Click to expand...

Well I don't want you thinking I am against VAR. It is here to stay. I just don't think it is implemented very well in that it's implemented from a referee's perspective by referees. Not from a player's or a spectator's perspective. Which is a fundamental mistake imo.
 
Last edited:
Stephen230 said:
The VAR did do something. He advised the referee to disallow two goals that had been given as goals on the field.

The Nunez one was certainly close to the naked eye. But a pretty easy VAR decision.

bcca620024a3d05ca55fa305e714e997.jpg


The Brentford one was different, in that the guy was clearly yards offside. The issue was whether there had been a touch by Mee. The linesman didn’t see the touch and the guy would have been onside without it. Once the VAR had established Mee had got a feint but clear touch on the ball, it was the easiest decision ever.

68e675052dcf615db1ac5987e7769144.jpg



Also nobody in The Premier League is ever millimetres offside anymore. There’s a tolerance level. If you look at the image for the Nunez offside, although it’s not a very clear photo, you’ll see there’s is a red line for the forward and a blue line for the defender, with a bit of green between them. If those two lines overlap at all, even if the red line is further forward, then the tolerance rule is applied and he’s onside.
Click to expand...

Thanks for that and yes, sorry, I wasn't very clear. I was trying to distinguish between the two off-side "goals" and the two allowed goals. Not incorrectly over-ruling goals that were correctly awarded doesn't seem much of a success to me.

On the two off-sides, the point was made that the Nunez goal would have been allowed without VAR. I was trying to see if there would have been much of a problem if, without VAR, it had been allowed. It is so close, I suppose the answer, from a spectator perspective, would have been no. Unless you were a Brentford fan, of course.

The other, I must confess, I didn't follow. I will go have a look. But if it comes down to a faint touch and the effect that had on the player in the advanced position, then I doubt anyone in the stadium, including the players, followed that thought process in real time. Anyway, I will find some video so I can follow it myself.

Thanks again for the info.
 
Hart of the Matter said:
Perhaps without VAR the officials would take more responsibility in getting the decisions right in the first place....
Click to expand...

It was an extremely tight call , humans can’t be expected to get those type of decisions correct and doubt very few would have flagged. Luckily we’ve got VAR and they can chalk off Liverpool goals that would have otherwise stood
 
BlueHammer85 said:
It was an extremely tight call , humans can’t be expected to get those type of decisions correct and doubt very few would have flagged. Luckily we’ve got VAR and they can chalk off Liverpool goals that would have otherwise stood
Click to expand...

You aren't appealing to our partisan nature, are you? Cheap shot :)

But really, I have a hard time celebrating decisions that can't be seen with the naked eye, no matter who scores them. To me, as a spectator, it isn't what the game is about.

I would even accept the Mahrez non-penalty if the authorities didn't go to such contrived lengths to get some decisions 100% accurate. That's the consistency problem I have.
 
halfcenturyup said:
FWIW, I thought Mahrez over-dramatised the fall as well. Twisted and shouted, not helped by the fact that he was up a second later chasing the ball. Not sure the referee could have been expected to see the actual contact but refer post 983 in the post-match thread for clear video of his boot distorting on impact. Difficult not to lose balance in those circumstances.

But, that notwithstanding, I cannot understand, for the love of God, the difference between VAR determining a factual offside and referring to the referee for subjective elements (interfering, deliberate play etc..) and VAR determining an actual contact and referring to the referee for subjective elements (seriousness, effect on player).

You will tell me that's not the protocol. But I would ask then, why not?

We are probably going round in circles here. It just boils down to the fact that, imo, VAR isn't implemented very well.
Click to expand...

I’ve still not seen Saturday’s incident. That link on the other thread didn’t work. But coincidentally an example of what the Premier League showed as a no penalty, also involved Mahrez and is apparently quite similar.



 
Stephen230 said:
I’ve still not seen Saturday’s incident. That link on the other thread didn’t work. But coincidentally an example of what the Premier League showed as a no penalty, also involved Mahrez and is apparently quite similar.



Click to expand...


I read Dale Johnson's articles on VAR decisions, and quite like them, but I do so to get the referee's angle. IMO he tries too hard to support the decisions (I suppose he has to to get input from PGMOL) but often without critically assessing the protocol that got to the decision. Just because a decision follows some protocol or other doesn't mean it's the right decision in the spirit of the game. IMHO of course.

With respect to Mahrez, there are two key differences between the two incidents. First, the ball may have been heading out of play in the original incident in Johnson's tweet. It may or it may not have been, but there is at least some doubt. Second, in attempting to charge the defender in the tackle, Mahrez puts his foot in an unnatural running position. I can accept it is likely this caused the defender's foot to come down on his foot. So I don't have a problem with it not being a penalty. It would be given as a foul anywhere else on the pitch, but I can accept that penalties require more scrutiny.

Neither of these were the case against Everton. The ball was clearly in play and he followed a normal running movement. The defender chose to attempt a tackle and mistimed it. Penalty.

Forget the exaggeration. I don't see how that can be a determinant in the decision of whether it's a foul or not. If that is protocol, then it's a stupid protocol. The referee thinks the fall is exaggerated to gain an advantage? Then book the attacker after giving the penalty. That would soon stop exaggerated falls the same way petulantly kicking the ball away stopped after yellow cards were dished out. In fact, if players thought fouls in the box were properly punished, especially after a player tries to stay on his feet, there would be no need for exaggerated falls.

Sorry for the long reply again. Just trying to get my points across clearly.
 
Clear foul on Bowen tonight in the area. The ref wouldn’t have given it as he pointed to a goal kick.
Thankfully we had VAR
 
Last edited:
halfcenturyup said:
Ah yes, the once-a-matchday reminder that VAR got something right :)
Click to expand...

It's more than right though isn't it - the most nailed on penalty ever and the ref would of gave a goal kick! had we not equalized just before the break i doubt we would have got anything last night
 
BlueHammer85 said:
It's more than right though isn't it - the most nailed on penalty ever and the ref would of gave a goal kick! had we not equalized just before the break i doubt we would have got anything last night
Click to expand...

Fair enough. I didn't see it so I can't comment. Arsene Wenger lives!
 
BlueHammer85 said:
Clear foul on Bowen tonight in the area. The ref wouldn’t have given it as he pointed to a goal kick.
Thankfully we had VAR
Click to expand...
One of the clearest penalties you'll ever see and the ref was looking right at it. Couldn't believe he didn't give it immediately. Only reason I can think he didn't was the way Bowen "fell".
 
JRockBlues said:
One of the clearest penalties you'll ever see and the ref was looking right at it. Couldn't believe he didn't give it immediately. Only reason I can think he didn't was the way Bowen "fell".
Click to expand...

Looked like he stood on his foot to me. Borderline. VAR should never have over-ruled it.
 
BlueHammer85 said:
Clear foul on Bowen tonight in the area. The ref wouldn’t have given it as he pointed to a goal kick.
Thankfully we had VAR
Click to expand...
I’m coming round to the realisation that it’s not so much VAR that’s the problem but the abysmal and shameful level of refereeing in this country, both on the field and in the VAR hut, plus the technology isn’t ready to make it accurate enough. Why are we not using the chip thing in the ball for offside like they did in the World Cup? At least you knew after a few seconds if it was likely to be offside or not. How on Earth Coote didn’t give that last night it’s astonishing. Him and Madley just ruin the game. They’re not corrupt or anything - just a poor Sunday league standard
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top