VAR Discussion Thread | 2024/25

[TheBeautifulGame]

And let's not forget diving could have been stamped out with retrospective punishment without the need for in-match VAR.

^^Great point about retrospective punishment. The obsession over dives in football is maddening, because genuine dive actors are an exceedingly rare thing. What annoys me is when a player may embellish a situation and fall to the ground more easily than maybe he otherwise would have if he wasn't trying to convince a ref that he was fouled, and you have fans trying to act like he "dove" as if he's just completely pretending that he was fouled. Generally players don't go down unless there's something that caused him to go down. There's exceptions of course, but those exceptions have always been very rare. And there's an art to embellishing fouls a tad without overdoing it. And slight to moderate embellishing doesn't mean it's not a foul.

But you're right, post-match suspensions and/or fines for those who are shown to have pretended to fall when there genuinely wasn't contact or only very slight would serve the sport well. That would not include falling due to stepping on someone foot. If someone was suspended or fined post-match, it would affect their reputation moving forward and referees would be on the lookout for more faking from a player who was caught going down on his own volition and punished post-match. But that's a far cry from what happened to Mbappe there, who is being accused of diving as a means to make it seem like VAR corrected a wrong decision, when in reality it wasn't a dive and a penalty would have been very acceptable in the situation. Maybe a bit harsh you could say but certainly not without reason. To not call penalty is also acceptable for a variety of reasons, one, having his foot stepped on is inadvertent contact, enough to bring Mbappe down but on its own not a foul, then there's the subjectivity of whether or not the holding would have prevented Mbappe from getting to the ball, which apparently was the critical pice of the puzzle that went into the decision. But even that's a slippery slope because there's been plenty of stonewall penalties in which the ball was *borderline* out of reach, and the ball being *possibly* out of reach doesn't stop it from being a penalty, if there was severe contact. It seems that whether or not the ball is subjectively determined (guesswork) to be out of reach is only considered when the contact (possibly foul) is only very minor or slight. The criteria that goes into such a decision is quick fickle and random it seems.

 

[TheBeautifulGame]

And just to put the cherry on top of this situation, there was also the matter of Rodrigo being in an offsides position when the ball was coming through off the header. Subjectively, he could be determined to have interfered with the play while in an offsides position, as he seemed to back into Mbappe as Mbappe was stepping on Rice's foot, Rodrigo's back heel *may* also have swiped Mbappe's leg which may have contributed to the fall, it's sort of hard to see clearly from the angles. What is seen clearly is that he stepped on Rice's foot. But what makes this tricky is that it would have been Rodrigo who would have interfered with his own teammate's attempt to the play the ball, but he technically still could be said to have "interfered" from an offsides position which would have been grounds to rule it offside instead of a penalty if they otherwise concluded that it was enough to warrant a penalty.

So all these various aspects were being looked at which contributed to the long review. In the end, they decided to not call a penalty or offsides, because they were simply too unsure with all the various subjective and open to interpretation aspects of the situation that were going on at once and couldn't come to a firm decision. But this only reinforces the fact that VAR isn't equipped to make these kinds of decisions, and in the end, no matter what decision was reached, it largely would have seen as controversial and a source of outrage.

 

[Blue Mist]

Why do we allow the wum on here ?
Yes he's on ignore but I come in the thread to see 2 pages of posters replying to his shite.

I've skipped them so may have missed sensible posts by BLUES.

 

[TheBeautifulGame]

What's so frustrating about VAR is how we have a situation like the Mbappe pen / no pen, where the situation produces so much noise and outrage, with much of the internet and fans in general split on whether they think it was a penalty or not. And as I pointed out, the situation really could be interpreted "reasonably" as either a penalty or a non-penalty. You could argue Rice held him back from possibly getting to the ball, and his position right behind him caused Mbappe to fall down due to having his foot right under his. You could also argue that even if that was grounds for a foul, that the offside interference by Rodrigo would have negated that and it could have been ruled offside. But had they ruled it that way, then the "decision" creates more controversy than just concluding that it wasn't enough to be a penalty.

But what I'm getting at is that we have all this controversy over something that was always going to be controversial, with VAR or without VAR. And we're forgetting how many times VAR has interfered and forced a ref to second-guess his on-field decision. For example, West Ham vs Man U back in November. And I'm sorry but we need to be objective about what happened there. That was not a penalty, the ref correctly ruled on the pitch that it wasn't a penalty, play on, but VAR disagreed, they saw contact and alerted the referee and told him to go to the monitor to review. He then decided that it was a penalty, and West Ham won 2-1 as a result of that decision. After the match Howard Webb came out and said that the VAR was wrong to overrule the ref and convince the ref that a penalty should have been given.

Anotherwords, the referee's instinctive on-field decision was the correct one, and it was VAR's interference which turned a correct decision of a no penalty into the wrong decision of a penalty, creating controversy where there should have been none.

And what bothers me is that every time that we get something like this Mbappe situation, we have pro-VAR fans trying to spin what happened into acting like they corrected a wrong decision, when it's very clearly an exercise of problem-creation-solutionism in a situation that would always be open to interpretation and probably would be controversial no matter what decision was reached. So anotherwords, a 50/50 situation or close to that. But we forget about situations like earlier in the season with that West Ham Man U match that VAR convinced the ref to reverse what was clearly the right call on the pitch, and VAR made it wrong. Which was much worse and much more controverisal than if the ref or VAR gave a penalty for Rice's holding Mbappe there, or not.

So we can't claim progress on VAR coming to a decision on what was essentially a 50/50 situation or close to it like the Mbappe pen / no pen as if all that analysis and delay was needed and justified, while forgetting about how many times VAR has wrongly interfered on less subjective situations and ended up convincing the ref that he made a wrong decision when he in fact didn't, and VAR's involvement resulted in a more clearly wrong decision being made as a result of a review that should never have been reviewed to begin with.

 

[Gazza]

Did you see it ? Rice had his arms around him but nowhere near enough Mbappe to dive to the ground.
Before VAR it’s a penalty to Madrid, no questions asked and everyone seemingly would be alll fine about it.

Is having your arms around a player part of the laws of the game now?

 

[BlueHammer85]

Is having your arms around a player part of the laws of the game now?

so basically had the penalty been awarded everyone would slate VAR for not over turning it, now it was awarded it was a clear foul from Rice and should have been awarded a penalty.

 

[TheBeautifulGame]

so basically had the penalty been awarded everyone would slate VAR for not over turning it, now it was awarded it was a clear foul from Rice and should have been awarded a penalty.

Now you're getting it. It was essentially a damned if you do damned if you don't situation. It could be argued either way.

I would appreciate if you would at least concede your claims that it was a dive and admit that, no, it wasn't a dive. Mbappe stepping on Rice's foot, which was likely a consequence of being held, and possibly also Mbappe being contacted by Rodrigo's back heel, is what brought Mbappe down. Maybe he embellished it a little, but that doesn't make it a "dive". That doesn't stop it from being a foul, and arguably a penalty.

But the point is Hammer, you're trying to spin this as VAR coming to the rescue and reversing a clearly wrong decision on the pitch as if VAR was needed here. That's simply not the case. It wasn't clearly a penalty or clearly not a penalty. It could be argued either way, but VAR is only supposed to intervene on "clear and obvious mistakes" or a "serious missed incident".

Nothing was "seriously" missed if it was ruled a penalty on the pitch, and it definitely wasn't a "clear and obvious mistake". So why did VAR get involved Hammer? By their own language, they shouldn't have got involved. They constantly go against their own standards and guidelines then at the same time want credit for correcting a wrong decision. In reality there is no right or wrong here, it was entirely subjective and open to interpretation.

VAR getting involved made this more controversial than it had to be. And another thing, and this is important. There's no way to know if the ref would have ruled that a penalty on the pitch had he not had VAR as backup. In the Championship, maybe he isn't sure and knowing that his decision would be final, he doesn't rule it a penalty. With VAR as a backup, he's become more confident to give it as a penalty knowing that if he's wrong, it can be reversed on review. That's the conundrum we have here.

 

[Gazza]

It's not often a penalty is given if a player is fouled and doesn't go down (VAR wouldn't be interested), a clip from a defender could make the forward lose control of the ball, but if the forward stays on his feet - then no pen, so you can't really blame players for exaggerating any contact by going down.

 

[BlueHammer85]

Now you're getting it. It was essentially a damned if you do damned if you don't situation. It could be argued either way.

I would appreciate if you would at least concede your claims that it was a dive and admit that, no, it wasn't a dive. Mbappe stepping on Rice's foot, which was likely a consequence of being held, and possibly also Mbappe being contacted by Rodrigo's back heel, is what brought Mbappe down. Maybe he embellished it a little, but that doesn't make it a "dive". That doesn't stop it from being a foul, and arguably a penalty.

But the point is Hammer, you're trying to spin this as VAR coming to the rescue and reversing a clearly wrong decision on the pitch as if VAR was needed here. That's simply not the case. It wasn't clearly a penalty or clearly not a penalty. It could be argued either way, but VAR is only supposed to intervene on "clear and obvious mistakes" or a "serious missed incident".

Nothing was "seriously" missed if it was ruled a penalty on the pitch, and it definitely wasn't a "clear and obvious mistake". So why did VAR get involved Hammer? By their own language, they shouldn't have got involved. They constantly go against their own standards and guidelines then at the same time want credit for correcting a wrong decision. In reality there is no right or wrong here, it was entirely subjective and open to interpretation.

VAR getting involved made this more controversial than it had to be. And another thing, and this is important. There's no way to know if the ref would have ruled that a penalty on the pitch had he not had VAR as backup. In the Championship, maybe he isn't sure and knowing that his decision would be final, he doesn't rule it a penalty. With VAR as a backup, he's become more confident to give it as a penalty knowing that if he's wrong, it can be reversed on review. That's the conundrum we have here.

'Maybe he embellished it a little' is a understatement, there wasn't enough contact to go down like that, otherwise players may aswell throw themselves to the floor at every contact if you're getting rewarded with a penalty - the Ref (IMO) wrongly awarded the penalty, VAR was there to tell the ref to have a second look on monitor - it is still the Refs decision upon viewing the monitor to award the penalty - that seems to be forgotten here.

'no way to know if the ref would have ruled that a penalty on the pitch had he not had VAR as backup' - we can go on past experiences, a player like Mbappe, throwing himself to ground, in front of a hostile crowd - Refs have a history of awarding these sort of penalties on a regular basis, i'm glad we have VAR to reduce this happening.

My opinion by the way, i argue in good faith which seems to rub angry Mist back up.

 

[thegoatsthegoat]

No , what would have ruined the game is cheating bastard Mbappe being awarded a penalty for a ridiculous dive - thanks to VAR this was overturned. Could have completely changed the complexity of the match.

Scrap VAR and those sort of farcical dives get rewarded with a penalty.

Did you create VAR? I have never known someone stick up for it so passionately and never ever have a bad word to say about it. Ignore the subjectivity of last night, it took an age to come to a decision which has opinions split. If something takes that long it is not clear and obvious is it. It has probably been said but the main problem is the implementation of VAR and the idiots running it. If you are happy watching that, waiting 5 plus minutes a decision then I am sure you are loving football at the minute. The problem is we are what 5 years or so into VAR and it is no further forward.

 

[TheBeautifulGame]

'Maybe he embellished it a little' is a understatement, there wasn't enough contact to go down like that, otherwise players may aswell throw themselves to the floor at every contact if you're getting rewarded with a penalty - the Ref (IMO) wrongly awarded the penalty, VAR was there to tell the ref to have a second look on monitor - it is still the Refs decision upon viewing the monitor to award the penalty - that seems to be forgotten here.

'no way to know if the ref would have ruled that a penalty on the pitch had he not had VAR as backup' - we can go on past experiences, a player like Mbappe, throwing himself to ground, in front of a hostile crowd - Refs have a history of awarding these sort of penalties on a regular basis, i'm glad we have VAR to reduce this happening.

My opinion by the way, i argue in good faith which seems to rub angry Mist back up.

'Maybe he embellished it a little' is far closer to reality than your "it was a ridiculous / farcical dive"!!

It LITERALLY wasn't a dive. You're accusing Mbappe of diving when he quite clearly stepped on Rice's foot, who just happened to be bear hugging him!!

What happens Hammer when you step on someone's foot and try to plant, do you stay up or do you go down? You know the answer. He didn't dive, he stepped on Rice's foot, may have also been contacted by Rodrigo's back heel as well. There's no way you can call that a dive.

I do understand your point about VAR being there to catch a ref giving a penalty for a player like Mbappe going down and due to his star power giving Mbappe the benefit of the doubt in real-time and awarding a penatly. But you're exaggerating here suggesting that he or other players routinely throw themselves to the ground. That's histrionics.

I get your argument that having VAR as a backup to catch such errors is a good thing. But this was not one of those situations. Mbappe didn't throw himself to the ground. He was held by Rice, stepped on his foot and was prevented from playing the ball. That's arguably a penalty, and if you don't think it is, that's fine, but it's definitely not a "dive" and he definitely wasn't throwing himself to the ground!

 

[BlueHammer85]

Did you create VAR? I have never known someone stick up for it so passionately and never ever have a bad word to say about it.

I'll be happy to go back and quote you all the times i've criticized VAR and the negatives it brings - i can do this if you acknowledge that and say fair enough.

 

[thegoatsthegoat]

I'll be happy to go back and quote you all the times i've criticized VAR and the negatives it brings - i can do this if you acknowledge that and say fair enough.

Don't worry if you have, I will take your word for it. The majority I have seen is you defending it blindly like last night. Because you believe it wasn't a pen. Something that subjective and taking 5 minutes should not be overturned. Football is much worse off having VAR.

 

[BlueHammer85]

Don't worry if you have, I will take your word for it. The majority I have seen is you defending it blindly like last night. Because you believe it wasn't a pen. Something that subjective and taking 5 minutes should not be overturned. Football is much worse off having VAR.

That long a delay is not good at all, i can understand the magnitude of the importance of getting it correct espeically if other factors like offside is involved - wouldn't want to be in that TV room! However, they are rare that long and it was the right call for the ref to have a second look on the monitor - ultimately the Ref still made the choice, he rightly imo acknowledged it wasn't a penalty and the correct outcome ensured - Had a ref just lazily pointed to the spot like previous years and Madrid get a goal back, Rice on a yellow then the whole game turns on its head. which is unfair. * I wanted Arsenal to lose by the way.

 

[thegoatsthegoat]

That long a delay is not good at all, i can understand the magnitude of the importance of getting it correct espeically if other factors like offside is involved - wouldn't want to be in that TV room! However, they are rare that long and it was the right call for the ref to have a second look on the monitor - ultimately the Ref still made the choice, he rightly imo acknowledged it wasn't a penalty and the correct outcome ensured - Had a ref just lazily pointed to the spot like previous years and Madrid get a goal back, Rice on a yellow then the whole game turns on its head. which is unfair. * I wanted Arsenal to lose by the way.

In your opinion. Others feel it was a pen. Which is the point, if it was that clear where has the 5 minutes come from? The game is slowly dying and I am staggered people accept it. That wasn't rare, it's quite often a long check and most of the times over something very very clear. Of course we want the right decisions, trying to get perfection is killing our game as a spectacle and I guarantee that more people would accept bad decisions if VAR was scrapped than have to live through this.

 

[BlueHammer85]

In your opinion. Others feel it was a pen. Which is the point, if it was that clear where has the 5 minutes come from? The game is slowly dying and I am staggered people accept it. That wasn't rare, it's quite often a long check and most of the times over something very very clear. Of course we want the right decisions, trying to get perfection is killing our game as a spectacle and I guarantee that more people would accept bad decisions if VAR was scrapped than have to live through this.

'In your opinion. Others feel it was a pen' - Either way it was still the Refs decision, he got the chance to take a much better look from different angles - this is what i want to happen when there's a penalty decision of this magnitude. i don't want to go back to the days of seeing star players get awarded penalties at every tumble in the box.

'if it was that clear where has the 5 minutes come from' - already mentioned that delay is to long and unacceptable, it is also quite rare - they were looking at other factors like offside etc also.

'The game is slowly dying' - this has been quoted since around the late 70's and more so when PL come into play - the game evolves, it has too - VAR was bought in because of the speed of the game, the amount of cheating and the costly constant mistakes the officials were getting wrong, For me it had to be bought in eventually, its far from perfect, there's alot i dislike but it's still the right way to go (i stress again IMO) If a ref is unsure or has missed a big call then he gets a chance for a second look, thats all i argue for.

 

[thegoatsthegoat]

'In your opinion. Others feel it was a pen' - Either way it was still the Refs decision, he got the chance to take a much better look from different angles - this is what i want to happen when there's a penalty decision of this magnitude. i don't want to go back to the days of seeing star players get awarded penalties at every tumble in the box.

'if it was that clear where has the 5 minutes come from' - already mentioned that delay is to long and unacceptable, it is also quite rare - they were looking at other factors like offside etc also.

'The game is slowly dying' - this has been quoted since around the late 70's and more so when PL come into play - the game evolves, it has too - VAR was bought in because of the speed of the game, the amount of cheating and the costly constant mistakes the officials were getting wrong, For me it had to be bought in eventually, its far from perfect, there's alot i dislike but it's still the right way to go (i stress again IMO) If a ref is unsure or has missed a big call then he gets a chance for a second look, thats all i argue for.

So you want a game delayed for 5 minutes? You are saying you don't care the disruption to the game, how long it takes, as long as in your opinion the end result is right - which it isn't always right after all that process. You can think that way, that way of thinking is killing the game and you are in a very small minority. It's shite mate and I am staggered a proper fan thinks this way

 

[TheBeautifulGame]

That long a delay is not good at all,

The long delay was very clearly due to the subjectivity of it, the possible offside interference, the determination of could he have gotten to the ball, etc. Nothing clear or obvious about it. By their own rules and standards they should never have gotten involved.

i can understand the magnitude of the importance of getting it correct especially if other factors like offside is involved

The importance of getting a specific decision correct is merely a product of what the VAR chooses to review, as if they are the ones who decide which decisions are more important than others, which is disrespectful to the match as a whole and all the other decisions that go on. Why is it so important for them to painstakingly review a subjective 50/50 decision that would be acceptable (and controversial) either way all the while countless other decisions throughout the match, often more deserving of their attention, go unchecked and unreviewed?

wouldn't want to be in that TV room!

Me either!! No one should be forced into that room, no one should be in such a nauseating room where they are tasked with deciding the outcome of a matches based on unknown or fickle reasoning.

However, they are rare that long

Bollocks.

it was the right call for the ref to have a second look on the monitor

They're only supposed to have a second look if the VAR saw a clear and obvious mistake, so no, by their own standards, it was the wrong decision to call the ref to the monitor. The VARs are only supposed to alert the referee to clear and obvious errors. In no way could that be described as a clear and obvious error, given that Rice had his hands on him and was holding him back preventing him from playing the ball, preventing a potential goal scoring opportunity.

ultimately the Ref still made the choice, he rightly imo acknowledged it wasn't a penalty and the correct outcome ensured

That's a fallacy, We've seen countless times of the ref being influenced by the VARs second-guessing his decision, and out of not wanting to go against the herd, the ref bending the proverbial knee to his VAR masters agreeing with the VARs view of the situation, under the guise of him making the decision.

Rice on a yellow then the whole game turns on its head. which is unfair. * I wanted Arsenal to lose by the way.

You only have so many opportunities to score goals, if you are prevented from having an opportunity to score, then that is unfair. The ref saw Rice's hands on Mbappe holding him back from playing the ball, then saw him go down, a result of another one of his extremities interfering with Mbappe's movement. Not unreasonable for him to point to the spot. The game could have turned on its head, but we'll never know what could have happened with that as a penalty. You've decided that the right decision was made, you've also decided that Mbappe "ridiculously" "farcically" dove and therefore didn't deserve the penalty. While you're entitled to your opinion, but that's not an accurate account of what happened.

And going against your own self interest isn't an excuse, as a means to show that you're unbiased. It's not your rooting interest bias that is questioned, it's your bias as it pertains to to your allegiance to VAR and the decisions that it makes.

 

[BlueHammer85]

So you want a game delayed for 5 minutes?

already mentioned that delay is to long and unacceptable, it is also quite rare - they were looking at other factors like offside etc also.

Where did i mention i want the game delayed that long ?

I wanted VAR decisions, especially offsides and more hopeful with automated to be sped up for sure.

Vast majority of VAR verdicts are done really fast, every now and then we get a long one like last night where there's other factors involved - Its still far to long, they will look at ways getting to quicker verdict year on year.

 

[BlueHammer85]

The long delay was very clearly due to the subjectivity of it, the possible offside interference, the determination of could he have gotten to the ball, etc. Nothing clear or obvious about it. By their own rules and standards they should never have gotten involved.


The importance of getting a specific decision correct is merely a product of what the VAR chooses to review, as if they are the ones who decide which decisions are more important than others, which is disrespectful to the match as a whole and all the other decisions that go on. Why is it so important for them to painstakingly review a subjective 50/50 decision that would be acceptable (and controversial) either way all the while countless other decisions throughout the match, often more deserving of their attention, go unchecked and unreviewed?


Me either!! No one should be forced into that room, no one should be in such a nauseating room where they are tasked with deciding the outcome of a matches based on unknown or fickle reasoning.


Bollocks.


They're only supposed to have a second look if the VAR saw a clear and obvious mistake, so no, by their own standards, it was the wrong decision to call the ref to the monitor. The VARs are only supposed to alert the referee to clear and obvious errors. In no way could that be described as a clear and obvious error, given that Rice had his hands on him and was holding him back preventing him from playing the ball, preventing a potential goal scoring opportunity.


That's a fallacy, We've seen countless times of the ref being influenced by the VARs second-guessing his decision, and out of not wanting to go against the herd, the ref bending the proverbial knee to his VAR masters agreeing with the VARs view of the situation, under the guise of him making the decision.


You only have so many opportunities to score goals, if you are prevented from having an opportunity to score, then that is unfair. The ref saw Rice's hands on Mbappe holding him back from playing the ball, then saw him go down, a result of another one of his extremities interfering with Mbappe's movement. Not unreasonable for him to point to the spot. The game could have turned on its head, but we'll never know what could have happened with that as a penalty. You've decided that the right decision was made, you've also decided that Mbappe "ridiculously" "farcically" dove and therefore didn't deserve the penalty. While you're entitled to your opinion, but that's not an accurate account of what happened.

And going against your own self interest isn't an excuse, as a means to show that you're unbiased. It's not your rooting interest bias that is questioned, it's your bias as it pertains to to your allegiance to VAR and the decisions that it makes.

Some fair points, i won't dissect everyone as i'm accused of being a WUM etc and i need to do some work!

ultimately i stick by having tech help for Refs, i'm not a lover of VAR, i don't like the long delays to get a verdict.

Last night imo was the correct decision, as frustrating at that wait was its still better than Mbappe being awarded a penalty on what i felt was a theatrical fall despite standing on foot.