Var debate 2019/20

[the talisman]

I have and still disagree on your interpritation....the OR means that he doesnt have to be in possession or control....


Is the rule wrong - absolutely

Was the interpritation of the rule wrong on this occasion - no it wasnt.

Sorry for quoting a post from so far back in the thread I’m trying to catch up.
Where does this OR come from?

I copied this from the IFAB website:



Consequently, a player will be penalised when the ball touches their hand/arm if:
• their hand/arm is above shoulder height (except when deliberately playing the ball) as a
player is ‘taking a risk’ by having their hand/arm in that usually ‘unnatural’ position
• the player’s body has been made unnaturally bigger, and has thus unfairly created a larger
barrier, by their hand/arm being away from their body
• a goal is scored directly from their hand/arm (even if accidental)
• a player gains possession/control of the ball from their hand/arm (even if accidental) and
then scores a goal or creates a goal-scoring opportunity

So, Laporte doesn’t gain possession or control so the goal should have stood, unless i’m missing something

 

[SWP's back]

Spot on about Mike Riley

This is what I was trying to quote live in real time. They’re absolutely correct.

 

[manchester blue]

But at what point is his head offside.The ball may've left his foot in the previous frame. It's moments like this that the brown envelope gets passed under the table.

In some ways, for offside, one frame per second should be used and it should be the clear daylight rule.

As you allude to using 50 frames per second you could easily manipulate when the ball was played by a few frames and place a player running at speed offside. Until the human element is removed offside should be referred when clear and obvious.

 

[SWP's back]

exactly

utd fans will be complaining about it this weekend, as will spurs fans yet its only us its against....laughable!

It’s now turned into “it’s there to help Liverpool”.

I really really hope they get a similar non decision next week although there will then be people on here claiming that one went against Liverpool to make it look less suspicious.

 

[117 M34]

But clear and obvious,i would like them to come out and explain what comes under that umbrella

For the penalty yesterday, var would have given the pen of the ref had said down the microphone:
I was looking the other way so I didn't see anything. Or
Silva has gone through and there was no contact

If the ref says:
Silva has gone through and the defender caught his foot but it was minimal and not enough for him to go down

VAR won't give the pen

 

[gingerprince]

The whole point of bringing new technology into the game was to make more decisions correct, be that goal line technology or VAR.

In fact in the CL last year, any time delay for VAR and pitchside monitor review was supported on that basis, eg yes , it's taking time,

this will improve as its introduction continues, however, we are making more decisions correct, so less games are being decided by

an incorrect call. The PL version on offside, in or outside of the box, ball striking an attackers hand leadng to a goal [albeit using the

PL interpretation of the IFAB Law] are all using videotechnology to determine the correct decision. However, on penalties, they have

decided to not to use the technology to come to the correct decision. The PL have set a different parameter, that gives a farcical

situation whereby VAR using all the technology at hand will merely, if onfield ref gives the penalty, they will review and agree a penalty,

or if ref doesnt award the penalty, they will also agree, eg it's not a penalty. So same VAR review will give x2 different decisions based on

same video analysis. So is VAR all about getting decision correct or isnt it? Exactly the same, with goalkeeper encroachment on penalties.

No Var review, it's all down to onfield officials to get it correct without using the technology that's there and used for encroachment for any

outfield player using VAR review. They are happy to reinforce the Sterling West Ham and Laporte Spurs incidents stating we came to correct

decision, as VAR technology was used and evidence proved it was correct decision, [again using PL interpretations]. However, they refuse

to use same technology & argument to substantiate whether correct decision is made for any goalkeeper encroachment on a penalty kick.

But it isnt going to change until next season, if then. So after first few round of games we will get used to it. However, will come to a head when

a cup final, relegation or title or CL place is won or denied later in the year when a last minute penalty is awarded or denied, when video replay

shows and all pundits disagree with VAR review, eg VAR official merely siding with onfield referee decision whether correct or an incorrect one.

 

[flook]

... he didn't go down though, he stayed on his feet.

that's a fair point, but I'm not going to let the truth get in the way of a good story :), sorry you're right of course, for once he did stay on his feet, still a clear tug though and no way it could have been overturned. The "conspiracy" element here is of course that that was a soft one given to Liverpool, whereas a rugby tackle by Lamela on Rodri was not given by the ref, and not given by VAR, inconsistencies which, from this end of the east lancs, always seem to go in the favour of our coastal cousins (A view I expect you disagree with)

Talk about agenda's, there is an agenda here against Liverpool re: VAR as if it has been implemented for their sole benefit. Don't be so silly. VAR is highly controvertial and where it works against one team, it benefits another, so why no agenda that it is being used to aid others clubs in avoiding relegation, or qualifying for Europe - whatever? Too many holes for it to be a one club conspiracy. Clubs across the board are being harshly affected by VAR which also equates to clubs across the board undeservedly benefitting from it too - Liverpool have not yet been one of them, either for or against. Cannot see how that equates to a conspiracy in their favour.

Jesus goal should have stood, but the new handball ruling scuppered that. All genuine penalties not given, regardless which team(s) are involved, is simply disgraceful. This is agreed upon by many fans of all clubs. VAR is an all inclusive supporters problem, not a Liverpool conspiracy agenda. Hate them as much as you like, but don't confuse the two.

Full disclosure, I support Liverpool. That said, I have no support for VAR when what is obvious to all, especially genuine penalty claims, is simply ignored.

I don't believe you've understood the agenda debate, it isn't (generally) felt to be of benefit for just Liverpool, it's seen as a tool to support the traditional sky cash-cows of Liverpool, United and to a lesser extent Arsenal and Chelsea, the so called big 4 before we and spurs crashed the party.

Whether it is an agenda or not is largely moot, because the constant challenging of these frankly ridiculous in some instances, decisions can only be for the good of the game in the long run.

Having said that, the whole agenda discussion could be squashed in an instant with full disclosure of the referee/VAR discussion as in rugby, ie mike up both and give clear explanations of the decisions on screen at the game as well as on TV (obviously you'll have to spend some of your yankee dollars on a new big telly over at your gaff)

Until that happens, there will always be mistrust of VAR and refereeing impartiality in general

 

[give it to gordon]

I thought VAR was brought in to help refs who had missed something. So 3 matches in City have had 2 clear pens not even and 2 goals ruled out.
So even with VAR our refs are at best shit at worse bent, or just following orders to screw City over. It is now clear to ALL football fans that since the take over City have had to play 11 v 14 this season it's now 11 v 15.

I dont think there has been a VAR incident at a dipperpool or rags yet but I might be wrong

 

[Academica]

The way it is being implemented at the moment is not to overrule the on field decision, so if the ref had given the Silva and Kane incidents as penalties they would of stood. What is the point of the VAR ref even looking if he is not going to intervene. VAR is never wrong it just gives the officials the chance to review an incident, at the moment the way it is being implemented in this country it's almost as if the officials are trying to sabotage the correct usage. I think Mike Riley is totally to blame for this as it's not just one official who is failing to overturn decisions but all of them. It's up to the premier league and the clubs to finally sort PIGMOL out they have been a law into them selves for far to long. In the rest of Europe the referee is told to look at an incident again if their is a doubt about his original decision on a pitch side monitor how many times has that happened this season, do we even have them. This is not the VAR system being used across the rest of Europe this is the Mike Riley system. I say again VAR never gives a wrong decision just our incompetent officials.

 

[117 M34]

I thought VAR was brought in to help refs who had missed something. So 3 matches in City have had 2 clear pens not even and 2 goals ruled out.
So even with VAR our refs are at best shit at worse bent, or just following orders to screw City over. It is now clear to ALL football fans that since the take over City have had to play 11 v 14 this season it's now 11 v 15.

I dont think there has been a VAR incident at a dipperpool or rags yet but I might be wrong

If the ref says he didn't miss the contact he just thought it was minimal then it won't get overturned.
If he said there was no contact it would have been given as a pen