Var debate 2019/20

[ballinio]

So what I see so far is that those who said Liverpool and the rags will get less penalties were wrong.

Those who said we'd get more penalties were wrong.

Only those who said that we'd have crucial goals ruled out on the flimsiest of pretexts were right.

Still, only three games in. I am assured that "these decisions will even themselves out"

2 points out 9 they’ve robbed us of , that might be all it takes for us to lose the title , var will rob us of another 6 to 8 points just to make sure , Liverpool will lose 0 is my estimate .

 

[Marvin]

2 points out 9 they’ve robbed us of , that might be all it takes for us to lose the title , var will rob us of another 6 to 8 points just to make sure , Liverpool will lose 0 is my estimate .

That's conspiratorial theory with zero justification. I dislike VAR because the process is damaging for fans participation in the game but I don't believe that refs are deliberately setting out to manipulate the system.

 

[M12Blue]

Graham Poll admitted it years ago. And i think he would know more about it than any of us..

Poll.... "Let me guarantee you this: none of the penalties given to Wigan Athletic, Stoke City or West Bromwich would have been awarded against Manchester United and yet they were against Norwich City. So are match officials really biased, do they deliberately favour the big teams?

The select group of referees which I served with did a lot of work with a sports psychologist, the excellent Craig Mahoney. He explained the difference behind conscious decision making and sub-conscious and that you can only really control conscious thought.

I don’t believe that any referee consciously goes out to give soft penalties against small teams but I know that they only give stone wall penalties against the biggest ones.

One of the reasons for this is that they know the fallout, from the managers and the media, if they give a soft penalty against one of the big teams and the sub-conscious mind kicks in to afford the referee a level of protection, quite naturally."

Slight caveat to that, not all big teams

 

[Keith Moon]

So what did Dermot Gallagher say about the Silva incident?

 

[creditunionhero]

The Silva non-penalty, was a clear foul and a clear infringement. the clue to VAR is in the title "Video assistant referee" it is meant to assist the referee reach the correct decision, if the assistant running the line sees an infringement he communicates it to the referee. The video assistant could clearly see the infringement and should communicate this to the ref, its a disgrace that this is being allowed to happen. VAR is supposed to help refs give the right decision and it is failing and under current interpretations wrong decisions are not being corrected.

 

[manimanc]

VAR 1 Tottenham 0.
What a difference a week makes.

 

[Blue Mooner]

Last season Salah got countless soft penalties, all of which were awarded by the onfield referee.
Everyone thought VAR - fantastic it's going to stop all that shit.

This season so far what we have is onfield referees not giving stonewall penalties (to City and to other top six challengers) and VAR doing nothing about it.
The onfield refs are hiding behind VAR, they will claim not to have seen it or not to be 100% certain and therefore unable to give it. Meanwhile everyone has stopped having digs at them as all the attention is deflected to the faceless VAR officials instead because they are not correcting the clear and obvious mistakes that have been made.

Time will tell whether Liverpool continue to get soft penalties from the onfield refs compared to other teams. When they get a few stonewall penalties ignored by the onfield ref and ignored by VAR then things will be even. I will be watching how their games are reffed with interest.

The biggest issue is however that VAR was supposed to be brought in to get the decisions correct and it's already absolutely failed in this regard just three games into the season. It's not the technology because at the end of the day the penalty reviews are simply someone rewinding a video. The consistent failure to correct/overrule the onfield refs decision is not something that can be put down to human error it is policy and policy is set by the higher ups in the game.

We (fans of all teams) are paying customers and are being shafted by the PL policy makers.

I think I would have more trust in a VAR panel of Ferdinand, Neville and Scholes - and that says it all!

And yet they corrected a hand ball that no one saw in real time and that in the end was even proven to not have been the correct decision. That game changing decision that directly cost us two points could be the difference between winning the league or not. Corruption clear and obvious.

 

[SWP's back]

Have any of those 32 involved a penalty given where it's clear there's been no contact?

No but there’s virtually none like Wolves vs Burnley yesterday which I didn’t think was a penalty.

 

[Florida Blue]

Slight caveat to that, not all big teams

The point still stands, just the the love in has changed. It's not united anymore it's Liverpool, they are desperate for them to win the league. Scudamore saying he doesn't want City running away with it, media saying its bad for the game if City win 2,3 in a row, it's boring, human rights issues etc. Poll actually admits refs are influenced by the media.

 

[daztrueblue91]

The big problem with VAR is the ego of the referees. They’re so shit scared of accepting VAR assistance for penalties that they would rather accept their incorrect judgement than get the correct decision.

However, the current format of VAR simply does not work. You cannot look for the slightest reason to disallow a goal, such as a stray pube being offside, and then ignore a clear stamp on an attackers foot.

With VAR there is no excuse for these incorrect decisions to stand.

It’s like getting into a taxi and the driver getting lost. If it turns out that the driver simply did not know where he was going and accidentally took the wrong route you’d be pissed off but accept it. However, if the taxi driver had a sat nav, ignored its directions and then got you lost, it would make matters a lot worse.

 

[blue b4 the moon]

2 points out 9 they’ve robbed us of , that might be all it takes for us to lose the title , var will rob us of another 6 to 8 points just to make sure , Liverpool will lose 0 is my estimate .

The main swing games will be against the dips & like you I'm not hopeful of a level playing field but there again I never am.

 

[SWP's back]

Graham Poll admitted it years ago. And i think he would know more about it than any of us..

Poll.... "Let me guarantee you this: none of the penalties given to Wigan Athletic, Stoke City or West Bromwich would have been awarded against Manchester United and yet they were against Norwich City. So are match officials really biased, do they deliberately favour the big teams?

The select group of referees which I served with did a lot of work with a sports psychologist, the excellent Craig Mahoney. He explained the difference behind conscious decision making and sub-conscious and that you can only really control conscious thought.

I don’t believe that any referee consciously goes out to give soft penalties against small teams but I know that they only give stone wall penalties against the biggest ones.

One of the reasons for this is that they know the fallout, from the managers and the media, if they give a soft penalty against one of the big teams and the sub-conscious mind kicks in to afford the referee a level of protection, quite naturally."

All the more reason to have a working version on VAR then surely and why lots of fans wanted it bringing in.

 

[marco]

we will get a better idea on VAR after say 10 games,we will by then be top of the league but unfortunately not the premiership league it's top of the hard done to and robbed league, United and Liverpool will be the top teams that have benefited, So they wanted a more competitive premiership and that is what they have designed with VAR, its not about fairness and honesty its about money, it wont raise an eyebrow if we get screwed week in week out because other teams and fans benefit from us getting screwed,we are in for a hard ride to beat the system and i don't expect us to do it but you never know,if their was anything fair about VAR us the fans who put thousands of pounds into the game would have been given the chance of some input but no its all done nice and quite and behind closed doors

 

[Pingu the Penguin]

So VAR is settling down a bit now and I’m a bit more comfortable after this weekend that the “high bar” thing is being equally applied. It also stops the game being re-refereed and is supportive of the on field official.

Get rid of mm offside calls and you have the makings of something workable.

 

[LWashington]

I'm not sure if anyone has posted this, apologies if someone already has, but 0.35s to 1 min is interesting.



It doesn't mention deflecting to another player.

 

[Fred_Quimby]

VAR - the lunatics have taken over the asylum.

 

[Florida Blue]

I'm not sure if anyone has posted this, apologies if someone already has, but 0.35s to 1 min is interesting.



It doesn't mention deflecting to another player.

It says "creating a goal scoring opportunity" in the guidelines.

When you hear him reading it out, it's even clearer Laportes wasn't handball under the new guidelines. the player has to gain ( the definition of the word gain is to secure something, he never did) control/possession, then create an opportunity.

It was written to stop players controlling the ball with the arm/hand, gaining an advantage, then passing it and creating a chance. Laporte didn't do that, it was a deflection, complete freak accident where it went.

If they wanted to make the Laporte incident to be called handball they simply had to have the guideline say " It's an offence if it hits the arm/hand and creates a goal scoring opportunity whether accidental or not"

They deliberately put in the player has to gain control/possession and THEN create a goal scoring opportunity.

 

[Bodicoteblue]

I'm not sure if anyone has posted this, apologies if someone already has, but 0.35s to 1 min is interesting.



It doesn't mention deflecting to another player.

‘Or creates a goal scoring opportunity’
Like ‘clear and obvious’ these terms can mean anything that they want.
One man’s interpretation of these will be different from another’s.
Basically allows them to make any decision they see fit.
Any ideas of consistency and accountability can be swiftly dispensed with.

 

[Rammy Blue]

So VAR is settling down a bit now and I’m a bit more comfortable after this weekend that the “high bar” thing is being equally applied. It also stops the game being re-refereed and is supportive of the on field official.

Get rid of mm offside calls and you have the makings of something workable.

In which case I have to ask, why have VAR?

 

[Colin Bells Boots]

So what did Dermot Gallagher say about the Silva incident?

He didn't see it ......................allegedly