Var debate 2019/20

[Florida Blue]

That’s exactly what I just fucking said.

3 times I’ve written that they’ve failed to overturn any one of the THIRTY-ONE penalty decision reviews that var has undertaken.

You said they are not when it should be they have NOT YET....

Are you saying VAR will not reverse one single penalty decision all season. If that is the guideline then why talk to the VAR in the first place.

When they reach the high bar ie somebody gets punched in the area and the ref misses it, they will give the penalty, you are saying they will never intervene, they will, they have to at some point, we just have to wait and see when they do.

 

[Bandofblues]

Oh I agree. I think Liverpool are reffed entirely differently to City and always have been. But that’s not a var issue. It’s the same isssue we had last year.

Var was meant to change that which is why I’m so pissed off with it.

Just sacking var off (rather than changing how it’s used) isn’t the answer for me as it just means a continuation of the status quo of favouring Liverpool for evermore.

And I think that is what's pissing people off, we all thought VAR would result in a better standard of refereeing/decision making by virtue of video replays. The old excuse of 'the ref only got one look' could no longer be used.

I glad you agree that Liverpool have benefited from favourable refereeing in previous seasons and I think most people on here shouting conspiracy are only saying the same thing with regards to the way VAR is being used so far, apart from the ones who will never admit any Rag penalty is a fair one no matter what evidence they are presented with. If VAR isn't properly used to take a second look at incidents and suggest a different opinion to the refs initial decision then you are 100% right "a continuation of the status quo of favouring Liverpool' will happen. There was bias bordering on downright cheating in favour of Liverpool at times last season and there's nothing to stop it happening again this season.

People thought that VAR was the new sheriff in town, turns out the new sheriff is blind drunk and has cataracts.

 

[cleavers]

I’m still convinced Kane’s was a penalty, he dives into Kane’s legs to stop him. If it was against Aguero I don’t imagine many on here would argue it’s not a pen.

I agree, but I think Sergio stays on his feet and gets to the ball, whereas Kane was looking for the ground to get a penalty (the only way he'd have scored yesterday).

I've not seen the others, but I'm with you that the bar is too high, but after much debate it will come down.

My biggest fault with VAR currently, is that it seems intent on taking goals away, and that is surely wrong in a game where the whole point of the game is actually scoring them, that's not good for the sport. I don't mind if wrong goals are disallowed, but marginal ones its wrong. As I said watching live yesterday I thought David dived, and I needed a replay to show me otherwise, so I have some sympathy with Mariner, but if he'd looked at it again in slow motion, I'm sure he'd have given it, but he was denied that opportunity by the way the VAR system is being used.

 

[SWP's back]

You said they are not when it should be they have NOT YET....

Are you saying VAR will not reverse one single penalty decision all season. If that is the guideline then why talk to the VAR in the first place.

When they reach the high bar ie somebody gets punched in the area and the ref misses it, they will give the penalty, you are saying they will never intervene, they will, they have to at some point, we just have to wait and see when they do.

Well so far in this thread I’ve suggested that someone being shot or taking someone out with a chainsaw may perhaps be noticed by var to the extent of giving a penalty that the referee missed.

I’ve also said “fuck knows what has to happen to read his the clear and obvious error bar” as Aspa, Rodri and Silva all qualify in my opinion.

I suspect they will lower the clear and obvious interpretation now the media has started to moan and the pressure will get to Riley.

 

[SebastianBlue]

Hmm...it doesn't though, does it? The 'benefit' of VAR is neutral, if all they're benefiting from is the original inherent bias?

Liverpool benefits (again, if we agree they receive advantages from refereeing not enjoyed by most other clubs in the league, including City) from the current VAR implementation, versus an implementation that allows overturning “subjective” in/decisions from referees, because it does not mitigate the bias/incompetence (which is what VAR is supposedly meant to do).

The current implementation is akin to finding previously undiscovered high resolution footage of an unsolved crime taking place, watching the footage in ultra slow motion with facial recognition identifying the assailants, then saying “yes, we can see what has happened, and who has done it, but there’s insufficient evidence to overturn the investigators’ original conclusion that there is insufficient evidence to charge anyone with the crime based on the previous limited evidence available.”

 

[mikemcfc]

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

how do you know that?

 

[ctid1894]

Ok mate. If you’re going to be so biased then you can argue with yourself as I really can’t be arsed to argue with an idiot. As the saying goes, you’ll drag me down to your level and beat me with experience.

You say that Sterling is proven onside but the same system that proves him onside, you say can’t be trusted for the Jesus offside. You pick and choose when you want to trust the systems and you can’t see your bias.

As for “no freeze frame proves it hit Laporte’s” hand. Fucking brilliant, I’ve seen plenty of great reasoning as to why it shouldn’t have been disallowed but that’s a new one.

Please provide one post of me saying Sterling is “proven” to be onside, you won’t find one because I’ve been the poster all along saying the camera technology means close onside/offside decisions are impossible, even backed up with the same maths equations which was subsequently in the Daily Mail. Good luck and stop being purposefully deceptive.

As for me being “biased” I think proving your “proven correct” decisions as complete and utter lies with factual evidence is pretty balanced but again if you’ve got to try and be purposefully deceptive to fit your narrative so be it.

 

[prestonibbo_mcfc]

I’m in a what’s app group of lads I play 5 a side with. About 15 of us in it and it was roughly a 3:1 split calling penalty yesterday on Kane.

The Aspa one was everyone saying penalty, same for Silva. The United one’s was everyone apart from two Liverpool fans.

I’m still convinced Kane’s was a penalty, he dives into Kane’s legs to stop him. If it was against Aguero I don’t imagine many on here would argue it’s not a pen.

Same here re Lascelles. They kept on about a slip, but there was no slip at all, he dived headlong across Kane. Penalty all day, for me.

 

[Bandofblues]

how do you know that?

And what would give the ref the right to tell VAR what actually happened? The ref should say 'I think contact was minimal' and VAR should overrule because he is clearly and obviously wrong.

 

[cleavers]

They are told not to use the screens to have a look so that is not an option,var have full control

That's not quite what they've been told, VAR are told to only refer the referee to the screen if they think he would change his decision, there would be no point having the screens, if they were told they weren't to use them. I think we'll see them used a bit more now, as there have been a couple of awkward decisions made by VAR followed by considerable debate from the media, the system will adapt as it gets more data, I'm sure of that, and the "its all against city" paranoia will die down imho. We are bound to get more decisions than most others because of the way we play.