Var debate 2019/20

[dubblue]

Supposedly, VAR supported the ref’s decision that Rodri made a meal of it. The reality is protectionism / jobs for the boys.

Unbelievable,what did Pogba do last night then if Rodri was making a meal of it. It’s corrupt to the core and Swarbricks comments just support that view.

 

[FootballSense]

VAR - there is a different interpretation of the Laporte `goal`.

The argument (which appears to have been accepted without careful scrutiny in the media) was that the decision to rule out the winning `goal` was a correct interpretation of a new handball rule and therefore by the letter of the new law correct (putting aside views about the actual law itself).

Referring to the new Rule 12

http://www.thefa.com/football-rules.../football-11-11/law-12---fouls-and-misconduct

"It is an offence if a player:

• gains possession/control of the ball after it has touched their hand/arm and then:
  • scores in the opponents’ goal
  • creates a goal-scoring opportunity"

The question is - after the ball had touched Laporte`s arm, did he gain possession / control of the ball and then create a goal scoring opportunity?

The answer rests on what the words possession / control and create mean.

There is a strong case that the goal should have stood based on the letter of the new Law 12.

It was Jesus who then had to gain possession and control the ball which was on its way to him naturally in any case, and create it by kicking the ball to one side and curling his shot round Spurs players into the net.

It was all due to Jesus. Praise the Lord.

 

[ChicagoBlue]

the pogba penalty in my opinion was 100$ a dive and should have been over ruled by var. he instigated the contact all the defender did was stand his ground. no chance over any of the dives from tom dalery's students salah firmino and salah being over ruled this season

Come on now. Be serious. Stuck his right leg out THEN “stood his ground” as Pogba nutmegged him!

Even the player knew he was dead to rights.

Let’s not get too Raggy in our post-match analysis.

As for the Scousers, you may have more of a case, but let’s gauge each incident individually.

 

[toffee balls]

That was me who asked him the question. Couldn’t quite believe what I was hearing

You came across very well and stood your ground.

 

[mancity2012_eamo]

Seriously, I’m at a loss how people can’t see the defenders right foot make contact with Pogbas left foot on that vid on the close up.

There's definitely contact. The question is who initiated it. I say Pogba did but to be honest you see this happen week in week out and they are given.
All attackers do it. They seek out contact. There was no tackle made. It doesn't seem to matter nowadays though.
In fairness to Pogba, I don't think it was as obvious as some I've seen given. Some we've benefited from too, although not too often. All teams do it.

 

[Fabled mabel]

There are a number of 'mysteries' in the operation of VAR in his little room that are unclear to me. Perhaps I have missed something.

Firstly. How many referees get involved in on screen refereeing? In the Women's WC it showed three all nicely togged out to watch a screen. It even named all three. So how many do they have in PL matches? From what I've seen there was one who was mentioned at Saturday's game and he seemed t be relatively inexperienced. So if there is just the one how do they keep an eye on a fast moving game where the ball is pinging around like on a pinball machine? If it is just one man how did he deal with the alleged offence by Laporte and still watch Jesus a split second later? Even if he has other refs with him it is not easy to spot potential offences and continue watch the play. So do they wait for a goal to be scored and then look for a reason to disallow it using the many camera angles covering the average PL match?

2 It strikes me that it is not easy for a layman to operate all this technology at his fingertips so my next question is what 'assistance' do they get from the TV technicians in viewing all these camera angles, the slow motions that goes with it and the lines curly or otherwise we get to see a couple of minutes later. So to what extent do the TV technicians and director control what the VAR sees. Or does not see. I doubt very much that any referee is able to operate all that technology himself. Several TV compactness show lots of bias in the coverage by presenters - why not in the VAR reviews?

3. So how does a an experienced match referee who has worked his way up the ranks even to FIFA level on the pitch in the middle of the sight and sound of the action react to being over ruled by a relative novice? It seems these often self important little twits so easily concede their authority to the VAR?

4. Lastly a more simple question but with a difficult answer - how the fuck did that dirty little get a free kick after Bernie had waltzed round his and the other two? The media also seemed to have missed the foul as well as the lovely footwork as well./

 

[burning blue soul]

Things we know about VAR:

1. It is still subjective for fouls.
2. It is still inaccurate for offside as the exact moment of the final pass is subjective, potentially resulting in an error of meters not millimetres.
3. The interpretation of the laws of the game varies between officials.
4. The officials will still lie about what they saw/didn't see.
5. Camera angles can be manipulated to justify an outcome.
6. IT IS NOT FIT FOR PURPOSE.

VAR.... it's a brexit level debate for people who love football and dont give a fuck about politics!! ...welcome to the party you lot!!

 

[Thaksinssoldier]

Come on now. Be serious. Stuck his right leg out THEN “stood his ground” as Pogba nutmegged him!

Even the player knew he was dead to rights.

Let’s not get too Raggy in our post-match analysis.

As for the Scousers, you may have more of a case, but let’s gauge each incident individually.

You really don't get the game if you look at that and don't see a player in the air before he's touched.

 

[citymad]

trouble with that is, it would take forever to analyze it. We'd have commercials for every VAR. It's too horrific to even think about.

 

[bobbyowenquiff]

If he is saying Oliver thought Rodri dived well it didnt look like that with oliver antics of finger to ear and a shoulder shrug.

Oliver didn't see it. It was shown clearly by SKY last night. He was looking away and then shrugged because he didn't see it. Swarbrick's version of events is fiction. I think Oliver was bounced into it by the VAR team. They are just covering each other's backs.

 

[toffee balls]

BBC I player ...Radio 5 Live about 8-40 this morning

That was very informative and well worth a listen.
Swarbrick came across as somewhat reasonable ( for a school teacher ) and was big on his statistics which is also good .
It is obviously very early for throwing the baby out with the bath water with crude statistics however, he quoted only 5 reviews in 20 matches which is 25% and he was pleased with that. Ok then , we have been involved with 3 of those which is 60% ( that is 1 team out of a league made up of 20 ) of all the reviews and had 2 altered which is 66 %.

Early days as I say with regards to the statistics but early indications are we are either extremely unlucky or we are being singled out and massively over scrutinised.

Time will tell.

 

[Trevor Morley's Tache]

You really don't get the game if you look at that and don't see a player in the air before he's touched.

Pogbad forced that contact by wafting his leg towards the defenders standing leg 'AFTER' he had already started to go down. If you look at his body position a second or so before he goes down you could see he had no intention of going past his man. It is just cheating.

It's not difficult to do. There will be numerous people trying it on in local league games all season, but the refs will either wave play on or book the c*nt for diving because they know exactly what is going on. The beautiful game at the top level is becoming sterile, and VAR is not helping.

 

[bobbyowenquiff]

I don’t see how it can be down to interpretation because the law is perfectly clear.

The rule is:



(I added the emphasis).

So the law requires that A player (singular) gains control after it has touched THEIR arm AND THEN creates a goal scoring opportunity.

In other words, for this rule to come into play it has got to be the player whose arm the ball touches that gains control of the ball, and that same player has then got to create the opportity to score or score himself. If the ball had come off Aymeric’s arm, accidentally, but he had trapped it and passed it to Jesus to score, the rule would be engaged. Because the ball touches his arm, but Aymeric does not gain control of the ball, the rule was not engaged. That is according to the clear, unambiguous words of the rule.

The law says nothing about a player from the same team gaining control, and if that’s what IFAB had intended it would have been perfectly easy for them to say so in the new rule. It makes perfect sense to say that an accidental ricochet where a player from the same team is on the receiving end is not the same as that player taking advantage of his own accidental handball. If the rule was ambiguous I can see why you might look at what it designed to prevent to understand what it was supposed to mean, but where the wording of the rule is clear as it is here, you don’t need to go any further than the rule itself.

Face it mate, a perfectly good goal was wrongly disallowed.

Spot-on. The wording is clear. It doesn't say anything about gaining possession for the team. This is just a pack of lies made up on the hoof by the Referees Group to cover themselves. Today Swarbrick said that referees had to abide by IFAB guidelines. It would be interesting to see how the new handball rules are being interpreted across the world.
I don't believe the Jesus goal would have been disallowed in any other European league. The officials in the UK are taking paying customers like us for idiots. Not for the first time.

 

[Saddleworth2]

Swarbricks answer does not stand up to scrutiny. Oliver was not even looking at the incident. We don't even know if VAR officials brought it to his attention.Surely if they had, he should have reviewed it on the pitch side monitor. Nothing like that happened. I wish to hell there was a way of pursuing this to get the correct sequence of events. Something stinks to high heaven.

 

[Trevor Morley's Tache]

Swarbricks answer does not stand up to scrutiny. Oliver was not even looking at the incident. We don't even know if VAR officials brought it to his attention.Surely if they had, he should have reviewed it on the pitch side monitor. Nothing like that happened. I wish to hell there was a way of pursuing this to get the correct sequence of events. Something stinks to high heaven.

See the 'Is the game bent' thread.

 

[DT King of all Geordies]

Thanks for that. I hadn't heard what Swarbrick said, just seen the comments here.

I wonder if this is a result of Saturday, and wanting to try explaining the process involved. It is quite possible that what is being run is different from what most people think it.

Looking at normal speed is reasonable for fouls, as slow motion can distort.

What do you mean by the last bit? Was VAR not given any time to give an opinion?

I think what they were saying that if it is not a clear and obvious error then it would not be looked at. Also Swarbrick mentioned trying to keep to a minimum the amount of decisions referred to VAR.

 

[shevtheblue]

Swarbricks answer does not stand up to scrutiny. Oliver was not even looking at the incident. We don't even know if VAR officials brought it to his attention.Surely if they had, he should have reviewed it on the pitch side monitor. Nothing like that happened. I wish to hell there was a way of pursuing this to get the correct sequence of events. Something stinks to high heaven.

But why does it need him looking at it pitch side? The guys in the room who are seeing all the angles on the screen have a better chance of getting it right, without players and fans in their face. So, why then did then get it wrong? Because they don't know the rules or have not understood them, or are they just fucking idiots? They say they are going to the letter of the law, well the letter of the law for this handball incident means it's a goal. The fact that numerous ex-professionals, commentators and even some refs have not highlighted this, is fucking frightening.

 

[BlueHammer85]

Just had a 2-3minute wait in between for something completely pedantic to be checked. Which even if it was offside, was not gaining an advantage in any form.

They went mental at first but it was completely cut short as I've seen from fan videos in the ground.

The cheer after it was awarded didn't make up for that celebration being cut short.

Even affects momentum for the kick off afterwards, gives the conceding team time to regroup. It's causing more problems on the pitch than it first intended in my opinion.

Yep to fair. Even though I’m in favour of VAR - the celebrations for fans have a real negative impact. It is the biggest downside for me.

 

[rnblade]

You only have to look at they way they tried to rule out Wolves goal v the rags last night.
It’s comical.

 

[bobbyowenquiff]

Swarbricks answer does not stand up to scrutiny. Oliver was not even looking at the incident. We don't even know if VAR officials brought it to his attention.Surely if they had, he should have reviewed it on the pitch side monitor. Nothing like that happened. I wish to hell there was a way of pursuing this to get the correct sequence of events. Something stinks to high heaven.

It certainly needs investigating. Swarbrick is claiming that VAR is there to support referees not replace them. But the call on Rodri was made by the VAR team. The Sky footage clearly shows that Oliver did not see the incident so he must have taken his lead from the VAR team without checking it. Just as he did for the disallowed Jesus goal. This is a total disgrace and it undermines referees and the integrity of the game. Swarbrick needs to be held to account for his comments on Radio 5 today.