Var debate 2019/20

[Rolee]

It was not even the worst decision of THIS weekend, so it was not the gravest error, nor the biggest error in the world and yes in real time would have been a tough call (even though I thought it was a pen). Hard to argue with unless your so entrenched that you believe the nasty world is all against little old City.

It was obvious to me in real time, I perhaps had a more favourable view than the ref with the camera angle. Seriously though mate, it's a stonewall penalty that even the most ardent Liverpool and United fans I talk football with are calling a definite pen and believe me they would normally argue against anything in City's favour.

I don’t think the world is against City, I'll admit to seeing things from a biased perspective but I'd rather be that than Bluemoon's answer to Niall Quinn.

 

[Rolee]

What’s the point in it going to VAR when we all know the person in the booth aren’t overturning referees on subjective decisions. We all know the outcome and it has nothing to do with it being City, it’s clear that’s the narrative across all games. Unless that’s changed we are wasting time in games playing out that pretend process.

Yep, the biggest failing is lack of pitchside monitors. I know it slows the game but it's far better than the current situation where the VAR ref is reluctant to undermine their colleague.

 

[Gordyola]

And they are wrong. Both Rat Boy and Keane both said foul and they are some of the biggest rag sympathisers around!! I can understand the ref not giving it, I don't think he had the best view of it. But to see it from behind and then to still think its not a foul, is frankly bizarre.

However it went in our favour!! :)

Don't really care what those two think So will have to agree to disagree Personally I would have booked him for simulation

 

[GaudinoMotors]

It works by legitimizing poor refereeing decisions and also helping the referee, if need be, when they can't find a reason to disallow a goal (an armpit hair being offside for example). An extremely clever way of massaging results. Taylor already new that by not giving the penalty he'd be supported by his VAR colleagues - no skin off his head - he won't be rested or made to officiate down the leagues anymore. It's brilliant when you think about it - zero accountability and the opportunity, or at least the chance, to engineer a result. Even if you think everything is above board and fair - it is more open to misuse than before. The lack of transparency and accountability for something of this importance is staggering.

 

[Franny's toilet roll]

Even Herr Klopp agrees the shove on KDB was a penalty -
"Look at Manchester City yesterday - it was so clear and obvious that Kevin de Bruyne was pushed [against Crystal Palace] and if I am saying Manchester City should have had a penalty then it must have been a penalty."

From BBC SPorts Website https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/50119117

Klopp is only saying this because he is attempting to validate his own claims against VAR . I think both incidents were called correctly against Utd, i even think the guy that was fouled took a bit of a dive and embellished the contact, hoping to get a freekick just outside the utd 18yd area. He then abused the 4th official for several minutes without evn being spoken to by the ref. Meanwhile Pep gets booked and fined left right and centre

 

[citizen_maine]

It works by legitimizing poor refereeing decisions and also helping the referee, if need be, when they can't find a reason to disallow a goal (an armpit hair being offside for example). An extremely clever way of massaging results. Taylor already new that by not giving the penalty he'd be supported by his VAR colleagues - no skin off his head - he won't be rested or made to officiated down the leagues anymore. It's brilliant when you think about it - zero accountability and the opportunity, or at least the chance, to engineer a result. Even if you think everything is above board and fair - it is more open to misuse than before it. The lack of transparency and accountability for something of this importance is staggering.

I suppose the difference now, is that the decisions look 10 times worse when they're not being overturned by VAR. In the past, they could stand by the ref 'didn't see it clearly'. Now they've got no excuse for getting it wrong, and it's standing out like a sore thumb

 

[Bellamy's Caddy]

It's clear that the officials weren't ready for the introduction of VAR in the Premier League this seaaon and are now learning on the job.

In the match day programme there is a page dedicated to VAR and explains what is is used for, there is a reference to 'clear and obvious errors'. In my opinion this is the biggest cause of confusion and debate, as it is so subjective. I think this needs to be reviewed and instead the question should be 'has the referee made a mistake'. The VAR panel should review the build up to goals or penalties etc and they should reach a consensus on the major decisions which is then communicated to the referee (if that means over ruling them so be it).

 

[jimharri]

Probably mentioned elsewhere, but did Ref Watch have any comment on our (non) penalty at Palace?

 

[Bellamy's Caddy]

Probably mentioned elsewhere, but did Ref Watch have any comment on our (non) penalty at Palace?

Yeah, they all agreed it was a penalty, even Dermott Gallagher. Stephen Warnock described it as 'GBH'. Even more frustrating that it wasn't given even with VAR!

 

[smevchenko]

And if my aunty had a dick she would be my uncle, and how do you know the game would have panned out differently? Oh you don't

It's common sense, if a major incident in a game is reversed, then the following events will obviously change. Yes, the result may end up the same, but it will take a different set of circumstances to get there.