VAR Discussion Thread - 2023/24 | PL clubs to vote on whether to scrap VAR (pg413)

[Ribble73]

I don't understand why City's penalty is being described as soft, or controversial. Law 12 includes:

"A direct free kick is awarded if a player commits any of the following offences:

holds an opponent"

This becomes a penalty if committed by a player in his own penalty area.

There is no further explanation or clarification, so this consideration of whether Rodri could have reached the ball is just unnecessary noise and obfuscation.

The controversy occurs for all the times holding occurs in the penalty area and a penalty is not awarded. When this happens, the referees are ignoring the Laws of the Game. If this was penalised more often, holding would stop, and the contest would be a fair one between opposing players.

It was clamped down on during a recent World Cup -at the start anyway -but soon died a death

 

[stonerblue]

It' not great.

But neither was officials allowing clear offside goals to stand, clear dives in the box being given as penalties, red card challenges unseen etc etc.

No form of officiating will please. but having tech help can at least improve the chances of the correct outcome.

We still have that happening with var

 

[SWP's back]

We still have that happening with var

There’s been 1 in several years. There used to be several every week.

 

[SWP's back]

Certainly you only see a couple of you when var works , nowhere to be seen the rest of the time

Just saying

Well seeing as well over 90% of VAR decisions are correct, if you want us to post every single time there’s a correct decision then I’ll end up with more posts on here than you.

 

[halfcenturyup]

I do wonder if that was in the mix for Oliver to ponder on after last year’s debacle

Bingo.

 

[Phil1]

Well seeing as well over 90% of VAR decisions are correct, if you want us to post every single time there’s a correct decision then I’ll end up with more posts on here than you.

Touché! Haha!
Still waiting to see a post from our Kaz giving Jack credit for his recent performance but I guess she didn’t see that game..

 

[mancboy]

Exactly. I think it just shows how they are so used to being refereed. As soon as a decision especially at old toilet is awarded against them (despite it being correct according to the current laws), theres wide spread outrage!!

They are so used to the Rashford offside Ratface goal from last year or Rashfords dives being given as a pen.

said this before, liverpool are the same, they have had it their way for so long, they actually think fair decisions given against them are incorrect

 

[stonerblue]

There’s been 1 in several years. There used to be several every week.

Bollocks. There were 3 off that list in the derby alone.

 

[mancboy]

There seems to be this whole idea that more should be made of the penalty and it was a disgraceful decision but the true disgraceful decision was not send anthony off, by every metric and letter of the law he lashed out and its a clear a sending off as you will ever see.

 

[Dave Ewing's Back 'eader]

I don't understand why City's penalty is being described as soft, or controversial. Law 12 includes:

"A direct free kick is awarded if a player commits any of the following offences:

holds an opponent"

This becomes a penalty if committed by a player in his own penalty area.

There is no further explanation or a, so this consideration of whether Rodri could have reached the ball is just unnecessary noise and obfuscation.

The controversy occurs for all the times holding occurs in the penalty area and a penalty is not awarded. When this happens, the referees are ignoring the Laws of the Game. If this was penalised more often, holding would stop, and the contest would be a fair one between opposing players.

I don't understand why City's penalty is being described as soft, or controversial. Law 12 includes:

"A direct free kick is awarded if a player commits any of the following offences:

holds an opponent"

This becomes a penalty if committed by a player in his own penalty area.

There is no further explanation or clarification, so this consideration of whether Rodri could have reached the ball is just unnecessary noise and obfuscation.sof

The controversy occurs for all the times holding occurs in the penalty area and a penalty is not awarded. When this happens, the referees are ignoring the Laws of the Game. If this was penalised more often, holding would stop, and the contest would be a fair one between opposing players.

'Cos we got it! What I don't understand is why, if Oliver intervened and assisted Blind Tierney when Rodri was grievously fouled inside the Rag area, why didn't he repeat his 'assist' when Haaland was dragged to the grass inside the Rag area?

The people who think that the Rodri pen was 'soft' are the same people who thought that Jack's fingernail in the Final was a blatant handball and a stonewall pen!

'Ignoring the LotG' is probably the kindest and most euphemistic way of saying the bastards are cheating.