VAR Discussion Thread | 2024/25

[TheBeautifulGame]

Takes one to know one. Just that one of us knows what he is talking about. Hopefully :)

A little free advice for you.

One of my old mentors (yes, accountants have them too) told me that "people will forgive you for being wrong, but they won't forgive you for being right". Being right in a community isn't the most important thing. Knowing when to shut up is, though .....

And a little self-deprecation goes a long way on here. I suggest you (try to) use it wisely.

For me, it's not about being right. I could care less about being right. It's about being intellectually honest about what is happening, in football and in life and to have the integrity to be objective about a situation.

The difference between me and some others is that I do not allow any bias to cloud by judgement. I try to be as fair as possible and call everything down the middle.

We're never going to get anywhere if we refuse to look at the objective facts about a situation. And in both of our cases, we have slowly inched towards conceding some minor points. But there is much more room to grow.

And I will have you know that I'm not above self-depreciation. But I'm going to stand my ground where appropriate. Remember how I engaged with Richard when he tried to pull rank on me. That kind of hubris is the antithesis of self-depreciation. And what had aligned us (as in you and i) for so long before this recent dust up over the Henderson incident is that we both equally objected to VAR and how top down it was. How it was against the desires of average fan not to mention all the problems it was causing.

While I hear you in some of your advice, I could also apply that same advice right back at you. The individuality of thought should not be repressed. Sure, I see things a little differently, but so what? It would be boring if we all agreed on everything. And I'm also willing to learn from those who can offer constructive thought and challenge me on my views. You may not realize it but you sort of helped me along as well when you said it's not about if the laws make sense but what they are. And I took a new avenue of getting into the whole what is a goal scoring opportunity and all that. To which you also proceeded to fight me on. That is when I concluded that all you seem to care about is being right, and here you are trying to lecture me about being right isn't the most important thing. You could have met me half way countless times but you didn't. And so I worked my around that challenge as well and here we are.

You said something that I can agree with about how you'll agree with me when you agree and you'll disagree with me when you disagree. And that's fair. I'll do the same. But there should be more respect and cooperation imho.

 

[Ithryn Luin]

For me, it's not about being right. I could care less about being right. It's about being intellectually honest about what is happening, in football and in life and to have the integrity to be objective about a situation.

The difference between me and some others is that I do not allow any bias to cloud by judgement. I try to be as fair as possible and call everything down the middle.

We're never going to get anywhere if we refuse to look at the objective facts about a situation. And in both of our cases, we have slowly inched towards conceding some minor points. But there is much more room to grow.

And I will have you know that I'm not above self-depreciation. But I'm going to stand my ground where appropriate. Remember how I engaged with Richard when he tried to pull rank on me. That kind of hubris is the antithesis of self-depreciation. And what had aligned us (as in you and i) for so long before this recent dust up over the Henderson incident is that we both equally objected to VAR and how top down it was. How it was against the desires of average fan not to mention all the problems it was causing.

While I hear you in some of your advice, I could also apply that same advice right back at you. The individuality of thought should not be repressed. Sure, I see things a little differently, but so what? It would be boring if we all agreed on everything. And I'm also willing to learn from those who can offer constructive thought and challenge me on my views. You may not realize it but you sort of helped me along as well when you said it's not about if the laws make sense but what they are. And I took a new avenue of getting into the whole what is a goal scoring opportunity and all that. To which you also proceeded to fight me on. That is when I concluded that all you seem to care about is being right, and here you are trying to lecture me about being right isn't the most important thing. You could have met me half way countless times but you didn't. And so I worked my around that challenge as well and here we are.

You said something that I can agree with about how you'll agree with me when you agree and you'll disagree with me when you disagree. And that's fair. I'll do the same. But there should be more respect and cooperation imho.

Fuckin hell!!????

 

[trublue55]

It's really not worth engaging with him any more.

Are you seriously suggesting that it has ever, (at any point) been worth engaging with him?

 

[TheBeautifulGame]

Are you seriously suggesting that it has ever, (at any point) been worth engaging with him?

If you want to engage, engage. If you don't, don't. But to cry about it is corny.

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

Fuckin hell!!????

Lol. Not right in the head.

 

[Longdarnit Blue]

Whilst slightly off topic - I’ve always thought that deliberately pulling shirts, fouling, handling the ball etc when a player is through on goal, then being sent off and requiring a VAR interpretation of what is a potential, probable or obvious goal scoring opportunity is completely insane.

I understand the heat of the moment excuse and OK if you’re 1-0 up with a minute to go but otherwise let it go, see what happens and keep 11 players on the pitch. Managers should play the clip of Jackson bearing down on the Betis goal last night as an example of what often happens. Players miss control the ball (like Jackson) the keeper saves or the player scores. A goal is never guaranteed. Getting sent off unnecessarily is more likely to cost teams in that game and the games when the player is suspended than conceding a goal.

Henderson being sent off would have probably cost the false cockneys the final. As our Great Viking has temporarily morphed into Erling Hojlund, he might have missed anyway.

Keep bloody VAR away from having to get involved in decision making and risk letting the game play out.

 

[halfcenturyup]

For me, it's not about being right. I could care less about being right. It's about being intellectually honest about what is happening, in football and in life and to have the integrity to be objective about a situation.

The difference between me and some others is that I do not allow any bias to cloud by judgement. I try to be as fair as possible and call everything down the middle.

We're never going to get anywhere if we refuse to look at the objective facts about a situation. And in both of our cases, we have slowly inched towards conceding some minor points. But there is much more room to grow.

And I will have you know that I'm not above self-depreciation. But I'm going to stand my ground where appropriate. Remember how I engaged with Richard when he tried to pull rank on me. That kind of hubris is the antithesis of self-depreciation. And what had aligned us (as in you and i) for so long before this recent dust up over the Henderson incident is that we both equally objected to VAR and how top down it was. How it was against the desires of average fan not to mention all the problems it was causing.

While I hear you in some of your advice, I could also apply that same advice right back at you. The individuality of thought should not be repressed. Sure, I see things a little differently, but so what? It would be boring if we all agreed on everything. And I'm also willing to learn from those who can offer constructive thought and challenge me on my views. You may not realize it but you sort of helped me along as well when you said it's not about if the laws make sense but what they are. And I took a new avenue of getting into the whole what is a goal scoring opportunity and all that. To which you also proceeded to fight me on. That is when I concluded that all you seem to care about is being right, and here you are trying to lecture me about being right isn't the most important thing. You could have met me half way countless times but you didn't. And so I worked my around that challenge as well and here we are.

You said something that I can agree with about how you'll agree with me when you agree and you'll disagree with me when you disagree. And that's fair. I'll do the same. But there should be more respect and cooperation imho.

You didn't get the bit about shutting up, did you?

 

[trublue55]

Hi guys,

i've a new concept for you, when a player (Haaland possibly?) is through 1 - on - 1 with the goalkeeper, tell him to just plough on straight through the middle of the keeper, fairly obviously, there is no longer any point in trying to take the ball round the keeper (that would probably be going away from goal), and would rule out any DoGSO, or red card.

 

[TheBeautifulGame]

You didn't get the bit about shutting up, did you?

Speak for yourself.

 

[TheBeautifulGame]

Hi guys,

i've a new concept for you, when a player (Haaland possibly?) is through 1 - on - 1 with the goalkeeper, tell him to just plough on straight through the middle of the keeper, fairly obviously, there is no longer any point in trying to take the ball round the keeper (that would probably be going away from goal), and would rule out any DoGSO, or red card.

That's not how it goes in football. Angles present themselves and you have to react to the randomness of the situation as best you can. There's always a point to taking the best angle that is available to you. Thinking that you should just run through the keeper each time is ignorant of the intricacies of the game.

 

[halfcenturyup]

Whilst slightly off topic - I’ve always thought that deliberately pulling shirts, fouling, handling the ball etc when a player is through on goal, then being sent off and requiring a VAR interpretation of what is a potential, probable or obvious goal scoring opportunity is completely insane.

I understand the heat of the moment excuse and OK if you’re 1-0 up with a minute to go but otherwise let it go, see what happens and keep 11 players on the pitch. Managers should play the clip of Jackson bearing down on the Betis goal last night as an example of what often happens. Players miss control the ball (like Jackson) the keeper saves or the player scores. A goal is never guaranteed. Getting sent off unnecessarily is more likely to cost teams in that game and the games when the player is suspended than conceding a goal.

Henderson being sent off would have probably cost the false cockneys the final. As our Great Viking has temporarily morphed into Erling Hojlund, he might have missed anyway.

Keep bloody VAR away from having to get involved in decision making and risk letting the game play out.

Well yes, it's supposed to be a serious disincentive. So don't offend and just take your chances.

Which is why the benefit of the doubt normally goes to the attacker.

Unless, of course, the defender realises the VAR is instructed not to disrupt the "spectacle" by sending a player off early if he can possibly avoid it. Then, what the hell, go round committing DOGSO offences in the first half.

 

[halfcenturyup]

That's not how it goes in football. Angles present themselves and you have to react to the randomness of the situation as best you can. There's always a point to taking the best angle that is available to you. Thinking that you should just run through the keeper each time is ignorant of the intricacies of the game.

I ran it through GoogleAI and got this:

"In a one-on-one situation with the goalkeeper, a player shouldn't generally run through the keeper. This is because doing so can lead to a foul, a penalty kick for the other team, and potential injury to the goalkeeper. Instead, players are encouraged to use a variety of techniques, including dribbling around the keeper, placing the ball with precision, or faking a shot."

It didn't know it wasn't a serious question either.

 

[TheBeautifulGame]

Whilst slightly off topic - I’ve always thought that deliberately pulling shirts, fouling, handling the ball etc when a player is through on goal, then being sent off and requiring a VAR interpretation of what is a potential, probable or obvious goal scoring opportunity is completely insane.

Of course it's completely insane. The goal scoring opportunity language and the decision-making process that its morphed into is counter productive and hugely problematic. The old fashioned way of doing things was much better but unfortunately the game has been hijacked by the FIFA President with his reinventing of the wheel and over-reliance of technology. But it's more of a design flaw than anything.

They need to go back to allowing the referee to simply judge the severity of the incident as it relates to carding. Keeping things simple as much as possible cannot be understated. They've over-complicated everything due to VAR which has created all this red tape as far as what is needed to make certain decisions.

Henderson being sent off would have probably cost the false cockneys the final. As our Great Viking has temporarily morphed into Erling Hojlund, he might have missed anyway.

And if that happened Palace fans would be crying about it too, Palace fans would be on about how he was unfairly sent off. What VAR does is that it creates controversy in situations where there wouldn't otherwise be. If the ref had merely seen the handball and called for a free kick with no card no one would have batted an eye. But it becomes controversial the moment play is stopped and then it goes to a review and then the wheels start churning about this needing to happen for this to be given and before you know it it's become its own monster. They've turned a nothing burger into a scandal merely by the reviewing process. And then as a result either City fans or Palace feel wronged by whichever way the review goes.

It's an absolute riot what VAR has done and continues to do, and whether we realize it or not, we're all sick of it. Something needs to be done and there really needs to be an urgency to actually get VAR out of the sport. One would think after all the shenanigans we've observed this season, the never ending controversy on a match day basis that this offseason could be a turning point.

Keep bloody VAR away from having to get involved in decision making and risk letting the game play out.

Amen.

 

[TheBeautifulGame]

Unless, of course, the defender realises the VAR is instructed not to disrupt the "spectacle" by sending a player off early if he can possibly avoid it. Then, what the hell, go round committing DOGSO offences in the first half.

And the other side of that coin is what Stephen pointed out earlier about how rare red cards were way back when. I mean, there is something to be said about disrupting the "spectacle" whether there's an agenda or a conspiracy to it or not. When you send someone off for something borderline or controversial, particularly early in a match like in the first half, you have influenced the game to a large degree. We talk all the time about the impression (at least) of match fixing through VAR interventions.

As a neutral observer, fans do not want to see any player be sent off controversially. Fans want to see both teams have an equal and fair opportunity to win the match. Not only does a sending off influence the match but it creates excuses afterwards. The officials aren't the stars of the game, fans would like them to essentially be invisible to the greatest extent possible. But now it's become all about them. And I'm sorry but if you are not allowed to consider the severity of the foul or whether or not it was deliberate, you have completely lost the plot as to what is supposed to go into that. If there's any doubt about an incident, it's best to keep him on.

 

[burning blue soul]

Y'kow, the football rule book reminds me of the bible.
In it's day it was adequate and could pull the woolly hat over the eyes of the vast majority of folk who didn't know any better to question.

But, as time has moved on there is now forensic examination of these documents that cannot stand that level of scrutiny and still be viable.

So, the blokes behind both just fudge stuff and go with the flow of public opinion. They drift along interpreting every bullshit caveat with another bullshit caveat. Its quite impressive, to be fair.
Knowing full well that the public have goldfish level memory retention and will have moved on after a few seconds.

Anyway, the lotg are not fit for purpose, and the enforcers are a bunch of towel flicking jobsworths who will follow party lines like they live in the kremlin.

Referees are the broken solution to the problem they create. Go figure that one out!!

 

[TheBeautifulGame]

I agree with everything you said there burning, but lets not lose sight of the fact that this whole situation has been hugely negatively impacted by VAR. Rewind 10 years ago, and yeah some of that stuff is true, but not even close to the extent that it is now.

 

[burning blue soul]

I agree with everything you said there burning, but lets not lose sight of the fact that this whole situation has been hugely negatively impacted by VAR. Rewind 10 years ago, and yeah some of that stuff is true, but not even close to the extent that it is now.

VAR was built up to be the solution. But, there is no solution because the rules are fucked to begin with.
Anyway, fuck 'em!

 

[york away to this!]

With hole digging like this, we'll be mining magma from the earth's core in no time.
Mind you, TheBeautifulGameBot will likely suggest they'll discover global marmite reserves, looking at the geological evidence to date...

 

[Manc Born & Bred]

Please know that I did not conclude that he didn't deny a goal scoring opportunity. If you go back to my earliest comments on the incident, I made it abundantly clear that I personally saw it as a denial of a goal scoring opportunity.

What I have since done however was put myself into the shoes of the VAR, a terrifiyng thought indeed, and tried to understand what went into their decision.

To be crystal clear on the subject :

was it in my personal view a "possible" denial of a goal scoring opportunity? Yes
was it in my personal view a "probable" denial of a goal scoring opportunity? Yes
was it in my personal view an "obvious" denial of a goal scoring opportunity? No

The latter of which is what is written in the law for them to determine. Do we all understand now, to where there can be no lack of understanding this distinction?

And your example is pertinent. Haaland is a spectacular player who can make often miraculous and thrilling moves from sometimes impossible angles. He can turn a difficult situation into a goal out of nowhere.

Please don't ever again accuse me of being a rag, a PGMOL agent or a stupid person. I don't know which is worse but they are all equally insulting! I am a blue tried and true and will always be.

It is my view that to what probability of a denial of a goal scoring opportunity shouldn't come into it, but it should be allowed to be corrected through any carding. And it is my personal view that the carding should be largely dependent on the severity of the foul and whether or not it is deliberate. Please consider my position and perhaps reevaluate your perspective on this.

1. I didn't accuse you of anything
2. If you think one of, if not the best, goal scorers in the PL doesn't have an obvious goal scoring opportunity after going around the keeper inside the box with no defender within yards of him then there is no hope
3. Even fans I have spoken to of other teams including a Palace fan have all agreed that Henderson should have been carded and the only explanation they can think of is that someone didn't want to ruin the spectacle of the game. That particular LOTG is on the same page as 'it's my first foul ref, it can't be a yellow' and 'it's too early in the game ref to book me for time wasting'. It doesn't exist and the only conclusion that can be reached is the VAR and his accomplices cheated
4. There are countless examples of players moving away from goal and still scoring. In fact to go around a keeper in a 1v1 situation, unless you nutmeg the keeper and jump over him then both the ball and player tend to move away from goal
5. The silence from the club annoys me as much as their refusal to turn the coach around and not play the dippers and their silence and by inference their complicity on the Instanbul debacle. If it was a red shirted team that was on the end of this decision the media would have been banging on about it for days. I will await to see what Howard Webb says about it in the next episode of Mic'd Up because even he can't defend the indefensible

 

[danielwood5]

In the Kova situation, the direction the opponent was headed in wasn't perhaps "directly" towards the goal but it was in the general vicinity of the goal. As in, he was running towards the endline, parallel to the sideline if you will. As opposed to Haaland who was running diagonally towards the sidelines and away from goal.

A crash course in geometry may be needed here. Shall I get a protractor?

Until you can admit that Haaland was in fact running away from goal

You're once again embarrassing yourself by proving that your arrogance and condescending nature is based purely on hubris as you've demonstrated on a number of occasions a complete lack of understanding of the Laws of the Game.
The guidance given to referees states that the player has to be moving in the general direction of the opposition goal for it be considered DOGSO but that it's accepted that the players or the ball wont always be headed directly to the goal, particularly in instances where a player is taking the ball around a defender or goalkeeeper, therefore any play that is generally moving upfield is considered moving towards goal.
if a player is facing their own goalkeeper, or if the general play is moving away from the opposition goal, i.e. passing to a team mate behind or to the side of them then this isn't DOGSO.
This reply isn't for you as you're too entrenched in your bullshit but more for anyone who may mistake eloquence for competence when reading your posts.