VAR Discussion Thread | 2024/25

[Gaylord du Bois]

 

[Saddleworth2]

He has had a lot worse pushing without a foul being given. I think it was the right decision but more because Robertson was an active player whilst in an offside position and impeded Donnas ability to save the header rather than 'the push'.

 

[Stephen230]

In the same way that Silva wasn't offside when tangling with the Wolves 'keeper before Stones headed it, Robertson's actions before the moment the ball hit Van Dijk's head are also irrelevant. So I don't think this is a great take.

The key difference and why both decisions are correct for me, is that at the moment Stones headed it, Silva had moved out of the line of the ball. Whereas Robertson is still in a direct line of the ball and the 'keeper at the point of the header.

It's getting the coverage it is purely because it's Liverpool and they lost. The Ake goal against Fulham was far more contentious but no one cares about Fulham right?

 

[mancboy]

As i said yesterday its incredibly simple and the media are being willfully ignorant when discussing it, donnarumma has to delay his dive because he does not know if robertson is going to divert the ball elsewhere into the net, that is the first instance of him interfering with play, the second instance of him interfering with play is when he ducks under the ball which in any area of the pitch would be considered a dummy and therefore interfering with play.

So there is not one but two reasons that the goal could have been disallowed for and whether donnarumma would have got to it or not is immaterial as he was denied the opportunity.

 

[Gray]

Re-watched that after someone else pointed it out yesterday. The referee isn't in shot but there seems to be a whistle at the exact same time that he touches the crossbar. He can of course do it before the signal for the penalty to be taken. So I'm not sure. Probably milliseconds in it, so would have been a bit harsh.

No he can't.

1. Procedure

The ball must be stationary, with part of the ball touching or overhanging the centre on the penalty mark, and the goalposts, crossbar and goal net must not be moving.

The player taking the penalty kick must be clearly identified.

The defending goalkeeper must remain on the goal line, facing the kicker, between the goalposts until the ball is kicked. The goalkeeper must not behave
in a way that unfairly distracts the kicker, e.g. delay the taking of the kick or touch the goalposts, crossbar or goal net.

 

[SkyBlueFlux]

No he can't.

1. Procedure

The ball must be stationary, with part of the ball touching or overhanging the centre on the penalty mark, and the goalposts, crossbar and goal net must not be moving.

The player taking the penalty kick must be clearly identified.

The defending goalkeeper must remain on the goal line, facing the kicker, between the goalposts until the ball is kicked. The goalkeeper must not behave
in a way that unfairly distracts the kicker, e.g. delay the taking of the kick or touch the goalposts, crossbar or goal net.

If it was just that crossbar was still wobbling it would have been borderline but that wording seems pretty clear cut. It specifically says he can’t touch the crossbar during the taking of the kick.

Bit of a weird stipulation to make as I can’t ever remember that being a significant distraction technique but rules is rules.

 

[Stephen230]

No he can't.

1. Procedure

The ball must be stationary, with part of the ball touching or overhanging the centre on the penalty mark, and the goalposts, crossbar and goal net must not be moving.

The player taking the penalty kick must be clearly identified.

The defending goalkeeper must remain on the goal line, facing the kicker, between the goalposts until the ball is kicked. The goalkeeper must not behave
in a way that unfairly distracts the kicker, e.g. delay the taking of the kick or touch the goalposts, crossbar or goal net.

None of that contradicts anything I've said. The 'procedure' starts when the referee indicates ( whistles ) for the penalty to be taken.

 

[Gray]

None of that contradicts anything I've said. The 'procedure' starts when the referee indicates ( whistles ) for the penalty to be taken.

It’s a grey area but the law also says:

After the players have taken positions in accordance with this Law, the referee signals for the penalty kick to be taken.

So the referee should not have allowed the kick to be taken until he had booked the keeper for breaking the law. That would have really got Slot’s back up.

 

[Gorton_Tubster]

In the same way that Silva wasn't offside when tangling with the Wolves 'keeper before Stones headed it, Robertson's actions before the moment the ball hit Van Dijk's head are also irrelevant. So I don't think this is a great take.

The key difference and why both decisions are correct for me, is that at the moment Stones headed it, Silva had moved out of the line of the ball. Whereas Robertson is still in a direct line of the ball and the 'keeper at the point of the header.

It's getting the coverage it is purely because it's Liverpool and they lost. The Ake goal against Fulham was far more contentious but no one cares about Fulham right?

I think it is a great take. things like that influence officials.

The lino was watching that, watching Robinson (As some people seem to call him nowadays) jochying for position, pushing the keeper, then ducking out of the way of the ball, whilst offside. I would have flagged straight away.

 

[richardtheref]

you sure immediately ? read it took 15 seconds. clearly some communication from VAR to lino on that.

Have just re watched the game in view of our earlier discussions.
1. The ref was about 8 yards away from the foul with a fairly decent view. So once again I would really question why the ref didn't see this in real time? Is this the ref taking the easy option?
2. From van dick heading the ball until the assistant put his flag up was actually 8 seconds. 13 seconds until the ref acknowledged it

 

[blue by birth]

I called it a pen, everyone around me in pub said it was 'joke' decision and went down to easy.
social media moaning about it, so caused some controversy.

Pen for me and without VAR it wouldn't have been awarded and Van Dijk goal would have stood. but its all corrupt apparently and must be scrapped.

Except the lino flagged for offside

 

[blue by birth]

var awarded man city a penalty and disallowed a Liverpool goal yesterday?

It was the lino ffs

 

[The Black Shed]

Isn't it weird that the day after Liverpool lose, and one of the goals was a contentious offside, the BBC open up a debate, for everyone, to discuss how the beautiful game needs to change.

Impeccable timing!

 

[BlueHammer85]

It was the lino ffs

Not the penalty. That wouldn’t have been given.

Offside was 13 seconds before flag went up so clearly some VAR communication.

Not sure why some get the hump when VAR helps get the right verdict , I’d feel robbed if that penalty wasn’t given and the Liverpool goal allowed to stand.

 

[Coljj]

 

[cleavers]

That's him off their christmas card list.

 

[MCFC1993]

Common sense to be honest.

Headed over on offside player, offside.
Headed nowhere near the offside player, onside.

Feels pretty straight forward.

 

[blue by birth]

Not the penalty. That wouldn’t have been given.

Offside was 13 seconds before flag went up so clearly some VAR communication.

Not sure why some get the hump when VAR helps get the right verdict , I’d feel robbed if that penalty wasn’t given and the Liverpool goal allowed to stand.

Possibly lino and ref talking rather than Var..
Even though the penalty was given I still hate Var..
Obviously var should pick up stuff like the penalty etc ..but it's still not something I like.
Referee should have seen the foul..he had a decent view

 

[cleavers]

Have just re watched the game in view of our earlier discussions.
1. The ref was about 8 yards away from the foul with a fairly decent view. So once again I would really question why the ref didn't see this in real time? Is this the ref taking the easy option?
2. From van dick heading the ball until the assistant put his flag up was actually 8 seconds. 13 seconds until the ref acknowledged it

1. He was living in hope, he knew it was a penalty right away, but he didn't want to give it himself, so he hoped var would just either give it, or agree with him, he didn't want to be sent to the monitor, when he was, he took far too long to see the obvious, and when he announced it was, he was literally shitting himself.

2. He knew var would back the officials, simply because it was given on field, and there was no clear and obvious reason to overturn the offside.

 

[TheBlueCat]

var awarded man city a penalty and disallowed a Liverpool goal yesterday?

Did you watch the game? Onfield decision was OFFSIDE