cleavers
Moderator
They started making cartoon drawings.
VAR Discussion Thread
- Thread starter SebastianBlue
- Start date
In a episode of cash talks football he proved that the officials are being very selective in the images they are using for their decision making especially for offsides .
simon23
Well-Known Member
But it wasn't stopped for the grappling between outfield players...that has been pretty consistent ( not totally....nothing ever is) all season and let go for a lot of it.....its the impact on the keeper which is inconsistent ...Arsenal have been impending the keeper at corners all season and getting goals from it....so this shoulc have been a goal
And just a general point...the rules are written in black and white but differing human perception/ interpretation of what is written is what will always make it subjective...out experiences impact hugely on perception of anything....
Dor me personally having plated football as a kid in the 80's id say all of that pushing / pulling is fine...its a contact sport...other people's experience will make them disagree with this.
You however have clearly made your mind up....but you cannot escape the fact that there is an element of bias in it.....most people in football have said its a foul on the keeper....its just Arsenal have been doing tge same all season and there in lies the issue
Stephen230
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 1 Apr 2022
- Messages
- 9,156
- Team supported
- MCFC
Listening to the audio, the AVAR seemed quite keen on the two Arsenal fouls but the VAR remained pretty non committal and passed it back to the referee without really giving much of an opinion himself on that part of it. But the referee didn't seem the slightest bit interested and just concentrated on the West Ham foul.
I'm probably in a minority of one here. But I have a bit of sympathy for the VAR in a situation like that. From the moment the ball hit the net, he was destined to be the main story of not just that match but the whole title race and relegation battle. Whatever way he went it was going to be hugely controversial and overshadow the actual football.
I'm probably in a minority of one here. But I have a bit of sympathy for the VAR in a situation like that. From the moment the ball hit the net, he was destined to be the main story of not just that match but the whole title race and relegation battle. Whatever way he went it was going to be hugely controversial and overshadow the actual football.
danielwood5
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 27 Jul 2012
- Messages
- 1,592
I disagree on a few points here.
I dont particularly feel sorry for the VAR guy here as he completely ignored the VAR protocol here and got involved in the whole decision making process incorrectly. At no point does he check if the referee saw the 'foul' on the keeper to check if this was a "clear and obvious error" giving him no legitimate reason to get involved.
He then looks at what may have been a foul on the keeper but because there were so many things that could be viewed as a foul going on he took the cowards way out and handed it back to the on-field referee, more than likely because he knew the implications of this goal and didn't want to be the one making the decision. At no point does he say "I think there's been an error" or "you've missed the grab on the keeper" he just sees a lot going on and passes responsibility.
The VAR man then didn't fully explain the issues he was seeing to the referee or show him the full view of what has been going on while simultaneously giving him the wrong chronological version of events.
The only reason the VAR team are being discussed in this is purely because they, inexplicably, got involved when they haven't in the hundreds of extremely similar incidents over the last two seasons.
If VAR hadn't got involved and the goal had stood nobody but Arsenal fans would be calling out the VAR team as the goal would have stood exactly the way that same goal has been allowed to stand over the last two seasons. The pundits would have brushed it off with "he's got to be stronger there" as they have done the last two years, fans of all clubs would have been fine with it as they've had to watch Arsenal score that exact goal against their team for two seasons and the league would have gone on as it has the last two years.
It is increasingly clear that the only reason VAR got incolved in that decision is because of the effect it would have had on Arsenal's season and had nothing to do with the VAR protocol or the Laws of the Game, and that is where the controversy has come from.
jamielowndes
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 15 Jan 2010
- Messages
- 3,453
Listening to the VAR audio for the West Ham goal, I dont have an issue with them saying Raya got fouled, he obviously did.
My issue is that its taken them nearly all season to actually acknowledge fouls on the goalkeeper from corners and they've completely blown past multiple fouls from the Arsenal defence that were raised for review prior to the called foul. Realistically the end result should have been a West Ham penalty (maybe advantage and the goal just stands as normal)
Bernardo had the right idea against Everton by just rugby tackling someone to the ground. They aren't calling it.
The rules on corners desperately need to change. The actual product of Premier League football is fucking awful because the referees are allowing it to be.
My issue is that its taken them nearly all season to actually acknowledge fouls on the goalkeeper from corners and they've completely blown past multiple fouls from the Arsenal defence that were raised for review prior to the called foul. Realistically the end result should have been a West Ham penalty (maybe advantage and the goal just stands as normal)
Bernardo had the right idea against Everton by just rugby tackling someone to the ground. They aren't calling it.
The rules on corners desperately need to change. The actual product of Premier League football is fucking awful because the referees are allowing it to be.
Tbilisi
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 5 Jul 2009
- Messages
- 9,693
- Team supported
- City and Darlington FC
I like tech for goal line, offsides and dangerous play incidents.
I also think it stops as much diving as in the past but players caught doing this should be retro punished.
I also think it stops as much diving as in the past but players caught doing this should be retro punished.
bluemanchester
Well-Known Member
"You however have clearly made your mind up....but you cannot escape the fact that there is an element of bias in it.....most people in football have said its a foul on the keeper....its just Arsenal have been doing tge same all season and there in lies the issue"
You are absolutely correct I have clearly made my mind up and the bias I have in that decision is because in this instance Trossard was clearly grappling Pablo, without looking at the clip from opposite where the corner was taken again, I am not sure Pablo is doing anything more than trying to escape Trossards grip. It was a foul in the 50s 60s and 70s when I was playing football. It was a foul when I did a bit of refereeing, has to be said not very well;-), in the 80s and it is still a foul today. As I said in another post, if I was a West Ham supporter I would be fuming at this decision that is so wrong on so many levels. Referees should not ignore fouls in the box that if they were anywhere else on the pitch would be a booking and if he was the last man a sending off. Maybe I see things in simple terms instead of allowing the gaslighting of Webb and his highly paid minions to influence me. That will not change however much mud is thrown my way;-)
Longdarnit Blue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 24 May 2024
- Messages
- 386
- Team supported
- City
I’m not a Rugby follower but I think a Rugby ref would have said to the VAR in real time over the loud speaker so everyone in the ground and on TV can hear something like:
“Onfield decision is a goal. There seemed to be a lot of grabbing and holding going on and I was unable to see clearly. Can you check the grappling going on following the corner and establish if any fouls have been committed by the defending team and the attacking team. If so which were committed first.”
Everyone in the ground knows what was happening and VAR has been instructed what to do by the actual person in charge.
VAR can look at what they’ve been told to look at whilst the incident is shown on the big screens in real time so fans can follow what VAR is doing. VAR can pretty easily follow the sequence of events and tell the referee what they’ve been able to establish.
“There are 3 fouls committed by 3 Arsenal players prior to a foul by a West Ham player on the Arsenal goalkeeper therefore you can award a goal”
Referee points to the centre circle - goal.
Everyone everywhere knows what has happened and why the decision has ultimately been made.
If we must have the anti-Christ that is VAR, it has to be transparent - audible and visible.
I’m not a conspiracy theorist but after that shit show and the farce of the “transcript”, any refusal to introduce a rugby style VAR does tend to suggest a willingness for cover up and corruption.
The simplest decision though is to get rid.
“Onfield decision is a goal. There seemed to be a lot of grabbing and holding going on and I was unable to see clearly. Can you check the grappling going on following the corner and establish if any fouls have been committed by the defending team and the attacking team. If so which were committed first.”
Everyone in the ground knows what was happening and VAR has been instructed what to do by the actual person in charge.
VAR can look at what they’ve been told to look at whilst the incident is shown on the big screens in real time so fans can follow what VAR is doing. VAR can pretty easily follow the sequence of events and tell the referee what they’ve been able to establish.
“There are 3 fouls committed by 3 Arsenal players prior to a foul by a West Ham player on the Arsenal goalkeeper therefore you can award a goal”
Referee points to the centre circle - goal.
Everyone everywhere knows what has happened and why the decision has ultimately been made.
If we must have the anti-Christ that is VAR, it has to be transparent - audible and visible.
I’m not a conspiracy theorist but after that shit show and the farce of the “transcript”, any refusal to introduce a rugby style VAR does tend to suggest a willingness for cover up and corruption.
The simplest decision though is to get rid.
bobbyowenquiff
Well-Known Member
It is simply a penalty. Trossard impacted the player who later fouled the keeper. So did Rice. Which is also a penalty. The comments from PGMOl are Orwellian. It was a clear mistake by the ref to think the Rice foul happened after the one on Reya. The video proves it started well before. That is just a fact. A fucking scandal.
bobbyowenquiff
Well-Known Member
Spot-on. The video sequence proves that three players committed fouls in that particular challenge. The Arsenal fouls preceded the West Ham one by a couple of seconds. The ref has only penalised West Ham. It is a penalty all day.
bobbyowenquiff
Well-Known Member
Well said. I respect your views as a referee. Surely behind closed doors referees can see this for what it is. Apart from some isolated cases I have always believed referees are honest, though some are incompetent. What we are now seeing is manipulation of images to support the decisions. The referees have to be in charge. VAR should just be a tool to help the ref, not to re-referee the game.
That has been the only way var would work with any transparency and I've called out the coat and dagger bollocks since day one. If referees are unable to communicate in a articulate manner publicly then recruit new referees. Its simple.
Colin Bells Boots
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 31 May 2016
- Messages
- 20,532
- Team supported
- Manchester City
PGMOL would insist that they are able to lie with a straight face .
Stiff Little Wingers
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 25 Aug 2010
- Messages
- 3,247
You've put that very well. The point about the ref leading the conversation is absolutely right - he's the person in charge and VAR is meant to help him.
richardtheref
Well-Known Member
I bumped into George Courtney just before last years cup final. He said he was glad he didn't have to deal with it and the people operating it as they are incompetent. This was just after he had retired as a Fifa representative
simon23
Well-Known Member
West Ham fans have a reason to be bias as well so Im sure they are mad but most fans who have no vested interest agree it was a foul....and I know city fans as well who believe it was a foul as well.
I aint throwing mud at you....just stating that you are unable to look at the incident impartially which you clearly agree with...fair play for admitting it.
My point is that Arsenal have been intefering with keepers all season and have scored a number of goals from it.....thats why I believe it should be a goal...as based ont he rest of the season it should have stood.
Now to the main issue...are goalkeepers a protected breed.....In my own opinion on football (not based on current interpritation of the rules or anything else) I dont think that in any game of football its s a foul (by current standards it is)....what the arsenal players were doing (grabbing around the waste of other players is (but the one on the goalkeeper isnt
What should happen in the future is to stop this grappling is that anything other than upper body contact/shoulder to shoulder should be a foul....
What annoys me is where pundits etc believe that raising your arms to jump isnt a natural position.....anyone that knows ANYTHING about biomechanics even at the mst basic level knows that lifting your arms is a part of jumping to propel yourself upwards....so arms are going to be raised....btu that doesnt mean you have to actually grab someone.
In the modern game SADLY but my god the powers that be need to get to grip of being over protective of keepers that 20 years would have been laughed at its beyond of fooking joke now :(
bluemanchester
Well-Known Member
"I aint throwing mud at you....just stating that you are unable to look at the incident impartially which you clearly agree with...fair play for admitting it."
Just got home from the match so will just address the point above. I did look at the incident impartially and saw Trossard grappling with Pedro who was trying to get away from the fouling by Trossard. That was the first foul of the incident. A penalty should have been awarded and the game stopped. For the VAR to ignore this is staggering, even when the assistant VAR was pointing it out. Tha VAR has not shown the ref all the angles I presume because if he had the ref would have correctly awarded a penalty, I would have thought. The later "foul" on the goalkeeper is irrelevant if the correct following of the laws of the game was taken. You are taking a lonely hill to die on and I would expect my hill to be like the Kinder Scout protest last century, teeming with people. Anyway it is gone now but as sure as eggs are eggs Le Arse will not be having the same leniancy they have been given this season.
flook
Well-Known Member
Seems the Scottish title may be decided by a dodgy VAR decision too.
www.bbc.co.uk
Hearts head coach Derek McInnes rages at 'disgusting' Celtic penalty
Hearts head coach Derek McInnes says his side are "up against everybody" after a "disgusting" 99th-minute penalty winner for Celtic ensured the Scottish Premiership title race goes to a final-day decider on Saturday.
www.bbc.co.uk