VAR impact and consequence log - game 27

[hello]

If we had that system the Jesus goal would almost certainly have still been chalked off. As far as I can remember Spurs didn’t have cause to use up two reviews earlier in the game so would still have had at least one review available so would have used it then because, why not?

In cricket it’s called “using up your reviews”. If the last batsman is given out lbw and the team still has a review they always use it.

So every late goal would be reviewed if the team conceding had a review left. Which could be quite an anti climax

However surely if using a review challenge system the captain\manager would have to specify a reason to review, not just a shit we conceded please review looking for any possible excuse. Would any spurs player have told kane their might have been a brush against the arm?

The offside to the mm ignoring laws of physics and the huge delays with no transparency whatsoever are the worse aspects though.

 

[ninjamonkey]

Not having a go or anything but it’s a bit of a flawed way of logging things. Jesus disallowed goal cost us points but was ultimately the correct decision and var got it right yet we’re saying it’s cost us points. The Silva penalty call this weekend was clearly a wrong decision but cost us nothing.

Also if we’re logging all the decisions not in our favour we have to count the ones going for us too. That West Ham game, we had that goal disallowed (correctly) but there was also the var review that confirmed sterling’s lob as a goal which everybody thought was offside and we wouldn’t have had the pen retaken and scored without var spotting the encroaching.

In a scenario where there’s a limited review system who’s in charge of deciding if it’s worth reviewing or not? If it’s the captain and he happens to be the keeper at the other end of the pitch how is he capable of deciding? If he has to consult a striker to decide whether it’s worth challenging then that’s going to take just as long to even decide to challenge as it would to just look at the challenge anyway. Players shouldn’t be burdened with reffing the game in their head too. Similarly if it’s down to the manager, he doesn’t have a great view either. There’s rarely anyone in a position better than the ref even the player who’s fouled often doesn’t know, we’ve all seen players utterly convinced they’ve been fouled when replays suggest otherwise. A challenge system is one of those things that sound like a good idea in theory but wouldn’t transfer into reality well at all.

 

[flook]

Not having a go or anything but it’s a bit of a flawed way of logging things. Jesus disallowed goal cost us points but was ultimately the correct decision and var got it right yet we’re saying it’s cost us points. The Silva penalty call this weekend was clearly a wrong decision but cost us nothing.

Also if we’re logging all the decisions not in our favour we have to count the ones going for us too. That West Ham game, we had that goal disallowed (correctly) but there was also the var review that confirmed sterling’s lob as a goal which everybody thought was offside and we wouldn’t have had the pen retaken and scored without var spotting the encroaching.

FFS have you read the VAR thread?

1 - wasn't handball, read and understand the handball rule, goal should have stood
2 - Sterlings goal wasn't offside, ref didn't give it, VAR review didn't give it, and certainly not everyone thought it was, though it was tight. again refer tot he VAR debate thread for an understanding of the limitations of the technology used and why it shouldn't be calling mm decisions
3 - VAR doesn't review encroachment so you're wrong about that too

it's not really your day is it

 

[balotelli's back pocket]

FFS have you read the VAR thread?

1 - wasn't handball, read and understand the handball rule, goal should have stood
2 - Sterlings goal wasn't offside, ref didn't give it, VAR review didn't give it, and certainly not everyone thought it was, though it was tight. again refer tot he VAR debate thread for an understanding of the limitations of the technology used and why it shouldn't be calling mm decisions
3 - VAR doesn't review encroachment so you're wrong about that too

it's not really your day is it

Wrong.

 

[I'm With Stupid]

Not having a go or anything but it’s a bit of a flawed way of logging things. Jesus disallowed goal cost us points but was ultimately the correct decision and var got it right yet we’re saying it’s cost us points. The Silva penalty call this weekend was clearly a wrong decision but cost us nothing.

Also if we’re logging all the decisions not in our favour we have to count the ones going for us too. That West Ham game, we had that goal disallowed (correctly) but there was also the var review that confirmed sterling’s lob as a goal which everybody thought was offside and we wouldn’t have had the pen retaken and scored without var spotting the encroaching.

In a scenario where there’s a limited review system who’s in charge of deciding if it’s worth reviewing or not? If it’s the captain and he happens to be the keeper at the other end of the pitch how is he capable of deciding? If he has to consult a striker to decide whether it’s worth challenging then that’s going to take just as long to even decide to challenge as it would to just look at the challenge anyway. Players shouldn’t be burdened with reffing the game in their head too. Similarly if it’s down to the manager, he doesn’t have a great view either. There’s rarely anyone in a position better than the ref even the player who’s fouled often doesn’t know, we’ve all seen players utterly convinced they’ve been fouled when replays suggest otherwise. A challenge system is one of those things that sound like a good idea in theory but wouldn’t transfer into reality well at all.

Yeah there are a few issues. Firstly, because we've got VAR the officials are now less likely to give offside because they've been instructed not to. There's every chance that in the absence of VAR, either of those offsides would have been given by the linesman anyway. There's also a problem of imagining what would have happened if the decision was different. Sure, when it's a last minute decision, you can fairly confidently say that we were robbed of 3 points, but when it's team wrongfully awarded a goal earlier in the game and then winning the game by one goal, it's harder to say that it would have been a draw if they didn't get a dodgy goal. The reality is that a lot of teams will push hard until they score and then protect what they have. If they hadn't have been given a dodgy goal, they may have continued to push and therefore been more likely to score a legitimate one. That's why those alternative league tables are bollocks. Even as an indicator of dodgy decisions they're not great, because a team that beats everyone 5-0 is going to suffer fewer game-changing decisions than one that wins 1-0 every week.

 

[flook]

Wrong.

Apologies, you're correct, it's goalkeeper encroachment it doesn't check for

point is though in that instance that VAR did it's job, not benefit us

 

[The Light Was Yellow Sir]

Not having a go or anything but it’s a bit of a flawed way of logging things. Jesus disallowed goal cost us points but was ultimately the correct decision and var got it right yet we’re saying it’s cost us points. The Silva penalty call this weekend was clearly a wrong decision but cost us nothing.

Also if we’re logging all the decisions not in our favour we have to count the ones going for us too. That West Ham game, we had that goal disallowed (correctly) but there was also the var review that confirmed sterling’s lob as a goal which everybody thought was offside and we wouldn’t have had the pen retaken and scored without var spotting the encroaching.

In a scenario where there’s a limited review system who’s in charge of deciding if it’s worth reviewing or not? If it’s the captain and he happens to be the keeper at the other end of the pitch how is he capable of deciding? If he has to consult a striker to decide whether it’s worth challenging then that’s going to take just as long to even decide to challenge as it would to just look at the challenge anyway. Players shouldn’t be burdened with reffing the game in their head too. Similarly if it’s down to the manager, he doesn’t have a great view either. There’s rarely anyone in a position better than the ref even the player who’s fouled often doesn’t know, we’ve all seen players utterly convinced they’ve been fouled when replays suggest otherwise. A challenge system is one of those things that sound like a good idea in theory but wouldn’t transfer into reality well at all.

Not only that, but without VAR, Silva doesn’t get the penalty either. Surely it can only have cost us if the ref gives a penalty and VAR overturns it?

 

[Eds]

If only the refs were miked up then we could hear what is being said as you can in cricket and rugby. You might still disagree with their decisions but at least we will have some idea of their thinking. Why on earth they aren't miked up is beyond me, unless of course they don't want to be transparent and accountable.

 

[Marvin]

Not having a go or anything but it’s a bit of a flawed way of logging things. Jesus disallowed goal cost us points but was ultimately the correct decision and var got it right yet we’re saying it’s cost us points. The Silva penalty call this weekend was clearly a wrong decision but cost us nothing.

Also if we’re logging all the decisions not in our favour we have to count the ones going for us too. That West Ham game, we had that goal disallowed (correctly) but there was also the var review that confirmed sterling’s lob as a goal which everybody thought was offside and we wouldn’t have had the pen retaken and scored without var spotting the encroaching.

In a scenario where there’s a limited review system who’s in charge of deciding if it’s worth reviewing or not? If it’s the captain and he happens to be the keeper at the other end of the pitch how is he capable of deciding? If he has to consult a striker to decide whether it’s worth challenging then that’s going to take just as long to even decide to challenge as it would to just look at the challenge anyway. Players shouldn’t be burdened with reffing the game in their head too. Similarly if it’s down to the manager, he doesn’t have a great view either. There’s rarely anyone in a position better than the ref even the player who’s fouled often doesn’t know, we’ve all seen players utterly convinced they’ve been fouled when replays suggest otherwise. A challenge system is one of those things that sound like a good idea in theory but wouldn’t transfer into reality well at all.

Jesus was about interpretation of the new handball rule. I believe that they got it wrong, and the goal should have stood as the rules seem to outlaw accidental control and then a shot or pass, not a ricochet.

There are two angles to VAR

• The technical
• The emotional disconnect it generates even if they get a decision right.

My point of view is that technology will eventually be deployed, but VAR in its current form will not last because it is not improving the quality of refereeing, and it's damaging fans experience.

You only have to look at the weekend's games and a whole series of pens that should have been given and weren't. The game has managed to add on an extra level of checks and and decisions are falling in the cracks. FIFA will save us, or maybe fans generally will at last unite over something.

I watched City on TV over the weekend. I heard City fans express their views re VAR. This needs to happen at every game and we need other clubs to get involved too. It will crash soon enough. Who has a vested interest in VAR? No one apart from a small group of people involved in the Project.

VAR in its current format will collapse because there's no social force behind it. It's not like FFP where we have huge vested interest backing it. City have been the major losers so far so City fans largely hate it. When the other clubs experience what we have, they will hate it too and it will fall.

There will be technology in football refereeing. But it has to be realtime. That is what I have learned. We have to put up with this for 1-2 seasons before the whole thing gets binned.

 

[flook]

Not only that, but without VAR, Silva doesn’t get the penalty either. Surely it can only have cost us if the ref gives a penalty and VAR overturns it?

The point of this thread isn't to consider what life would be like without VAR though is it, the point is the impact and consequences of the VAR decisions. To use your example, the general consensus of opinion is that the foul on Silva was a clear and obvious penalty, therefore, had VAR fulfilled its remit and corrected the referees clear and obvious error, we would have had a penalty.

The argument that VAR fulfilled it's remit in disallowing the Jesus goal for handball is wrong, because the referee not giving that is not a clear and obvious error.

Note, as I said on page 1, I'm sticking to the clear and obvious remit as that was what it was introduced to combat, you might argue that's wrong, you're entitled to your opinion, I will not change mine