VAR impact and consequence log - game 27

[Fiftyyearsandcounting]

The VAR crew should look at offside decisions without the aid of arbitrarily drawn lines, if they can't tell just by plain sight then, by definition, it can't be "clear and obvious".
In the case of the Palace shove, VAR should ask the ref' if he saw it. If he did see it,then his decision (either way) should stand as it is simply a matter of judgement as to the effect of the shove. If he didn't see it, then he should check with a pitch-side monitor and he still makes the call. Observing the action on the pitch gives the ref' a better feeling for how much the player may have exaggerated the push.

 

[Scaring Europe to Death]

My overall sense is that the Guardiola era peaked towards the end of last season.
However, after comparing the disallowed Palace goal v Liverpool, with the Mane shove on Sterling, my tolerance levels are beginning to boil.
There is no consistency whatsoever, when VAR’s biggest selling point was supposedly the exact opposite.
In fact, the only consistency, is that the real contentious, game changing decisions are favouring Liverpool, and going against City.

 

[Eds]

The VAR crew should look at offside decisions without the aid of arbitrarily drawn lines, if they can't tell just by plain sight then, by definition, it can't be "clear and obvious".
In the case of the Palace shove, VAR should ask the ref' if he saw it. If he did see it,then his decision (either way) should stand as it is simply a matter of judgement as to the effect of the shove. If he didn't see it, then he should check with a pitch-side monitor and he still makes the call. Observing the action on the pitch gives the ref' a better feeling for how much the player may have exaggerated the push.

The whole point is that we were clear and obvious wouldn't apply to offside as you are either on or offside. What they didn't say is that the technology used isn't good enough to provide clarity. Refs still not using monitors which again shows they are not making the final decision. Did the ref see Ayew breath on Lovren or not? We have no idea as there is no transparency and that is what is required as there is in rugby and cricket. How did the ref decide that that goal should be disallowed but another said it wasn't a push on Sterling last week. I know which had more force and it wasn't Ayew's touch? We should put microphones all the way along the pitch so we can pick up conversations...

 

[Colin Bells Boots]

The whole point is that we were clear and obvious wouldn't apply to offside as you are either on or offside. What they didn't say is that the technology used isn't good enough to provide clarity. Refs still not using monitors which again shows they are not making the final decision. Did the ref see Ayew breath on Lovren or not? We have no idea as there is no transparency and that is what is required as there is in rugby and cricket. How did the ref decide that that goal should be disallowed but another said it wasn't a push on Sterling last week. I know which had more force and it wasn't Ayew's touch? We should put microphones all the way along the pitch so we can pick up conversations...

PiGMOL don't want to be exposed by their conversations with the faceless ones though.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Apparently Premiership are saying the VAR offside ruling against Raz on Saturday was merely confirming the on field decision rather than over ruling it. One paper reports this and says " despite appearances to the contrary "

Absolute fucking horseshit.

 

[rnblade]

Before VAR we were told the refs make mistakes. The purpose of VAR is to allow technology to ensure rules are followed by using someone who has time & is not caught up with the emotion of the game.

there is no excuse for mistakes that’s why people are pissed off, don’t call it VAR mistakes. It’s bent refereeing assisted by bent referees all done under a cloak of secrecy & lies.

EXACTLY THIS!!!!!

 

[Tricky_Trev]

The VAR crew should look at offside decisions without the aid of arbitrarily drawn lines, if they can't tell just by plain sight then, by definition, it can't be "clear and obvious".
In the case of the Palace shove, VAR should ask the ref' if he saw it. If he did see it,then his decision (either way) should stand as it is simply a matter of judgement as to the effect of the shove. If he didn't see it, then he should check with a pitch-side monitor and he still makes the call. Observing the action on the pitch gives the ref' a better feeling for how much the player may have exaggerated the push.

“Clear and obvious” doesn’t apply to offsides, only subjective calls. They have decided that offsides are now black and white and no longer subjective. They’ve wrongly done that in my opinion, but nevertheless, that’s the way it is.

 

[fierydan]

At Anfield we saw that a defender,albeit inadvertently in the referees view,legitimately play the ball with his arm.
On Saturday Zoumas arm clearly played Sterling on side.

 

[Blue tube]

Once you start calling offsides with the use of technology its time to give up. We have always relied on the eagle eye of a referee or lines person to declare whether something. I have no issue with using technology as we have seen in goal line technology it can be of huge benefit. But we are now calling virtually every marginal offside there is and its ruining the game because players often play on that narrow margin and just taking goals out of the game which is not a good thing. The lines have to be dumped and if the naked eye can't call it then the benefit of doubt is given to the side scoring.

I agree was thinking more of a better system than they have now as it is clearly dog shit

 

[Norbiton]

Apparently Premiership are saying the VAR offside ruling against Raz on Saturday was merely confirming the on field decision rather than over ruling it. One paper reports this and says " despite appearances to the contrary "

What has the onfield decision got to do with it? We're told that VAR on offsides is definitive, there's never been a suggestion that if it's tight it stays with the original call. Until now apparently.