VAR thread 2022/23

Status
Not open for further replies.
City_Sean said:
It staggers me how the narrative is that Taylor had a good game at weekend? Letting fouls go unpunished is not good refereeing, it culminates in exactly what happened on Sunday. That "foul" from Haaland happened throughout the game yet VAR didn't operate the same high bar that Taylor did. If that's the case you simply cannot referee a game in that manner.
Click to expand...
I don't know why people are blaming VAR for City's disallowed goal. VAR did it's job. It asked Taylor to look at a foul in the build up to the goal. Taylor is to blame here. He should have rejected VAR on the basis that he had allowed such minor infringements up to that point, as he told both teams he would be doing, and he wasn't going to change his refereeing approach at that point.

TAYLOR IS TO BLAME. He referrees well generally, but has a habit of turning weak when confronted with important decisions.
 
Paladin said:
I don't know why people are blaming VAR for City's disallowed goal. VAR did it's job. It asked Taylor to look at a foul in the build up to the goal. Taylor is to blame here. He should have rejected VAR on the basis that he had allowed such minor infringements up to that point, as he told both teams he would be doing, and he wasn't going to change his refereeing approach at that point.

TAYLOR IS TO BLAME. He referrees well generally, but has a habit of turning weak when confronted with important decisions.
Click to expand...
Who says Taylor had a choice ? Refs 99 times out of a hundred do what var 'suggests'. There is a reason why they do.
 
BlueHammer85 said:
The ref could have decided I’ve let enough go throughout the game, I’ll let Haaland off - it’s his call , not VAR. He saw it on monitor, it was a foul, it was the correct decision
Also, are you honestly in agreement Salah made a handball in the turn for the goal ?



there's more goals this season on average per game than at any time in Prem history
Click to expand...
Was it his decision though? Technically it was, but how much pressure was he under to overturn it? We'll never know unless the PiGMOL allow us access to the real-time comm's.

In the context of the game (every contested challenge that went before and after the goal) it was the INCORRECT decision. It can't ONLY be given as a foul if a goal is scored then let go every other time. That's a bullshit way to run the game.
 
Trevor Morley's Tache said:
Was it his decision though? Technically it was, but how much pressure was he under to overturn it? We'll never know unless the PiGMOL allow us access to the real-time comm's.

In the context of the game (every contested challenge that went before and after the goal) it was the INCORRECT decision. It can't ONLY be given as a foul if a goal is scored then let go every other time. That's a bullshit way to run the game.
Click to expand...

Fair reply
You've answered your first question straight away, so yes. It was a foul. correct decision

The responsibility should lie with the ref not VAR, if he deems that not much of a foul in the context of the game then it's on him to ignore the VAR and it's on him to make the ultimate decision when seeing it on the monitor.

I personally think there is a difference of allowing some argy bargy go throughout the game but when it leads to a goal then the correct decision has to take precedent, think we've seen that in the history of the game - a couple of challenges go unpunished in the middle of the pitch or waved play on, but in the area it's given a penalty no matter what (for example)

I'm definitely in favour for comm's/transparency argument - not sure it would solve much but still be good to know what was said.
 
Paladin said:
I don't know why people are blaming VAR for City's disallowed goal. VAR did it's job. It asked Taylor to look at a foul in the build up to the goal. Taylor is to blame here. He should have rejected VAR on the basis that he had allowed such minor infringements up to that point, as he told both teams he would be doing, and he wasn't going to change his refereeing approach at that point.

TAYLOR IS TO BLAME. He referrees well generally, but has a habit of turning weak when confronted with important decisions.
Click to expand...
Taylor, like every other PiGMOL specimen, will have had a game that exhibited strong, consistent refereeing, according to PiGMOL, and be a role model to budding referees.
 
BlueHammer85 said:
Fair reply
You've answered your first question straight away, so yes. It was a foul. correct decision

The responsibility should lie with the ref not VAR, if he deems that not much of a foul in the context of the game then it's on him to ignore the VAR and it's on him to make the ultimate decision when seeing it on the monitor.

I personally think there is a difference of allowing some argy bargy go throughout the game but when it leads to a goal then the correct decision has to take precedent, think we've seen that in the history of the game - a couple of challenges go unpunished in the middle of the pitch or waved play on, but in the area it's given a penalty no matter what (for example)

I'm definitely in favour for comm's/transparency argument - not sure it would solve much but still be good to know what was said.
Click to expand...
As I said above, if you are ONLY applying the CORRECT ruling when a goal is scored then we might as well pack up and go home.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.