VAR thread 2022/23

Status
Not open for further replies.
Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese said:
I still think there is a story to come out about clattenburgs sudden mid-season move to the middle East....
Click to expand...
Absolutely 100%. He also had some very dodgy business dealings outside football, he was wide open to be corrupted
His conduct at that Bolton game with Bellamy exposed him as a cheat
 
bluenova said:
Why wasn't the offside marginal? It looks to be close enough in the image you've shown? Being 30 yards away from the ball doesn't stop you being offside.
Click to expand...

This is the point where Nunes is being judged for offside. This is confirmed in the ESPN article posted by @Bluehammer. Alexander-Arnold clearly plays Nunes onside. In fact from the linesman's position, there is no way he can see any Wolves player to the right of Alexander-Arnold, and he probably can't even see Nunes through that crown of players. To be certain of offside, there needs to be a Wolves player to the right of Alexander-Arnold, and there is not even a remote possibility of this. Hence it is not a marginal decision. Offside does not even factor in to the equation.

bluenova said:
It's also impossible for assistants to get all close calls right - They can't really look at two things at once (the ball and the last man), and if the assistant is just a foot out of line with the ball, then a player on the other side of the pitch could easily appear to be the last man, while being onside..
Click to expand...

In this case, the ball being headed and the player adjudged to be offside are in a direct line from the linesman's vision. Alexander-Arnold is to the right of them. This is easy for the linesman to pick up. I've been a linesman at Maine Road, and this is not a difficult decision for a competent linesman.

Stephen230 said:
I wasn’t necessarily including you as being in the conspiracy brigade. To be honestly I rarely pay much attention to who I’m replying to.

But some people are convinced that every single referee and every single organisation is involved in one huge scam to fuck City over and benefit Liverpool. Ironically normally the first people to accuse Liverpool fans of having a victim mentality. Which is all fair enough, if that’s what they think. But there’s little point in debating with them, as their answer to everything is… Because it/ he/ they are bent.
Click to expand...

This is a very specific incident, with a very suspicious set of circumstances. I would query this whoever benefitted, because it smacks of bias.

BlueHammer85 said:
there's some explanation and what seems pretty balanced on here

www.espn.co.uk

VAR Review: Explaining the offside drama in Liverpool vs. Wolves

Liverpool and Wolverhampton Wanderers played out a 2-2 draw in the third round of the FA Cup at Anfield. This is what happened with VAR.
www.espn.co.uk www.espn.co.uk

1-4 is basically saying why did the official make the wrong decision - because they do... every weekend pre VAR officials were making wrong/bad decisions and they still do now - how many times has a lino flagged wrong and VAR over turned because it was clearly onside - it happens on a weekly basis. is it corruption every time a official makes a bad judgment ?

point 5-6 - there's just not conclusive proof Madley is definitely telling the lino to stick his flag up, it's a 1 second clip or blurry image that doesn't prove anything

point 8 - I've agreed with this, i'd be happy for that to happen - but will it really resolve those who believe it's all a conspiracy ? imagine the dissection for every conversation between the officials during a controversial grey area decision - people/social media would have a field day questioning every word that was said during the convo.

also I do agree all stadiums should have sufficient set ups to calibrate offsides - Liverpool had a goal against them given v Arsenal for the same reasoning - that really needs to be addressed going forward.
Click to expand...

As referred to above, the article tries to give a balanced view of the incident. It says this:

"After the delivery into the box, the last attacking touch was by Hwang Hee-Chan -- this sets the offside phase."

This picture is when Hee-Chan heads the ball to Nunes, starting the attacking phase. (I appreciate this view wasn't available to VAR).

As I said, there is no way any competent linesman could have given offside in this situation, or anywhere else in this phase of play. This is why I think the decision is questionable.

I absolutely agree that there isn't any conclusive proof that Madley tells the linesman to raise his flag. But he is telling him something. Hence my question, what was said between the two of them.

The explanation we have been given is just not credible, and does not fit with what we see with our own eyes. If this evidence was presented in a court of law, the cross examination would be brutal, and Madley would be made to look a complete fool.

We don't have all the answers, but my money is firmly on trying to keep a high profile team in the competition. Imagine if Traore had scored the Salah goal, and Liverpool had a late winner disallowed in these circumstances. There would be questions in Parliament and PGMOL would have had to print a full page apology in the Liverpool Echo by now.
653d48ee73ca9f774472730035cb7989.jpg
 
Last edited:
Has he gone yet ? I assume I will have to skip 15 pages but if he's still here, why bother.
 
SebastianBlue said:
I think describing half the cameras of other grounds (and no big screens to show VAR review) leading to blind spots for VAR assessment as “substantially different” is pretty reasonable.

Number of cameras varies—for reasons passing understanding and standards of competitive fairness—from 4 to 8. Liverpool only has 4, with at a least one blind spot for VAR review resulting from the 50% setup.

This means VAR review is substantially different at Anfield than at the Etihad, both the for clubs and the fans.

Strawman grasping a straws?
Click to expand...

I said that I am not aware if some grounds have substantially less cameras than others. It may well be the case. I don’t know.

I know when you get a new favourite word, there’s an urge to use it as often as possible. But using it in context occasionally is also good.
 
Stephen230 said:
I said that I am not aware if some grounds have substantially less cameras than others. It may well be the case. I don’t know.

I know when you get a new favourite word, there’s an urge to use it as often as possible. But using it in context occasionally is also good.
Click to expand...
I’ve literally just explained that some grounds have substantially fewer cameras, including Liverpool.

And what is even better is if you would stop building strawman arguments every other post. That would be brilliant.
 
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.