VAR thread 2022/23

[halfcenturyup]

,. .!!

People confuse having a different opinion for being a troll

12 years I’ve been here and never had a ban

Seems more like 25 years :)

 

[BlueHammer85]

Again, you only acknowledge them after I called you out on your original claim.

Then you posted an entirely fictious claim that I thought *no one* believed that VAR was brought in to benefit Liverpool and United. And have conveniently chosen not to respond to my rebuttal of that claim. That does look a lot like wumming.

You keep making false claims, being called out on them, then later acting as if you were right or that you never made them in the first place.

It’s not a false claim

Some believe VAR was bought in solely to benefit Liverpool and Man Utd, your own poll proves that.

It wasn’t worth a poll as I acknowledge other people think it’s bought in for other conspiracy reasons.

Going round in circles so I’ll leave you to speculate if I’m trolling

 

[SebastianBlue]

It’s not a false claim

Some believe VAR was bought in solely to benefit Liverpool and Man Utd, your own poll proves that.

It wasn’t worth a poll as I acknowledge other people think it’s bought in for other conspiracy reasons.

Going round in circles so I’ll leave you to speculate if I’m trolling

Your claim about what I expected was entirely false (supported by none of my previous posts) and was very close to trolling.

I'll remove the poll now that your original claim has been proven wrong and you have qualified it.

 

[SebastianBlue]

Back to discussing the topic of the thread.

Let's all refrain from WUM behaviour like labelling other members part of a "conspiracy brigade".

Further posting of that sort may lead to thread ban.

 

[Trevor Morley's Tache]

Just for clarity are you saying that in your opinion some referees have intentionally made a conscious effort to put themselves in a position between two City players for the express purpose of discouraging a pass from one to the other?

Yes.

I've seen Taylor actually look over his shoulder in the direction of David Silva when he's had the ball at his feet (on numerous occasions), and then position himself between Silva and obvious forward pass. On one occasion Dave got so frustrated he smashed a pass STRAIGHT at Taylor who had to take evasive action.

And not just Alty either. Plenty of ref's do it if you keep an eye out for it.

 

[Stephen230]

Yes.

I've seen Taylor actually look over his shoulder in the direction of David Silva when he's had the ball at his feet (on numerous occasions), and then position himself between Silva and obvious forward pass. On one occasion Dave got so frustrated he smashed a pass STRAIGHT at Taylor who had to take evasive action.

And not just Alty either. Plenty of ref's do it if you keep an eye out for it.

Fair enough. Do you have a theory on why you think they’d deliberately do that?

 

[Dave Ewing's Back 'eader]

Yes.

I've seen Taylor actually look over his shoulder in the direction of David Silva when he's had the ball at his feet (on numerous occasions), and then position himself between Silva and obvious forward pass. On one occasion Dave got so frustrated he smashed a pass STRAIGHT at Taylor who had to take evasive action.

And not just Alty either. Plenty of ref's do it if you keep an eye out for it.

The last whistling wanker we had got in the way of a couple of passes, and on one occasion the player on the ball waited till the useless lump got out of the fuckin' way!

 

[stonerblue]

Mate. Re-read that whole exchange. It was low 80’s or high 70’s prior (source dependent), it’s now 94% INCLUDING VAR. Which does anything but beg that question.

Yes mate, done that. Couldn't concentrate on the thread yesterday as i had an old drunk mithering me at same time.

 

[stonerblue]

For all the whys and wherefores, to have a poll suggesting that car was implimented solely to assist united and liverpool makes us look small time as fuck

Small-time at best. I'd say it makes up look stupid, deluded or just, wait for it...., bitter.

 

[stonerblue]

To be fair, I recall officiating accuracy being regularly reported as 90+% prior to VAR being implemented. Which would be expected, as they wouldn’t be reporting that about 1 out of every 5 decisions are incorrect, would they. Especially given they had been resisting implementing video review for decades after it had been used and continually refined elsewhere in the world.

It’s fairly common for past data points to be revised when an entity needs to provide proof of efficacy for a new policy. Happens all the time in non-sport industry. In fact, there’s an entire industry built up to support such endeavours.

I know, because I used to audit it. ;-)



*44% of those that have responded. It’s probably not actually 44%, though.

And, how do they know which decisions were incorrect?