VAR thread 2022/23

[halfcenturyup]

Is it possible to have laws of the game that aren’t loose or ambiguous in a contact sport like football though?

Could you word a law that covers exactly what a foul is, that covers every possible incident you’d like to be penalised, excludes every possible incident you’d like to not be penalised, and not be the slightest bit ambiguous?

If everything is so subjective, and it is, the wording of the law should be suitably vague.

You can't try to describe every incident that causes offside, for example, and then forget the purpose of the law, which is the offside player getting advantage, and say "letter of the law". You can describe certain situations that can clarify subjective areas, but the overriding factor should be "gaining an advantage". There can be no letter of the law for subjective decisions. It doesn't make any sense.

Same for handball. Who cares if the ball brushes your hand before you score, or any of the other 25 situations it describes (over-exaggeration intended)? Was it deliberate or not is the issue.

 

[give it to gordon]

Just adding insult to injury. What a joke of an organisation.

Refs body accepts Fabinho should have had red card

Referees' body PGMOL accepts Liverpool midfielder Fabinho should have been sent off for a tackle on Evan Ferguson in Sunday's FA Cup tie at Brighton.

www.bbc.co.uk

VAR is like the dippers, a complete shambles.

What's the point of apologising if no action is taken.

The list of bent decisions this season is out of control and is fast making the premier league a joke.

 

[halfcenturyup]

This isn’t true. It’s a matter of record that all 20 Premier League clubs unanimously voted for the introduction of VAR.

:)

You would make a poor politician.

 

[halfcenturyup]

VAR is like the dippers, a complete shambles.

What's the point of apologising if no action is taken.

The list of bent decisions this season is out of control and is fast making the premier league a joke.

I particularly liked this part:

"As part of a drive for transparency within PGMOL, the organisation has privately let it be known there was enough evidence to warrant a red card."

Wtaf?

 

[give it to gordon]

I particularly liked this part:

"As part of a drive for transparency within PGMOL, the organisation has privately let it be known there was enough evidence to warrant a red card."

Wtaf?

Transparency would mean miking up and letting the public hear the discussion. That's not going happen.

The premier league needs to look into improving the refs in their league as PGMOL fall well sort. Or perhaps PGMOL are just doing what the premier league want.

The two red tops do well out of PGMOL, more so than most.

 

[Trevor Morley's Tache]

I particularly liked this part:

"As part of a drive for transparency within PGMOL, the organisation has privately let it be known there was enough evidence to warrant a red card."

Wtaf?

This is just BULLSH*T. Leaking a story about how they are driving towards transparency is all just image manipulation. Strangely, the article only mention the Fabinho challenge. I presume the other two red cards that would have been issued to 90% of the other teams in the PL have been airbrushed from history?

If they were SERIOUS about transparency, we'd have been allowed full unfettered access to communications between the referee's and VAR long ago.

They aren't which has more than roused suspicions of game manipulation.

 

[Bluearmy]

I particularly liked this part:

"As part of a drive for transparency within PGMOL, the organisation has privately let it be known there was enough evidence to warrant a red card."

Wtaf?

They are taking fans for fools now

 

[its grim up north]

you can add.... “interfering with an opponent” means preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent’s line of vision

That's exactly what happens when a shot comes in and a player is in the line of sight of the goalie.

 

[SWP's back]

As I have said before, Dale is independent and usually speaks sense



I bet quite a few on here will now support what he’s saying.

 

[SebastianBlue]

As I have said before, Dale is independent and usually speaks sense



I bet quite a few on here will now support what he’s saying.

Well, when he is speaking sense (“usually” means he doesn’t always), of course. ;-)

Jokes aside, he isn’t the only one that has done analysis to indicate that VAR intervention (or nonintervention, as is more often the case this season) generally favours Liverpool and United at the expense of other teams.

Hence why that has been the reasonable argument being put forth. Again, many people seem to want to interpret the suspect officiating arguments in here as assertions that it is an “always on” approach, which is not correct. They aren’t always attempting to influence match outcomes, nor are they always successful when they are attempting to do so.

But there is mounting evidence of favouritism toward the cash cow clubs and such interventions unfortunately make sense from an overall business perspective for the league.