VAR thread 2022/23

[Stephen230]

Well, there’s a surprise!

View attachment 81392

At the other end of the table, champions Manchester City and this season's surprise package Brighton were the teams most negatively affected by VAR as both had four more decisions go against them than for them.

View attachment 81393

As the popular suggestion is that the perceived bias always favours the big clubs, I’d say it is a surprise, as 6 of the 7 clubs with a positive score have only been promoted to the Premier League in the last three or four years.

 

[The Future’s Blue!]

Very much agree.

VAR apologists are the biggest shills in football.

To be fair, there’s not many left on TV (apart from the Sky white washers protecting their brand), it‘s more on here that we see them.

 

[SkyBlueFlux]

As the popular suggestion is that the perceived bias always favours the big clubs, I’d say it is a surprise, as 6 of the 7 clubs with a positive score have only been promoted to the Premier League in the last three or four years.

Depends on what this is actually showing. Is it just saying who has had the most VAR reviews go in their favour? Or does it only count decisions that are overturned?

To start with, for this to be a helpful measure first VAR actually has to be involved at all. If it chooses not to review it's not going to be included.

So yes it could be saying what you suggest... but it could just as easily be saying that these smaller teams get screwed over more often by on-field decisions which then have to be rectified by VAR. Or it could be saying that VAR tends to get involved for smaller teams only when it's 100% certain something will be overturned.

I think tin pot analysis like this that just states headlines but actually tells you nothing is counter-productive and has zero explanatory power. Even if on this occasion we appear to be the beneficiaries.

 

[Gorton_Tubster]

weren't lfc top of that list last season too?

 

[Stephen230]

Depends on what this is actually showing. Is it just saying who has had the most VAR reviews go in their favour? Or does it only count decisions that are overturned?

To start with, for this to be a helpful measure first VAR actually has to be involved it all. If it chooses not to review it's not going to be included.

So yes it could be saying what you suggest... but it could just as easily be saying that these smaller teams get screwed over more often by on-field decisions which then have to be rectified by VAR. Or it could be saying that VAR tends to get involved for smaller teams only when it's 100% certain something will be overturned.

I think tin pot analysis like this that just states headlines but actually tells you nothing is counter-productive and has zero explanatory power. Even if on this occasion we appear to be the beneficiaries.

True, it means little without a precise explanation of what it’s showing. I did have a little look to find the original article but didn’t come across it immediately and wasn’t that bothered to keep searching.

 

[HypnoticBlue]

Not quite sure how the rags could possibly be the same points and place with or without VAR when they were given the biggest bullshit offside decision I’ve ever seen in the derby at old toilet.
It still pisses me off now even though we still won the title.

 

[Stephen230]

Not quite sure how the rags could possibly be the same points and place with or without VAR when they were given the biggest bullshit offside decision I’ve ever seen in the derby at old toilet.
It still pisses me off now even though we still won the title.

Won’t show up in any VAR related articles. It was an on-field decision that the VAR didn’t get involved in.

 

[northendenton]

Not often I agree with Murphy...

Don't worry it's not habit forming

 

[Deleted member 81382]

Bent as fuck and we all knew it was going to happen today.

Twice in the same season.

Unbelievable.

 

[SebastianBlue]

VAR is great and gets everything right.

Nothing suspicious at all about decisions when it comes to matches involving United.