VAR thread 2022/23

[Alan Harper's Tash]

Vinny got a straight red in the Rag's match when he clearly won the ball. The bullshit excuse at the time was two footed, out of control when we all know it was a perfectly executed, perfectly timed challenge.

Now I know we've moved on from there but we are still no clearer in our understanding of what is and what isn't a reckless/dangerous challenge because the 'interpretation' changes from game to game for whatever reason we can only speculate. I have my suspicions.

That’s almost the perfect scenario where VAR was needed.

Its not an exact science as what every single one of us deems excessive force will differ by various degrees.

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

And you can be guilty of violent conduct without even making contact with an opponent.

Fair dos. This wasn’t that though. That’s surely when someone jumps in with both feet aimed at the player etc. and somehow misses?

 

[Blue Mist]

I think he has some alternative views to what most of us see. He keeps us grounded. I don't always agree with him, but I don't think VAR was invented as a means of curtailing City's progress.

VAR isn't perfect, but it might get better as time passes.

Hang on. I don't think Var was invented to curb our progress either. VAR the machine is only as good as those that operate it and that is the problem. The people that operate it. Full stop end of. It was supposed to only interfere if a ref had made a clear and obvious error. Today's rescinded red cannot, in any possible way, be called a clear and obvious error, therefore Var was wrong and if it was wrong it is not fit for purpose.

 

[RayCTID]

The only real contentious VAR decision was the red card incident. In my point of view it was reckless

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

The only real contentious VAR decision was the red card incident. In my point of view it was wreckless

Unlike the titanic them, as the ship has since been found.

 

[RayCTID]

Unlike the titanic them, as the ship has since been found.

Alright smart arse

 

[Paladin]

Fair dos. This wasn’t that though. That’s surely when someone jumps in with both feet aimed at the player etc. and somehow misses?

Probably yes, but there will be other scenarios. @Trevor Morley's Tache in the previous post hits the nail on the head, saying that everyone will have a different tolerance level for what constitutes excessive force. Today, the referee's first opinion was valid and should not have been overturned (IMO).

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

Probably yes, but there will be other scenarios. @Trevor Morley's Tache in the previous post hits the nail on the head, saying that everyone will have a different tolerance level for what constitutes excessive force. Today, the referee's first opinion was valid and should not have been overturned (IMO).

Do you think a more experienced referee would have been more likely to brandish a yellow card and let VAR look it over?

I was surprised that he chose red when it came.

It‘s a late, high tackle without much force. Good luck in picking which boxes that ticks!

 

[Paladin]

Hang on. I don't think Var was invented to curb our progress either. VAR the machine is only as good as those that operate it and that is the problem. The people that operate it. Full stop end of. It was supposed to only interfere if a ref had made a clear and obvious error. Today's rescinded red cannot, in any possible way, be called a clear and obvious error, therefore Var was wrong and if it was wrong it is not fit for purpose.

Apologies, I didn't mean to infer anything about your overall view of the intentions of VAR. What I am really trying to get across is that there are many conflicting opinions about football, and we should be careful about dismissing any as being wrong or false or invalid.

I also wanted to defend one particular contributor, because this and other threads, this forum would be a much poorer place without him.

 

[Paladin]

Do you think a more experienced referee would have been more likely to brandish a yellow card and let VAR look it over?

I was surprised that he chose red when it came.

It‘s a late, high tackle without much force. Good luck in picking which boxes that ticks!

This is precisely it. No opinion on this is wrong, because the interpretation is subjective. The referee's first opinion was not wrong. If he had brandished a yellow card initially, it wouldn't have been wrong. VAR had no business to intervene.

Here are three offences in the Laws of the Game that are to be sanctioned with a red card.

The second one is not open to interpretation. The other two most certainly are.