VAR thread 2022/23

[tregyblue61]

I thought red at first then, after looking again, I thought it's more than a yellow card for deliberately bringing KDB down. Maybe we should have 10 minutes in a sin bin for subjective decisions?

 

[Blue Mist]

My opinion on yesterday was a penalty for Newcastle, what was Stones thinking of. To me the Trippier tackle was a red but as some have said a tackle is always subjective. However, why does VAR now show the ref still images of the incident??? How does this improve VAR

Richard, because of what you are, a qualified ref, I value your opinion but if you are confused heaven help us.
If var choose which image to show the ref it is open to manipulation.

 

[David Kloppesh]

My opinion on yesterday was a penalty for Newcastle, what was Stones thinking of. To me the Trippier tackle was a red but as some have said a tackle is always subjective. However, why does VAR now show the ref still images of the incident??? How does this improve VAR

have you ever played actual football?

 

[decmancity]

I don't understand it. He jumps off the ground, studs are up near Kevs knee. How is it not a red?

If that is Rodri on Saint-Maximin hes off and we all know it.

 

[Trevor Morley's Tache]

I don't see any path for VAR to improve, unless;

• They do away with any TV influence, including having 2-way comm's with the TV operators/broadcast studio.
• They make all communications relating to VAR decisions public during the game and available for teams to review post match.
• They appoint an INDEPENDENT body to oversee and audit their processes.

The fact they are reluctant to do any of this is ringing alarm bells for me.

And just a point on the 'clear & obvious discussion above. This is from the PL's own website:

"What qualifies as a “clear and obvious error”? ​

In testing, there was no unanimity. Different VARs came up with different outcomes.

But the VAR should not be asking, "Do I think it's right or wrong?" The question is, "Is what the match officials have done a clear and obvious error?"

There is a very high bar for that intervention".

'Very high bar'?

REALLY???

 

[freshie]

Need to get rid of the whole clear and obvious bullshit. Adds extra subjectivity to decisions when I thought the whole point of VAR was to reduce subjectivity

 

[Stephen230]

My opinion on yesterday was a penalty for Newcastle, what was Stones thinking of. To me the Trippier tackle was a red but as some have said a tackle is always subjective. However, why does VAR now show the ref still images of the incident??? How does this improve VAR

My understanding is ( and it’s a while since I read it, so I’m open to being corrected ) that unless they are trying to establish if there was actual contact or not, which clearly wasn’t the case here, that the review should only be watched at real time and not slow motion, never mind stills.

 

[Nascent Blues]

I don't see any path for VAR to improve, unless;

• They do away with any TV influence, including having 2-way comm's with the TV operators/broadcast studio.
• They make all communications relating to VAR decisions public during the game and available for teams to review post match.
• They appoint an INDEPENDENT body to oversee and audit their processes.

The fact they are reluctant to do any of this is ringing alarm bells for me.

And just a point on the 'clear & obvious discussion above. This is from the PL's own website:

"What qualifies as a “clear and obvious error”? ​

In testing, there was no unanimity. Different VARs came up with different outcomes.

But the VAR should not be asking, "Do I think it's right or wrong?" The question is, "Is what the match officials have done a clear and obvious error?"

There is a very high bar for that intervention".

'Very high bar'?

REALLY???

Exactly. This was the point I was making earlier - no way could the VAR officials have come to the 'clear and obvious error' conclusion if they had adhered to their own rules. The fact that they ignored their own rules means their integrity is, rightly, called into question.

 

[edinburgh123]

And to remind all the doubters about what is a red card offence:

SERIOUS FOUL PLAY

A tackle or challenge that endangers the safety of an opponent or uses excessive force or brutality must be sanctioned as serious foul play.
Any player who lunges at an opponent in challenging for the ball from the front, from the side or from behind using one or both legs, with excessive force or endangers the safety of an opponent is guilty of serious foul play.

I would say that Trippier lunged at KDB, both feet were off the ground and being out of control was endangering the safety of the player. The challenge doesn't have to have excessive force.

To be fair though - the above is a bit bias, I think you will find if you read the bit in the rules below that you conveniently missed out you will spot the problem.
The actual FULL rule is as follows : -

A tackle or challenge that endangers the safety of an opponent or uses excessive force or brutality must be sanctioned as serious foul play.
Any player who lunges at an opponent in challenging for the ball from the front, from the side or from behind using one or both legs, with excessive force or endangers the safety of an opponent is guilty of serious foul play.
Note - in the situation where a dominant team the Premier League do not want to win as it affects the brand are in danger of already running away with the League early on, at the expense of media darlings, the VAR official has a right to overrule anything he or she fancies

 

[117 M34]

That wasn't a red yesterday. The still image makes it look really bad and if you were using just that it would be a red but in reality it was just a cynical challenge to stop a break.
If a red wasn't given at first, I doubt many would have been saying it should have been a red.