VAR thread 2022/23

[Blue Mist]

Handball laws as they currently stand:

It is an offence if a player:

• deliberately touches the ball with their hand/arm, for example moving the hand/arm towards the ball
• touches the ball with their hand/arm when it has made their body unnaturally bigger. A player is considered to have made their body unnaturally bigger when the position of their hand/arm is not a consequence of, or justifiable by, the player’s body movement for that specific situation. By having their hand/arm in such a position, the player takes a risk of their hand/arm being hit by the ball and being penalised

I think we can all agree that Ruben didn't move his arm towards the ball. I think we can all agree he didn't make his body unnaturally bigger so why was it a penalty?

Ergh because the scouse rats said it was?

But I agree with you. He jumped for the ball. Where were his hands meant to go ?

 

[Blueknows]

Ergh because the scouse rats said it was?

But I agree with you. He jumped for the ball. Where were his hands meant to go ?

But Carney said it was deliberate

 

[Djibrilshairdo]

Carney is fucking clueless and an embarrassment as far as football commentary goes. She has a bright future at Stockley Park.

 

[Blue Mist]

But Carney said it was deliberate

Carney also said it was a clear penalty when Eddie saved it at the feet of the new wonder kid so I think we can ignore anything and everything she says.

 

[KentBlue]

Carney also said it was a clear penalty when Eddie saved it at the feet of the new wonder kid so I think we can ignore anything and everything she says.

Didn't she contradict herself by saying it was a penalty but Eddie got the ball first?

 

[Bantamgaz]

Carney is fucking clueless and an embarrassment as far as football commentary goes. She has a bright future at Stockley Park.

Nahhhhhhh she’s just another media lovey who will try to pull anything up regarding Man City ........... it’s all about fitting in don’t you know ............. fooking deliberate ?????? If she thinks that then sorry she shouldn’t be near any game at all

 

[stonerblue]

It's still fucking shite and spoiling the game

 

[Blue Mist]

Didn't she contradict herself by saying it was a penalty but Eddie got the ball first?

No @KentBlue she said it was a penalty, then said if it hadn't been offside it would have been a penalty.
Matterface then said the replay showed Eddie got the ball first and she just replied, well on seeing it the first time it looked a clear penalty. Not once did she back down and admit she was wrong.

 

[Trevor Morley's Tache]

Still think the TV companies are influencing VAR decisions.

Nobody has offered any evidence to the contrary apart from them flatly denying it, and the fact that what goes on in those shady cabins at Stokley Park is shrouded more secrecy than GCHQ just makes it worse.

Either make it transparent and allow independent auditors to oversee the process, or f*ck it off completely because in its current guise it is not fit for purpose and open to corruption.

 

[the-ecstacy-of-eight]

Hawkeye is used in ALL majors except the French Open because it's Clay and you can see the markings

but despite being the ONLY major without tech being used, players are not happy:


Shapovalov, however, found support from his fellow players, including U.S. Open champion Dominic Thiem, whose match against Casper Ruud was also blighted by couple of uncertain calls.

“I would support 100% HawkEye on clay, because at the match from Denis against Roberto yesterday there was a mistake, and then today in my match there was a mistake in my favour actually,” world number three Thiem told reporters.

“Casper showed me the mark on his phone after the match. It’s not the umpire’s mistake, because sometimes you just cannot see the mark. It’s too difficult, especially after the set break, because they clean the court, they brush the lines.

“... I hope that next year we will have it (HawkEye) in every clay court tournament.”

Brad Gilbert, a former world number four and currently an acclaimed coach, also felt “modern technology works on clay better than umpire’s interpretations of marks”.


Greek Stefanos Tsitsipas agreed that he would rather depend on technology.

“I think it’s time for HawkEye on clay. I don’t understand why they haven’t proceeded,” said the world number six.

“... We have to keep growing and keep adding new things to the sport that will help make the sport better and more fair.”




The Hawk-Eye Live system will be used at this year's US Open at Flushing Meadows along with seven of the nine ATP and WTA tournaments


Hawk-Eye's margin of error averaged about 3.6 millimeters (0.14 inches) and that the system was around 99.9 percent accurate


but hey, don't let facts get in the way

Errrr, these aren't facts, these are opinions (apart from the mathematical bits at the end of your post, which aren't facts either, they're estimates and averages)

 

[the-ecstacy-of-eight]

The time it took to allow our goal when it was obvious after a cursory glance of the replay it was onside is the biggest concern for me. What were they checking for on the offside, it sure as hell wasn't Phil, so were they trying to make out Alvarez was off in the middle and rule it out for making a move to the ball, that would have been boll*cks and he picked it up after the next phase of play (Phil's shot and the keeper's save)? It basically played out to me that they were looking at anyway possible to rule it out when there were no reasons to do so.
VAR is a great tool, being used by great tools incorrectly

Edit: Not VAR but when are they going to penalise Alexander-Arnold for foul throws, every single one is "one handed" and illegal

...and then remember how quickly VAR gave Salah's "was he onside/was he offside" goal in the Arnold handball game at anfield?!

Have we ever been shown the VAR slo-mo replay of that goal? It was also in the age of "lines drawn on the pitch", but did we ever see the still frame with the lines drawn? Have we fuck!

Oh, silly me, after the match we're all told that VAR might not have been working that day!

How fucking convenient.

It's a fucking sham, and all you have to do is listen to the edited highlights of "neutral" co-commentator Karen Carney from Saturday for how it all "works".

 

[Blue Mist]

I know screens are not important and play no part in a var decision but isn't it strange that there are only 2 clubs who REFUSE to have them ?
One even built a new stand so could easily have factored a screen in..... but didn't.
Mind you they are the only 2 clubs who openly flout the allocation of disability places (even though one built a new stand and could have factored it in)

 

[BlueHammer85]

Errrr, these aren't facts, these are opinions (apart from the mathematical bits at the end of your post, which aren't facts either, they're estimates and averages)

Fact - Hawkeye is used in ALL majors except the French Open because it's Clay and you can see the markings

Fact - but despite being the ONLY major without tech being used, players are not happy (some)

Fact - The Hawk-Eye Live system will be used at this year's US Open at Flushing Meadows along with seven of the nine ATP and WTA tournaments

Fact - Hawk-Eye's margin of error averaged about 3.6 millimeters (0.14 inches) and that the system was around 99.9 percent accurate

 

[BlueHammer85]

 

[bluenova]

No @KentBlue she said it was a penalty, then said if it hadn't been offside it would have been a penalty.
Matterface then said the replay showed Eddie got the ball first and she just replied, well on seeing it the first time it looked a clear penalty. Not once did she back down and admit she was wrong.

To be fair, when do they ever? It's actually pretty unusual for a commentator to contradict their co-commentator.

It's one of the odder aspects of football on tv, that while the studio team may disagree, the commentary team often seem to support each other even if they're obviously wrong.

 

[Blue Llama]

It's one of the odder aspects of football on tv, that while the studio team may disagree, the commentary team often seem to support each other even if they're obviously wrong.

It's probably because they spend most of the match having a chat and occasionally having a look at the game to utter a cliche, like I've seen them given

 

[Pingu the Penguin]

Pawson thought no penalty, all the dipper players were clamouring for one, and as soon as the commentators (immediately) joined in we were done for. i accept with the current rules, once VAR get involved its only going to get given. However, in my opinion, not just because we were on the receiving end (again), the header was going wide, and Dias (even the commentators agreed) was trying to pull his arm away, i understand how that is a penalty, but WHY ??

I suppose if you cant score with a header or a shot by beating the goalkeeper, we should practice trying to hit the opponents arm or hand, having said that if its City they likely wont give it !

Offences like that (not on target, no goal denied) should be punished differently with an indirect free kick in the box

 

[Pingu the Penguin]

I don’t dispute that - far more gray areas in football , always will be

When Hawkeye failed in the UK (shed its game) we saw the real failure of VAR. the video team just blindly went with the Hawkeye call and didn’t review or overturn it

 

[kaz7]

I will just say it once rather than moan all season , we will be shafted in full view multiple times ,get the odd rare decision so it doesnt look so obvious but more of the same , varred differently to the red shirts cunts , everyone in blue knows the score

 

[mcfc64]

I will just say it once rather than moan all season , we will be shafted in full view multiple times ,get the odd rare decision so it doesnt look so obvious but more of the same , varred differently to the red shirts cunts , everyone in blue knows the score

I totally agree Kaz , let’s see if that sort of penalty from Sat gets awarded against the scum and dippers .