VAR... ha ha ha

[GenerationA47 751]

...and debated and debated, and then here is what Timm said about it all

“I think the first one on Willian is a pen. I’m brutally honest there. I think I caught him.

“On the pitch I was not sure because it happened so fast. When I saw it again afterwards I was like ‘ooh, that’s quite close’. I guess you can give it.

“The second one was a dive, from then on they pushed it too hard, went down a little bit too easily.

“Of course VAR would help the referee sometimes in some situations, but I’m not a big fan of it. Football is all about these situations.

"We all remember (Diego) Maradona heading the ball with his hand (against England in 1986) or Frank Lampard against Germany (at the 2010 World Cup).

“Those are things in football you need, it puts emotions on, you can write about it, the TV stations have something to talk about. I don’t know if I like it.”

[lake district canary 4,531]

Ray. Willans had perfect control of the ball.  He was easily avoiding the tackle from Klose and he would have scored if he had just kept going.  You say why should he try and avoid the tackle - my point of view is why would he not try to avoid the tackle....the answer, of course is to get a penalty.  He did not have to go down he did not have to drop his foot so he would look like he is getting fouled. I think Willans would have scored and Chelsea would have won the game had he kept to his feet - but his instinct was to cheat, as with the ridiculous Pedro and the other guy that got sent off for throwing himself to the ground. Cheating didn''t pay last night and it made for a much better match overall.  The lack of honesty is getting to the point where football matches are

decided on incidents of cheating - and for the good of the game it has

to be stamped out.  A tackle for behind or a trip is one thing - players

running into defenders and goalkeepers to get penalties is another.  Last night was a breath of fresh air for those that like to see honesty in footballers. Cheating should not be seen to prosper.

[GenerationA47 751]

Personally I regret he said that.

His words smack of what I would like to think will become the ''old'' way of thinking - "if it looks bad, it should be given... or if there is ''contact'' it should be given."

I''m given hope by last night''s game, quite the opposite to how VAR is being portrayed, it seems to have worked.

Either the video ref agreed with, or at least didn''t object to, those no-penalty calls... meaning two heads are better than one (and one of the heads has access to replays, while the other head is in theory close to the incident) - nobody is undermined.

Or, the video ref objected and the ref overruled them on the basis of personal confidence in his own observations, positioning etc. Meaning the ref''s ultimate authority and precedence is maintained.

All the kerfuffle and criticism is so much reactionary knee-jerk fear of change. I suppose it''s only to be expected from certain players, fans and pundits.

The kind who want a return to leather balls, long shorts, 2 points for a win, and no passback rule... oh no, hang on, they only object vociferously to major changes within the last 5 years.

The best bit about Timm''s comments, which won''t be atypical of people who think like this... is how it''s so sad that VAR is removing emotions from the game and stopping the media talking about decisions

HAHAHAHAHAHA

as he emotes to TalkSport about the incident

[ricardo 7,385]

I have to agree with LDC, WIllian played for the penalty by deciding to trail his leg over Tim. Nine times out of ten he would have got it but the ref was in the perfect place to see the reality.

[Ray 111]

Well Guys,

There we have our difference of opinion, I don''t believe he did trail his leg, for starters it was his leading leg, which I guess makes it more difficult and it appears at the moment of contact Klose caught him with his knee''ish about a foot (12 inches) off the ground half way up his shin, which was off the ground?

Perhaps the most telling indictment came from Klose himself when he admits it was a penalty as he caught him.

Either way it''s given us all something to discuss.

[Indy 3,298]

From a technical point of view there was contact so was a penalty, but from that refs view camera angle, he was already diving and dragging that leg over the out stretched Klose leg.

So I can see that this type of over acting needs to be stamped out.

When did indirect free kicks go out of the game? Why are all free kicks now direct?

[paul moy 235]

[quote user="Ray"]Well Guys,

There we have our difference of opinion, I don''t believe he did trail his leg, for starters it was his leading leg, which I guess makes it more difficult and it appears at the moment of contact Klose caught him with his knee''ish about a foot (12 inches) off the ground half way up his shin, which was off the ground?

Perhaps the most telling indictment came from Klose himself when he admits it was a penalty as he caught him.

Either way it''s given us all something to discuss.[/quote]Timm''s logic is that if he made contact with Willian then it is a penalty.  That is a flawed argument as players deliberately make contact nowadays to engineer penalties, and in my view that is what Willian did. That is cheating and is what Chelsea are quite adept at up until now.  They were caught out last night, three times.  It will be very interesting to watch them in the future..... 

[Crabbycanary3 994]

Actually Ray, if you break down Klose''s piece, he said that , at the time, he wasn''t sure. He knew he had made contact with Willian.

Afterwards, he concedes that it was ''quite close'', and ''I guess you can give it''. That, to me, is indicative of the game today, and that any contact, must mean a foul, and we have seen plenty of those type of incidents given, BUT, it doesn''t mean it is right, and I for one (and it seems, many others) are glad that at least last night, it was finally dealt with, in the correct manner.

Ask Klose a specific question about Willian''s ''soft'' leg (btw, you seem to be in the minority who thinks it wasn''t) , and , now he has had a chance to see it, what he thinks Willian was doing, and looking for.

[Ray 111]

I agree I''m in the minority on here, but if the three ex pro pundits and Mr Poll were on here I guess I may not be. Funny ol'' game Saint, funny ol'' game.

[Crabbycanary3 994]

Like I have said, those people have been indoctrinated, with what the ''modern'' game is about. It''s just wrong................

[Ray 111]

Crabbycanary3,

It''s wrong in your opinion, possibly mine too, but that doesn''t make it wrong and us right, it just means we have revealed to all, our values and beliefs on modern day football. Any event/person/etc. has no meaning other than that which you give it, and thank goodness for that.

[Crabbycanary3 994]

It''s morally wrong. Not, to me in my naive way, how true sport should be played. That then leaks into society, but that is a WHOLE new debate!

[Ray 111]

Crabbycanary3,

Gonna be pedantic here, morally wrong according to our morals, not the morals of the diver.

My wife sometimes says to me, that person has no conscience/morals, my answer is always, they do, we all do, it''s just a different conscience/morals to yours.

Doesn''t mean we have to like others morals or even lump them, however they are just as entitled to hold them as anyone.

[KiwiScot 1,443]

Any penalty decision would need to have VAR look at it otherwise the attacker dives and if the ref says no penalty he will then shout for VAR. If the penalty is awareded then the defenders shouts for VAR. Who cares in the truth if VAR gives you another roll of the dice to reverse the decision to your favour. Red cards I think for diving after VAR reviewOn another note. I think refs should have open mics to the broadcast just to hear what the players say to them.

[GenerationA47 751]

"On another note. I think refs should have open mics to the broadcast just to hear what the players say to them."Agreed. And only the two captains be permitted to address the ref. Sensible rugby rules, long overdue in football in my opinion.

[First Wazzock 902]

What about having the best of three?

Or, even having panels across Europe like the Eurovision Song Contest?

...Luxembourg can we have your votes...Penalty or no Penalty...

[Crabbycanary3 994]

Ray, I get it.

I am worldly wise, and know there are murderers/rapists/terrorists yada yada yada, out there, but I am just talking about sport, and the purity of competition etc.

Wouldn''t it be great, if the whole (Sporting, at least?) World could have a certain level of morals, that they would all adhere to, without resorting to, for example, diving? How many footballers dived, even 25 years ago, compared with these days?

We all know that certain sportspeople take drugs for instance, which , in my eyes, would always make any victories hollow and invalid. In their head, it''s what they believe is required to ''win'' at their sport, but the vast majority of people know that is a line that must never be crossed.

The essence of all sport, probably goes back to the gladitorial age, purity of competition, if you like. What Willian did last night was nothing like that, but is related to what goes on, in all sports, one way or another, these days. I will never accept that, and it is a crying shame that plenty of pundits etc, try and justify it as sport. Nah

[Ray 111]

Crabbycanary3,

Utopia is what you (we) are looking for I guess? But was setting Christians against lions considered purity of sport.

I''m willing to bet that the Pink Un of the day would have had discussions about an illegal move by one Gladiator or another, I think it is quite simply human nature??

[Crabbycanary3 994]

Not utopia Ray, just a raising of the levels please!

I was thinking more Gladiator to Gladiator, no animals!

Also, should we just shrug our shoulders, and not question things, because that is just a slippery slope, if not.

[Ray 111]

Crabby,

As Edmund Burke said, “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.”

And to complete the circle, I guess that all depends on the individuals definition of evil, but I get the point.

Cheers

Ray

[Guest]

Funny how certain things are acceptable but others aren''t.

Why is spitting considered such a beastly thing and yet kicking someone up the jacksie is all part of the game?

Diving is such a cowardly thing whereas pulling someones shirt is acceptable?

I don''t condone any of them but wonder what part of our human psyche sees similar things as poles apart.