VAR

[Fiery Zac 1,066]

Today was the first occasion I haven’t celebrated as much as I normally would because I was worried about VAR disallowing a goal.

Pukkis goal was a lovely move but from where I sit I had no idea if he had timed his run correctly or whether Buendia had delayed the pass slightly too long. As the ball went in and I jumped up Martin Atkinson was right in my eyeline and his hand went straight to his ear, obviously just getting confirmation the goal was ok. But it was this movement that made me stop and wait to see whether the perfectly good goal would stand. Once it had (and there was never any confirmation other than the ref just letting the celebrations continue, he didn’t give any signal) I would’ve looked stupid to then start celebrating as everyone else had sat down. The fact linesmen are told to keep their flag down to see how play develops also makes the uncertainty within the ground all the more infuriating.

To have VAR, those moments will obviously happen and I’ll have to get used to it but it was a weird feeling not to really celebrate a city goal simply because I was worried it would be ruled out.

Thoughts? Anybody else react the same?

[Van wink 2,994]

It didnt even cross my mind.

It probably will after we eventually get one disallowed

[Fiery Zac 1,066]

1 minute ago, Van wink said:

It didnt even cross my mind.

It probably will after we eventually get one disallowed

I don’t think it would have crossed mine if I hadn’t been looking at the ref at that moment. Frustrating because for all fans at the games, those moments are special and it spoilt it 😥

[daly 551]

Farce at the moment till they sort out the teething problems

[JF 694]

I honestly thought on first watch that their winning goal was going to get ruled out, was very, very close. They should have had a penalty awarded and quite how the ref has missed the foul on Krul is beyond me

[Capt. Pants 5,013]

I thought Chelsea could have had a 4th, the ref did check it. It's instinct to celebrate a goal narrow offside or not.

[Ramrod 258]

I thought the ref did OK today. No reason for VAR to question him. 

[Branston Pickle 4,150]

Really?  BT said the ref gave the goal that was disallowed for a foul on Krul....

[ricardo 8,034]

Just now, Branston Pickle said:

Really?  BT said the ref gave the goal that was disallowed for a foul on Krul....

I don't think he did.

The ball went into the net so was automatically reviewed.

[JF 694]

No it was stated by the Var check that the referee gave the goal and Var over ruled him

[Branston Pickle 4,150]

Those at the ground might not have been (made) aware but it was def stated the ref‘s “soft call”, to use cricket parlance, was a goal.

[ricardo 8,034]

1 minute ago, Branston Pickle said:

Those at the ground might not have been (made) aware but it was def stated the ref‘s “soft call”, to use cricket parlance, was a goal.

if so then he was the only one who thought so. it was an obvious foul.

[Branston Pickle 4,150]

2 minutes ago, ricardo said:

if so then he was the only one who thought so. it was an obvious foul.

No doubt on that one - certainly a foul all day long (in the modern game).

[crispeduk 282]

Have said before, had the early impression there's less goalmouth grappling with VAR, now I'm sure of it. Another less obvious effect is maybes that, with referees effectively under scrutiny now as well as the players, there does seem to be a levelling of the playing field around the pitch, not just in and around the penalty areas, in that 50-50s feel much more like they are just that, 50-50s. Not just for ourselves, I have been generally less angered by decisions seemingly being weighted the way of 'big clubs' than I was last time we were in the Prem. Not suggesting cheating in the past, just that pressure was easier to succumb to in the past. Early days I know, but I continue to believe there's more benefits than dis-benefits in using VAR.

Btw I know VAR doesn't apply all around the pitch, I am talking about officials' mindsets, which they would likely not switch on and off according to where they are on the field.

Edited August 24, 2019 by crispeduk

[Graham Paddons Beard 2,791]

[ricardo 8,034]

20 minutes ago, Graham Paddons Beard said:

That's what I said.

 

[Icecream Snow 777]

I'd like it to be like in cricket, where unless it's an absolute howler, the decision remains with the officials decision.

Neves scored  a wondergoal against Man United and they were inching the frames back and forth to see if the guy who made the pass was offside.

 

[Branston Pickle 4,150]

30 minutes ago, ricardo said:

That's what I said.

 

It is and it isn’t - the ref thought it was a goal and only in checking was he advised that it shouldn’t be given...it’s perhaps subtle but nit quite the same thing.

[Van wink 2,994]

It seems VAR was used several times today, I was aware the foul on Tim was being checked but for the rest of the checks I had no idea it was happening.

Have I missed something?

[canarydan23 4,762]

3 hours ago, ricardo said:

if so then he was the only one who thought so. it was an obvious foul.

He gave the goal. Didn't blow for a free-kick and then made the signal for an overturned decision after the review. Pitiful decision from a pretty pitiful referee.

Amazingly, Norwich fan and Guardian writer Barry Glendenning was saying how ridiculous VAR was for ruling out the goal. I don't know, but would assume he's been a vocal VAR critic so we were seeing cognitive dissonance in action, but to see a Norwich fan saying they thought that was a legitimate goal was truly bizarre.

[canarydan23 4,762]

As for VAR, the decision for it should be given to the players and coaching staff, not proven and consistently incompetent officials who seem to struggle even with replays on TV screens. Something similar to the cricket review or NFL. Allow it for everything and you'd quickly eliminate diving. Players know if they've made contact, so if a player goes down and the ref blows for a freekick, ask for a review and the diver gets booked and you get possession back. You simply restrict it to 2 failed reviews a match and that will stop abuse.

Football needs video assistance, but it needs a governing body with a brain to roll it out.

[hogesar 10,766]

Instead of investing all this time and money into VAR they should have focussed on how they train, coach and bring through the next generation of referees because the fact I still have to watch Martin fcking Atkinson try and make a game about Martin fcking Atkinson in 2019 is nothing short of a joke.

[Fiery Zac 1,066]

37 minutes ago, canarydan23 said:

He gave the goal. Didn't blow for a free-kick and then made the signal for an overturned decision after the review. Pitiful decision from a pretty pitiful referee.

Amazingly, Norwich fan and Guardian writer Barry Glendenning was saying how ridiculous VAR was for ruling out the goal. I don't know, but would assume he's been a vocal VAR critic so we were seeing cognitive dissonance in action, but to see a Norwich fan saying they thought that was a legitimate goal was truly bizarre.

? Glendenning isn’t a Norwich fan, he supports Sunderland and is quite vocal about it during podcasts

[Iwans Big Toe 382]

4 hours ago, ricardo said:

if so then he was the only one who thought so. it was an obvious foul.

Not the only one. The commentator on BT sport thought it should have stood. But he had zero grasp of the laws of the game.

 

 

 

 

[canarydan23 4,762]

8 hours ago, Fiery Zac said:

? Glendenning isn’t a Norwich fan, he supports Sunderland and is quite vocal about it during podcasts

Really? I've never listened and given his grasp of the game I'm grateful for that. I was basing it on the fact that his Twitter photo is the old egg n cress Norwich shirt. Very odd. 

[Fiery Zac 1,066]

50 minutes ago, canarydan23 said:

Really? I've never listened and given his grasp of the game I'm grateful for that. I was basing it on the fact that his Twitter photo is the old egg n cress Norwich shirt. Very odd. 

I’m not on twitter but can only assume it’s because of the Ian Culverhouse game he played/plays on talksport. Very rarely listened to talksport but him and Max Rushden talk about PL players nobody remembers (underrated) and it became named the Culverhouse game. 

[Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man 4,622]

17 hours ago, Fiery Zac said:

The fact linesmen are told to keep their flag down to see how play develops also makes the uncertainty within the ground all the more infuriating.

That's the only realistic way to operate. If the assistant flags for tight calls and gets it wrong, the play can't be restarted.

17 hours ago, daly said:

Farce at the moment till they sort out the teething problems

Farce? In three rounds of matches, I haven't seen any serious issues with it yet in the Premier League and it's running really well in comparison to other competitions. This is the third season of VAR in Serie A and after only two matches this season, I've already seen one use of VAR that was executed far worse than anything I've seen in the Premier League so far.

17 hours ago, Branston Pickle said:

Really?  BT said the ref gave the goal that was disallowed for a foul on Krul....

I think he would've disallowed it had there been no VAR. He just wanted to wait and confirm it, because he has the luxury of doing so. Besides, it was a foul all day long; Giroud was nowhere near the ball.

[nutty nigel 7,902]

18 hours ago, Fiery Zac said:

Today was the first occasion I haven’t celebrated as much as I normally would because I was worried about VAR disallowing a goal.

Pukkis goal was a lovely move but from where I sit I had no idea if he had timed his run correctly or whether Buendia had delayed the pass slightly too long. As the ball went in and I jumped up Martin Atkinson was right in my eyeline and his hand went straight to his ear, obviously just getting confirmation the goal was ok.

This is exactly how it was for me. I just watched the ref instead of celebrating. Will we get used to it in time? Or will we always long for the days when all that was needed was a crafty peep for the linesman's flag.

[Ramrod 258]

I didn't learn until later the ref gave the Giroud foul goal. It seemed confusing at the time although Krul was adamant and players on both sides seemed to believe it wouldn't stand. 

I feel the decisions were all correct in the end. Their penalty claim where a player runs blind side into a clearing defender was rightly refused. 

[Drazen Muzinic 1,502]

18 hours ago, ricardo said:

if so then he was the only one who thought so. it was an obvious foul.

It was very noticeable that, even though the ref didn't give a foul, the Chelsea players didn't celebrate the goal and their fans were quite muted too. That indicated to me it was an obvious foul.