Jump to content
Note to existing users - password reset is required Read more... ×
Sign in to follow this  
Indy

VAR not being used correctly

Recommended Posts

I think VAR is being used largely in the same way as cricket - which for lbw uses ‘umpire’s call’ if it isn’t “obviously” wrong…I don’t have a problem with that for penalties as it seems to be sensible enough.

 I do have a problem with some of the offsides being given, though - imo some are just too paper thin to be given; it isn’t possible to tell the precise nanosecond the ball is passed, and if a player is an inch ahead when the frame stops, it’s more than possible they were onside at the point of the pass.  I don’t know what has happened to the benefit of the doubt going to the attacker, but for me that was good for the game and should be reinstated.  VAR should only give an offside if it is absolutely clear.  The Spurs game last week v Leicester is a prime example of a game that hinged on it, from being 2-0 up to a marginal decision, Spurs were 1-1 only a minute or two later and lost a game they wouldn’t have otherwise done.

Edited by Branston Pickle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

VAR isn't being used correctly because I think the referees are either a) scared of being accused of 'ruining the game', or b) scared of undermining the referee on the field. We've seen many instances of clear penalties not given yet the VAR has done diddly squat. I don't believe it has been used to overturn a penalty (or non-penalty) decision in the Premier League yet.

Yesterday's penalty wasn't an example of this, however.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the offside is a different issue and perhaps the solution to that is to tweak the offside rule to reflect VAR rather than not using VAR for it.

In terms of the other decisions they do seem to be getting themselves in a mess with them and the bar for overturning a decision seems so high.  I know they are doing it on purpose so that the referee on the pitch is still seen as the decision maker in all cases other than a really obvious error but the bar does seem too high to me. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Watching the game online yesterday it appeared pretty clear from the replays that for our shout, the Palace player has his arm pointing directly up in the air as he's jumping and it hits his underarm. He's blocked a cross with his arm in an unnatural position. I thought by the laws of the game this was a pen. IF that's the case, surely it's an obvious error? Or is 'obvious error' always going to be 100% subjective and therefore makes VAR a complete waste of time anyway?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, hogesar said:

Watching the game online yesterday it appeared pretty clear from the replays that for our shout, the Palace player has his arm pointing directly up in the air as he's jumping and it hits his underarm. He's blocked a cross with his arm in an unnatural position. I thought by the laws of the game this was a pen. IF that's the case, surely it's an obvious error? Or is 'obvious error' always going to be 100% subjective and therefore makes VAR a complete waste of time anyway?

I agree. I can't seem to find a replay of that incident anywhere (coincidence or do they prefer to keep these incidents under the radar?) in the highlights packages but watching it live at the game it looked absolutely blatant to me and I fully expected VAR to intervene. Would be good to see a slow motion replay of it. The reforms to the handball rule have resulted in a mess as well. in my view if a player has their arms raised above their head and blocks a cross then that should be a penalty.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, hogesar said:

Watching the game online yesterday it appeared pretty clear from the replays that for our shout, the Palace player has his arm pointing directly up in the air as he's jumping and it hits his underarm. He's blocked a cross with his arm in an unnatural position. I thought by the laws of the game this was a pen. IF that's the case, surely it's an obvious error? Or is 'obvious error' always going to be 100% subjective and therefore makes VAR a complete waste of time anyway?

Same as Stones against Man City. His arm was clearly in an 'unnatural position' when the ball hit it and we should've had the opportunity to go 3-0 up.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I declined to comment about their "handball" as I thought it sounded like sour grapes and I wasn't too sure of the ruling.

But since seeing the rule, it was a definite handball. I would expect everyone to put their hands up like that as much for protection as anything else. 

I never thought VAR was necessary as controversy has always been an exciting and lasting part of the game. But the squawlers who said the game was too important to be without it cannot defend how it is being used.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A point that has been made on one of the other boards is that VAR actually seems to be reducing the number of yellow cards being given for dives because refs are not giving them and are asking for VAR to check the incident. But VAR can't recommend yellow cards and so for some non "penalties" that I think would otherwise have been given as dives and yellow cards the players are not getting sanctioned. It would be ironic if VAR actually worsened diving because as we have seen if there is any sort of contact then VAR is not going to overturn it so it must encourage players to draw contact and go down. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A bunch of Palace supporters said to me after the game that it was never a penalty, they said their boy read Amadou’s outstretched leg and blatantly saw his chance to fall over said outstretched leg. Watching the highlights back confirmed it to me IMO. Eagles supporters said to me that was what won them the game, they were quite honest about it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The crux for me that I thought VAR was going to stop this sort of thing happening, it was a daft lunge but no real contact, the whole point of a penalty is preventing a goal scoring chance, the consequences are massive in awarding a penalty which could ultimately cost relegation!

All it’s done is made more controversial decisions, the way each associations uses it appear to be different! Sure the common way forward needs to be made and made more black n white!

Sorry guys it was never a penalty, the hand ball was more clear cut penalty yet wasn’t given and theirs was!

Just do away with VAR if all it’s doing is massaging the refs ego instead of being used to make the right decision!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't have an issue with theirs not being overturned to be honest because although I think on balance it wasn't a penalty it certainly very much looked like one, its enough of a marginal call for there to be differing opinions on it. It certainly wasn't a clear and obvious error by the ref. The handball one on the other hand I though was pretty obvious although I still have yet to see or find a replay of it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought both penalty shouts were pretty soft, it's just bad luck the one against us was the only one given. Yes Amadou lunges in, but it's pretty clear their player takes a tumble once Amadou is on the deck. Just like the handball, his arm's above his head but he would argue he's just protecting himself and if his arm wasn't there it would have hit him in the head most probably.

As to VAR, what happened to the ref reviewing the replay on a screen by the pitch? I know it increases the delay but I rather thought it added to the excitement too. Too slow for our world renowned high intensity league? With a happy side effect that refs don't have to admit getting it wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man said:

The purpose of VAR Is to eliminate the 'shockers' that are clearly wrong. There were no decisions of that magnitude against Palace and there aren't in many games. 

If that’s the case why is offside decided on such fine margins?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man said:

The purpose of VAR Is to eliminate the 'shockers' that are clearly wrong. There were no decisions of that magnitude against Palace and there aren't in many games. 

I think the handball shout was a shocker but have not been able to confirm it as it appears to have been air brushed from history. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Peanuts said:

I thought both penalty shouts were pretty soft, it's just bad luck the one against us was the only one given. Yes Amadou lunges in, but it's pretty clear their player takes a tumble once Amadou is on the deck. Just like the handball, his arm's above his head but he would argue he's just protecting himself and if his arm wasn't there it would have hit him in the head most probably.

As to VAR, what happened to the ref reviewing the replay on a screen by the pitch? I know it increases the delay but I rather thought it added to the excitement too. Too slow for our world renowned high intensity league? With a happy side effect that refs don't have to admit getting it wrong.

If that is what happened then by the current interpretation of the rules it is a clear penalty and should have been given by VAR.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man said:

Because offside is a definite, black and white decision. There's no matter of opinion. An iffy handball or a rash tackle are subjective.

But it’s not, as said the margins of when the ball is actually kicked to the mm offside isn't black and white!

So surely there’s some argument that tight offside should be left as is?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So this plie of **** that the gormless wet themselves over...

......... turns out to be a pile of worthless ****

Most decisions in football are subjective, unlike sports where such technology is used, are not

As predicted the same arguments will continue, only tis time much time, effort and money has been wasted pandering to the 'happy clappies' who want it all 'proper' with no element of doubt that a game like football will always have over many of it's decisions (or calls, if the ref has a phone)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Indy said:

But it’s not, as said the margins of when the ball is actually kicked to the mm offside isn't black and white!

So surely there’s some argument that tight offside should be left as is?

For what it's worth, I actually agree that a bit of leeway for offside decisions wouldn't go amiss. Maybe 5/10cm 'margin of error' would see goals not disallowed when an attacker was practically level, but as it currently is, tall offside decisions are 'black and white'.

 

22 minutes ago, PurpleCanary said:

If that is what happened then by the current interpretation of the rules it is a clear penalty and should have been given by VAR.

Probably should've been, but it wasn't a shocker. 

Trybull on Haller and Godfrey on Barnes were both far more clear cut than the handball on Saturday and we got away with those.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Watching the ManC game. Sterling looks as though he was fouled just in/out of the area but stayed on his feet, just, tried to carry on and lost the ball.

Which asks the question, if he was fouled, does him staying on his feet stop the ref awarding a free or penalty?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, keelansgrandad said:

Watching the ManC game. Sterling looks as though he was fouled just in/out of the area but stayed on his feet, just, tried to carry on and lost the ball.

Which asks the question, if he was fouled, does him staying on his feet stop the ref awarding a free or penalty?

Is your question “does” or “should”? Should it stop the ref awarding a fk or penalty? No. Does it? Probably, yes, more often than not.

On 30/09/2019 at 19:50, Bill said:

So this plie of **** that the gormless wet themselves over...

......... turns out to be a pile of worthless ****

Most decisions in football are subjective, unlike sports where such technology is used, are not

As predicted the same arguments will continue, only tis time much time, effort and money has been wasted pandering to the 'happy clappies' who want it all 'proper' with no element of doubt that a game like football will always have over many of it's decisions (or calls, if the ref has a phone)

I sort of agree. As you suggest, for the objective decisions (goal line technology,even offside if it can be accurate enough), VAR or technology can help. For pretty much everything else, I’m not so sure it works too well.

I actually think the ref running over to the TV screen for a “second look” worked better than the current system. The VAR ref could say in the ear “did you see (incident)?” If ref saw it and didn’t think it was a foul,then play on. If he didn’t see it, then let him go and watch it back. That way it might get used better as well, because it removes that element of “overruling your mate”... it’s limited only to when the ref doesn’t see something. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The trouble is that in the Premier League we don't have Video Assistant Referee (VAR). There is no pitchside screen, so no opportunity for the guy in the studio to get the on field ref to review an incident. What we actually have is Video Referee (VR), and all he does is check a decision. 99 times out of 100, nothing changes because, as has been said, he doesn't want to make his mate look a fool. If there is a case of overruling, the Video Ref is making the decision. Its so far away from the VAR we saw in the World Cup, which actually worked well. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Hissing Sid said:

The trouble is that in the Premier League we don't have Video Assistant Referee (VAR). There is no pitchside screen, so no opportunity for the guy in the studio to get the on field ref to review an incident. What we actually have is Video Referee (VR), and all he does is check a decision. 99 times out of 100, nothing changes because, as has been said, he doesn't want to make his mate look a fool. If there is a case of overruling, the Video Ref is making the decision. Its so far away from the VAR we saw in the World Cup, which actually worked well. 

This is incorrect. Every match has a pitchside screen for the referee to use, if they deem it necessary. The image below is from our match with Liverpool.

 

Screen Shot 2019-10-02 at 09.28.04.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 02/10/2019 at 09:30, Legend Iwan said:

This is incorrect. Every match has a pitchside screen for the referee to use, if they deem it necessary. The image below is from our match with Liverpool.

 

Screen Shot 2019-10-02 at 09.28.04.png

Which rather begs the question why aren't they using it? I would much prefer to see the original referee look at the incident again and decide if he wants to change his mind rather than have him overruled or vindicated by a guy sat 50 miles away in a studio. 

There was a penalty incident in the Southampton v Bournemouth game a couple of weeks ago which is a good case in point. Absolutely blatant penalty. Not given by the ref but I am sure that had he watched it again on the screen he would probably have held his hands up and said "I got that wrong."

Alternatively they need to be referring specific questions to the video ref such as "I didn't give that as I didn't see any contact, can you check for me if that was correct" or "I thought that hit his chest not arm but can you check" and then if not the case they look at it again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Jim Smith said:

Alternatively they need to be referring specific questions to the video ref such as "I didn't give that as I didn't see any contact, can you check for me if that was correct" or "I thought that hit his chest not arm but can you check" and then if not the case they look at it again.

I think its the other way around.  Refs seem to be being spoken to via their earpiece if/when there's a close decision to be made.  As in "hang on a sec, we just want to check that wasn't handball - yep, you were right, carry on...".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×