VAR...again

[Creative Midfielder 1,985]

13 minutes ago, lake district canary said:

They either improve it dramatically or scrap it. I cannot believe the farce that it has become and it smacks of total incompetence at the top of the people who are in charge of it. Who is it, the referee association?  The FA? The Premier League?  Whoever it is, it has been rolled out so far below any kind of common sense that it is just ridiculous. I'm afraid I don't go along with this idea that "oh, it's new and needs time to bed in and be tweaked" or whatever - it is simply being run awfully with an incompetence bordering on rank stupidity.

I am forever going to remember that "frame" or in layman's terms that "photo" of the ball several feet away from Vrancic after he had kicked it and in the self same picture Pukki being judged a fraction of a millimetre offside.  If the officials are that incompetent to judge something like that fairly, it doesn't matter how good var gets, we are always going to get the kind of travesty we saw against Spurs.

Agree with pretty much all of that, although I think VAR has so totally lost credibility that the only viable option is to scrap it.

I've always assumed that the Premier League is responsible but then we've also had the utter farce that VAR was also used in some FA Cup games but not in others. So I think your summary of 'incompetence bordering on rank stupidity' is spot on.

I think the idea that it needs time to bed in is farcical - managers, players, pundits, fans and more importantly IFAB have all told the Premier League that they have got it completely wrong and they've taken no notice whatsoever. Frankly they don't give a toss as long as the cash keeps rolling in and that is the only thing that will change anything - if the fans decide it isn't worth paying through the nose to watch this cr@p any more then we might get our game back.

 

[HertsCanary93 222]

From the replays I have seen now. I think the check on the penalty was for an offside in the buildup.

Luckily he was a fair chunk on, but not as far as you might think with the rubbish 'armpit to the millimetre' interpretation of the FA. 

Imagine if both the red card and penalty were overruled due to pukkis arm being offside. I think I would have spontaneously combusted. 

I didn't see anything wrong with the check on Godfrey's red. It took a bit longer than I would have liked, but I think that was mostly due to some afters around the technical areas, that had to be calmed down first. A red was correct and Bournemouth would have been rightly upset if he had just received a yellow. 

Edited January 18, 2020 by HertsCanary93

[Mr Angry 1,542]

1 hour ago, Graham Paddons Beard said:

Why now introduce the pitch side monitor ? Oh and let Michael Oliver be the first to use it our only ref even close to the World Cup? Suspicious much? 

They haven’t “introduced” it-it’s been available since the start of the season. 

[Creative Midfielder 1,985]

6 minutes ago, HertsCanary93 said:

From the replays I have seen now. I think the check on the penalty was for an offside in the buildup.

Luckily he was a fair chunk on, but not as far as you might think with the rubbish 'armpit to the millimetre' interpretation of the FA.

I'm not so sure, the caption seems definite that the check is for handball. Some have suggested it was for a possible Cantwell handball but nobody knows, so again we're back to the question of what was the 'clear and obvious error' that prompted the check - did the Bournemouth players even appeal for a Cantwell handball or a Pukki offside - I don't think so!!

The ref and linesmen didn't see handball or offside either, so why did VAR spend 2 or 3 minutes looking??

[All the Germans 1,073]

6 minutes ago, Creative Midfielder said:

I'm not so sure, the caption seems definite that the check is for handball. Some have suggested it was for a possible Cantwell handball but nobody knows, so again we're back to the question of what was the 'clear and obvious error' that prompted the check - did the Bournemouth players even appeal for a Cantwell handball or a Pukki offside - I don't think so!!

The ref and linesmen didn't see handball or offside either, so why did VAR spend 2 or 3 minutes looking??

I thought the 'clear and obvious' was just in general play that they would intervene. However, all goals - as game changing - were checked as a matter of course. Whilst offside are also auto-checked, as they are a definite rather than being subjective; they either are onside or they are offside and therefore the clear and obvious does not apply.

[Thirsty Lizard 3,154]

28 minutes ago, Creative Midfielder said:

I'm not so sure, the caption seems definite that the check is for handball. Some have suggested it was for a possible Cantwell handball but nobody knows, so again we're back to the question of what was the 'clear and obvious error' that prompted the check - did the Bournemouth players even appeal for a Cantwell handball or a Pukki offside - I don't think so!!

The ref and linesmen didn't see handball or offside either, so why did VAR spend 2 or 3 minutes looking??

Definitely not a Cantwell handball, but they were probably looking at the flick on by Duda to Cantwell. (Was a lovely volleyed first time pass to Pukki by Cantwell and a great instinctive first time effort by Duda. Shame they don't still do 'Save of the Season' because I think Cook would be in the running). 

[Kenny Foggo 1,116]

4 hours ago, lake district canary said:

 Yet another three or four minutes taken out of a game while they tried to find a way of reversing a clear penalty decision. Bonkers.

The red card, took too way, way too long, at second glance it was pretty clearly a red card. Again, bonkers. 

And they still don't add enough time on at the end of a half or the end of a game to allow for the var officials while they are fannying around with their laptops.

Bonkers.

 

It's just ruining the game. Most obvious penalty ever yet had to wait for ever... Tackle the second he did it, it was obviously a red..

[Kenny Foggo 1,116]

4 hours ago, lake district canary said:

Jees, are you kidding?  It's getting just beyond ridiculous.

Yep.. how far back to you go to decide what was relevant or not... Just bin it now

[Mason 47 1,371]

It's almost like they feel the need to do a check to justify having the technology on board. Like others have said, how far back do you look?

Are we going to see a goal disallowed soon because Pukki accidentally trod on his dogs paw whilst making dinner?

[KiwiScot 1,436]

Change VAR to x3 challenges per team like in American football.

[Canary Wundaboy 1,358]

They won’t scrap it but I reckon they’ll impose a strict time limit on the Stockley review and make every decision an on-pitch monitor review. They’ll also rectify the offside rule.

[Nuff Said 5,079]

I think I’ve said this before, but just in case...

 

I don’t hold with most of the conspiracy theories around VAR, but: does it not occur to anyone else that a two to three minute break in play is perfect to slip in a few adverts? 

[SwindonCanary 455]

VAR Was correct on both the goal and the sending off, so it's doing it's job.

[Branston Pickle 3,631]

Not so sure it was doing it’s job if you look at West Ham v Everton and a backward headbutt.  The defender made the most of it but that has to be a red all day long.

[Alex Moss 2,165]

The big question for me is why isn’t every (major) decision that VAR flags up checked on the pitchside monitor? Now that does seem quite suspicious...

Also, obviously the Godfrey incident was a definite sending off, don’t disagree with that, but I do take umbrage with the fact that at least one of the Bournemouth backroom staff was talking to the ref constantly and voicing his displeasure whilst the pitchside monitor was being reviewed for the Godfrey incident. From what I saw the ref tried to blank him in fairness but people on either bench should not be allowed to do this. It really needs to be outlawed very very quickly for obvious reasons.

[nutty nigel 7,506]

7 minutes ago, Branston Pickle said:

Not so sure it was doing it’s job if you look at West Ham v Everton and a backward headbutt.  The defender made the most of it but that has to be a red all day long.

So what have we really gained? It's gone from the fallible judgement of the officials in the stadium to the fallible judgement of an official with a screen.

But whatever. It's absolutely carp for anyone who pays to support their team in the stadium. I held back on celebrating the pen to see if it was retaken. That's how it's got.

[Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man 3,773]

4 minutes ago, Alex Moss said:

The big question for me is why isn’t every (major) decision that VAR flags up checked on the pitchside monitor? Now that does seem quite suspicious...

Offsides are not checked because they're matter of fact decisions that are easier to decide in the office with all the lines and everything. On-field decisions that are clearly correct don't need to be checked, and rightly so. We're already complaining that VAR is too slow, so why would we want them to check even more than they need to?

 

2 hours ago, Graham Paddons Beard said:

What would you suggest made him look at it again? 

The VAR told him to check the video. The VAR did not tell him to change his decision: that was the referee alone. As has been pointed out in this thread already, we've been asking for the refs to use the pitchside monitors for a while, and now it's finally happening some people still aren't happy.

 

4 minutes ago, Alex Moss said:

Also, obviously the Godfrey incident was a definite sending off, don’t disagree with that, but I do take umbrage with the fact that at least one of the Bournemouth backroom staff was talking to the ref constantly and voicing his displeasure whilst the pitchside monitor was being reviewed for the Godfrey incident. From what I saw the ref tried to blank him in fairness but people on either bench should not be allowed to do this. It really needs to be outlawed very very quickly for obvious reasons.

I believe it already is. Most competitions have a zone around the screen where only the ref can enter, and I imagine the Premier League is applying it as well.

[Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man 3,773]

3 minutes ago, nutty nigel said:

So what have we really gained? It's gone from the fallible judgement of the officials in the stadium to the fallible judgement of an official with a screen.

But whatever. It's absolutely carp for anyone who pays to support their team in the stadium. I held back on celebrating the pen to see if it was retaken. That's how it's got.

I understand the feeling. I didn't celebrate Cantwell's goal against Palace because it looked offside to me. It isn't enough to make a quick glance at the assistant any more.

[Overrated, over paid 22]

Wait until next season. There are 'allegedly' discussions with advertisers to take flash spots to of 10-15 second ads out in-game whilst VAR is being reviewed. Whilst the VAR delays and frustrations will no doubt continue for players and crowds at least viewers will get the chance to be distracted by, for example, the latest Mercedes SUV, McDonalds burger offering or Ed Sheerans lasts album release. 

You heard it here first! 😣

 

[Alex Moss 2,165]

8 minutes ago, Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man said:

Offsides are not checked because they're matter of fact decisions that are easier to decide in the office with all the lines and everything. On-field decisions that are clearly correct don't need to be checked, and rightly so. We're already complaining that VAR is too slow, so why would we want them to check even more than they need to?

 

I believe it already is. Most competitions have a zone around the screen where only the ref can enter, and I imagine the Premier League is applying it as well.

I hear you, Wacky, but I just find it utterly stupid that the ref makes a decision on some things but is overruled on others. It’s meant to be an assistant, nothing more.

As for the pitchside monitor exclusion zone, you could see the backroom Bournemouth staff member watching the monitor whilst pulling a grimacing face and clearly voicing his displeasure to the ref. Godfrey’s was a sending off, no complaints there, but that interference on a tighter decision could have a bearing, and it needs to be a punishable offence. 

[lake district canary 4,530]

Why can't the 4th official be the one that looks at the monitor and helps the ref? There are 4 officials at a match and the simple answer is to give them more responsibility - the 4th official to check decisions on the monitor, the assistant referees to be given more clout.  VAR seems to me to be just useless on so many levels, but mostly on the effect on the delays in the flow of a match. The delay in taking the penalty yesterday was ridiculous. The time it took to decide it was a red card was ridiculous too. One ten second replay by VAR should have been enough for them to say to the ref to go and check the monitor and ten seconds for him to see it and make his decision. If the 4th official was given responsibility for looking at the monitor, it wouldn't even have needed VAR - just a simple look at a replay......a kind of instant ground based instant VAR. 

So remote VAR is clumsy and inefficient and imo always will be. It is effectively taking the spirit out of the game in so many ways and just confirms what many of us know - that technology is not the answer to everything in life. Sadly, there are too many people who still think that more technology is the way forwards.

Edited January 19, 2020 by lake district canary

[Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man 3,773]

3 minutes ago, lake district canary said:

Why can't the 4th official be the one that looks at the monitor and helps the ref? There are 4 officials at a match and the simple answer is to give them more responsibility - the 4th official to check decisions on the monitor, the assistant referees to be given more clout.  VAR seems to me to be just useless on so many levels, but mostly on the effect on the delays in the flow of a match. The delay in taking the penalty yesterday was ridiculous. The time it took to decide it was a red card was ridiculous too. One ten second replay by VAR should have been enough for them to say to the ref to go and check the monitor and ten seconds for him to see it and make his decision. If the 4th official was given responsibility for looking at the monitor, it wouldn't even have needed VAR - just a simple look at a replay......a kind of instant ground based instant VAR. 

So remote VAR is clumsy and inefficient and imo always will be. It is effectively taking the spirit out of the game in so many ways and just confirms what many of us know - that technology is not the answer to everything in life. Sadly, there are too many people who still think that more technology is the way forwards.

I understand your point, but from a logistical point of view, the VAR has an office with about ten monitors and ten camera angles at the same time whereas the fourth official would have just the one, so I don't think they'd be any quicker. If anything, they'd be slower. 

[lake district canary 4,530]

7 minutes ago, Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man said:

I understand your point, but from a logistical point of view, the VAR has an office with about ten monitors and ten camera angles at the same time whereas the fourth official would have just the one, so I don't think they'd be any quicker. If anything, they'd be slower. 

It can't be that difficult to arrange a screen at a match that can show three or four different angles of an incident. It strikes me that this remote VAR thing is just in its primitive early stage and that if it is to become integral to football permanently, it will have to morph into something efficient that can be done at the pitchside by one person. 

Edited January 19, 2020 by lake district canary

[Wilson 62]

Just watched the game again on MOTD.

Why is the referees var monitor placed in the away teams seating area?

They are able to influence the referee.

The guy in the picture clearly gives his opinion in the refs ear.

[Jim Smith 2,314]

8 hours ago, Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man said:

Offsides are not checked because they're matter of fact decisions that are easier to decide in the office with all the lines and everything. On-field decisions that are clearly correct don't need to be checked, and rightly so. We're already complaining that VAR is too slow, so why would we want them to check even more than they need to?

 

The VAR told him to check the video. The VAR did not tell him to change his decision: that was the referee alone. As has been pointed out in this thread already, we've been asking for the refs to use the pitchside monitors for a while, and now it's finally happening some people still aren't happy.

 

I believe it already is. Most competitions have a zone around the screen where only the ref can enter, and I imagine the Premier League is applying it as well.

We seemed to have put the monitor right next to the away dugout. Several of their coaches were chipping in and they didn’t have to move to do so. If you watch the MOTD footage you can see one says “Ooooh that’s nasty” or words to that effect right in the refs ear.

they need to address this and move the monitor. Not saying it made a difference here but it should not be happening. 

[Indy 3,283]

14 hours ago, lake district canary said:

To the eye and to any official with brain cells, the ball was clearly on target, otherwise why would the defender bother handling it...and also it was deflected on to the post so again, clearly on target. And why need to check for an offside, because if they are taking the game back to previous incidents, why stop with just one stage back?  There was no-one remotely near offside anyway.

A penalty is a moment full of pressure for the taker too - the delay only makes that worse, again helping the perpetrators of the foul play. Thankfully Pukki is a cool customer, but I think the more noise that is made about var the better, it is utterly, utterly ruining the beautiful game, whether the decisions are correct or not.

I sort of agree, but as others pointed out, definitely an improvement by taking it back to referee, everything yesterday was correct, just for clarity, imagine if the ref missed the great save from cook and gave a goal kick, by checking VAR would have got this right. Just saying I’m for VAR if used for key events to check, even the Godfrey red was a good call.

[Capt. Pants 4,194]

28 minutes ago, Wilson said:

Just watched the game again on MOTD.

Why is the referees var monitor placed in the away teams seating area?

They are able to influence the referee.

The guy in the picture clearly gives his opinion in the refs ear.

Err 26000 in the crowd probably evened it up a bit didn't it? But in fairness the monitor needs to be further down the tunnel.

Both decisions were right. 

[hogesar 9,606]

VAR is just an absolute joke for anyone who actually goes to games. I would much rather be in the Championship than spend another season with this absolute BS of not being able to instinctively celebrate a goal anymore.

Not only that - the check on the most blatant penalty you'll ever see took 2 or 3 minutes. How is that fair on Pukki with the relating pressures etc? Yeah, hes calm and composed but if he was injured and we were relying on a young player like Idah....

[Wilson 62]

58 minutes ago, Capt. Pants said:

Err 26000 in the crowd probably evened it up a bit didn't it? But in fairness the monitor needs to be further down the tunnel.

Both decisions were right. 

I didn’t dispute the outcome but it’s not useful having someone chime in at the actual point of contact with their view at a time when the referee is making his final decision.

Not being a psychologist and not having studied  the reactions in this type of situation I’m not qualified to say if it makes any difference.

Best to remove all doubt.

 

[Branston Pickle 3,631]

The whole thing is pretty ridiculous and needs a massive rethink.  If this is the price to pay for a few more supposedly correct decisions, then this season on its own is proving that it’s not a price worth paying - it’s ruining the game.