MOTD VAR

[lake district canary 4,549]

Don't often watch MOTD these days, but did today and wasn't surprised to see another ridiculous VAR decsion.

Brentford were awarded a penalty by the ref and VAR even though it was clear that Toney was impeding the defender who was being pulled off balance by Toney. Yes the defender's arm comes up, the foul was by Toney in the first instance.

A clear mistake by the ref who to be fair may not have seen that but VAR??  Why could they not see that? Obvious the first time you see the replay. Still clearly not fit for purpose and still ruining football matches. 

Leeds should have had a penalty too in their match with Villa. Don't mind so much if refs make mistakes, but there is no excuse for VAR if it doesn't do it's job.

Top flight football a joke still.

Rant over.

 

Edited January 15, 2023 by lake district canary

[cambridgeshire canary 6,818]

Yeah the Toney one was obvious. Soon as the replay came on all the commenters even pointed out how obvious it was that Toney forced himself into the defender so he could go to ground to try and get a penalty. Yet if they can work that out from just one replay in a second or two why the hell do we even have VAR if they won't bother telling the ref? Too scared to upset the ref and tell him he's wrong, that's why. It's shameful.

[Yellow Wal 314]

If only ex-professionals had an input into VAR we wouldn't get so many of these terrible decisions.

Very few referees have played the game at a high level and do not have the understanding of the foul play that goes on. Referees are trained as referees and have a good understanding of the rules of the game but ex-players have a good practical knowledge of what actually goes on, on the pitch, and can recognise fouls and cons far easier than referees as they have been part of it all their sporting lives.

As has been said many times in the past, the best poachers make the best gamekeepers.

Ex-professionals have a large input into rugby, hockey and cricket. Why not football?

[FenwayFrank 2,469]

Most pundits have said Toney was “clever” . Why are players being rewarded for cheating?

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

17 minutes ago, FenwayFrank said:

Most pundits have said Toney was “clever” . Why are players being rewarded for cheating?

We used to just have goals. Then we had assists. Now we have rewards for being clever.

[Google Bot 3,329]

The first United goal vs Man City confused me too, I can't see with all the **** decisions we've had against us that it would've been allowed.  I don't know if it's corrupt or ran by idiots if I'm honest.

One things for sure, the more we head to this binary system and bending the rules for VAR the more exploits it opens up for players to cheat using marginal averages.

[Branston Pickle 3,696]

The first Man U goal yesterday is just strange -by the letter of the law he’s not offside, per people who know about these things, but if that’s the case the law needs revising. Rashford was running onto the ball and it was within an inch of touching it - if that’s not impeding/influencing then I don’t know what is; when you consider the Salah one v Wolves last week (and Bamford vs us last season) something isn’t right.

[All the Germans 1,082]

I like the principle of VAR and hope it stays and improves. However, if you just move the rubbish judgement from the man on the pitch to the rubbish judgement of the man sat in front of a screen, you have barely improved at all. It's not VAR's fault the people reviewing the footage are terrible but you may as well not have it if that is the case.

[NFN FC 1,123]

It's a fookin joke. VAR out! 

[lake district canary 4,549]

1 hour ago, Branston Pickle said:

The first Man U goal yesterday is just strange -by the letter of the law he’s not offside, per people who know about these things, but if that’s the case the law needs revising. Rashford was running onto the ball and it was within an inch of touching it - if that’s not impeding/influencing then I don’t know what is; when you consider the Salah one v Wolves last week (and Bamford vs us last season) something isn’t right.

Yes, they explained the law on MOTD - but it is convoluted and lacking common sense. They have tried to pin it down to specifics rather than a general "interfering with play" - and by doing that, all they have done is taken away any vestige of common sense to it. Rashford was running with the ball at his feet - even though he never touched it - and was as involved in the goal as much as it is possible to be involved in it without actually scoring himself - all from an offside position.

That rule - and many others too probably - need changing back to something open to interpretation by the ref. The more they try and pin rules down with extra criteria like they are doing, the harder it is to get common sense decisions.

[Norfolk Mustard 94]

8 minutes ago, lake district canary said:

Yes, they explained the law on MOTD - but it is convoluted and lacking common sense. They have tried to pin it down to specifics rather than a general "interfering with play" - and by doing that, all they have done is taken away any vestige of common sense to it. Rashford was running with the ball at his feet - even though he never touched it - and was as involved in the goal as much as it is possible to be involved in it without actually scoring himself - all from an offside position.

That rule - and many others too probably - need changing back to something open to interpretation by the ref. The more they try and pin rules down with extra criteria like they are doing, the harder it is to get common sense decisions.

Given it's a game of sport, the phrase 'interfering with play' seems ironic to me! Why not allow disguised runs & moves from offside positions? Providing the strike is made by a player who remains onside, it should count. Keep it nice & simple...

[norfolkngood 1,091]

they should go back to old days anyone Behind the last defender who is not on floor injured is offside when ball is played 

the lines on VAR are good so that would be very simple none of the phase 1.2.3.4. 

 

[Well b back 3,281]

Did Toney have a bet on a Brentford penalty at round about that time ?

[nutty nigel 7,645]

I'm sure controversial VAR incidents help sell the game on TV. Talking points for the pundits and viewers.

What of the TV extras in the stands who have no idea what's going. 

[Petriix 2,853]

More often than not it's the laws of the game as much as the implementation of VAR at fault. Some common sense adjustments to the rules would fix the majority of such issues. When it comes to the subjective calls, however, there's always going to be room for interpretation and therefore bias.

What there should be is accountability and improvement. All VAR decisions should be subject to open analysis and, rather than being defensive, they should acknowledge errors and look to do better. 

[Ulfotto 644]

I think we are slowly coming round to the position that VAR is there for the absolute howler.

If the var people look at it and say “see them given” then 100% leave it with the on field decision. This line should be trotted out more and more.

 

[Robert N. LiM 4,511]

21 hours ago, Yellow Wal said:

If only ex-professionals had an input into VAR we wouldn't get so many of these terrible decisions.

Very few referees have played the game at a high level and do not have the understanding of the foul play that goes on. Referees are trained as referees and have a good understanding of the rules of the game but ex-players have a good practical knowledge of what actually goes on, on the pitch, and can recognise fouls and cons far easier than referees as they have been part of it all their sporting lives.

As has been said many times in the past, the best poachers make the best gamekeepers.

Ex-professionals have a large input into rugby, hockey and cricket. Why not football?

Agree with this, but the flipside of it is true too: too many footballers, coaches and pundits simply don't know the rules. I think a prerequisite of getting your coaching badges should be to qualify as a referee and ref some amateur football. A good way for ex-pros to give something back to the game, and to raise the understanding of the rules amongst footballers.

[Robert N. LiM 4,511]

As a cricket fan, I find the differences between VAR and DRS (the cricket equivalent, the Decision Review System) really interesting. DRS, in general works very well, because they use technology to make clear-cut decisions about matters of fact that an umpire can't be sure of on the field. Did the batters' bat cross the line before the stumps were broken. Did it hit his pads in line with the stumps? Did she hit the ball or not? There are a few areas where it's interpretation (would the ball have gone on to hit the stumps? Did that catch carry, or did it graze the grass?) but in those cases 'umpires' call' is used and decisions are only overturned if the evidence is clear.

By contrast, so many football decisions are based on interpretation or opinion. Was that enough contact to justify giving a foul? Was she interfering with play? Was the hand in a 'natural position' when the ball struck it? Yes, watching on TV might give a clearer idea, but in the end, it often comes down to opinion. I strongly believe you should just stick with the opinion of the on-field referee. Sure, mistakes will be made, but they're made with VAR too. And if the game is 'too important' for these mistakes to be made, that's the fault of the game, not the refs. Get on with it, basically. Luck's part of sport. Suck it up.

[SwearyCanary 1,179]

Just. Get. Rid. Of. Offside. 

It serves no purpose other than to create controversy. Akanji played Rashford offside, then was penalised for utilising his awareness to use the trap. It makes the trap totally ****ing pointless. 

Imagine the relief of having no question over whether you can celebrate a goal because a players bôllock may have swung a millimetre too far. If you ditch offside players can bomb forward without hesitation and defenders can bomb back just as committed. If a team put a man up top to hoof it to then a team can either put a man on him or take their in field numerical advantage. It is just another tactical option to exploit and in my opinion just as interesting and far less **ing boring to keep talking about over and over and over again 

Rant over 

Edited January 16, 2023 by SwearyCanary

[Barham Blitz 664]

I forget where I read it but somebody said that Rashford's non-interference in play was the longest dummy in football history.  And was therefore interference.

 

[Newtopia 519]

16 hours ago, Ulfotto said:

I think we are slowly coming round to the position that VAR is there for the absolute howler.

If the var people look at it and say “see them given” then 100% leave it with the on field decision. This line should be trotted out more and more.

 

I hope you are right, I am nervous that refs are worryingly not making a decision, 

[city4eva 215]

Fulham’s pen against Newcastle was also dodgy IMO, the Fulham player stood on Trippiers foot first, so  shouldnt the foul have been given the other way ?

 

scrap the offside rule 

 

[shefcanary 2,466]

4 hours ago, Newtopia said:

I hope you are right, I am nervous that refs are worryingly not making a decision, 

Darren Cann (Norwich fan?) was the Assistant Referee in this match. As soon as he made his decision and the Man City players ran toward him to remonstrate you could see him saying to them "calm down, VAR will be reviewing this, let them sort it out". Takes away the responsibility totally from the on field officials.

[shaunieboy77 73]

Am I right in thinking all Premier league grounds have big screens......except Anfield and Old Trafford? 

[ged in the onion bag 857]

With VAR involved it’s a completely different game to the rest!   The rules are applied differently but just as inconsistently.    For example, Man Utd’s goal is disallowed everytime without VAR! 

It allows the rules to be interpreted differently. 
 

For the games integrity this awful joke of a system has to go!    They won’t improve it because it still relies on the idiocy, incompetency or inconsistency of the VAR team!    It’s exposing these clueless refs to the fact they never played at any reasonable level!    If they had done, they wouldn’t be reffing now!    The abuse is shocking!