VAR Farce
- Thread starter Ryanj91
- Start date
We warmed you all but you didn’t listen!
Or Liverpool. Just saying...
I look forward to hearing why spurs' goal was OK but City's against Spurs was not.
Weren't you just saying in another thread that somebody shouldn't question these referees' decisions because they are so much better than any of us?
Or does that only apply when you agree with the decision?
onthebrink
Well-Known Member
Presumably the VAR in this case felt the ball didn't hit the player's arm. I think the Laporte one was 100% clear that it did hit his hand. I'm not saying VAR got it right in the Watford game but that was obviously their view.
Do we know who controls the VAR information that goes on the big screen? Is it done from Stockley Park or by the home club? (In other words, was the 'No Goal' part of it down to VAR or another party.)
one
RefChat Addict
I don't need hi res and dedicated technology to see that the ball has hit the arm here. The bounce of the ball another proof. It is moving downwards And away from goal before contact. After contact bounces up and slightly back towards goal. The angle of the bounce can't be anything but arm contact. VAR didn't have to rely on geometry to see the ball hit the arm. Unless he is not aware of the new law changes this is a clear and obvious error.
Remember the ball don't have to hit the arm first or hit the arm only. Part arm part chest is still contact with arm. It does not have to be deliberate. As long as the ball hits the arm, the goal has to be disallowed.
Remember the ball don't have to hit the arm first or hit the arm only. Part arm part chest is still contact with arm. It does not have to be deliberate. As long as the ball hits the arm, the goal has to be disallowed.
90 games so far and NO referee could be arsed to look at a pitch side monitor, imagine if that's your job in setting them up and connecting up the required technology links!!!
Do the people at Stockley Park get any extra pay? Fans are ultimately paying for this farce. Just jobs for the boys. It doesn't need a qualified referee to judge offside and clear and obvious errors are not clear and obvious errors in VARVARLAND.
Who VARs the VAR? Do they get together and ever admit privately that it might just conceivably have been an error at all? Or is there an omerta? What happens in Stockley Park stays in Stockley Park.
Who VARs the VAR? Do they get together and ever admit privately that it might just conceivably have been an error at all? Or is there an omerta? What happens in Stockley Park stays in Stockley Park.
How does that VAR work?
Last edited:
Yesterday was proof, as if we didn't already have it, that VAR in its current form isn't fit for purpose.
It's inconsistent, confusing and, at least on the face of it, is being used as a way of confirming incorrect decisions. Those at Stockley Park seem to be totally unwilling to overturn an on field decision and the PL/PGMOL are hiding behind the 'high bar' nonsense to justify it.
Just thinking back across the 9 games City have had so far this season, there's three stonewall penalties that haven't been given on the field (Rodri v Spurs, Silva v Bournemouth and Zaha on Du Bruyne yesterday) and that have been confirmed by VAR. As a fan, it almost makes the decision worse because it almost feels like you've been wronged twice. That's just City and I'm sure that fans of all clubs will be able to point to at least one blatantly incorrect decision that hasn't been overturned.
It's inconsistent, confusing and, at least on the face of it, is being used as a way of confirming incorrect decisions. Those at Stockley Park seem to be totally unwilling to overturn an on field decision and the PL/PGMOL are hiding behind the 'high bar' nonsense to justify it.
Just thinking back across the 9 games City have had so far this season, there's three stonewall penalties that haven't been given on the field (Rodri v Spurs, Silva v Bournemouth and Zaha on Du Bruyne yesterday) and that have been confirmed by VAR. As a fan, it almost makes the decision worse because it almost feels like you've been wronged twice. That's just City and I'm sure that fans of all clubs will be able to point to at least one blatantly incorrect decision that hasn't been overturned.
......and VAR in Rugby is 100% spot on so far... Red card for France.... Bye bye....Dirty git!!!!
I don't understand the high bar standards that pundits go on about.
A penalty is a penalty.
A handball leading up to a goal is handball.
Imagine being a Watford fan. You've paid a large chunk of your savings from your salary to watch your team play. During this game a referee who has all this technology is too scared to say, 'Yes that was a penalty and Handball = No Goal,' and as a result robbed your team of their first win of the season. I'd be furious.
VAR has no excuses to be wrong tbh.
A penalty is a penalty.
A handball leading up to a goal is handball.
Imagine being a Watford fan. You've paid a large chunk of your savings from your salary to watch your team play. During this game a referee who has all this technology is too scared to say, 'Yes that was a penalty and Handball = No Goal,' and as a result robbed your team of their first win of the season. I'd be furious.
VAR has no excuses to be wrong tbh.
onthebrink
Well-Known Member
RefJef
RefChat Addict
Things take time.
in the rugby World Cup four years ago, I remember decisions taking ages, and the TMO system (rugby’s VAR) taking a lot of criticism for spoiling the game.
This morning I’ve just watched Wales France and have concluded they got it working right. As @Sheffields Finest says, the TMO spotted an infringement that rightly led to a red card. More interestingly was Wales’ try and the way the protocol upheld the on field decision as the video evidence was not conclusive. I also think the way the decision making process is communicated to the players and spectators helps.
in the rugby World Cup four years ago, I remember decisions taking ages, and the TMO system (rugby’s VAR) taking a lot of criticism for spoiling the game.
This morning I’ve just watched Wales France and have concluded they got it working right. As @Sheffields Finest says, the TMO spotted an infringement that rightly led to a red card. More interestingly was Wales’ try and the way the protocol upheld the on field decision as the video evidence was not conclusive. I also think the way the decision making process is communicated to the players and spectators helps.
one
RefChat Addict
That's the point I am making. Hitting chest shoulder doe not meant it didn't hit the arm. And as per my previous post , for me, there is conclusive evidence.
I think its the EPL VAR instructions that is the problem here. From what I have seen so far it would be something like "if you can find any excuse not to get involved, don't get involved" and of course you can always find some excuse.
PinnerPaul
RefChat Addict
We've discussed this once or twice before. They decided before season started not to use pitchside monitors - just re read the LOTG and says referee MAY use OFR, not that he has to.
PinnerPaul
RefChat Addict
VARs are the same PL referees out on the pitch every week! So yes he would know the handball LAW
PinnerPaul
RefChat Addict
I'm not buying this 'time' argument - it was first used in football quite a while ago now.