The Video Assistant Referee (VAR)

[ciggiesnbeer]

VAR is meant to do one thing. Inform the referee of clear and obvious mistakes. He made one today for whatever motivation and the VAR ref failed to do his job.

Shambles.

 

[Zatman]

19 minutes ago, ciggiesnbeer said:

VAR is meant to do one thing. Inform the referee of clear and obvious mistakes. He made one today for whatever motivation and the VAR ref failed to do his job.

Shambles.

 

He made more than one though

[sharkyvilla]

So at what stage do they tell the ref to go have a look at the decision on the screen, or do they not do that at all?  

[Chindie]

21 minutes ago, ciggiesnbeer said:

VAR is meant to do one thing. Inform the referee of clear and obvious mistakes. He made one today for whatever motivation and the VAR ref failed to do his job.

Shambles.

 

The Premier League has a very specific take on what clear and obvious is. They won't have considered the incident as clear and obvious.

The system is absurd.

[Chindie]

2 minutes ago, sharkyvilla said:

So at what stage do they tell the ref to go have a look at the decision on the screen, or do they not do that at all?  

They can ask him to take a look at any incident that matches the criteria of being clear and obvious, which is a high bar to meet, but the League is recommending they only use the pitchside monitor in exceedingly rare circumstances. Which basically means they won't.

[bannedfromHandV]

VAR hasn’t solved anything this far. All it’s done is add fuel to the fire and slow the game down.

Quelle surprise 

[Genie]

Apparently VAR did review the incident with Grealish today.

Quote

The Premier League later confirmed the VAR, Andrew Madley, has reviewed the “potential penalty situation”, but had been unable to check the “goal” “because the whistle went before the ball went into the net”.

It doesn't say what the VAR team thought. 

Link

Edited August 31, 2019 by Genie

[Genie]

Spoiler

beIN Sports pundit Andy Gray said: “They will probably come out tomorrow, the VAR, and say we could not look back at it and tell the referee what we thought, because two things: They will say Zaha pushed him (Grealish) - the first offence was outside the box. That is the get out of jail card, so it wasn’t a penalty and they would say it wasn’t a goal. That is the get out of jail card for VAR.

“The first offence was outside the box. Yes, he got that wrong but what he should have done, the referee, was not blow his whistle straight away.

“Jack Grealish does everything he can to stay on his feet and and gets the pass off.

“They will say that was a secondary offence. The one he got wrong was Zaha. Zaha should have had a foul given against him for that. He didn’t. The referee thought it was a dive. That is unlucky for Aston Villa.

Link

[Genie]

So it seems like VAR cant do much because Friend blew his whistle for the "dive' before the goal went in.

This is in contradiction to the new offside rule where play is allowed to continue and then is reviewed by VAR if theres a goal.

Why didn't he let play carry on, then VAR rule the goal out if there was an infringement?

Utterly bewildered by it. The only thing that makes sense is that he really didn't want us to score.

[Davkaus]

43 minutes ago, Chindie said:

The Premier League has a very specific take on what clear and obvious is. They won't have considered the incident as clear and obvious.

The system is absurd.

It's almost like the VAR system has been subverted by the bastards at PGMOL and is essentially used as an arse-covering device.

Admitting that a referee has made a mistake is almost unthinkable to them. A bunch of referees all agree that the referee is supreme and must not be questioned. **** the lot of them.

[Keyblade]

32 minutes ago, bannedfromHandV said:

VAR hasn’t solved anything this far. All it’s done is add fuel to the fire and slow the game down.

Quelle surprise 

Slows the game down is a huge reach. There's an average of about 6 checks game and most of them are imperceptible bar the very contentious ones. 

[sne]

2 minutes ago, Keyblade said:

Slows the game down is a huge reach. There's an average of about 6 checks game and most of them are imperceptible bar the very contentious ones. 

Yeah the way they are using it, or rather not using it in the PL has made this a non issue after what I'm guessing was an emergency meeting after the first round this season.

The Basque derby last night in La Liga had 8 minutes of VAR waiting for the audience to enjoy apparently.

[Chindie]

9 minutes ago, Davkaus said:

It's almost like the VAR system has been subverted by the bastards at PGMOL and is essentially used as an arse-covering device.

Admitting that a referee has made a mistake is almost unthinkable to them. A bunch of referees all agree that the referee is supreme and must not be questioned. **** the lot of them.

Pretty much.

The thing I really can't get my head around, is they are quite happy to use technology to hold the offside rule to account to an extent out was never designed to do so, but they then won't use the technology to actually do anything to the more egregious and contentious incidents that fans actually get pissed off about.

The juxtaposition of anally retentive usage of offside that nobody wanted, while the bad decisions that people actually care about are unchanged.

The system is useless, pointless, stupid and ab utter waste of time 

[foreveryoung]

VAR is basically making no difference at all.

I'm sure the refs have all agreed with the PL, under no circumstances can it be used to over rule them.

[sne]

It does feel a bit like when the police are investigating themselves if there was any wrongdoings around a case.

Or like when politicians are deciding about salary raises for themselves.

It's bound to be a bias mess.

 

Edited August 31, 2019 by sne

[PieFacE]

I've been very pro about VAR, and I'm pretty sure I'm about to say the same thing that I did last week. 

But... I think VAR does have a place in football, I genuinely do, but the current implementation is absolutely pathetic to the point where there is no point in having it.

I'd rather today's incident happen with no VAR, than to have it with VAR and it be reviewed and still not overturned. What's the point? Why even bother?

VAR does so much to take goals away from the game with mm offsides, if it can't rectify the mistake made today and also bring goals into the game that have previously been wrongfully disallowed then just scrap it.

It needs to work both ways, and it isn't at the minute.

Edited August 31, 2019 by PieFacE

[Zatman]

The thing with VAR its supposed to continue the play and then pull back any issues

[Talldarkandransome]

Just seen incident in the Leicester v Bournemouth game, shocking challenge by Leicester player, ref gave nothing. VAR reviewed and agreed with the ref. Proves that it's just there to agree with the ref. Studs up ankle breaker too

[a m ole]

Disregarding Friend blowing his whistle early - if the VAR officials don’t think that was enough evidence to correct the referees mistake to punish a ‘dive’ and instead award a penalty then the entire system is completely pointless.

Rebrand it Lino3000 and we can start pretending all referees are doing their best to be objective again.

[jacketspuds]

10 hours ago, Genie said:

So it seems like VAR cant do much because Friend blew his whistle for the "dive' before the goal went in.

This is in contradiction to the new offside rule where play is allowed to continue and then is reviewed by VAR if theres a goal.

Why didn't he let play carry on, then VAR rule the goal out if there was an infringement?

Utterly bewildered by it. The only thing that makes sense is that he really didn't want us to score.

Completely agree. The phase of play should be allowed to finish and then be reviewed if necessary. The refs actions completely took VAR out of the game.