Jump to content

The Video Assistant Referee (VAR)


Stevo985

Recommended Posts

22 hours ago, Villaphan04 said:

if they move confederations (i think that's the correct word), then they have to start at the bottom of that new one , like Jarred Gillett. 

 

who, btw, was the VAR who told the on field ref to go look at the disallowed West Ham 2nd goal

I believe it was, in fact, Jared Gillett

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, villa89 said:

That's been my stance since the start. In my mind its something for egregious errors, like the wrong player been sent off, two footed tackles, blatant penalties not given. The problem now is the VAR officials are far too keen to get involved and be part of the action. They love being talked about. Maybe once a weekend there should be a VAR intervention, instead its every game for nonsense things like arsenals disallowed goal last weekend. 

I actually thought it was a foul but the ref in real time had a clear view and didn’t, there was absolutely no reason to deem it a clear and obvious mistake 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

They should just remove the whole "Clear and obvious" thing because it makes no sense, it's down to interpretation. Though, I suspect it's done on purpose so it allows for a grey area in the event officials still get stuff wrong. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, WHY said:

I actually thought it was a foul but the ref in real time had a clear view and didn’t, there was absolutely no reason to deem it a clear and obvious mistake 

It probably was a foul but as you say the Ref didn't blow for it and that's enough. Also we want goals in the game, it should be a last resort to disallow a goal not looking for any excuse. Also VAR process takes way too long, if you can't see it with one replay then it wasn't clear and obvious. 

Edited by villa89
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, PieFacE said:

They should just remove the whole "Clear and obvious" thing because it makes no sense, it's down to interpretation. Though, I suspect it's done on purpose so it allows for a grey area in the event officials still get stuff wrong. 

i always thought "clear and obvious" was put in by marketing in an attempt to convince people it wont ruin the game

it will "only" be used when its clear and obvious which can be interpreted as not very often 

i think they've changed the wording on the PL website this season - Factual decisions, such as offside or if a foul was committed inside or outside the penalty area, will not be subject to the "clear and obvious error" test

the rest of the wording - 

All 380 Premier League fixtures in a season will have a VAR, who is constantly monitoring the match but will be used only for "clear and obvious errors" or "serious missed incidents" in four match-changing situations:

Goals
Penalty decisions
Direct red card incidents
Mistaken identity

thats how i understood it, he's always watching but you're right on the grey area, there's no definition anywhere for what clear and obvious or serious actually means

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Clear and obvious is one of the worst things about VAR. It should never have been used as a phrase. It just adds ambiguity. It can be interpreted in many ways.

 

If a ref sees an incident and decides it's not a foul, then it would have to be very clear and obvious that he's got that wrong for them to oveturn it. Fine, I agree with that.

However if a ref has missed an incident, then I'd argue it doesn't have to be clear and obvious because he hasn't seen it in the first place. In that situation they're looking at it fresh as an unseen incident so if they deem it to be a foul, even if it isn't obvious, then it should be a foul.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, villa4europe said:

Surely VAR disallowing the goal would mean the play was dead meaning that his 2nd yellow is binned off? 

Not that it matters, **** Juventus 

Even more incredibly Candreva was down by the corner flag actually playing Bonucci onside!!

But the replay VAR refs were studying didn't show him.....

  • Shocked 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Mister_a said:

I’d be gutted if this happened to Villa.

To be honest if you’re stupid enough to take your shirt off when you’re on a yellow you don’t really have a leg to stand on

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, VillaChris said:

Even more incredibly Candreva was down by the corner flag actually playing Bonucci onside!!

But the replay VAR refs were studying didn't show him.....

Incredible, can't believe how blatant it is, they just didn't see him? :D

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems VAR is dependent on what the broadcasters show them. I think it’s been claimed before that they get different coverage and replays/angles than what we see on the live broadcasts and yet, when they’re sent to the TV to check they’re shown exactly what we see.

It’s so totally flawed and open to artificial manipulation.

Just like the ridiculous goal given against us away at City a couple of years ago, Sky didn’t show a wide angle replay until minutes after the goal had been given, had they done so it would have been painfully obvious just how offside Rodri (I think) was when he came back to tackle Mings.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â