Jump to content

The Video Assistant Referee (VAR)


Stevo985

Recommended Posts

21 minutes ago, Wainy316 said:

Why was our goal against City unable to be reviewed by VAR as the whistle had been blown but Man Utd once got awarded a penalty against Brighton after the friggin' full time whistle had blown!?

Because the whistle being blown in our game meant the opposition had stopped playing because there was a whistle. It's impossible for VAR or any ref to determine whether that goal would have still happened if they didn't blow.

The Man Utd game was an incident that happened before the full time whistle, but a decision was made after the full time whistle had blown.

The two situations aren't comparable, different scenarios completely.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Wainy316 said:

Why was our goal against City unable to be reviewed by VAR as the whistle had been blown but Man Utd once got awarded a penalty against Brighton after the friggin' full time whistle had blown!?

You would think after the full time whistle blows that any decisions that weren’t given shouldn't than be given, regardless of when the incorrect decision occurs. 
 

Got to love a bit of corruption.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Chilwell foul today on Ramsey very similar to the one Emerson Royal did against Martinelli which was given a straight red. 

Against Nottingham Forest we should have had a pen, very similar to the one Arsenal got against Liverpool which was given as a penalty.

VAR is a joke just get rid it's meant to be consistent.

It's only consistent if your a big six side.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, AshVilla said:

Chilwell foul today on Ramsey very similar to the one Emerson Royal did against Martinelli which was given a straight red. 

Against Nottingham Forest we should have had a pen, very similar to the one Arsenal got against Liverpool which was given as a penalty.

VAR is a joke just get rid it's meant to be consistent.

It's only consistent if your a big six side.

Can we get rid of it after Gerrard is gone?

Thnx bye!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Chillwell's foul today was not very nice at all. 

I don't know what more it would've had to have been a red...not to have a pitch side check doesn't seem right.

As a side note, imo the ref should be making all decisions...not being advised. 

VAR should just say...'go check the monitor' and leave the decision making with one person. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, May-Z said:

Chillwell's foul today was not very nice at all. 

I don't know what more it would've had to have been a red...not to have a pitch side check doesn't seem right.

As a side note, imo the ref should be making all decisions...not being advised. 

VAR should just say...'go check the monitor' and leave the decision making with one person. 

Definitely

VAR watches everything, when they spot something they buzz down and say "you might want to look at that again" pitch ref can say yep or no I'm OK and this is why*

That's how it was when they introduced it at the world cup with FIFA in charge

* the this is why element of it could also then be shared, maybe not live on the spot but if the recording was now on sky sports news of him saying its only a yellow because...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, bobzy said:

I don't think the Chilwell tackle was worthy of a red, personally.  It's not a good challenge, for sure, but doesn't warrant sending off IMO.

Why not?

For me he's left the ground has no control and his studs are up

If that's not a red then I'm not sure what is anymore, not saying it should be I'm saying that in terms of consistency and what we've seen in other games it is a red

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, villa4europe said:

Why not?

For me he's left the ground has no control and his studs are up

If that's not a red then I'm not sure what is anymore, not saying it should be I'm saying that in terms of consistency and what we've seen in other games it is a red

I just don’t think a player should be sent off for that. I haven’t watched it back but, from memory, he ended up along the ground and caught our player on the ankle with his studs. There wasn’t anything particularly dangerous or reckless in there, for me.

Then again, I am aware I’m also one of few who don’t have appetite for red cards. A lot of people want to see reds for any contact of stud on a player - which I just don’t agree with.

Agreed on the consistency point, but I don’t think other incidents have been exactly the same (I also don’t think Emerson should have been sent off. I remember commenting on it on this forum somewhere).

Edited by bobzy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the Chilwell tackle - I think a few years ago this would be a yellow card all day long (an orange one if ever there was one) BUT I think in today's game it could have definitely been given as a red as it was a pretty naughty challenge, reckless, studs up, could have caused a bit of damage to Ramsey. I think VAR should have been involved (and no doubt would have if roles were reversed 🧐)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can't convince me the Chilwell tackle was not a red card. Reckless, out of control, studs up, off the ground, not looking at the ball, nowhere near getting the ball. Isn't that the definition of a red card challenge? By what metric would it be anything else?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

He’s not off the ground. If he WAS off the ground, it would be a red because that completely changes the whole dynamic (actually landing on the player).

I dunno - I don’t want the game to be mistimed challenge = red.

As @WakefieldVillan says, it’s an “orange” situation and I think either decision (yellow and stays on or red and goes off) is valid and wouldn’t be overturned. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â