Jump to content

The Video Assistant Referee (VAR)


Stevo985

Recommended Posts

13 minutes ago, bobzy said:

It was a real weird one.  The defender wins the ball to poke it away but then seemed to make a second movement with his leg across Bailey which sent them both flying.

Should've been a penalty IMO.

That's where I am too, was only on about the 6th replay that I saw the defender actually plants his foot after the initial tangle and goes at him again, the 2nd movement is unnaturally kicking away from bailey which is what trips him

It's incredibly clever / devious play from the defender but it's a pen 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, bobzy said:

It was a real weird one.  The defender wins the ball to poke it away but then seemed to make a second movement with his leg across Bailey which sent them both flying.

Should've been a penalty IMO.

Yeah it's probably that second movement that I'm missing. I saw him win the ball cleanly so felt like it wasn't a penalty, but sounds like I missed the second bit so fair enough

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah defender has initially won the ball but that just kicked it into Bailey’s path who’s about to shoot and he wipes him out. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That Bournemouth goal disallowed for the mildest touch on Raya. 

If that was on a defender or striker it's not a foul so why does a goalkeeper have a different rule set? 

VAR even checked. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, foreveryoung said:

Corrected.

Same thing. VaR refs are part of the package. The whole process must work.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, The_Steve said:

Rogers no penalty

Rogers-pen.gif

Adingra penalty

spacer.png

No consistency at all

One given on field, the other not. Literally the only difference. Either they both should be or neither should be (my preference)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, StefanAVFC said:

One given on field, the other not. Literally the only difference. Either they both should be or neither should be (my preference)

Both would be soft. Rogers gets just ahead of the defender and is impeded from progressing. That's more of a foul for me. I just don't get why there was no VAR check. Sky tried to pass it off that the defender got the first touch (didn't and hip checks Rogers) or that it was too early in the game (irrelevant).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, The_Steve said:

Both would be soft. Rogers gets just ahead of the defender and is impeded from progressing. That's more of a foul for me. I just don't get why there was no VAR check. Sky tried to pass it off that the defender got the first touch (didn't and hip checks Rogers) or that it was too early in the game (irrelevant).

I think they did check and it got cleared while the ball was still in play.  It's pissed me off because the two challenges are either penalties or not penalties but I don't think it was very smart defending from Konsa, he shouldn't really have given the ref a decision to make by making the contact with his left leg.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Problem with VaR is that people think that it somehow guarantees right decisions, which it clearly doesn't.

All it does is give so much more information that officiating has become a pivotal issue in football. Which it never was before.

I'd get rid of the whole tjing and not show tje endless rewinds on TV after each decision. Go back to watching football instead of discussing about the refs.

People just can't let go these days.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Brumstopdogs said:

 

I'm not sure 

In the ground where things aren't necessarily clear then yeah maybe 

Our penalty shout for Rogers yesterday if that was VAR'd and they said no the defender got the ball then yeah good

But then for their penalty, the ref puts the mic on and says "trip by konsa, penalty" what does that add? 

I'm leaning towards a lot of it being common sense and them shying away from actual explanations, it will be simple say what you see stuff 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, villa4europe said:

I'm not sure 

In the ground where things aren't necessarily clear then yeah maybe 

Our penalty shout for Rogers yesterday if that was VAR'd and they said no the defender got the ball then yeah good

But then for their penalty, the ref puts the mic on and says "trip by konsa, penalty" what does that add? 

I'm leaning towards a lot of it being common sense and them shying away from actual explanations, it will be simple say what you see stuff 

A lot of the problem is the lack of communication between the actual incident happening and the decision being made - IMO it would benefit the crowd to know more about the decision making process like they do in rugby.

I agree once the decision has been made then maybe doesn't need to be announced like in the video but possibly it is worth a try to see what the feedback is like.

Edited by Brumstopdogs
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Brumstopdogs said:

A lot of the problem is the lack of communication between the actual incident happening and the decision being made - IMO it would benefit the crowd to know more about the decision making process like they do in rugby.

I agree once the decision has been made then maybe doesn't need to be announced like in the video but possibly it is worth a try to see what the feedback is like.

Might benefit the crowd more, but the main problem is the subjectivity regarding what a foul actually is.

The two penalty shouts in the Brighton game basically highlight that - in real time, the referee thinks that one is and one isn’t. There’s not enough in either for someone to definitively say “you got that one wrong” (although, for me, neither is a penalty) so the original decision stands both times.

I think that’s probably correct as far as VAR is concerned, but the nature of that subjectivity means fans just get more annoyed.

They probably need to sack it off apart from factual things like offside and maybe violent conduct not spotted or something. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 05/05/2024 at 18:02, AVTuco said:

Problem with VaR is that people think that it somehow guarantees right decisions, which it clearly doesn't.

I don't think anyone ever thought it would guarantee right decisions, but certainly the expectation was that it would get the vast vast majority right.

Certainly my logic at the time was there were drawbacks, but getting the right decision would be worth it.

 

Turns out you can't account for complete incompetence by the refs.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â