The Video Assistant Referee (VAR)

[AndyM3000]

How has that Wolves goal been ruled out? 

[MrBlack]

2 hours ago, AndyM3000 said:

How has that Wolves goal been ruled out? 

It got referred to the ref. I assume it was deemed he didn't see it happen and so was told that there was an apparent elbow he might have missed. Rather than the ref having seen it and judged it not to be a foul on real time that VAR wouldn't then overrule him on. 

Which really just makes you wonder why the ref wasn't asked to take a look at the last of forest's non-penalties where Young didn't win the ball despite the ref clearly thinking he had.

[StefanAVFC]

6 hours ago, MrBlack said:

Which really just makes you wonder why the ref wasn't asked to take a look at the last of forest's non-penalties where Young didn't win the ball despite the ref clearly thinking he had.

The same ref who didn't think it was worth another look on VAR for Forest thought this was...

[MrBlack]

19 minutes ago, StefanAVFC said:

The same ref who didn't think it was worth another look on VAR for Forest thought this was...

Yes I did see that. Maybe his Luton bias did impact the Forest call...

[Baldricks Cunning Plan]

7 hours ago, MrBlack said:

It got referred to the ref. I assume it was deemed he didn't see it happen and so was told that there was an apparent elbow he might have missed. Rather than the ref having seen it and judged it not to be a foul on real time that VAR wouldn't then overrule him on. 

Which really just makes you wonder why the ref wasn't asked to take a look at the last of forest's non-penalties where Young didn't win the ball despite the ref clearly thinking he had.

Cunha's arm was raised to as the Bournemouth player was pushing him. The Bournemouth player wasn't impeded as he then went onto go towards Semedo and put in a challenge on Doherty. It wasn't clear and obvious, the reasoning behind the overturning (the arm/elbow) is dubious to say the least, yet the same VAR official (Darren England who was on VAR duties when the Kilman header against West Ham was disallowed and for the Spurs/Liverpool debacle) and Attwell contrived to chalk off a goal. Earlier in the season at Fulham Attwell was on VAR duty when a Fulham penalty decision wasn't overturned as he couldn't prove whether or not contact was made on Tom Cairney, in the same game overturned a non award of a penalty for minimal contact on Harry Wilson after a few moments earlier ruling that a headbutt on Max Kilman wasn't hard enough to warrant action. I don't think that the system is corrupt, it is just the officials are incompetent and make up rules as they go along to suit the mistakes or the conclusions that they come to. 

[MrBlack]

32 minutes ago, Baldricks Cunning Plan said:

Cunha's arm was raised to as the Bournemouth player was pushing him. The Bournemouth player wasn't impeded as he then went onto go towards Semedo and put in a challenge on Doherty. It wasn't clear and obvious, the reasoning behind the overturning (the arm/elbow) is dubious to say the least, yet the same VAR official (Darren England who was on VAR duties when the Kilman header against West Ham was disallowed and for the Spurs/Liverpool debacle) and Attwell contrived to chalk off a goal. Earlier in the season at Fulham Attwell was on VAR duty when a Fulham penalty decision wasn't overturned as he couldn't prove whether or not contact was made on Tom Cairney, in the same game overturned a non award of a penalty for minimal contact on Harry Wilson after a few moments earlier ruling that a headbutt on Max Kilman wasn't hard enough to warrant action. I don't think that the system is corrupt, it is just the officials are incompetent and make up rules as they go along to suit the mistakes or the conclusions that they come to. 

I agree... they're seemingly not very good. Consistency is an issue, and their bias is always going to be a hard one to ignore. Luton fan should never be reffing a game of their rivals. 

Can't say I envy them though, the job is under such scrutiny and on a lot of calls you're going to get two different opinions if you ask the fans of the two clubs.

[The_Steve]

Sweden said no

 

[AVTuco]

22 hours ago, The_Steve said:

Sweden said no

 

Well done Sweden, good for you.

[fightoffyour]

Have we seen this kind of input on the offside lines before?

No surprise but they’re drawn completely arbitrarily It’s literally up to the operator in this situation to the make the call by choosing points as they please rather than the actual positions of the players. And I’m not sure they even got the right frame in the first place.

[AndyM3000]

That's the offside method they do everytime. The assistant VAR who does the tech draws the lines and asks the official ref in the VAR room if they are happy with it. This was aired months ago and there's been a number of shows since going through VAR decisions so I'm not sure why this has now gained so much traction again.

The way they do the offside is still subjective, which is why it annoys me a lot when you hear the commentators and pundits go "It's a matter of fact" when its still not. I am convinced that Cov goal in the FA Cup wasn't done correctly and different set of VAR crew might have ended up with it being onside.

None of this really matter though now with automated VAR coming in next season. AI will pick the point on the players based on set tracking points and there is a sensor in the ball so they can tell when it's been kicked. Even if this makes errors somehow they will be consistent and there's no bias attached to it.

 

 

[a-k]

A major problem with VAR is the inherent bias. An argument I've seen going around is that the ref was in prime position to see the foul, "if there was one", so there was no need for VAR to intervene. But, Villa shades off, it's a clear foul, and I don't see how anyone can argue against that?? Carlos is directly under the ball, gets an illegal barge in the back, moving him a meter or two forward and no longer under the path of the ball. It's a foul all day long, and the argument should not be why did VAR intervene when Pawson was staring straight at it, but how did Pawson not give it in the first place? Did he just swallow his whistle in the moment? Think that he'll just let the phase continue and then let VAR come in if it's a foul? 

[foreveryoung]

2 hours ago, a-k said:

A major problem with VAR is the inherent bias. An argument I've seen going around is that the ref was in prime position to see the foul, "if there was one", so there was no need for VAR to intervene. But, Villa shades off, it's a clear foul, and I don't see how anyone can argue against that?? Carlos is directly under the ball, gets an illegal barge in the back, moving him a meter or two forward and no longer under the path of the ball. It's a foul all day long, and the argument should not be why did VAR intervene when Pawson was staring straight at it, but how did Pawson not give it in the first place? Did he just swallow his whistle in the moment? Think that he'll just let the phase continue and then let VAR come in if it's a foul? 

They don't need to see it, they got VAR to help them out. This is what has now happened, Referees have got lazy.

[ThunderPower_14]

6 hours ago, a-k said:

A major problem with VAR is the inherent bias. An argument I've seen going around is that the ref was in prime position to see the foul, "if there was one", so there was no need for VAR to intervene. But, Villa shades off, it's a clear foul, and I don't see how anyone can argue against that?? Carlos is directly under the ball, gets an illegal barge in the back, moving him a meter or two forward and no longer under the path of the ball. It's a foul all day long, and the argument should not be why did VAR intervene when Pawson was staring straight at it, but how did Pawson not give it in the first place? Did he just swallow his whistle in the moment? Think that he'll just let the phase continue and then let VAR come in if it's a foul? 

This is why I think all VAR should be able to flag is that the ref needs another look at a certain contest. Then the on field ref who has a feel for the game and will have to answer for a poor decision can review his own decision.

At the moment I fully agree with you, the VAR want to back their colleague in the on-field ref but then the ref also wants to back the VAR. Take that mateship out of it and let referees make a decision that they and they alone will have to answer for.

[tinker]

Anyone still want to get rid a var......we would have lost that game 2-4 if the ref and linesman had their way.

[TreeVillan]

Exactly, I hated the idea of introducing VAR when it was first announced.

But it genuinely winds me up when people complain about VAR when it correctly rights a wrong. The very same people will be complaining about dodgy decisions when VAR gets removed just like they were before. 

[Wurzel]

 

[turvontour]

On 28/04/2024 at 20:44, tinker said:

Anyone still want to get rid a var......we would have lost that game 2-4 if the ref and linesman had their way.

Yes please. Can't stand it. As long as the refs aren't biased to certain clubs then I'd take the rough with the smooth of some decisions being right some wrong. The same way that football was for the previous 145 years.

 

[villa4europe]

4 minutes ago, turvontour said:

Yes please. Can't stand it. As long as the refs aren't biased to certain clubs then I'd take the rough with the smooth of some decisions being right some wrong. The same way that football was for the previous 145 years.

 

PGMOL weren't good enough

VAR wasn't the answer

PGMOL still aren't good enough 

Getting rid of VAR isn't the answer 

[turvontour]

14 minutes ago, villa4europe said:

PGMOL weren't good enough

VAR wasn't the answer

PGMOL still aren't good enough 

Getting rid of VAR isn't the answer 

Personally I don't like how bad it is for the fans at the game. I'm not attending a game to find out whether Diego Carlos pushed someone or not, of which there isn't a right or wrong answer anyway. The guy watching it on pitch head on in real time has an opinion that it isn't a foul. I dont even think we were told why it was being checked at the ground. I'm far more there to celebrate late winners in the moment, or concede late winners in the moment, based on the referees initial decision.

If you're a Chelsea fan coming from London and paying £100-150 to be there, or a Lille fan spending £400 to be there, do you honestly want these goals youve scored being checked and reversed minutes after they've gone in. 

[MapleVilla]

I think the other major problem is the time it takes. It's like they only review something way after it's happened, and then it's reviewed in real time, and of course they want to make sure, but it all adds to the time in which something happens and the final decision being made.  Why isn't an offside for example being flagged in real time within the VAR room. Then when the goal has been scored VAR are contacting the ref "hey that's offside, it's clear and obvious." Or "hey you should go over to the screen to review it". I watch the NHL and as soon as there is a penalty or something that needs reviewing it's very quick. The odd occasion it does take a little longer, mainly because of the angle of the camera and the view isn't great, so they're having to look at multiple angles. But half the VAR related incidents in the premier league you can see after one or two replays. The Carlos tackle on the weekend took ages and I could see it was a foul 3500 miles away on TV. Why is it taking so long for them to decide? It's technology, why aren't we using it to help us? Instead of putting all the emphasis on it to make a decision? Help the referee, I don't think anyone is really bothered whether it's the ref or VAR that says "foul" or "offiside" as long as the correct decision is made. At the moment it just feels like it annoys everyone because of the mi of decisions that go on week by week and the whole reason for it was to eradicate human error, and simplify decisions.