Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
 Share
Donut

VAR Issues

By Donut, in Leicester City Forum

Recommended Posts

Donut

Donut

Posted
Posted

Watching the game tonight im delighted the VAR awarded us a perfectly good goal tonight that otherwise would have been ruled out.

 

However there are still a couple of obvious issues with it that need fixing.

 

1) referees cannot blow their whistle for offside anymore. 

 

If they do and a striker or goalkeeper stops (playing to the whistle) they stand to waste a perfectly good goalscoring chance.

 

This will particularly happen if a defense is holding a high line and the striker has to run through a longer distance on goal.

 

2) the power is still with the onfield referee to the extent over turning a wrong penalty decision will be very difficult because "clear and obvious error" is going to be extremely hard to prove.

 

Look at the penalty tonight. The referees on field decision still holds a huge amount of power. 

 

It would take a total howler to be overturned and if a referee misses a total howler then he has more worries than VAR

 

  • Like 1
Babylon

Babylon

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, Donut said:

2) the power is still with the onfield referee to the extent over turning a wrong penalty decision will be very difficult because "clear and obvious error" is going to be extremely hard to prove.

 

Look at the penalty tonight. The referees on field decision still holds a huge amount of power. 

 

It would take a total howler to be overturned and if a referee misses a total howler then he has more worries than VAR

 

I think with regards holding they will be wary of giving them or overturning them, purely because you'll get 20 pennos a game.

 

What annoyed me the most was that rather than just showing us a replay, they show the ref doing nothing. Show us the pictures so that we see exactly what they are seeing. What we saw cut in and out, seemed to not show whole incidents or stopped on the wrong frames of an image. I hated that part of it.

  • Like 4
foxes_rule1978

foxes_rule1978

Posted
Posted (edited)
45 minutes ago, Lovejoy said:

Will they review every goal scored now?

Only if the ref asks the question or the video ref sees something wrong. It will be seemless like the first goal we scored. It isn’t perfect for sure but I’m for VAR, it helps with big decisions especially like our second goal today. Fair enough you will always have opinion for situations like the Iborra incident, but I would rather have more than just the ref look at it and that is what VAR brings. 

Edited by foxes_rule1978
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Donut

Donut

Posted
  • Author
Posted

The integrity of the competitions must be in question?

 

In non VAR games the referee will have to blow for offside and players play to the whistle.

 

In VAR games play should never stop for offside?

Tielemans63

Tielemans63

Posted
Posted (edited)

Needs to be carefully managed. Made this point before but in rugby union bloody everything gets referred because referees no longer back themselves and they don't back themselves because they know they'll get hammered for not using VAR - all in all it makes for a very turgid experience a lot of the time.

 

Football authorities need to look at that and make sure it doesn't happen. My prediction is that soon players and fans will be questioning everything which might make for a lot of delays which isn't good for the game. I can imagine there might be a referral limit after a while like you get in cricket.

Edited by Paddy.
  • Like 2
  • Popular Post
StanSP

StanSP

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted

for anyone who is against it totally, the way I see it is think about if Iheanacho's 2nd goal was to win promotion/title/cup final/avoid relegation and VAR didn't exist or wasn't used.

 

Imagine how livid you'd be on the way home knowing it could have been overturned with the help of technology and that it was actually onside but because the referee flagged, it was actually disallowed. You'd be gutted and I'm sure we've all been there over the years and know how it feels to have a perfectly good goal chalked off.

 

The concept of VAR is perfect in that it eradicated (clear and obvious) errors. The way it is executed is something that still needs work and I don't think anybody is questioning that part.

  • Like 11
Corky

Corky

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, Spudulike said:

Couldn't have done much for that Linesman's confidence lol

 

VAR says onside

To be honest, looking at it live, I thought it was offside. But it was very marginal.

 

No real blame to the linesman for that, just pleased the correct decision was reached.

 

Offsides are the easiest decisions to sort out as it is clear in the laws what there is to be looked at, it won't take too long to establish whether it was or wasn't.

Donut

Donut

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Im not against VAR im all for the concept but tonight has proved there are significant grey areas.

 

Thats why its a trial though

  • Like 2
yorkie1999

yorkie1999

Posted
Posted (edited)

I was dead in line with it and it was clearly onside. Nacho was too fast for the limo, who was 3 yards behind. Goes to show. It was great waiting for the decision as well

Edited by yorkie1999
StanSP

StanSP

Posted
Posted
Just now, yorkie1999 said:

I was dead in line with it and it was clearly onside. Nacho was too fast for the limo, who was 3 yards behind. Goes to show

incorrect.

 

Replays showed the linesman was bang in line with Iheanacho and Pond. Can see why he gave it offside as it's a split second movement which involves Riyad's pass, Pond moving towards him, Iheanacho moving forward. 

 

 

Kitchandro

Kitchandro

Posted
Posted

I couldn’t agree more with the OP, it’s a halfway house and the referees still have way too much discretion.

 

The Iborra penalty incident clearly should have been given tonight.

 

The other thing was, I saw the replay at home, concluded it was clearly onside and it took Moss a further 30 seconds (it felt like longer) to actually give the goal.

 

They need to be far quicker because that was tedious and it was an easy decision once you’ve seen the replay.

  • Like 1
Collymore

Collymore

Posted
Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, StanSP said:

for anyone who is against it totally, the way I see it is think about if Iheanacho's 2nd goal was to win promotion/title/cup final/avoid relegation and VAR didn't exist or wasn't used.

 

Imagine how livid you'd be on the way home knowing it could have been overturned with the help of technology and that it was actually onside but because the referee flagged, it was actually disallowed. You'd be gutted and I'm sure we've all been there over the years and know how it feels to have a perfectly good goal chalked off.

 

The concept of VAR is perfect in that it eradicated (clear and obvious) errors. The way it is executed is something that still needs work and I don't think anybody is questioning that part.

Yeah but it evens itself out so it could have been a disallowed goal against us that was ruled a goal destroying our dreams. At least you know it's fair but to pretend it's always going to work in out favour is an unrealistic sell. 

Edited by Collymore
StanSP

StanSP

Posted
Posted
Just now, Kitchandro said:

I couldn’t agree more with the OP, it’s a halfway house and the referees still have way too much discretion.

 

The Iborra penalty incident clearly should have been given tonight.

 

The other thing was, I saw the replay at home, concluded it was clearly onside and it took Moss a further 30 seconds (it felt like longer) to actually give the goal.

 

They need to be far quicker because that was tedious and it was an easy decision once you’ve seen the replay.

don't think Moss can be blamed for that. All he's doing is waiting for confirmation from whoever is in the studio back in London (in this case, Mike Jones). 

  • Like 1
StanSP

StanSP

Posted
Posted
Just now, Collymore said:

Yeah but it evens itself out so it could have been a goal against us that was ruled a goal destroying our dreams. At least you know it's fair but to pretend it's always going to work in out favour is an unrealistic sell. 

yeah my point being was that VAR, in my opinion, is good for the game because at least you'll get to the right decisions for the majority of the time, whether it's against you or for you :)
 

I don't buy the criticism that 'there'll be no talking points when technology is used' (not you, just what I've heard about it over the years). Look at what this thread is for an example of how there are still talking points about the game!

  • Like 1
Kitchandro

Kitchandro

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, StanSP said:

don't think Moss can be blamed for that. All he's doing is waiting for confirmation from whoever is in the studio back in London (in this case, Mike Jones). 

I didn’t say it was Moss’ fault, it was Jones’ i’m sure.

 

All he needs to say is ‘Jon, he’s onside, give the goal’.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...