The VAR thread

[jmono84]

1 hour ago, Lambert09 said:

@majaco Here's the clip for all.   What I will say, when viewing it again you could argue Maguire stops playing so may have made the interception but as its Maguire... probably not 

 

"Done by VAR twice in 10 seconds, you cant sing that"

 

That’s outrageous! Why blow up? He was going to send that lad off for that until he remember which team he played for.

 

Absolute bollox officiating!

 

thanks for posting mate, even though you’ve pissed me off 😂😂

[Spudulike]

Some interesting info here. Only Norwich have come off worse this season in the VAR debacle. 

 

https://www.espn.com/soccer/english-premier-league/story/4452736/how-var-decisions-have-affected-every-premier-league-club-in-2021-22?platform=amp

 

[jmono84]

25 minutes ago, Spudulike said:

Some interesting info here. Only Norwich have come off worse this season in the VAR debacle. 

 

https://www.espn.com/soccer/english-premier-league/story/4452736/how-var-decisions-have-affected-every-premier-league-club-in-2021-22?platform=amp

 

So the two against Brighton wasn’t VAR? Useless fvcking officals!

 

Also it doesn’t include the red that should have been on McTominay

[tom27111]

8 minutes ago, jmono84 said:

So the two against Brighton wasn’t VAR? Useless fvcking officals!

 

Also it doesn’t include the red that should have been on McTominay

Sorry, how was McTominay's challenge a red card? 

 

It wasn't.

 

If Tielemans goes in like that on Pogba and gets sent off you'd be going mental.

 

Inconsistencies in VAR are frustrating and that's the issue.

[Spudulike]

11 minutes ago, jmono84 said:

So the two against Brighton wasn’t VAR? Useless fvcking officals!

 

Also it doesn’t include the red that should have been on McTominay

Only includes those incidents they choose to review. Subjective. Doesn't matter whether it's correct or not. It's that clear and obvious thing again. Stockley Park decide and consequently determine results. 

[Dorkingfox]

Both feet of the ground

[tom27111]

56 minutes ago, pmcla26 said:

Studs up, high foot, excessive force and endangering an opponent. If Maddison's leg was planted he could have caused serious injury. I struggle to see how it's anything but a red, to be honest. Obviously biased but still. 

So you'd have the same view if our player made the same challenge?

[messerschmitt]

54 minutes ago, pmcla26 said:

Studs up, high foot, excessive force and endangering an opponent. If Maddison's leg was planted he could have caused serious injury. I struggle to see how it's anything but a red, to be honest. Obviously biased but still. 

 

2 hours ago, tom27111 said:

Sorry, how was McTominay's challenge a red card? 

 

It wasn't.

 

If Tielemans goes in like that on Pogba and gets sent off you'd be going mental.

 

Inconsistencies in VAR are frustrating and that's the issue.

I disagree, we all accepted the Perez sending off, I think most people even Leicester fans accept you can't tackle like that anymore.

[tom27111]

Just now, messerschmitt said:

 

I disagree, we all accepted the Perez sending off, I think most people even Leicester fans accept you can't tackle like that anymore.

I don't think we did accept the Perez red. Where was his foot meant to go?

 

But we'd have been screaming for it the other way round.

 

That's my point, stop being biased and look at it rationally.

 

I think West Ham had a player sent off last year for literally kicking a ball and he caught an onrushing player. Outrageous decision. 

 

I'm sur @The Bear is still outraged that Youri wasn't sent off in that opening game a couple of years ago, blatant red.

[Steve_Guppy_Left_Foot]

12 minutes ago, tom27111 said:

So you'd have the same view if our player made the same challenge?

I think the most salient point isn't what we as fans think but if madison had have made that tackle on mctominay then it would almost certainly have been reviewed and madison sent off and what's more nevile and his senile counterpart would all be saying how clear a red it was. 

[adam]

3 hours ago, tom27111 said:

Sorry, how was McTominay's challenge a red card? 

 

It wasn't.

 

If Tielemans goes in like that on Pogba and gets sent off you'd be going mental.

 

Inconsistencies in VAR are frustrating and that's the issue.

Clear red too me. Even Gary neville said he was lucky to be on the pitch. 

[Claridge]

[deep blue]

I wonder what part of the Nacho incident the ref was asked to look at.  I thought there was good reason to judge that Nacho had been fouled earlier in the sequence, in which case it should have been a pen to us.  My personal view is that 2 players were competing for the ball and there was a bit of natural leg contact on both sides during the struggle, but not enough to warrant a foul either way.  When the Man U player realised he wasn't going to win the ball he fell to the ground feigning injury.  There was nothing to it.

 

What concerns me, but not commented on, was the way the ref was being harangued by Man U players.  He then went and looked at the monitor thatr was right under the baying Man U crowd.  How could an unbiased opinion be reached under such circumstances?

[tom27111]

39 minutes ago, deep blue said:

I wonder what part of the Nacho incident the ref was asked to look at.  I thought there was good reason to judge that Nacho had been fouled earlier in the sequence, in which case it should have been a pen to us.  My personal view is that 2 players were competing for the ball and there was a bit of natural leg contact on both sides during the struggle, but not enough to warrant a foul either way.  When the Man U player realised he wasn't going to win the ball he fell to the ground feigning injury.  There was nothing to it.

 

What concerns me, but not commented on, was the way the ref was being harangued by Man U players.  He then went and looked at the monitor thatr was right under the baying Man U crowd.  How could an unbiased opinion be reached under such circumstances?

Please post a link to back up your claim.

 

Genuinely, I'd love to see that 

[Dan]

I think one of the best things about the conference league is that it isn't tainted with this sporting cancer. It's football for people who don't like football.

[Lambert09]

8 hours ago, tom27111 said:

So you'd have the same view if our player made the same challenge?

Personally I would have been fuming at our player for making such a stupid decision to tackle like that. 
 

You can go in hard and fair. But there is no need for tackles at that intensity, it’s just thuggery… something that this particular player is known for.  
 

 

[Lambert09]

2 hours ago, Dan LCFC said:

I think one of the best things about the conference league is that it isn't tainted with this sporting cancer. It's football for people who don't like football.

I wouldn’t be against a ‘European slightly above average league’ 

[leicsmac]

3 hours ago, Dan LCFC said:

I think one of the best things about the conference league is that it isn't tainted with this sporting cancer. It's football for people who don't like football.

Get your arse off the fence and tell us how you really feel, man!

[Wasyls Pec Deck]

One of the frustrating things is that we were all told VAR would end controversy. But it hasn’t and it can’t. It merely just transfers human made decisions from someone who is there to someone else watching it remotely in slow mo. Humans make errors and court controversy - and cannot please everyone. Therefore it has just transferred human errors from one person to two or three. In other words it has expanded incompetence.

 

There must be a way of screening it so that it only comes into play when there has been an absolute howler. But then again there will be a problem with defining that.

[st albans fox]

49 minutes ago, Wasyls Pec Deck said:

One of the frustrating things is that we were all told VAR would end controversy. But it hasn’t and it can’t. It merely just transfers human made decisions from someone who is there to someone else watching it remotely in slow mo. Humans make errors and court controversy - and cannot please everyone. Therefore it has just transferred human errors from one person to two or three. In other words it has expanded incompetence.

 

There must be a way of screening it so that it only comes into play when there has been an absolute howler. But then again there will be a problem with defining that.

Saw the Italians use it last night to finish off juveentus’ remote chances of winning the league 

inter wing back puts his foot across the challenge and plants his foot just before the defender placed his foot in the same place - so the foot is trodden on (not heavily) and the player takes another step before falling under further challenges - just not a pen. But the var intervenes and whilst the English comms are astonished that it gets given, at half time, zola comments ‘well there is contact so it’s a pen’.  Sorry but this isn’t the game j grew up with and played and it’s certainly not the one I want to watch any more …..

 

God knows where this will end up if a dozen years time but it won’t be what all of us think the game is and was 

 

we need someone with influence out there to stop this because it’s going to rip the game up and take it away from us all - and we won’t get back to where it was … 

 

 

 

[Spudulike]

9 hours ago, tom27111 said:

Please post a link to back up your claim.

 

Genuinely, I'd love to see that 

Tom, I'm now wondering if you have actually seen the incident. Seriously, I think you're on a windup. 

[Robo61]

11 hours ago, deep blue said:

I wonder what part of the Nacho incident the ref was asked to look at.  I thought there was good reason to judge that Nacho had been fouled earlier in the sequence, in which case it should have been a pen to us.  My personal view is that 2 players were competing for the ball and there was a bit of natural leg contact on both sides during the struggle, but not enough to warrant a foul either way.  When the Man U player realised he wasn't going to win the ball he fell to the ground feigning injury.  There was nothing to it.

 

What concerns me, but not commented on, was the way the ref was being harangued by Man U players.  He then went and looked at the monitor thatr was right under the baying Man U crowd.  How could an unbiased opinion be reached under such circumstances?

Whilst I don't think the goal should have been disallowed, there is no evedence that there was a foul on Nacho and in any case the whole incident took place outside the area.

[dmayne7]

16 hours ago, tom27111 said:

Sorry, how was McTominay's challenge a red card? 

 

It wasn't.

 

If Tielemans goes in like that on Pogba and gets sent off you'd be going mental.

 

Inconsistencies in VAR are frustrating and that's the issue.

Surely on the wind up. Seen plenty of worse tackles but look at the speed he goes flying in at and where he catches Maddison, it's an awful tackle.

 

You're right about the other part though. I'd be fuming if Youri had done that as it would be completely reckless and put us under pressure for the rest of the game.

[when_you're_smiling]

The thing that annoys me with the disallowed goal is that the ref only looked at it from one angle.

 

Surely for it to be clear and obvious it has to be made based on more than one angle otherwise you’re making a decision in 2D.

[Guest worth_the_wait]

Many people still don't seem to realise that we have been sold a big fat lie.
 
We were led to believe that VAR was there to overturn blatantly obvious errors, such as Maradona punching the ball into the net in the 1986 World Cup Quarter Final.   Or maybe rare instances where a goal was allowed with a player clearly a couple of yards offside.
 
Instead VAR has corrupted the term "clear and obvious" to mean whatever the person(s) at Stockley Park wants it to mean.  
 
So for example on Saturday, it apparently wasn't a clear and obvious error not to send the Man Utd player off, but it was apparently a clear and obvious error to disallow Maddison's "goal".  I don't think either decision was necessarily a clear and obvious error, whatever that actually means.
 
And in the last 2 years, there has barely been a single offside decision overturned that was a blatantly obvious error.   Practically every offside decision overturned has been by miniscule margins of about an inch, or less ... which in any common sense definition is level ie onside.  And it's sometimes taken them 3 minutes to work it out!
 
(and as has been pointed out before, the camera technology to 1/50th second and working out the precise moment the ball was kicked, doesn't allow such accuracy anyway).
 
The use of the pitchside monitor is becoming a joke.   
 
Stockley Park finds a slow motion angle of what they thinks reinforces their opinion of the incident, but discards the other images that the onfield referee might think backs up his decision.   And the showing of it in slow motion is just as likely to lead to a wrong conclusion.   In many instances the onfield ref can make a better call of whether there was sufficient contact to cause the hulking great bloke to crumple in a heap, roll over 4 times, and squeal like a baby.  The zombie at Stockley Park is just checking slow motion for whether "there was contact".
    
And this is actually encouraging players to try and engineer even more contact than they previously used to, knowing that VAR will be less likely to catch out their antics.   Unless of course, it's a total dive and there was absolutely no contact at all.  But refs are fairly good at spotting the obvious dives anyway.
 
(I say "fairly good" as we can all think of the odd famous diving example that wasn't spotted.  But these pretty much even themselves up anyway.  Speedie dived in 1992 playoff final, Ewan Roberts clatters the Derby goalie in 1994 playoff final).
 
But at least pre VAR we could cheer every goal and penalty save (and even an offside flag that saved our bacon).  Now, you don't even know what the ****s going to stand until VAR has gone through every possible option of trying to ruin your celebrations.