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
DJ Barry Hammond

The VAR thread

By DJ Barry Hammond, in Leicester City Forum

What are your thoughts on VAR?  

679 members have voted

  1. 1. What are your thoughts on VAR?

    • Love it, all for it, fantastic introduction to football
      109
    • Hate it, games gone
      236
    • Somewhere in between
      334

This poll is closed to new votes

  • Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.
  • Poll closed on 17/05/20 at 19:00

Recommended Posts

Dahnsouff

Dahnsouff

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, StanSP said:

Still don't get how people think it was only minimial contact on Origi.

 

It's so clear. 

He was not bearing weight on his leg and it didn’t move even a fraction when it was touched. :dunno:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jammie82uk

jammie82uk

Posted
Posted
23 hours ago, StanSP said:

Still don't get how people think it was only minimial contact on Origi.

 

It's so clear. 

One of The things that makes it not a foul for me just like the mane incident a few weeks ago, they get hit on the left leg or foot in mane’s case both go down holding their right foot  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
UniFox21

UniFox21

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, jammie82uk said:

One of The things that makes it not a foul for me just like the mane incident a few weeks ago, they get hit on the left leg or foot in mane’s case both go down holding their right foot  

The pain and force was so great its passed from one foot to the other. Medical mystery, doctors are baffled. 

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
UniFox21

UniFox21

Posted
Posted (edited)

'Ref Watch: VAR right not to overrule decision'

http://www.skysports.com/share/11841098

 

 

Two decisions wrong just this weekend; penalties should've been given for both Watford and Man City. 

If Watford score, they're 2-0 and probably go on to win the game. 

 

That's two decisions too many, the annoying this is these aren't even 50/50 calls. The Vertonghen challenge is a clear foul, it shouldn't be missed normally, no excuses with VAR.

 

Edit: 

They call our decisions as correctly called, Moss didn't see the clip of the ankle so once it's brought to his attention it needs to be called as a foul

Edited by UniFox21
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ThaiFox

ThaiFox

Posted
Posted

Anyone who's followed this thread will know my feelings on the disaster that is VAR.

 

After last weekends decisions, I don't know how anyone can now disagree with me!

 

The quicker VAR is binned the better. Utterly shambolic last weekend.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Les-TA-Jon

Les-TA-Jon

Posted
Posted (edited)

Most people aren't twigging on to the 'clear and obvious' metric nor the high bar they've set for it. They've openly said they don't want VAR to be a vehicle for matches to be 're-refereed' 

 

So a lot of people are left confused by VAR.

 

Another thing is, most people aren't making the distinction between normal refereeing decisions and VAR itself. Much of the debate/controversial moments so far, have been to do with the inherently subjective nature of the laws of the game and how it's refereed, rather than VAR itself. Ultimately, we have to accept that there will always be that present in the game, but it's about referees making those subjective decisions in the most informed way - i.e additional replays and camera angles. 

 

The other thing is, that there's always going to be a lag with these things - everyone in the sport, fans included, have to get used to it. So we're seeing a lot of decisions being made, that aren't being made differently because of VAR - they're only being made because officials now have an opportunity to see them. For example 95% of officials would rule the Wood clip on Evans as a foul, over the last 10-15 years - but they'd never be expected to see those kinds of incidents in real time - hence why historically we haven't seen those kinds of decisions. Now with the VAR checks they can see them, and with the footage it's hard to argue that it's NOT a foul. 

 

So the jarring effect for fans, isn't VAR itself, it's just that decisions that we're used to being noticed and now getting seen. And that's where the clear and obvious thing comes back in. Moss didn't see the trip, so VAR can overrule it because it's a clear and obvious mistake. But, even if they think it's a foul on Origi in the Man U vs Liverpool game, they can't overrule it, because Atkinson saw the incident. 

 

What's interesting about the Woods Evans incident is that it introduces two new concepts:

  • the 'defensive dive' whereby we might well see defenders starting to dive or simulate, when an attacker bundles them away/over/off the ball (and presumably only when they know their chance of effectively defending the play is gone) in the hope that a VAR goal check results in it being chalked off for a foul in the build up. 
  • Player's making requests to the Referee/VAR to review a specific element of the incident - we saw Evans getting up and immediately saying "He tripped me up". Historically players have no recourse on the field - the ref's already made his decision, but in this instance may Evan's had some influence there? Maybe VAR would have seen it anyway, but were they specifically looking for it? 
Edited by Les-TA-Jon
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
KrefelderFox666

KrefelderFox666

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, Les-TA-Jon said:

Most people aren't twigging on to the 'clear and obvious' metric nor the high bar they've set for it. They've openly said they don't want VAR to be a vehicle for matches to be 're-refereed' 

 

So a lot of people are left confused by VAR.

 

Another thing is, most people aren't making the distinction between normal refereeing decisions and VAR itself. Much of the debate/controversial moments so far, have been to do with the inherently subjective nature of the laws of the game and how it's refereed, rather than VAR itself. Ultimately, we have to accept that there will always be that present in the game, but it's about referees making those subjective decisions in the most informed way - i.e additional replays and camera angles. 

 

The other thing is, that there's always going to be a lag with these things - everyone in the sport, fans included, have to get used to it. So we're seeing a lot of decisions being made, that aren't being made differently because of VAR - they're only being made because officials now have an opportunity to see them. For example 95% of officials would rule the Wood clip on Evans as a foul, over the last 10-15 years - but they'd never be expected to see those kinds of incidents in real time - hence why historically we haven't seen those kinds of decisions. Now with the VAR checks they can see them, and with the footage it's hard to argue that it's NOT a foul. 

 

So the jarring effect for fans, isn't VAR itself, it's just that decisions that we're used to being noticed and now getting seen. And that's where the clear and obvious thing comes back in. Moss didn't see the trip, so VAR can overrule it because it's a clear and obvious mistake. But, even if they think it's a foul on Origi in the Man U vs Liverpool game, they can't overrule it, because Atkinson saw the incident. 

 

What's interesting about the Woods Evans incident is that it introduces two new concepts:

  • the 'defensive dive' whereby we might well see defenders starting to dive or simulate, when an attacker bundles them away/over/off the ball (and presumably only when they know their chance of effectively defending the play is gone)
  • Player's making requests to the Referee/VAR to review a specific element of the incident - we saw Evans getting up and immediately saying "He tripped me up". Historically players have no recourse on the field - the ref's already made his decision, but in this instance may Evan's had some influence there? Maybe VAR would have seen it anyway, but were they specifically looking for it? 

This already exists, players moan at everything and I do think VAR would have already been looking at it anyway (was quite obvious that Evans didn't just tumble getting the ball).

 

Back to your post about VAR in general, I think there are three types of fans:

 

1. Don't like VAR at all as it delays games, takes away the spontaneous celebration etc. (they would rather refs make bad mistakes)

2. Hate VAR because it makes bad decisions, isn't working (as you describe, it's the rules generally)

3. Those who like VAR but think it can be sped up, improved

 

I would class myself as 3. It needs to be quicker, clearer signage to inform fans, have the chat between ref/VAR over the tannoy system for everyone to hear, give VR more control over the incidents, get refs to view more of the replays themselves. Rugby is a very good example of how communication, reviewing etc. should work. Linesman, ref, VAR all look together and discuss.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ThaiFox

ThaiFox

Posted
Posted
45 minutes ago, Corky said:

Where it worked last night. Great decision to play on then return to the incident. Clear red which the ref didn't see and the linesman might not have been completely sure about.

It was also excellent refereeing by Marriner to let the game go on at that point, who I thought refereed well last night in terrible conditions.

 

As much as I loathe VAR, revisiting the incident after the goal showed it can work. However it MUST be consistent to convince me, which it hasn't been so far. I've seen just as many reviewed VAR red card incidents, worse than last night, which have gone unpunished, including Tielemans v Bournemouth.

 

Showing it to the fans on a big screen keep them fully informed and left no-one in any doubt the decision was correct. Unlike last Saturday at Spuds where it showed No Goal, but also 1-1 after Alli handled it, and a goal was given!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guesty

Guesty

Posted
Posted

Even worse for VAR today. When you see Man City's second goal it was clear David Silva got a slight touch. Sterling was offside obstructing the keeper right infront of him when he touched it and it should have been disallowed. After about 4 minutes of review they said Silva didn't touch it and gave the goal to De Bruyne who played the ball in. Even though Silva was telling the ref at the time he scored it.

 

Now the Premier League have overruled and given the goal to Silva after the match. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ThaiFox

ThaiFox

Posted
Posted
22 hours ago, Guesty said:

Even worse for VAR today. When you see Man City's second goal it was clear David Silva got a slight touch. Sterling was offside obstructing the keeper right infront of him when he touched it and it should have been disallowed. After about 4 minutes of review they said Silva didn't touch it and gave the goal to De Bruyne who played the ball in. Even though Silva was telling the ref at the time he scored it.

 

Now the Premier League have overruled and given the goal to Silva after the match. 

 

Yes, another terrible decision.

 

Add in the Brighton v Everton match and we have yet another weekend (so far!) of farcical decisions.

 

There is no consistency at all and it actually seems to be getting worse and is definitely creating more problems than before it's introduction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
StanSP

StanSP

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, Super_horns said:

Well apparently you only won 9-0 because Mike Dean was unsporting in sending the Southampton player off ..

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/50201142

Crooks is a massive knob head. 

Made so much of the VAR decision and wanted to get a dig in to Mike Dean he almost disregarded that most of the goals would/could have come along even if Southampton had 11.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
steveherbe

steveherbe

Posted
Posted
On 26/10/2019 at 10:25, UniFox21 said:

Brilliant how they showed the red card incident yesterday.  Clearly showing the incident to the crowd, commentators felt it was the best its been done so far 

Was just going to say the same, even though I didn't see it on the screen in the ground as I was too busy celebrating.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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
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...