The VAR thread

[Aus Fox]

47 minutes ago, worth_the_wait said:

I've kept track of all decisions overturned (not just VAR agreeing with an onfield decision).

 

I reckon we've had 8 in our favour, and 6 against.  (Although optastats says we had another one against us - so it might be 8 for, 7 against).

 

This includes Wigan's disallowed goal in the FA Cup.

 

I wouldn't say my stats are absolutely 100% correct, but in the right order of magnitude.

Can you confirm what there’s decisions are? I think I could count 6 against us in the last few weeks alone.

Ben Mee handball - no penalty

Villa cup semi - No penalty

KDB - No penalty 

Ederson foul on Iheanacho- no penalty no red card

Praet handball - penalty given 

Iheanacho goal not given.

[Guest ttfn]

16 minutes ago, Aus Fox said:

Can you confirm what there’s decisions are? I think I could count 6 against us in the last few weeks alone.

Ben Mee handball - no penalty

Villa cup semi - No penalty

KDB - No penalty 

Ederson foul on Iheanacho- no penalty no red card

Praet handball - penalty given 

Iheanacho goal not given.

The problem with the “stats” is they only report on incidents where VAR has made an overturn.

So the referee might have made an absolute howler (eg Ndidi’s goal initially not being ruled out against Spurs) and it’s in the figures being quoted, but supposedly Spurs “benefited” from VAR when in reality all it was doing was fixing a howler.

 

What it’s not doing is pulling out the increasing number of decisions that really ought to be overturned but aren’t being overturned. So people might point to the table and say we or others have net benefited from VAR when in reality we haven’t “benefited” from it nearly as much as we ought to have - teams supposedly benefiting the most from VAR could well still be suffering the most from crap refereeing and vice versa.

[fuchsntf]

1 hour ago, worth_the_wait said:

I've kept track of all decisions overturned (not just VAR agreeing with an onfield decision).

 

I reckon we've had 8 in our favour, and 6 against.  (Although optastats says we had another one against us - so it might be 8 for, 7 against).

 

This includes Wigan's disallowed goal in the FA Cup.

 

I wouldn't say my stats are absolutely 100% correct, but in the right order of magnitude.

Just like VAR then..!

[worth_the_wait]

21 minutes ago, Aus Fox said:

Can you confirm what there’s decisions are? I think I could count 6 against us in the last few weeks alone.

Ben Mee handball - no penalty

Villa cup semi - No penalty

KDB - No penalty 

Ederson foul on Iheanacho- no penalty no red card

Praet handball - penalty given 

Iheanacho goal not given.

The stats I have collected only relate to when VAR has overturned an onfield decision, or when VAR has given a decision not seen by the ref or linesman.

 

(It ignores any when VAR is "in agreement" with the decision, even if we think the decision is completely wrong.  That's not relevant in these stats, as without VAR nothing would have changed).

 

Anyway, these are the "overturned" decision I have noted:

 

FOR
 Wolves      (H) - goal ruled out handball  
 Tottenham   (H) - goal ruled out offside
 Burnley     (H) - goal ruled out foul
 Southampton (A) - player sent off
 Everton     (H) - penalty overturned
 Wigan FA Cup(H) - goal ruled out offside
 Southampton (H) - penalty overturned offside
 Wolves      (A) - goal ruled out offside

 

AGAINST
 Tottenham   (H) - goal ruled out offside
 Brighton    (A) - penalty retaken (encroachment by both teams)
 Everton     (H) - goal offside flag overruled
 Southampton (H) - goal disallowed offside
 Man City    (H) - awarded penalty for handball
 Norwich     (A) - goal ruled out for handball in buildup

 

As I sais above, Optastats claimed at least one other decision against us, but no idea what.

 

 

[st albans fox]

6 minutes ago, worth_the_wait said:

The stats I have collected only relate to when VAR has overturned an onfield decision, or when VAR has given a decision not seen by the ref or linesman.

 

(It ignores any when VAR is "in agreement" with the decision, even if we think the decision is completely wrong.  That's not relevant in these stats, as without VAR nothing would have changed).

 

Anyway, these are the "overturned" decision I have noted:

 

FOR
 Wolves      (H) - goal ruled out handball  
 Tottenham   (H) - goal ruled out offside
 Burnley     (H) - goal ruled out foul
 Southampton (A) - player sent off
 Everton     (H) - penalty overturned
 Wigan FA Cup(H) - goal ruled out offside
 Southampton (H) - penalty overturned offside
 Wolves      (A) - goal ruled out offside

 

AGAINST
 Tottenham   (H) - goal ruled out offside
 Brighton    (A) - penalty retaken (encroachment by both teams)
 Everton     (H) - goal offside flag overruled
 Southampton (H) - goal disallowed offside
 Man City    (H) - awarded penalty for handball
 Norwich     (A) - goal ruled out for handball in buildup

 

As I sais above, Optastats claimed at least one other decision against us, but no idea what.

 

 

you’ve got the Everton decisions mixed around re for and against 

 
looking through those calls above, assuming that a pen is converted and nothing else changed , I make that 

 

points gained: 4

points lost: 2 

 

you could argue that given the decisions are pretty well matched for and against and only 2 points is the difference, we could manage happily without VAR - things may well balance themselves out over a season and we wouldn’t have to suffer with the non celebrations 

 

 

[Guest ttfn]

14 minutes ago, worth_the_wait said:

The stats I have collected only relate to when VAR has overturned an onfield decision, or when VAR has given a decision not seen by the ref or linesman.

 

(It ignores any when VAR is "in agreement" with the decision, even if we think the decision is completely wrong.  That's not relevant in these stats, as without VAR nothing would have changed).

 

Anyway, these are the "overturned" decision I have noted:

 

FOR
 Wolves      (H) - goal ruled out handball  
 Tottenham   (H) - goal ruled out offside
 Burnley     (H) - goal ruled out foul
 Southampton (A) - player sent off
 Everton     (H) - penalty overturned
 Wigan FA Cup(H) - goal ruled out offside
 Southampton (H) - penalty overturned offside
 Wolves      (A) - goal ruled out offside

 

AGAINST
 Tottenham   (H) - goal ruled out offside
 Brighton    (A) - penalty retaken (encroachment by both teams)
 Everton     (H) - goal offside flag overruled
 Southampton (H) - goal disallowed offside
 Man City    (H) - awarded penalty for handball
 Norwich     (A) - goal ruled out for handball in buildup

 

As I sais above, Optastats claimed at least one other decision against us, but no idea what.

 

 

The penalty overturn against Everton was against, not for.

Edited 1 March 2020 by ttfn

[CUJimmy]

1 hour ago, worth_the_wait said:

I've kept track of all decisions overturned (not just VAR agreeing with an onfield decision).

 

I reckon we've had 8 in our favour, and 6 against.  (Although optastats says we had another one against us - so it might be 8 for, 7 against).

 

This includes Wigan's disallowed goal in the FA Cup.

 

I wouldn't say my stats are absolutely 100% correct, but in the right order of magnitude.

Are these including offsides?  Whether we like it or not these tend to be correct according to the law as it is written.  I am more interested in the ones where there is some subjectivity because they are the ones that seem to be favouring certain teams, or over the past couple of weeks one in particular.

[Super_horns]

2 hours ago, st albans fox said:

Please let’s not extend its remit even further .....it’s bad enough interfering as far as it !

Fair point - they'd want it for throw ins then!

[worth_the_wait]

1 hour ago, ttfn said:

The penalty overturn against Everton was against, not for.

Apologies.  Yes, the Everton entries are the wrong way round.  Penalty overturn was AGAINST and offside flag overruled was FOR.

[worth_the_wait]

1 hour ago, CUJimmy said:

Are these including offsides?  Whether we like it or not these tend to be correct according to the law as it is written.  I am more interested in the ones where there is some subjectivity because they are the ones that seem to be favouring certain teams, or over the past couple of weeks one in particular.

Ok.  That's a separate issue, and i've no idea what the analysis would show.  Assuming, of course, that we could agree on what is actually offside.  

 

I was only checking the actual overturning of decisions by VAR.  As ultimately that is what has changed this season.

[Ian Nacho]

Don’t understand the Everton fans moaning about VAR today. The bloke is laying right in front of the keeper. 

[Toddybad]

Tbh VAR has been a disaster this season but I think the blame actually lies in two of the rules rather than VAR itself. 

 

Handball. The idea any touch off an attacker is a foul is ridiculous. Just leave it at unnatural position where an advantage is gained. So the wolves goal in the opening day is still disallowed as they only scored because it hit an arm, but kelechi scores on Friday. Admittedly this still doesn't help with Dr bruyne or the cup match v villa but it's fairly obviously they are down to human error by the video refs.

 

Offside. Arms and legs are irrelevant. We shouldn't be looking for toe positions. Just make a decision as to whether it's clear daylight or not and use the torso position. 

[purpleronnie]

45 minutes ago, Ian Nacho said:

Don’t understand the Everton fans moaning about VAR today. The bloke is laying right in front of the keeper. 

Me neither, but people believe there's a bias in favour of the 'top' teams, so I guess they have to follow that narrative.

[Facecloth]

9 hours ago, Ian Nacho said:

Don’t understand the Everton fans moaning about VAR today. The bloke is laying right in front of the keeper. 

He can clearly see the ball, he's diving to his right to try and save the initial shot. The deflection off Maguire wrong foots him. Sigurdsson isn't in his line of sight and doesn't try to play the ball.

[Facecloth]

9 hours ago, Toddybad said:

Offside. Arms and legs are irrelevant. We shouldn't be looking for toe positions. Just make a decision as to whether it's clear daylight or not and use the torso position. 

I hear this a lot and I don't think it'll solves it. Plus that means a player could be a stride ahead of the defender and be onside, which isn't right. The offside is quite simple, if the VAR can't spot anything after say 30 seconds, stick to the onfield decision. No lines etc, just pause it, look and decide. We've all watched football on tv. They show a highlight of a goal, pause it for a couple seconds at the point the ball is played and we can all see if its offside or not. Well giving VAR 30 seconds is plenty, in fact it might be too long.

[Sol thewall Bamba]

Either it's totally corrupt as proved again yesterday or it's being deliberately used to create talking points. No one talks about the football anymore they just talk about VAR. Every Monday morning you go into the office and discuss controversial VAR moments from the weekend. 

[Kopfkino]

13 hours ago, Ian Nacho said:

Don’t understand the Everton fans moaning about VAR today. The bloke is laying right in front of the keeper. 

Cos every week we have to have a giant VAR grumble. Yesterday was solely about interpretation of rules and what is line of sight (apparently only whatever is directly in front of your eye is now line of sight for some people) and whichever way it had gone you'd have had people whinging about the interpretation cos that's the way football is. Which I guess is why, unless people magically find some respect for the blokes making the decisions, VAR can never really work. 

[davieG]

31 minutes ago, Sol thewall Bamba said:

Either it's totally corrupt as proved again yesterday or it's being deliberately used to create talking points. No one talks about the football anymore they just talk about VAR. Every Monday morning you go into the office and discuss controversial VAR moments from the weekend. 

We have a VAR threads but where's the fantastic goal type thread.

 

I think most post game chat has been influenced so much by TV with it's constant replays of even crap pieces of play.

 

Back in the day we used to spend whole evenings in the pub analysing goals and passages of play having no access to TV or replays, goals would be dissected and re-enacted. Now we don't need to do that as we've probably already seen them 10 times already and from 10 different angles so the focus is on VAR and was it wasn't it.

[foxinmyhouse]

I didn't think evertons goal was offside yesterday.  De gea saw the ball for the first shot as he was diving the right way and the second the ball come off maguire he stopped because again he could see it going the other way. I also think that although the player was on the floor the ball was clearly not being played to him, it was a shot to the opposite side. Maguire then deliberately tried to kick the ball but got it all wrong. Which again I thought being a deliberate touch means that even if the player is offside it's not because it's another phase of play. Also the only reason the Everton player was in that position on the floor was because he was taken out by the defender as he kicked the ball.

 

 

 

[fox in the sox]

Question regarding Man City goal from corner that wasn't a corner. Should this sort of thing be checked or would there just be too many stoppages?
What is the point of it all if goals are still being scored that aren't goals? There is the argument that if Villa had defended the corner well there wouldn't be a problem. I'm in two minds over this one.

[davieG]

27 minutes ago, fox in the sox said:

Question regarding Man City goal from corner that wasn't a corner. Should this sort of thing be checked or would there just be too many stoppages?
What is the point of it all if goals are still being scored that aren't goals? There is the argument that if Villa had defended the corner well there wouldn't be a problem. I'm in two minds over this one.

Well they’ve been known to go a fair way back in play to check for other fouls so I don’t see why they can’t check the validity of a corner or free kick that leads directly to a goal.

[st albans fox]

6 minutes ago, davieG said:

Well they’ve been known to go a fair way back in play to check for other fouls so I don’t see why they can’t check the validity of a corner or free kick that leads directly to a goal.

so you let the corner be taken and then if it results in a goal you go back and check if the corner was correctly awarded …………. presumably this goes for attacking throws aswell.

 

VAR is nuts but it isn't nearly as nuts as this  !!!!!

 

35 minutes ago, fox in the sox said:

Question regarding Man City goal from corner that wasn't a corner. Should this sort of thing be checked or would there just be too many stoppages?
What is the point of it all if goals are still being scored that aren't goals? There is the argument that if Villa had defended the corner well there wouldn't be a problem. I'm in two minds over this one.

 

don't be in two minds - where does it end ??  you could end up re refereeing a game that ends up lasting for 2 1/2 hours !!!   we don't want var for anything more than where its already being applied and even that's too much intervention !!!!

 

it wasn't a corner - sh1t happens ….. defend it properly.  then there wont be a goal to worry about !  

 

Edited 2 March 2020 by st albans fox

[davieG]

2 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

so you let the corner be taken and then if it results in a goal you go back and check if the corner was correctly awarded …………. presumably this goes for attacking throws aswell.

 

VAR is nuts but it isn't nearly as nuts as this  !!!!!

 

 

don't be in two minds - where does it end ??  you could end up re refereeing a game that ends up lasting for 2 1/2 hours !!!   we don't want var for anything more than where its already being applied and even that's too much intervention !!!!

 

it wasn't a corner - sh1t happens ….. defend it properly.  then there wont be a goal to worry about !  

 

I’m just saying that as all goals are checked then it’s fair to check how that goal came about. Haven’t we had goals disallowed because of a foul back down the pitch leading up to a goal. Why should we review missed fouls by the ref and not wrongly giving advantages given by the ref. Of course one would need in both instances to decide how far back you go. 

[Muzzy_Larsson]

Watched a few MLS games this weekend given it was the opening weekend and although they've had it in play for a couple of seasons now they are infinitely implementing it better than in the EPL.  The Sounders scored a goal that was marginal last night in terms of offside and it was clarified within seconds.  In the EPL it would have taken about five minutes to draw all the lines and be as pedantic as they could about it.   They really stick to the "clear and obvious" mantra in the MLS and it makes a big difference.  Italy and Germany are largely the same.  I find it ironic in England that they are so reluctant to let the referees check the pitch side monitors, in the interests of keeping delays to a minimum yet they'll happily take 3 or 4 minutes trying to clarify an offside decision by drawing lines and applying mathematical theory to get to the decision.  Surely when it comes to the point of doing that it infers that the decision is not "clear and obvious".

[st albans fox]

1 hour ago, davieG said:

I’m just saying that as all goals are checked then it’s fair to check how that goal came about. Haven’t we had goals disallowed because of a foul back down the pitch leading up to a goal. Why should we review missed fouls by the ref and not wrongly giving advantages given by the ref. Of course one would need in both instances to decide how far back you go. 

you cant have the ball going dead and then play restarting with a potential reversal thereafter for something that has already happened ??  once the ball has gone dead, then nothing will be looked at from before that point after a restart. they are only supposed to check back to when the defence has been able to reset itself - the ball going dead is that opportunity.