The VAR thread

[CosbehFox]

The thing what gets me is that this season they were supposed to give the attacker far more benefit with wider lines etc in an offside - so why isn't the same benefit applied this afternoon? 

[Lcfc82]

Needs binning off.

How anyone can still be in favour of it is beyond me 

[Sampson]

20 minutes ago, Foxes96 said:

The problem is if you stand in an offside position you give the officials a decision to make. Same with the one that went our way the other day, and Söyüncü going to ground giving away the pen. 
 

To do it once is daft, but to stand in an offside position again is just clueless. So infuriating

It's not daft though is it?

 

I can't understand why people are saying this.

 

Barnes didn't "give the officials a decision to make", he was objectively not standing in the keeper's eyeline.

 

The keeper was even looking in completely the opposite direction in the 2nd goal.

 

The officials had no decision to make at all. Both were objectively onside and the officials have completely invented offsides which aren't in the rules.

[Corky]

It's a guessing game in terms of whether keepers are really affected by players standing in offside positions away from them.

 

 

[Always Next Year]

Love it or Hate it we still have the same shit officials with gods knows how much technology in front of them making the same shit decisions when fans sitting at home are shown replays that are clearly the opposite to what they are seeing.

[Sampson]

32 minutes ago, tom27111 said:

I love that the same people slagging off VAR for the Barnes decisions (especially the first one), are the people that were loving VAR when Norwich had a goal disallowed against us for pretty much the same thing 

What the **** are you chatting about? Cantwell was literally standing right in front of Kasper.

 

Barnes was standing 2 yards to the side of the keeper in the first and completely behind him in the 2nd.

 

Cantwell was in the keeper's eyeline, Barnes wasn't 

Edited 19 September 2021 by Sampson

[Carl the Llama]

Farcical by VAR today and entirely inconsistent with how they viewed the Man Utd goal.  Strange that.

[Col city fan]

One of the main reasons for VAR is to make the game more entertaining by giving fair decisions 

In our game today, it was laughable and makes a mockery of the game. 
I’d go as far as to say today’s game , as a spectacle, was utterly ridiculous 

[Tielemans63]

It's made no discernible difference to the standard of refereeing - it's still as diabolical as ever and it's really diminished the game as a spectacle, especially inside the stadium when you have to wait ages.

 

I hate it

[jammie82uk]

3 minutes ago, Col city fan said:

One of the main reasons for VAR is to make the game more entertaining by giving fair decisions 

In our game today, it was laughable and makes a mockery of the game. 
I’d go as far as to say today’s game , as a spectacle, was utterly ridiculous 

You know the game is a mess when the officiating is the central of discussion instead of the fantastic team goal we did actually score 

[Cecchini1976]

Just seen the decisions, all 3

are shocking and it was never a penalty and both goals should have stood

[Col city fan]

1 minute ago, jammie82uk said:

You know the game is a mess when the officiating is the central of discussion instead of the fantastic team goal we did actually score 

Spot on lad

[NasPb]

Problem has never been the technology rather the incompetent refs that there are 

[Bert]

The problem is the inconsistency of it all. Ronaldo in offside position but goal allowed. Barnes twice in an offside position goals disallowed. 

[SemperEadem]

1 hour ago, Sol thewall Bamba said:

Part of the reason I care much less than I used to. 

 

Hands down ruining the sport, and people defend it.

 

Had fans singing for it today ffs

[Kopfkino]

16 minutes ago, NasPb said:

Problem has never been the technology rather the incompetent refs that there are 

Until they show any transparency of accountability they always will be incompetent. Needs far more open black box thinking rather just trying to cover their backs and hiding from their decisions

[Steve Earle]

11 minutes ago, Bert said:

The problem is the inconsistency of it all. Ronaldo in offside position but goal allowed. Barnes twice in an offside position goals disallowed. 

I don’t like VAR but we saw it work wonderfully in the Euros. We start another PL season & our atrocious officials are still making it look the hardest job in the world.

I’m afraid it’s poor people, not poor technology 

[Super_horns]

Is there any reason apart from bad language  (which can be dealt  with by bookings and red cards) why fans cannot hear what is being said ?

 

Happens in other sports .

 

Do they think fans will start a riot or something..
 

 

[Guest ttfn]

1 hour ago, goody2028 said:

 

But the same was true of the disallowed norwich goal against us.

 

In this situation the only relevant question should be whether the attacking player materially impacts the ability of the goalkeeper to save the ball. I’ve not seen our 2 goals today but for the Norwich one Schmeichel could have had a completely unimpeded view, stood an extra yard to his left and still not got anywhere near it. We’re just ruling out goals for the sake of it at this point.

[Super_horns]

1 minute ago, Steve Earle said:

I don’t like VAR but we saw it work wonderfully in the Euros. We start another PL season & our atrocious officials are still making it look the hardest job in the world.

I’m afraid it’s poor people, not poor technology 

Wales fans might disagree but yes generally it seemed slicker and quicker .

[messerschmitt]

Just now, Steve Earle said:

I don’t like VAR but we saw it work wonderfully in the Euros. We start another PL season & our atrocious officials are still making it look the hardest job in the world.

I’m afraid it’s poor people, not poor technology 

This is the best thing said about VAR I have ever read and say's it all really.

[reporterpenguin]

It seems largely to be there to justify the referees decision, not get to the correct one. When it came in there was all the talk about it making sure match changing decisions were right, but as we saw today there were at least two and quite possibly three match changing decisions it got wrong. 
 

For the penalty the fact that it hit his arm seemed to be enough to stick with the decision. Surely if that was shown to a referee with all the angles and the build up without them knowing what the on field was a free kick would have been given rather than a penalty?

 

It’s a similar story with the offsides. From the sideline angle you can see why the linesman raised his flag, which seems enough for them to let the decision stand. Looking from the other angles shows a different story, but as long as there’s a way to justify the original decision they won’t overrule. 

[Guest ttfn]

6 minutes ago, ttfn said:

But the same was true of the disallowed norwich goal against us.

 

In this situation the only relevant question should be whether the attacking player materially impacts the ability of the goalkeeper to save the ball. I’ve not seen our 2 goals today but for the Norwich one Schmeichel could have had a completely unimpeded view, stood an extra yard to his left and still not got anywhere near it. We’re just ruling out goals for the sake of it at this point.

Having just seen them both the first one is definitely offside, Barnes is right in the goalkeeper’s line of sight.

 

For the second one there’s no way that should be disallowed, the keeper has a clear line of sight and Barnes doesn’t attempt to play it.

[Kopfkino]

9 minutes ago, ttfn said:

In this situation the only relevant question should be whether the attacking player materially impacts the ability of the goalkeeper to save the ball. I’ve not seen our 2 goals today but for the Norwich one Schmeichel could have had a completely unimpeded view, stood an extra yard to his left and still not got anywhere near it. We’re just ruling out goals for the sake of it at this point.

We don’t need to make the situation worse by having referees have to mentally calculate an expected save value. For the Norwich one it’s pretty simple sure, for others it’s not and it just opens a whole different can of worms.

[Bert]

It’s also worth noting that all decisions that went against us were all made without VAR changing them. VAR just backed them up so had we not had VAR all three decisions would’ve been the same.