VAR

[Snowflake Royal]

The more I think about yesterday’s incident, the more I believe that the VAR really doesn’t know the laws of the game. Maybe should get Sian Massey to explain them to him

At least the VAR is in the same boat as managers, players, pundits and most fans.

I watched some local youth football (EJA) the other week and one parent was screaming at the injustice of a penalty being given against his side for the goalkeeper going two fisted into the strikers head and poleaxing him to the ground. Apparently it was the ball what did it.

People are weird.

[Hoop Blah]

I’ve mentioned a few times how I just don’t understand how we’ve come to the point of using technology to make judgements on such fine margins that are beyond its margin for errors.

The City goal yesterday is a good example of this. Look at the ball in the image below. How can they be making calls based on this when the ball itself looks about twice the size of the actual ball?



I think I’ve read/heard that the tech at Stockly Park is better than your standard TV or the Sky coverage, but isn’t this supposed to be the real footage they’re using?

[Victor Meldrew]

:evil: Oh very dear.

City goal VAR’d when the defenders arm, including a gloved hand are very clearly playing Sterling onside.
Wouldn’t be surprised if the VAR thought that the defenders arm doesn’t count because you can’t score with it

At least it didn’t matter

Utterly farcical isn’t it. Liverpool and Sheffield lost out because attackers had hands in an offside position so at least that was consistent. Then along comes City v Chelsea and suddenly hands don’t count any more

Just scrap this farcical technology. We really don’t want 2 minutes wasted while officials look at things from different angles then get it wrong when they can do that instantly. At least with the latter method we can all be more acceptable of the human error.

You say that but pre-VAR there were calls for more technology.
Now we have it there are calls for it to be scrapped.
There have been terrible decisions in the past so do you really think that if VAR were scrapped the fans and pundits would quietly go "Oh dear, never mind the officials are only human and make mistakes so be it, let the game continue"?

I thought any advantage on offside decisions was meant to be in favour of the attacking side.
Seemingly that has now gone but was it a universal creed or was it just for English football?

Anyway, feeling today in a kind of "well what can you do?" mood brought upon by acceptance that Brexit will happen, albeit finalised in about 10 years' time and not on 31st January, and that the Tories will be re-elected because a GE has come down to one topic I say carry on with VAR as decisions are now more likely to be right , and if not, corrected.
IMHO that is probably better than guessing.

[URZZZZ]

Anyone more intelligent than me able to explain the Arsenal penalty retake? I thought it was for encroachment but there were equally Arsenal players in the box so I don’t understand it

Worked well for the Leicester goal though although not sure why the lino flagged when he’s been told to be on the side of caution

[Hendo]

Anyone more intelligent than me able to explain the Arsenal penalty retake? I thought it was for encroachment but there were equally Arsenal players in the box so I don’t understand it

Worked well for the Leicester goal though although not sure why the lino flagged when he’s been told to be on the side of caution

I guess he thought it was nailed on, which shows that VAR has worked.

[Old Man Andrews]

Anyone more intelligent than me able to explain the Arsenal penalty retake? I thought it was for encroachment but there were equally Arsenal players in the box so I don’t understand it

Worked well for the Leicester goal though although not sure why the lino flagged when he’s been told to be on the side of caution

I guess he thought it was nailed on, which shows that VAR has worked.

VAR hasn't worked, more or less universally accepted that it needs to go.

[Hendo]

Anyone more intelligent than me able to explain the Arsenal penalty retake? I thought it was for encroachment but there were equally Arsenal players in the box so I don’t understand it

Worked well for the Leicester goal though although not sure why the lino flagged when he’s been told to be on the side of caution

I guess he thought it was nailed on, which shows that VAR has worked.

VAR hasn't worked, more or less universally accepted that it needs to go.

But it did work in the Leicester v Everton game, the lino gave an offside decision, which was incorrect and VAR took a look and correctly allowed the goal.

I agreed that it is crap and should be binned off, but in this specific instance, it has correctly overturned a wrong decision.

[John Madejski's Wallet]

I guess he thought it was nailed on, which shows that VAR has worked.

VAR hasn't worked, more or less universally accepted that it needs to go.

But it did work in the Leicester v Everton game, the lino gave an offside decision, which was incorrect and VAR took a look and correctly allowed the goal.

I agreed that it is crap and should be binned off, but in this specific instance, it has correctly overturned a wrong decision.

^^ I don't fully agree with that one, impossible to say if the flag going up/whistle could have affected the goal

However the encroachment retake was spot on by VAR as it was one of the encroaching players that cleared it. If he hadn't, you'd have hoped it would have stood as both team were encroaching

[Franchise FC]

I guess he thought it was nailed on, which shows that VAR has worked.

VAR hasn't worked, more or less universally accepted that it needs to go.

But it did work in the Leicester v Everton game, the lino gave an offside decision, which was incorrect and VAR took a look and correctly allowed the goal.

I agreed that it is crap and should be binned off, but in this specific instance, it has correctly overturned a wrong decision.

You're right, of course, and in this instance the defenders didn't stop because of the flag, but this is one of the great mysteries of VAR. If defender stops because flag goes up (and the ref blows), but then VAR decides 'NOT OFFSIDE' - then what. The defender may have had the opportunity to intervene but for the flag and whistle.

It's still much, much worse than the occasional human error, IMO.

[URZZZZ]

VAR hasn't worked, more or less universally accepted that it needs to go.

But it did work in the Leicester v Everton game, the lino gave an offside decision, which was incorrect and VAR took a look and correctly allowed the goal.

I agreed that it is crap and should be binned off, but in this specific instance, it has correctly overturned a wrong decision.

You're right, of course, and in this instance the defenders didn't stop because of the flag, but this is one of the great mysteries of VAR. If defender stops because flag goes up (and the ref blows), but then VAR decides 'NOT OFFSIDE' - then what. The defender may have had the opportunity to intervene but for the flag and whistle.

It's still much, much worse than the occasional human error, IMO.

I guess it's play to the whistle though so it's technically still the fault of the defenders

Now if the ref did blow his whistle, that's a different matter

[paultheroyal]

On point of above - players have been told - "you must play on" = assistant is only assisting and its the whistle you adhere to.

I will keep saying it - VAR should just be matter of fact. Was it in or out of play, was it offside, was it inside the box - the rest is referee interpretation on the field. Keep it as simple as that and then it will work.

[URZZZZ]

On point of above - players have been told - "you must play on" = assistant is only assisting and its the whistle you adhere to.

I will keep saying it - VAR should just be matter of fact. Was it in or out of play, was it offside, was it inside the box - the rest is referee interpretation on the field. Keep it as simple as that and then it will work.

Agree with the principle but they're still getting things like offsides wrong anyway

[paultheroyal]

On point of above - players have been told - "you must play on" = assistant is only assisting and its the whistle you adhere to.

I will keep saying it - VAR should just be matter of fact. Was it in or out of play, was it offside, was it inside the box - the rest is referee interpretation on the field. Keep it as simple as that and then it will work.

Agree with the principle but they're still getting things like offsides wrong anyway

Are they though? Dont think i have got one wrong yet have they? Even the one above, the line is drawn and he is off. Arm pit or not, he is off. Unless you factor in on the technology a 10% margin onside error, you are on or off.

[Franchise FC]

On point of above - players have been told - "you must play on" = assistant is only assisting and its the whistle you adhere to.

I will keep saying it - VAR should just be matter of fact. Was it in or out of play, was it offside, was it inside the box - the rest is referee interpretation on the field. Keep it as simple as that and then it will work.

Agree with the principle but they're still getting things like offsides wrong anyway

Are they though? Dont think i have got one wrong yet have they? Even the one above, the line is drawn and he is off. Arm pit or not, he is off. Unless you factor in on the technology a 10% margin onside error, you are on or off.

Er, not quite.

Firstly, there are only 24 frames per second. Which one shows the exact point of contact with the ball ? Is the point of reference the first time the ball is contacted or the last point at which the boot is in contact with the ball. TV pictures are not analogue.

Secondly, they most certainly have got offsides wrong. The disallowed goal from Sterling against Chelsea was VERY clearly onside, but the VAR managed to not understand the laws of the game.

[paultheroyal]

Agree with the principle but they're still getting things like offsides wrong anyway

Are they though? Dont think i have got one wrong yet have they? Even the one above, the line is drawn and he is off. Arm pit or not, he is off. Unless you factor in on the technology a 10% margin onside error, you are on or off.

Er, not quite.

Firstly, there are only 24 frames per second. Which one shows the exact point of contact with the ball ? Is the point of reference the first time the ball is contacted or the last point at which the boot is in contact with the ball. TV pictures are not analogue.

Secondly, they most certainly have got offsides wrong. The disallowed goal from Sterling against Chelsea was VERY clearly onside, but the VAR managed to not understand the laws of the game.

But if you are referring to the decision thats the picture above - then he is offside. Tight call or not he is off. Are you referring to another one as might of missed it.

[Franchise FC]

Are they though? Dont think i have got one wrong yet have they? Even the one above, the line is drawn and he is off. Arm pit or not, he is off. Unless you factor in on the technology a 10% margin onside error, you are on or off.

Er, not quite.

Firstly, there are only 24 frames per second. Which one shows the exact point of contact with the ball ? Is the point of reference the first time the ball is contacted or the last point at which the boot is in contact with the ball. TV pictures are not analogue.

Secondly, they most certainly have got offsides wrong. The disallowed goal from Sterling against Chelsea was VERY clearly onside, but the VAR managed to not understand the laws of the game.

But if you are referring to the decision thats the picture above - then he is offside. Tight call or not he is off. Are you referring to another one as might of missed it.

What part of that picture shows him offside ?

And that image is AFTER the ball has been played since the ball is already away from the City player's head.

[Hoop Blah]

On point of above - players have been told - "you must play on" = assistant is only assisting and its the whistle you adhere to.

I will keep saying it - VAR should just be matter of fact. Was it in or out of play, was it offside, was it inside the box - the rest is referee interpretation on the field. Keep it as simple as that and then it will work.

Offside isn't just a matter of fact though. Being in an offside position is, admittedly, but even that isn't measurable to enough accuracy with the existing VAR set up. They're making decisions based on a couple of centimetres when it's potentially only accurate to about 20cm.

Edit: Kinda what he says ^^

[Sanguine]

Anyone more intelligent than me able to explain the Arsenal penalty retake? I thought it was for encroachment but there were equally Arsenal players in the box so I don’t understand it

Worked well for the Leicester goal though although not sure why the lino flagged when he’s been told to be on the side of caution

We've had a couple of these this season (Declan Rice one of them?) - the Premier League's interpretation of the encroachment rules is to apply them where encroachment leads to an advantage. In this case, Max Aarons was inside the box when the kick was taken, and he cleared the ball from the rebound - clear advantage. Had the rebound fallen to an Arsenal player who had encroached, it would have been disallowed. Had Arsenal scored the original penalty, encroachment would not have been penalised as Arsenal gained no advantage from it.

[URZZZZ]

Anyone more intelligent than me able to explain the Arsenal penalty retake? I thought it was for encroachment but there were equally Arsenal players in the box so I don’t understand it

Worked well for the Leicester goal though although not sure why the lino flagged when he’s been told to be on the side of caution

We've had a couple of these this season (Declan Rice one of them?) - the Premier League's interpretation of the encroachment rules is to apply them where encroachment leads to an advantage. In this case, Max Aarons was inside the box when the kick was taken, and he cleared the ball from the rebound - clear advantage. Had the rebound fallen to an Arsenal player who had encroached, it would have been disallowed. Had Arsenal scored the original penalty, encroachment would not have been penalised as Arsenal gained no advantage from it.

OK, thanks for the clear up. Not something I necessarily agree with though, I don’t think anyone should encroach regardless of the outcome. I, for one am personally surprised we haven’t seen more penalty retakes given how they’re checking goalies on their lines this season

[Sanguine]

Anyone more intelligent than me able to explain the Arsenal penalty retake? I thought it was for encroachment but there were equally Arsenal players in the box so I don’t understand it

Worked well for the Leicester goal though although not sure why the lino flagged when he’s been told to be on the side of caution

We've had a couple of these this season (Declan Rice one of them?) - the Premier League's interpretation of the encroachment rules is to apply them where encroachment leads to an advantage. In this case, Max Aarons was inside the box when the kick was taken, and he cleared the ball from the rebound - clear advantage. Had the rebound fallen to an Arsenal player who had encroached, it would have been disallowed. Had Arsenal scored the original penalty, encroachment would not have been penalised as Arsenal gained no advantage from it.

OK, thanks for the clear up. Not something I necessarily agree with though, I don’t think anyone should encroach regardless of the outcome. I, for one am personally surprised we haven’t seen more penalty retakes given how they’re checking goalies on their lines this season

Not sure I agree - if no advantage accrues, why stop the game? By the same logic you'd retake every penalty where the keeper comes off his line, whether it is scored or not.