Jump to content

VAR this season


Saint_clark
 Share

Recommended Posts

Could have done us a favour today with that clear pen.

 

Just saw that again. Absolute pen. Don’t know anyone who likes or has confidence in VAR now. Staggering how they can fck up something that could be simple and benefit the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

so he was offside then.

what aspect are you struggling to understand?

 

I'm no expert on the rules but I definitely recall there being a rule which stated there had to be 'daylight' between the attacker and the last defender for him to be offside and in most of these recent VAR offside decisions there hasn't been. When was this rule changed and why?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm no expert on the rules but I definitely recall there being a rule which stated there had to be 'daylight' between the attacker and the last defender for him to be offside and in most of these recent VAR offside decisions there hasn't been. When was this rule changed and why?

 

“Daylight” - that clear, unambiguous and easily enforceable instruction :lol: What happens for night games pal?

Edited by shurlock
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It meant that the forward had to have his entire body offside, not just part of it. Have referees started to ignore this or has there been a rule change?

 

I should add that before the 'daylight' rule was introduced, a player could be offside with any part of his body which could play the ball, which appears to be the case again now. Was the 'daylight' rule just a short-term experiment which was then dropped? I know that rules are constantly being revised. If there are any referees on here who know what happened, it would clarify the situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They're now saying the refs on pitch are going to start using the screens pitchside, as though that will solve anything. If qualified refs with massive screens are making questionable calls, a ref with a tiny screen pitch side is not going to be any better.

 

Using it for offside just isn't working. If they're going to insist on using it for offside it needs to be hawkeye level, factual, not a decision made by somebody drawing red and blue lines onto an off angle image. Or they should say that if you can't tell without drawing lines on it, it's not an obvious error and the original decision stands.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They're now saying the refs on pitch are going to start using the screens pitchside, as though that will solve anything. If qualified refs with massive screens are making questionable calls, a ref with a tiny screen pitch side is not going to be any better.

 

Using it for offside just isn't working. If they're going to insist on using it for offside it needs to be hawkeye level, factual, not a decision made by somebody drawing red and blue lines onto an off angle image. Or they should say that if you can't tell without drawing lines on it, it's not an obvious error and the original decision stands.

 

Agree with this. Same as in cricket when the decision stays with the umpire on 50/50 lbw's.

 

the VAR tech is fine, it's the application of it that needs reviewing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

so he was offside then.

what aspect are you struggling to understand?

 

Was he? That is impossible to judge from a TV screen. There are too many imprecisions. The instant that they choose the freeze-frame from a 50 fps set of images allows for an inaccuracy of 20ms which equates to over 30 cm for someone running at about 15mph. The lines that they draw across the pitch are no more accurate than 30 cm at best on the far side of the pitch.

 

Nowhere near enough to interfere it’s the decisions taken on the field.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
Got away with one yesterday.

 

Who cares except Watford, they really deserved it to turn against them because of the cheating punched goal two seasons ago and the ref and linesman ruling out Austin's perfectly good goal last season because the linesman thought it hit Yoshida from the touchline. It was a yard away and not in the goalkeepers eyeline. Both of those decisions could have relegated us. We deserved a bit of luck against them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not a ‘clear and obvious’ error though, was it.

 

When something like that goes unnoticed by everybody in the stadium and on the pitch and even most of the television shots it would be really pernickety to overrule the referee in charge.

 

does not need to be with handball. If there is a handball from the attackers when the goal is scored, it should be ruled out

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But there does need to be for VAR to overrule the onfield decision.

 

for an attacking handball, it should be ruled out. We got away with it because a camera angle was not available to see it.

Clear and Obvious error has nothing to do with it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It does for the VAR to interfere.

 

every goal is checked by VAR regardless. every goal should be ruled out if an attackers arm/hand plays a part...regardless

 

we never got away with it because it was seen and not enough to overrule the ref, we got away with it because the camera angle did not provide a view where the ball accidentally hit Djenepo's hand. Even the premier league said after the game it should not have been a goal

Link to comment
Share on other sites

every goal is checked by VAR regardless. every goal should be ruled out if an attackers arm/hand plays a part...regardless

 

we never got away with it because it was seen and not enough to overrule the ref, we got away with it because the camera angle did not provide a view where the ball accidentally hit Djenepo's hand. Even the premier league said after the game it should not have been a goal

Fair enough, I hear what you’re saying.

 

In matters which are not subjective the VAR can have the definitive decision. In effect we got away with it because the ‘handball’ was not obvious. Personally I think there’s something wrong with the implementation of the system if they have to go hunting through all sorts of angles and slow-motion replays before they can find some sort of infringement.

 

As for the new attacker’s handball ruling the least said the better. There’s an enormous difference between yesterday’s example and punching the ball straight into the net

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fair enough, I hear what you’re saying.

 

In matters which are not subjective the VAR can have the definitive decision. In effect we got away with it because the ‘handball’ was not obvious. Personally I think there’s something wrong with the implementation of the system if they have to go hunting through all sorts of angles and slow-motion replays before they can find some sort of infringement.

 

As for the new attacker’s handball ruling the least said the better. There’s an enormous difference between yesterday’s example and punching the ball straight into the net

But they (rightly) don't do that in the PL, which is why we got away with it. If they'd done a Women's WC type VAR analysis we would've waited 3 minutes before having the goal disallowed.

 

And I think the point of the new rule is to avoid having a long deliberation if an attacking handball is intentional or not. Handball, yes or no? 10 second VAR check and it's done one way or the other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...