Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Agree with that re the ref, thought the Palace players were getting hysterical about very little. If we had been on the wrong end of that VAR decision though, I'd have been fuming.

 

Where I was sat it seemed a definite offside but VAR seems to show it was marginal

 

Thought the Referee allowed the game to flow and we benefited for the most part

Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought ref had a few bad moments.

- did stuff all to stop the dissent from the palace players..

- his insisting that PEH wait to come back on after being forced to change shirt due to an unseen foul

- his playing advantage when it was crystal clear that the saints players wanted the free kick

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thought the Ref was poor today Playing advantage when there was none, set plays are a big part of our game so we need them.

 

Stopping the game for an offside when we were breaking away is crazy considering how many times he played advantage before this!

 

Allowing the Palace players to get in his face constantly. Should of sent the palace player off for descent in 1st half!

Agree with that re the ref, thought the Palace players were getting hysterical about very little. If we had been on the wrong end of that VAR decision though, I'd have been fuming.
Why would you have been Livid, it was offside, Can't argue with that.

 

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

Link to post
Share on other sites
Why would you have been Livid, it was offside, Can't argue with that.

He seemed level to me. I know we've discussed VAR to death, but a centimetre ahead when analysed by forensics just doesn't seem right to me. Still, in our favour so who cares!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Let Milovejovic commit fouls and then when called on it let him scream in his face and then disrespect him by walking away and ignoring him when he called him back. Second yellow needed there. Palace players realized at that point they’d be able to scream at the ref all game with no repercussions.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Let Milovejovic commit fouls and then when called on it let him scream in his face and then disrespect him by walking away and ignoring him when he called him back. Second yellow needed there. Palace players realized at that point they’d be able to scream at the ref all game with no repercussions.

 

Marriner wouldn't have taken it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
He seemed level to me. I know we've discussed VAR to death, but a centimetre ahead when analysed by forensics just doesn't seem right to me. Still, in our favour so who cares!
I dont Agree that it should be offside but by the letter of the law it is, the law needs to change no problem with VAR for this

 

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

Link to post
Share on other sites

Fair enough, and VAR ain't going anywhere any time soon. Guess we'll just have to get used to it.

 

Just to put things into perspective, I still don't have a satnav and didn't get a mobile phone until everyone else in the country had one for 10 years.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I dont Agree that it should be offside but by the letter of the law it is, the law needs to change no problem with VAR for this

 

What????

 

You don’t agree with the rule that offside should be offside. How would you change it, someone offside will in the future be onside?

 

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Link to post
Share on other sites
Were you at the game?

 

The ref wasn't great. Showed no authority at all and let the Palace players walk all over him

 

Spot on , PEH practically stopped the game waiting for free kick and he just waved his arms as for the amount of dissent allowed reckon his bosses will be telling him to man up when Palace surrounded him

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to post
Share on other sites
What????

 

You don’t agree with the rule that offside should be offside. How would you change it, someone offside will in the future be onside?

 

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Now VAR is in place the Daylight rule should be brought back.

 

The offside rule was brought in to stop the attackers having an advantage. Now it has gone full cycle and people are offside by a toenail.

 

Let's not take all the goals out of football and bring back the Daylight rule

 

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

Link to post
Share on other sites
Thought the ref was weak, Milivojevic should’ve been sent off in the first half, if that’s not a second yellow for dissent then god knows what is. Constant spoiling fouls from Palace and only two yellow cards all game.
That foul on Djenepo should always be a Red no attempt to play the ball and a swipe at his legs!

 

How can Palace complain about Zaha being unfairly treated in games when their players are doing that

 

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

Link to post
Share on other sites
Now VAR is in place the Daylight rule should be brought back.

 

The offside rule was brought in to stop the attackers having an advantage. Now it has gone full cycle and people are offside by a toenail.

 

Let's not take all the goals out of football and bring back the Daylight rule

 

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

 

If they’re offside by a toe nail, they’re offside. You wouldn’t say the ball didn’t cross the goal line by a whisker, therefore it should be goal.

 

Do you think there won’t be hairline offsides under your daylight rule. Wherever you draw a line, it’s a line. If the defenders toe nail is stopping daylight, they’ll be a ****ing debate over that. There’s only two outcomes regarding offside, on or off. No rule change will ever change that.

 

 

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Link to post
Share on other sites
That foul on Djenepo should always be a Red no attempt to play the ball and a swipe at his legs!

 

How can Palace complain about Zaha being unfairly treated in games when their players are doing that

 

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

 

Yes, I think that should be a red. A deliberate kick at the player with no attempt to play the ball. Unfortunately it’s very rare to see one given for that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
There’s only two outcomes regarding offside, on or off. No rule change will ever change that.

They could always remove the concept of offside from the rulebook.

 

Why not just rely on the position of the players' feet, as they do in rugby and the NFL to determine if a ball has gone out of play. Far easier to judge and accept.

Edited by badgerx16
Link to post
Share on other sites
Now VAR is in place the Daylight rule should be brought back.

 

The offside rule was brought in to stop the attackers having an advantage. Now it has gone full cycle and people are offside by a toenail.

 

Let's not take all the goals out of football and bring back the Daylight rule

 

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

 

This. The offside rule should be changed such that use of VAR would not be appropriate. "Being level" is not how offside shoulbe judged, its about having an advantage, and an armpit or a toenail is not an advantage.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I'm happy with VAR the issue is the rules need to be watertight and black and white. Off side is easy, like throw ins, and goals are obvious and easy. Any part of your body is offside your offside simples none of this daylight bollix. I Iike the new handball rule with goals, to, becuase it removes ambiguity.

 

I have had to watch us suffer plenty of dodgy opposition goals over the years due to crap linesmen and refs so for me VAR is making things fairer.

 

Sent from my moto g(6) using Tapatalk

Link to post
Share on other sites
Personally I'm happy with VAR the issue is the rules need to be watertight and black and white. Off side is easy, like throw ins, and goals are obvious and easy. Any part of your body is offside your offside simples none of this daylight bollix. I Iike the new handball rule with goals, to, becuase it removes ambiguity.

 

 

Spot on.

 

The chumps in the TV studios just don’t get it. It’s so frustrating. Clear & obvious applies to subjective decisions, offside is a factual call (as is the new handball rule regarding goals). What they don’t seem to get their heads round is the fact the linos are told to keep their flags down. For all we know without VAR the Lino would have flagged the initial offside yesterday. People seem to be implying that hairline close decisions shouldn’t be ruled offside. The implication of that is the officials will decide what’s “close enough” and what isn’t. A factual decision becomes a subjective one, and subjective decisions lead to more arguments and accusations of bias than factual ones.

 

The only way you’ll ever stop goals like yesterday’s being ruled out is if you use VAR upon appeal (like cricket does). Maybe Saints wouldn’t have appealed it (nobody seemed to think it was offside) or had run out of appeals. The simple fact is that if VAR checks every goal, offside ones will be ruled out. It doesn’t matter if it’s 10 yards or a toe nail offside.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Link to post
Share on other sites
If they’re offside by a toe nail, they’re offside. You wouldn’t say the ball didn’t cross the goal line by a whisker, therefore it should be goal.

 

Do you think there won’t be hairline offsides under your daylight rule. Wherever you draw a line, it’s a line. If the defenders toe nail is stopping daylight, they’ll be a ****ing debate over that. There’s only two outcomes regarding offside, on or off. No rule change will ever change that.

 

 

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

VAR has been great for us this season so we can't really complain. But I think what people are annoyed about is if you are level and VAR needs to go into super zoom mode to see something you are going to always find something to not give a goal.

 

There are issues in determining how to apply the rule which I expect will be changed at the end of the season. They said that it counts for any part of the body that can be used to score goals. So that means arms/hands are not offside. If you then take into account the attacker is facing goal and the defender has their back to goal means the attacker is likely to be leaning forwards which is a natural position. Their feet are likely to be onside whilst their armpit isn't due to being in the natural leaning forward position.

 

I expect they will change it to be where your feet are. That seems the best way to do it imo.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What I find odd is the way football pundits and us fans still can’t (won’t) accept the decision by the match officials. A close decision goes to VAR where it is examined by qualified officials who take a bit of time (30 seconds or so; maybe a minute) to come to a decision. Yet despite this, The MOTD team and others still persist in moaning about the outcome. Why?

 

Accept the decision, take it on the chin and move on. It seems the default setting for football fans and pundits is to moan about the match officials.

Link to post
Share on other sites
What I find odd is the way football pundits and us fans still can’t (won’t) accept the decision by the match officials. A close decision goes to VAR where it is examined by qualified officials who take a bit of time (30 seconds or so; maybe a minute) to come to a decision. Yet despite this, The MOTD team and others still persist in moaning about the outcome. Why?

 

Accept the decision, take it on the chin and move on. It seems the default setting for football fans and pundits is to moan about the match officials.

 

Because it isn't what Var was supposed to be used for? It has gone from clear and obvious errors to major, mega zoom into trying to determine mm. The problem is it can't do that.

 

The problems we are seeing are that the players are level. It is only when you super zoom in and try and get to individual pixels that these decisions are being given. That isn't what it was supposed to be used for.

 

As some of the pundits were saying if you are going to look so far into detail that way then it is eventually going to creep into the other parts of the game too. Are we then going to look into details of fouls? When the ball hits a shoulder does it slightly touch the arm? When someone jumps for a ball are they being impeded at all? The game is going to be stop start and the flow will be destroyed. The rules need to be set in stone so they can stop all these pauses.

If a player is level and the only way you can determine they are not is by zooming in x300 to see a hair is offside for me that ruins the game.

Link to post
Share on other sites
What I find odd is the way football pundits and us fans still can’t (won’t) accept the decision by the match officials. A close decision goes to VAR where it is examined by qualified officials who take a bit of time (30 seconds or so; maybe a minute) to come to a decision. Yet despite this, The MOTD team and others still persist in moaning about the outcome. Why?

 

Accept the decision, take it on the chin and move on. It seems the default setting for football fans and pundits is to moan about the match officials.

 

It takes a lot longer than 30 seconds or a minute.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Because it isn't what Var was supposed to be used for? It has gone from clear and obvious errors to major, mega zoom into trying to determine mm. The problem is it can't do that.

 

The problems we are seeing are that the players are level. It is only when you super zoom in and try and get to individual pixels that these decisions are being given. That isn't what it was supposed to be used for.

 

As some of the pundits were saying if you are going to look so far into detail that way then it is eventually going to creep into the other parts of the game too. Are we then going to look into details of fouls? When the ball hits a shoulder does it slightly touch the arm? When someone jumps for a ball are they being impeded at all? The game is going to be stop start and the flow will be destroyed. The rules need to be set in stone so they can stop all these pauses.

If a player is level and the only way you can determine they are not is by zooming in x300 to see a hair is offside for me that ruins the game.

 

Agree 100%.

 

There needs to be a 'too close to call' limit. If we are having to get the cameras to zoom in, looking at a thousand different shots to determine if something is or isn't it should be deemed level.

Going down the whole everything has to be precise road is a recipe for disaster. Mainly because a lot of those decisions have since been shown to be wrong.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Because it isn't what Var was supposed to be used for? It has gone from clear and obvious errors to major, mega zoom into trying to determine mm. The problem is it can't do that.

 

The problems we are seeing are that the players are level. It is only when you super zoom in and try and get to individual pixels that these decisions are being given. That isn't what it was supposed to be used for.

 

As some of the pundits were saying if you are going to look so far into detail that way then it is eventually going to creep into the other parts of the game too. Are we then going to look into details of fouls? When the ball hits a shoulder does it slightly touch the arm? When someone jumps for a ball are they being impeded at all? The game is going to be stop start and the flow will be destroyed. The rules need to be set in stone so they can stop all these pauses.

If a player is level and the only way you can determine they are not is by zooming in x300 to see a hair is offside for me that ruins the game.

 

All this has come about because referees could not spot Liverpool players cheating or Watford player punching the ball into the net.

 

The standard of officiating was utterly appalling

Link to post
Share on other sites
All this has come about because referees could not spot Liverpool players cheating or Watford player punching the ball into the net.

 

The standard of officiating was utterly appalling

 

It was. But if the goal is to make football 100% precise and every decision correct it isn't going to happen.

VAR has made a lot of mistakes already.

 

Imagine it was the last game of the season. We needed a win to stay up. It is the 93rd min and we get a goal. VAR looks into it. Using the space telescope it spots that a piece of fabric that cannot be seen by the naked eye is offside. We go down.

Whilst a bit dramatic is that where we want to be going?

Link to post
Share on other sites
It takes a lot longer than 30 seconds or a minute.

 

Thank you for pointing this out. Isn’t that an even more compelling reason to accept the decision? The decision hasn’t been taken hastily but after considered thought.

 

The phrase ‘but VAR breaks up the game’ is often heard but what do fans want? A correct decision (however long it may take) or a incorrect call made an official often several yards behind play?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The phrase ‘but VAR breaks up the game’ is often heard but what do fans want? A correct decision (however long it may take) or a incorrect call made an official often several yards behind play?

 

It depends on how you go about defining if it is correct or not? If the player is clearly offside and a blind guy could see it then it needs correcting. If it is so close that you are using technology to determine which pixel belongs to what player it has gone too far.

Link to post
Share on other sites
It was. But if the goal is to make football 100% precise and every decision correct it isn't going to happen.

VAR has made a lot of mistakes already.

 

Imagine it was the last game of the season. We needed a win to stay up. It is the 93rd min and we get a goal. VAR looks into it. Using the space telescope it spots that a piece of fabric that cannot be seen by the naked eye is offside. We go down.

Whilst a bit dramatic is that where we want to be going?

 

But didn’t something that close give Manchester City the title last season? Aguero’s goal at Burnley was 29.15 millimetres over the line. Are you saying it was so close it shouldn’t have been awarded?

 

I ask again, what is it about football fans that they cannot accept a close decision?

 

In reply to Saint Benali who asks how can ‘close’ be defined? I ask back if a decision made by experienced, qualified officials isn’t good enough, then what will satisfy you?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Thank you for pointing this out. Isn’t that an even more compelling reason to accept the decision? The decision hasn’t been taken hastily but after considered thought.

 

The phrase ‘but VAR breaks up the game’ is often heard but what do fans want? A correct decision (however long it may take) or a incorrect call made an official often several yards behind play?

I take the opposite view. The beauty of the Beautiful Game is that it has ebb and flow, that it is possible for a ball to be cleared off the line one moment and then the team can run down the other end and score, This is what makes the game special. It’s not cricket, doncha know.

Link to post
Share on other sites
There was a goal given in Scotland today that wouldn't have been given in England (for handball). How can you play the game by different rules in different countries and indeed in different competitions ?

 

It probably wouldn't have been given in Scotland if they had VAR and it was shown that it went in off his hand.

Link to post
Share on other sites
It was. But if the goal is to make football 100% precise and every decision correct it isn't going to happen.

VAR has made a lot of mistakes already.

 

Imagine it was the last game of the season. We needed a win to stay up. It is the 93rd min and we get a goal. VAR looks into it. Using the space telescope it spots that a piece of fabric that cannot be seen by the naked eye is offside. We go down.

Whilst a bit dramatic is that where we want to be going?

In a word, yes. Much better than going down because a Watford player punches an equaliser into the net with his hand.

VAR may not be perfect, but it's much less likely to make a mistake, and if it does it'll be by millimeters, not centimeters or meters by incompetent on field refs.

 

Someone suggested having offside decided by feet only. Good idea. On top of that, then let VAR have 30 seconds max to decide if his feet are offside. If VAR can't decide by then the goal stands.

 

Problem solved.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought the ref was totally inept there were a lot of late tackles he ignored, the No 4 should have gone for the foul and subsequent dissent and after that he lost his credibility. It was interesting that despite the celebration after the "non" goal, the VAR, game stopped for injury, stop for Hojbergs new shirt and the debacle with the no 4 there was only a minute extra time? Perhaps they wanted the ref off the pitch quick to read up on the rule for late tackles. No surprise he is new and will improve we hope.

Link to post
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
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

View Terms of service (Terms of Use) and Privacy Policy (Privacy Policy) and Forum Guidelines ({Guidelines})