VAR

This Forum is the main messageboard to discuss all things Claret and Blue and beyond
Claretlad
Posts: 616
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 2:52 pm
Been Liked: 161 times
Has Liked: 118 times
Location: Burnley

VAR

Post by Claretlad » Sat Feb 22, 2020 4:38 pm

Vydra And Rodriguez
These 18 users liked this post: 4:20 cricketfieldclarets DomBFC1882 mkmel lesxdp burnleymik SalisburyClaret longsidepies the_fat_shearer Cirrus_Minor Juan Tanamera Bosscat morpheus2 MG70 kaptin1 dpinsussex CombatClaret tarkys_ears

cricketfieldclarets
Posts: 19440
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:59 pm
Been Liked: 7619 times
Has Liked: 10444 times

Re: VAR

Post by cricketfieldclarets » Sat Feb 22, 2020 4:58 pm

Like it.

That today was very harsh on Bournemouth. Surprised it was given. Especially after Ben Mees last week.

Doubt he’d have changed that if it was the opposite way around I.e.the home side.

Vegas Claret
Posts: 17244
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:00 am
Been Liked: 5573 times
Has Liked: 2679 times
Location: clue is in the title

Re: VAR

Post by Vegas Claret » Sat Feb 22, 2020 5:00 pm

the one that Cook handled in the first half was a stone wall handball and yet it wasn't given. We were on the right side of some incredibly poor decisions today imho

DomBFC1882
Posts: 503
Joined: Mon Aug 14, 2017 2:21 pm
Been Liked: 129 times
Has Liked: 1229 times

Re: VAR

Post by DomBFC1882 » Sat Feb 22, 2020 5:01 pm

Correct decisions all round for me. It was 100% a penalty to us and defo handball from billing. You could also argue we should have another penalty for the handball swipe in the first half
This user liked this post: Hibsclaret

Vino blanco
Posts: 3391
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 2:42 pm
Been Liked: 1136 times
Has Liked: 834 times

Re: VAR

Post by Vino blanco » Sat Feb 22, 2020 5:02 pm

I thought our penalty was stonewall and couldn't believe when Dean didn't give it
This user liked this post: DomBFC1882

BFCmaj
Posts: 864
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:38 pm
Been Liked: 352 times
Has Liked: 1933 times
Location: Rossendale

Re: VAR

Post by BFCmaj » Sat Feb 22, 2020 5:25 pm

I can understand Bournemouth being angry at the decision but play was carried on and they managed to score from it. Had the handball decision not been given, they would have been given the goal. Had they stopped play to check the handball and it was deemed not handball they would have been fuming that they were not given the opportunity to attack. Correct decision to do it this way in my opinion. It gave the officials the opportunity to give the decision for the penalty to Burnley or the goal to Bournemouth.
These 2 users liked this post: DomBFC1882 Juan Tanamera

Longsidelenny
Posts: 608
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2018 6:55 pm
Been Liked: 125 times
Has Liked: 1 time

Re: VAR

Post by Longsidelenny » Sat Feb 22, 2020 5:30 pm

It went our day today with var but outstanding from us in patchers let’s give dyche so much credit for turning our season around proud to be a claret utc

FactualFrank
Posts: 23235
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 12:46 am
Been Liked: 6284 times
Has Liked: 10617 times
Location: Leeds

Re: VAR

Post by FactualFrank » Sat Feb 22, 2020 6:01 pm

The penalty that we were given and scored looked to have come off the shoulder, so we got fortunate there.

FCBurnley
Posts: 4625
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 3:56 pm
Been Liked: 983 times
Has Liked: 554 times

Re: VAR

Post by FCBurnley » Sat Feb 22, 2020 6:07 pm

Thought hand ball in first was deliberate by Cook and a sure pen as was the Smith handball in second. However I thought Kings goal should have counted. No way it was deliberate handball by Billing.

Jakubclaret
Posts: 3560
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2016 10:47 pm
Been Liked: 421 times
Has Liked: 339 times

Re: VAR

Post by Jakubclaret » Sat Feb 22, 2020 6:33 pm

FactualFrank wrote:
Sat Feb 22, 2020 6:01 pm
The penalty that we were given and scored looked to have come off the shoulder, so we got fortunate there.
I don’t think they are happy bunch, just had a look on there forum, we could have played with 11 quadruple amputees & nicked a goal & somebody’s nasal hair would have been offside :lol:

DomBFC1882
Posts: 503
Joined: Mon Aug 14, 2017 2:21 pm
Been Liked: 129 times
Has Liked: 1229 times

Re: VAR

Post by DomBFC1882 » Sat Feb 22, 2020 6:39 pm

FCBurnley wrote:
Sat Feb 22, 2020 6:07 pm
Thought hand ball in first was deliberate by Cook and a sure pen as was the Smith handball in second. However I thought Kings goal should have counted. No way it was deliberate handball by Billing.
It doesn't have to be deliberate though under the current rulings

cricketfieldclarets
Posts: 19440
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:59 pm
Been Liked: 7619 times
Has Liked: 10444 times

Re: VAR

Post by cricketfieldclarets » Sat Feb 22, 2020 6:42 pm

BFCmaj wrote:
Sat Feb 22, 2020 5:25 pm
I can understand Bournemouth being angry at the decision but play was carried on and they managed to score from it. Had the handball decision not been given, they would have been given the goal. Had they stopped play to check the handball and it was deemed not handball they would have been fuming that they were not given the opportunity to attack. Correct decision to do it this way in my opinion. It gave the officials the opportunity to give the decision for the penalty to Burnley or the goal to Bournemouth.
It’s a good point well made. That said imagine it was Leeds or Blackburn we were playing. Imagine the outcome.

Granny WeatherWax
Posts: 1798
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2018 3:20 pm
Been Liked: 450 times
Has Liked: 51 times

Re: VAR

Post by Granny WeatherWax » Sat Feb 22, 2020 6:51 pm

Said it on the ratings thread last week after I got back from Southampton, Dyche could evolve the way we play by using Jay and Vydra as his front two.
These 2 users liked this post: Bosscat cricketfieldclarets

Bosscat
Posts: 10551
Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2018 9:51 am
Been Liked: 3276 times
Has Liked: 8088 times

Re: VAR

Post by Bosscat » Sat Feb 22, 2020 6:52 pm

BFCmaj wrote:
Sat Feb 22, 2020 5:25 pm
I can understand Bournemouth being angry at the decision but play was carried on and they managed to score from it. Had the handball decision not been given, they would have been given the goal. Had they stopped play to check the handball and it was deemed not handball they would have been fuming that they were not given the opportunity to attack. Correct decision to do it this way in my opinion. It gave the officials the opportunity to give the decision for the penalty to Burnley or the goal to Bournemouth.
Good points BFCmaj and cannit disagree with any of them....

Had it been reversed we would be fuming ... but thems the rules now we have all to get on with it.

VAR :D

Audenshaw Cerry on their fans forum...

At this moment in time, I actually HATE the Premier League.

What I have seen today has almost destroyed my enjoyment of football.

Two appalling VAR decisions today may cost our club Premier League status, not on its own perhaps, but if we were to finish a couple of points inside the relegation zone I would look back at this match.

I am so angry, I could rant for hours.

What has happened to the beautiful game?


Another complainer...
That's it. I am done with the EPL.
VAR has destroyed football as I know it, and I don't want to watch it in this form any longer.
I will not mourn any relegation, indeed it will be a relief to get back to the game we know.

Damn fine first half performance. Shocking decision to deny us the goal.
It's clearly hit Billings shoulder.

However we should still have been a couple up.

Ten our equaliser, pulled back for a ball that hits Smith on the top of his arm...just too depressing for words.

If we played with 11 quadruple amputees today and nicked a goal, some f***ers nasal hair would have been offside.

Too angry to write anymore.
Last edited by Bosscat on Sat Feb 22, 2020 7:01 pm, edited 2 times in total.

scouseclaret
Posts: 1850
Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2016 7:29 pm
Been Liked: 632 times
Has Liked: 203 times

Re: VAR

Post by scouseclaret » Sat Feb 22, 2020 6:55 pm

I can certainly sympathise with Bournemouth - wouldn’t have been happy if it had happened to us. Equally, I’d be pretty upset if we’d have found ourselves at 1-1 having had a stonewall penalty turned down. I thought it was handball real time, and I thought it was handball when I saw the replay on the big screen. Ultimately, the right decision was made, but they could have checked it and stopped play before Bournemouth put the ball in the net.

damo_whitehead
Posts: 338
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 10:02 pm
Been Liked: 156 times
Has Liked: 106 times

Re: VAR

Post by damo_whitehead » Sat Feb 22, 2020 7:00 pm

I would be furious if it was the other way round, the first goal dissalowed looked insanely harsh, can anyone be certain it even touched a hand/arm? For the penalty at first I thought it was handball but it seems to of hit his shoulder, that isn't handball is it, and if it is, then it is hardly clear and obvious which is the case for the defending team regarding handballs being overturned!

But.. I will take it off the soft southern sods :D

jrgbfc
Posts: 4886
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2016 10:30 pm
Been Liked: 1188 times
Has Liked: 134 times

Re: VAR

Post by jrgbfc » Sat Feb 22, 2020 7:03 pm

Went in our favour today. There'll be plenty of times when it goes against us. Wood at Leicester earlier this season springs to mind.

FactualFrank
Posts: 23235
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 12:46 am
Been Liked: 6284 times
Has Liked: 10617 times
Location: Leeds

Re: VAR

Post by FactualFrank » Sat Feb 22, 2020 7:07 pm

jrgbfc wrote:
Sat Feb 22, 2020 7:03 pm
Went in our favour today. There'll be plenty of times when it goes against us. Wood at Leicester earlier this season springs to mind.
A lot of fans don't appreciate that though. I've read Bmouth fans just lambasting us as a team and the town, even though they WILL have had plenty of decisions go their way, when it shouldn't have.

BennyD
Posts: 3363
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:10 am
Been Liked: 1259 times
Has Liked: 652 times
Location: Nantwich

Re: VAR

Post by BennyD » Sat Feb 22, 2020 7:08 pm

I hate VAR with a passion and I wish it wasn’t here. Today we benefitted, next week we might not but that’s the way it is. I would much rather the ref cocked up and we had someone to rant at, but that’s not the way it is any more. Having seen the blatant leg stamp in the Spurs game and the obvious punch to the throat in the City game being ignored, I would say that VAR isn’t fit for purpose but I don’t make the rules. C’est la vie.

Vegas Claret
Posts: 17244
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:00 am
Been Liked: 5573 times
Has Liked: 2679 times
Location: clue is in the title

Re: VAR

Post by Vegas Claret » Sat Feb 22, 2020 7:22 pm

Bosscat wrote:
Sat Feb 22, 2020 6:52 pm
Good points BFCmaj and cannit disagree with any of them....

Had it been reversed we would be fuming ... but thems the rules now we have all to get on with it.

VAR :D

Audenshaw Cerry on their fans forum...

At this moment in time, I actually HATE the Premier League.

What I have seen today has almost destroyed my enjoyment of football.

Two appalling VAR decisions today may cost our club Premier League status, not on its own perhaps, but if we were to finish a couple of points inside the relegation zone I would look back at this match.

I am so angry, I could rant for hours.

What has happened to the beautiful game?


Another complainer...
That's it. I am done with the EPL.
VAR has destroyed football as I know it, and I don't want to watch it in this form any longer.
I will not mourn any relegation, indeed it will be a relief to get back to the game we know.

Damn fine first half performance. Shocking decision to deny us the goal.
It's clearly hit Billings shoulder.

However we should still have been a couple up.

Ten our equaliser, pulled back for a ball that hits Smith on the top of his arm...just too depressing for words.

If we played with 11 quadruple amputees today and nicked a goal, some f***ers nasal hair would have been offside.

Too angry to write anymore.
They aren't wrong though, VAR is depressingly bad at the moment

Rileybobs
Posts: 8622
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:37 pm
Been Liked: 3555 times
Has Liked: 816 times
Location: Leeds

Re: VAR

Post by Rileybobs » Sat Feb 22, 2020 7:22 pm

VAR is terrible, absolutely terrible.

I have not seen the incidents back but for the first disallowed goal if the ball hit Billing’s arm then it was of course the correct decision to disallow the goal. The problem is how do we define where the shoulder stops and the arm begins?

The second disallowed goal was 100% the correct decision. I don’t even know how anyone can contest this although I’ve heard both Keown and Sutton do just that. It was clear as day in real time hence the appeals from players and fans alike. The fact that Bournemouth played on and scored a goal is irrelevant. Of course it’s a bit of tough luck for Bournemouth but had the assistant referee made the right call in the first place there would have been no drama.

I do suspect that had Bournemouth not scored the incident wouldn’t have been reviewed at all though.

Inchy
Posts: 2006
Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2016 5:32 pm
Been Liked: 916 times
Has Liked: 79 times

Re: VAR

Post by Inchy » Sat Feb 22, 2020 7:24 pm

In the first half when the Bournemouth player pinged it onto his own arm wasn’t a pen. It clearly wasn’t intentional. The one for the Pen was a pen on my opinion. The only way he could keep the ball in play was to use his arm. Intentional or not he used his arm to keep it in play and they went and scored. Had to reverse the decision

FactualFrank
Posts: 23235
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 12:46 am
Been Liked: 6284 times
Has Liked: 10617 times
Location: Leeds

Re: VAR

Post by FactualFrank » Sat Feb 22, 2020 7:25 pm

Shoulder isn't handball, and it hit his shoulder.

LeadBelly
Posts: 2513
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 11:07 am
Been Liked: 692 times
Has Liked: 1384 times
Location: North Hampshire

Re: VAR

Post by LeadBelly » Sat Feb 22, 2020 7:26 pm

VAR worked in our favour somewhat today. It's a lot better for our points total than when there was no VAR and we had plenty of solid pens not given for us and dodgy goals given against us (thinking Arsenal especially here). Not sure it's good for the game overall in its current implementation but it's working for us IMO.

I suspect MotD talk tonight will be more about VAR controversy rather than "Burnley get 13 points from 5 games" great run. We'll see though and, whatever the pundits say, it wont alter our points total.

Guller Bull
Posts: 918
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:01 pm
Been Liked: 266 times
Has Liked: 327 times

Re: VAR

Post by Guller Bull » Sat Feb 22, 2020 7:34 pm

How was the handball by their defender not looked at (or mentioned)?

Dark Cloud
Posts: 3818
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 9:03 am
Been Liked: 1056 times
Has Liked: 1295 times

Re: VAR

Post by Dark Cloud » Sat Feb 22, 2020 7:39 pm

We definitely got the right end of VAR today, but it's still crap and is spoiling the game.

Rileybobs
Posts: 8622
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:37 pm
Been Liked: 3555 times
Has Liked: 816 times
Location: Leeds

Re: VAR

Post by Rileybobs » Sat Feb 22, 2020 7:43 pm

FactualFrank wrote:
Sat Feb 22, 2020 7:25 pm
Shoulder isn't handball, and it hit his shoulder.
The ball hit Smith’s arm.

FactualFrank
Posts: 23235
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 12:46 am
Been Liked: 6284 times
Has Liked: 10617 times
Location: Leeds

Re: VAR

Post by FactualFrank » Sat Feb 22, 2020 7:46 pm

Dark Cloud wrote:
Sat Feb 22, 2020 7:39 pm
We definitely got the right end of VAR today, but it's still crap and is spoiling the game.
We've had our fair share of getting the wrong end of it, but it's the delay that's annoying.
This user liked this post: Dark Cloud

Gordaleman
Posts: 2729
Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2020 3:04 pm
Been Liked: 535 times
Has Liked: 434 times

Re: VAR

Post by Gordaleman » Sat Feb 22, 2020 7:56 pm

The worst VAR decision today wasn't in the Burnley game, it was in the Chelsea game. Clear and obvious stamp by a Spurs player is reviewed by VAR and declared not to be a red card. Later, Stockley Park admitted they got it wrong and the Spurs player should have gone.

What the F*** is going on?

Scrap VAR before next season.

ecc
Posts: 2565
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:08 am
Been Liked: 890 times
Has Liked: 869 times

Re: VAR

Post by ecc » Sat Feb 22, 2020 7:59 pm

I was in favour of it. FIFA and UEFA have tried it. It doesn't work. On the contrary. The only strand I'd keep is goalline technology.

All teams have had decisions "for" and "against".

I haven't seen any film of the incidents but don't really care. We won they lost and there you go.

BabylonClaret
Posts: 1739
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 10:51 pm
Been Liked: 374 times
Has Liked: 367 times

Re: VAR

Post by BabylonClaret » Sat Feb 22, 2020 8:03 pm

They are rough calls no doubt, but the 2nd looked a definite pen (not seen it back yet) - the ball is going out for a corner and he keeps it in with his arm. Then they punch it clear whilst pretty much 2/3 of our team are looking at the ref and claiming for the pen.

But overall? They created chuff all for all tbeir pretty triangles and the right team won. They can't argue with that. We should really have been out of sight before they equalised

Stayingup
Posts: 2557
Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2016 8:02 pm
Been Liked: 431 times
Has Liked: 835 times

Re: VAR

Post by Stayingup » Sat Feb 22, 2020 8:03 pm

We had two men of the match today. Vydra and VAR!!!

Actaully a good end to end game to watch and Bournemouth have some good players and will probably avoid relegation. Second half we created a lot and it was va joy to watch.

BabylonClaret
Posts: 1739
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 10:51 pm
Been Liked: 374 times
Has Liked: 367 times

Re: VAR

Post by BabylonClaret » Sat Feb 22, 2020 8:05 pm

And Sutton was talkong out of his arse. We were listening to that. They ******* love Bournemouth on BBC and it was all about how witjout those calls we wouldnt have won. Not how we had probably 5 or 6 very good chances to their 1 or 2

cricketfieldclarets
Posts: 19440
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:59 pm
Been Liked: 7619 times
Has Liked: 10444 times

Re: VAR

Post by cricketfieldclarets » Sat Feb 22, 2020 8:07 pm

Bosscat wrote:
Sat Feb 22, 2020 6:52 pm
Good points BFCmaj and cannit disagree with any of them....

Had it been reversed we would be fuming ... but thems the rules now we have all to get on with it.

VAR :D

Audenshaw Cerry on their fans forum...

At this moment in time, I actually HATE the Premier League.

What I have seen today has almost destroyed my enjoyment of football.

Two appalling VAR decisions today may cost our club Premier League status, not on its own perhaps, but if we were to finish a couple of points inside the relegation zone I would look back at this match.

I am so angry, I could rant for hours.

What has happened to the beautiful game?


Another complainer...
That's it. I am done with the EPL.
VAR has destroyed football as I know it, and I don't want to watch it in this form any longer.
I will not mourn any relegation, indeed it will be a relief to get back to the game we know.

Damn fine first half performance. Shocking decision to deny us the goal.
It's clearly hit Billings shoulder.

However we should still have been a couple up.

Ten our equaliser, pulled back for a ball that hits Smith on the top of his arm...just too depressing for words.

If we played with 11 quadruple amputees today and nicked a goal, some f***ers nasal hair would have been offside.

Too angry to write anymore.
To be honest I have to agree with the sentiments on var.

Granny WeatherWax
Posts: 1798
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2018 3:20 pm
Been Liked: 450 times
Has Liked: 51 times

Re: VAR

Post by Granny WeatherWax » Sat Feb 22, 2020 8:12 pm

We benefited massively today by VAR but my hatred of it has increased to new heights. In theory video technology works but in practice, but they way they are trying to use it, it never will.

The premier league are that arrogant in how they have tried to implement it its not wonder it’s been a massive mess.

scouseclaret
Posts: 1850
Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2016 7:29 pm
Been Liked: 632 times
Has Liked: 203 times

Re: VAR

Post by scouseclaret » Sat Feb 22, 2020 8:40 pm

ecc wrote:
Sat Feb 22, 2020 7:59 pm
I was in favour of it. FIFA and UEFA have tried it. It doesn't work. On the contrary. The only strand I'd keep is goalline technology.

All teams have had decisions "for" and "against".

I haven't seen any film of the incidents but don't really care. We won they lost and there you go.
VAR worked well during the World Cup. Yes, there were a few incidents, but nothing like the controversy we’ve seen this season.

I don’t think the Premier League, and it’s biggest members, ever wanted VAR - they were dragged kicking and screaming into it. As the seasons gone on, I’ve become increasingly convinced that the Premier League is trying to trash it. The way it’s been implemented, the rank irrational decisions, the refusal to allow refs to use pitch side monitors, it all seems designed to whip up the kind of fury we’re now seeing.

The World Cup demonstrated that VAR can improve decision making outcomes - why hasnt the PL implemented it in the same way. The problem is with then, not VAR itself.
This user liked this post: Claretlad

Dressinggown
Posts: 729
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 1:24 pm
Been Liked: 489 times
Has Liked: 73 times
Location: Padiham

Re: VAR

Post by Dressinggown » Sat Feb 22, 2020 8:52 pm

The joy of scoring has gone.

Football has gone.

Flying Without Ings
Posts: 94
Joined: Sat Jul 27, 2019 10:09 pm
Been Liked: 24 times
Has Liked: 5 times

Re: VAR

Post by Flying Without Ings » Sat Feb 22, 2020 8:59 pm

VAR can only overrule decisions if they are CLEAR and OBVIOUS apparently, but they are currently overruling correct decisions.

Burnley were the better team over the course of 90 minutes today (especially second half), but Bournemouth were robbed by VAR.

Aclaret
Posts: 1800
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2018 3:16 pm
Been Liked: 484 times
Has Liked: 647 times

Re: VAR

Post by Aclaret » Sat Feb 22, 2020 9:02 pm

If the ref or the linesman couldn't see the big decisions we are in trouble

tim_noone
Posts: 14847
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2017 8:12 pm
Been Liked: 3822 times
Has Liked: 13207 times

Re: VAR

Post by tim_noone » Sat Feb 22, 2020 9:05 pm

It's been good For Burnley... I'll take it.

quoonbeatz
Posts: 2858
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:03 am
Been Liked: 1598 times
Has Liked: 596 times

Re: VAR

Post by quoonbeatz » Sat Feb 22, 2020 9:54 pm

Rileybobs wrote:
Sat Feb 22, 2020 7:22 pm
The second disallowed goal was 100% the correct decision. I don’t even know how anyone can contest this although I’ve heard both Keown and Sutton do just that.
Keown contested it despite saying he hadn't seen it, the massive tube.

quoonbeatz
Posts: 2858
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:03 am
Been Liked: 1598 times
Has Liked: 596 times

Re: VAR

Post by quoonbeatz » Sat Feb 22, 2020 9:55 pm

VAR was spot on today, it's the handball law that is a mess.
This user liked this post: dsr

nil_desperandum
Posts: 6147
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 5:06 pm
Been Liked: 1479 times
Has Liked: 2889 times

Re: VAR

Post by nil_desperandum » Sat Feb 22, 2020 10:06 pm

As I understand the handball rule this season if the ball hits the hand or arm - intentional or not - and it leads to a goal then the goal has to be ruled out and a free-kick given where the incident took place. So as I see it Mike Dean might not have adjudged it to be deliberate handball and didn't give a penalty, and had the ball then gone out of play VAR might have stuck with Dean's decision,(no penalty) but since the handball led directly to a goal then once the VAR check confirmed that it was handball then there was no option but to bring play back to where the infringement took place. On this occasion - unfortunately for Bournemouth it was in their own box, but there was no decision for VAR to make: it was a handball and it led to them scoring a goal The VAR ref didn't have any discretion in the matter.

tim_noone
Posts: 14847
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2017 8:12 pm
Been Liked: 3822 times
Has Liked: 13207 times

Re: VAR

Post by tim_noone » Sat Feb 22, 2020 10:08 pm

Pre Var Burnley got diddley squat ....nothing went our way and under dyche we always played honestly and got Nothing! Again were above the biggest cheats Arsenal. UTC!

cricketfieldclarets
Posts: 19440
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:59 pm
Been Liked: 7619 times
Has Liked: 10444 times

Re: VAR

Post by cricketfieldclarets » Sat Feb 22, 2020 10:13 pm

nil_desperandum wrote:
Sat Feb 22, 2020 10:06 pm
As I understand the handball rule this season if the ball hits the hand or arm - intentional or not - and it leads to a goal then the goal has to be ruled out and a free-kick given where the incident took place. So as I see it Mike Dean might not have adjudged it to be deliberate handball and didn't give a penalty, and had the ball then gone out of play VAR might have stuck with Dean's decision,(no penalty) but since the handball led directly to a goal then once the VAR check confirmed that it was handball then there was no option but to bring play back to where the infringement took place. On this occasion - unfortunately for Bournemouth it was in their own box, but there was no decision for VAR to make: it was a handball and it led to them scoring a goal The VAR ref didn't have any discretion in the matter.
So in essence they’d have been better off missing than scoring?
This user liked this post: nil_desperandum

Gordaleman
Posts: 2729
Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2020 3:04 pm
Been Liked: 535 times
Has Liked: 434 times

Re: VAR

Post by Gordaleman » Sat Feb 22, 2020 10:19 pm

You think that VAR was crazy at Turf Moor? Watch Garth Crooks tear Michael Oliver apart over the Chelsea Spurs incident.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/av/football/51599582

Claret
Posts: 586
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:57 pm
Been Liked: 217 times
Has Liked: 322 times

Re: VAR

Post by Claret » Sat Feb 22, 2020 10:19 pm

nil_desperandum wrote:
Sat Feb 22, 2020 10:06 pm
As I understand the handball rule this season if the ball hits the hand or arm - intentional or not - and it leads to a goal then the goal has to be ruled out and a free-kick given where the incident took place. So as I see it Mike Dean might not have adjudged it to be deliberate handball and didn't give a penalty, and had the ball then gone out of play VAR might have stuck with Dean's decision,(no penalty) but since the handball led directly to a goal then once the VAR check confirmed that it was handball then there was no option but to bring play back to where the infringement took place. On this occasion - unfortunately for Bournemouth it was in their own box, but there was no decision for VAR to make: it was a handball and it led to them scoring a goal The VAR ref didn't have any discretion in the matter.
It’s stretching it a bit to say that that hand ball led to the goal.

wilks_bfc
Posts: 6227
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:33 pm
Been Liked: 1827 times
Has Liked: 930 times
Contact:

Re: VAR

Post by wilks_bfc » Sat Feb 22, 2020 10:30 pm

Claret wrote:
Sat Feb 22, 2020 10:19 pm
It’s stretching it a bit to say that that hand ball led to the goal.
How is it a stretch?

The handball kept the ball in play/prevented it from Jeff reaching it with 4 passes & 15seconds later it was in the back of our net

Claret
Posts: 586
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:57 pm
Been Liked: 217 times
Has Liked: 322 times

Re: VAR

Post by Claret » Sat Feb 22, 2020 10:54 pm

When they introduced this new law about accidental hand ball being classed as an offence if it leads to a goal I’m sure they just had in mind the situation where an attacker handles it immediately before the goal, not in his own flamin’ penalty area! That’s just ridiculous and leads to farcical situations
This user liked this post: cricketfieldclarets

paulatky
Posts: 1220
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2016 10:25 am
Been Liked: 189 times
Has Liked: 613 times

Re: VAR

Post by paulatky » Sun Feb 23, 2020 12:18 am

FCBurnley wrote:
Sat Feb 22, 2020 6:07 pm
Thought hand ball in first was deliberate by Cook and a sure pen as was the Smith handball in second. However I thought Kings goal should have counted. No way it was deliberate handball by Billing.
New rule it doesnt have to be deliberate.
If it touches hand/arm of any attacker in the buildup to a goal its dissallowed

Post Reply