VAR finally getting it right?

[1968claret]

Two penalties overturned today, where the attacker has fallen over as if shot, following the slightest of contacts.
Hopefully will continue in this vein. Football is not supposed to be a non contact sport!

[Grumps]

Anywhere else on the pitch the arsenal one would be a foul.

[Marney&Mee]

Didn’t understand the Maddison goal standing yday. Ridiculous rule as it is, wasn’t the Leicester players arm offside?

[DCWat]

Arms can’t be offside.

[LeadBelly]

Didn’t understand the Maddison goal standing yday. Ridiculous rule as it is, wasn’t the Leicester players arm offside?

They only count bits of the body with which the ball can be legally played- hence arms don't count.

[huw.Y.WattfromWare]

Didn’t understand the Maddison goal standing yday. Ridiculous rule as it is, wasn’t the Leicester players arm offside?

You can only be off side with a part of the body you can score with so no. I hate this lines on the pitch measuring though. If you can’t tell from a picture it should be onside.

[Devils_Advocate]

You can only be off side with a part of the body you can score with so no.

This rule would have been well unfair for Maradona if he was still playing

[houseboy]

Question: regardless of VAR decisions being right or wrong do we really want or need goal celebrations muted until the proverbial slide rule has been used, by which time the moment has passed. We should go back to allowing for refereeing errors rather than all this clinical measuring of little toes being a millimetre on or offside. Even with VAR mistakes are still made but the time is still wasted. And it hasn’t stopped most of the face clutching, swan diving cheats from continuing in the same way.

[Taffy on the wing]

Anywhere else on the pitch the arsenal one would be a foul.

I thought Saka should have been booked for a dive. The goalie one looked really soft too!

[RammyClaret61]

VAR didn’t do to well at Man City. That was never a penalty in a million years. Should’ve been a free kick to Spurs.

[Claretforever]

So it’s finally getting some decisions correct*, which is what it should have been doing from the beginning?

*Maguire’s goal should have been disallowed for offside from the angle it showed, rather than him diving. I don’t think the Wolves penalty should have been given either.

I don’t like it and think we’d be better off without it. Not in the literal points to our team way perhaps, but more the enjoyment of the game.

[houseboy]

I think it is due to everything now having to be ‘clinical’ and precise. Not just in football. Everyone now is so afraid of making a mistake for fear of being sued or hung out to dry on social media. Whatever happened to people accepting human error? VAR should be consigned to the same bin as the Sinclair C5.

[Ric_C]

Arms can’t be offside.

Yeah but by that rationale, you can wave "offside position" hands right in front of the goalkeeper blocking his view. Another example of the offside law being too complicated.

Personally I thought the Leicester goal was offside as a fair amount of the attackers bodies were obstructing the goalkeeper from an offside position. But I get we have to draw the line somewhere (no pun intended)

[vinrogue]

The best part of VAR is that no longer can the wind from the Cricket Field blow players over for a penalty against us. We at least have a sporting chance of a kick by an attacker at our keeper being judged as contact from our keeper on the innocent City player being overturned to our free kick and not a penalty..... I may be grumpy today.....

[huw.Y.WattfromWare]

Have Southampton won a game since Hassenhuttl complained about Mason? I don’t think so and then they get decisions like this. I actually think the first is a pen, I know a lot don’t, but for me he has tucked in his right hand to his body but has his left hand out and it stops a ball into the danger area. For the second one not to be given after that one was is just outrageous.

5F589F1F-D7A2-42E9-BE7A-39F6C1F0B861.jpeg (393.26 KiB) Viewed 2329 times

CA716A39-22C8-4795-BC05-E452EFC0C485.jpeg (693.01 KiB) Viewed 2329 times

[JohnMac]

VAR was introduced to do away with the controversy surrounding what were deemed to be incorrect decisions. Now it has become controversial because correct decisions (within the laws of the game) are deemed to be incorrect

[claretgimmer]

Scrap it

[Goddy]

VAR was introduced to do away with the controversy surrounding what were deemed to be incorrect decisions.

...and it's the limited nature of this, too, which does my head in. For example, in the Everton/Fulham game, one of the Fulham players clearly dived which the commentators (Steve McManaman in particular, wetting himself about it) pointed out immediately. Why can't VAR be used for such obviously 'incorrect decisions'? In this case, it would have been easy to book the diving Fulham player, and award a free kick to Everton......just seems mad to me but wtfdik.

[JohnMac]

...and it's the limited nature of this, too, which does my head in. For example, in the Everton/Fulham game, one of the Fulham players clearly dived which the commentators (Steve McManaman in particular, wetting himself about it) pointed out immediately. Why can't VAR be used for such obviously 'incorrect decisions'? In this case, it would have been easy to book the diving Fulham player, and award a free kick to Everton......just seems mad to me but wtfdik.

Agree entirely. We are the only League that has lines superimposed for offside as justification, I've read others just accept the decision of the Officials. Cheating, diving, no retrospective Yellow cards, it's just a mish mash of made up rubbish.

[dsr]

...and it's the limited nature of this, too, which does my head in. For example, in the Everton/Fulham game, one of the Fulham players clearly dived which the commentators (Steve McManaman in particular, wetting himself about it) pointed out immediately. Why can't VAR be used for such obviously 'incorrect decisions'? In this case, it would have been easy to book the diving Fulham player, and award a free kick to Everton......just seems mad to me but wtfdik.

It's not a VAR problem, it's a refereeing problem. Refs nowadays are taught to give free kicks and penalties when a player falls over and asks for it, unless they are certain that there was no contact. If they don't know whether it's a foul or not, they give it. (Because it's clear that the ref didn't see anyone touch that Fulham man, and it's clear that the ref didn't see Maguire get fouled, they just had a guess based on the man falling over.) If refs went back to giving what they can see not what they assume, or at least if they stopped assuming that a player who falls over has been fouled, then it might stop the ridiculous amount of diving that the FA appears to want to encourage.

[ClaretTony]

I still don't understand the West Brom v Man United one yesterday when the pen was given. I know it was reversed but why on earth did they not check the offside in the first place?

VAR, I'm in a meeting tomorrow on that very subject with Mike Riley there.

[Hedontplayforyou]

Maybe they should enhance the sound , especially in times with no crowds and listen to the extremity of the scream when they brush legs, it’s an absolute disgrace and an embarrassment- my partner gave birth a few days ago and she didn’t make as much noise as some of these clowns -embarrassing!

Similar to the screaming thread I know but VAR should be used extensively to combat cheating wether it be in game or as a dressing down afterwards

[Ashingtonclaret46]

I still don't understand the West Brom v Man United one yesterday when the pen was given. I know it was reversed but why on earth did they not check the offside in the first place?

VAR, I'm in a meeting tomorrow on that very subject with Mike Riley there.

Mark Clattenburg said that the offside was not considered because he was not active when the ball was first played into the box and only became active when it was put back across to him and he was then onside. He also said that he considered that the contact was minimal and it was correct to reverse the decision.
I have given up totally on trying to figure out any decisions these days, I'm just so happy that I am no longer involved at any level because VAR is turning out to be a pain in the proverbial.

[ClaretTony]

Mark Clattenburg said that the offside was not considered because he was not active when the ball was first played into the box and only became active when it was put back across to him and he was then onside.

I'm further confused now because when the free kick was taken didn't it go straight to Maguire? I don't recall it being put back across to him.

[Bordeauxclaret]

There was only one cross and that was the free kick.

[ClaretTony]

Mark Clattenburg said that the offside was not considered because he was not active when the ball was first played into the box and only became active when it was put back across to him and he was then onside. He also said that he considered that the contact was minimal and it was correct to reverse the decision.
I have given up totally on trying to figure out any decisions these days, I'm just so happy that I am no longer involved at any level because VAR is turning out to be a pain in the proverbial.

Here you go - absolute truth that one referee got the pen call wrong, VAR missed the offside and Clattenburg doesn't have a clue what he's talking about.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mm-bJVlVR4c

[Ashingtonclaret46]

I misheard what I was told and he actually said ".....he's not deemed to be actively offside until he challenges his opponent for the ball. The ball is not within a playable distance when the foul occurs so it is not simply offside. ........."

[ClaretTony]

I misheard what I was told and he actually said ".....he's not deemed to be actively offside until he challenges his opponent for the ball. The ball is not within a playable distance when the foul occurs so it is not simply offside. ........."

So a free kick is played into the box towards a player who is clearly in an offside position but he's not deemed to be actively offside? These referees are making them up as they go along. VAR isn't the problem is it, it's the shocking quality of official who is operating it and then talking about it.

[Ashingtonclaret46]

So a free kick is played into the box towards a player who is clearly in an offside position but he's not deemed to be actively offside? These referees are making them up as they go along. VAR isn't the problem is it, it's the shocking quality of official who is operating it and then talking about it.

I didn't change the Laws of the Game or their interpretation, this was all brought about by the advent of VAR and I am not surprised at all in the confusion which reigns amongst PL officials, trainee officials, players, management and fans.
Harry Maguire reckons that Man Utd are being treated badly these days --short memories. He got away with a handball at the end of their game at the Turf.

[huw.Y.WattfromWare]

There are far to many grey areas that get the ref off the hook. Take them all out. Handball is handball, offside is offside, elbow to head is red card, stopping the taking of a FK is a yellow card, etc.,
Diving and clock management need a major look at also.

[Ashingtonclaret46]

This situation was put forward by a member of the referees' board to which I subscribe and it shows just how crazy the game is going:-

"Although in an offside position Harry Maguire had not, at the time of the contact with the defender, committed an offside offence as the Laws are currently framed. However absurd that may seem at first glance, imagine a scenario where, instead a contentious foul / no foul situation, a player who was in an offside position when the ball was played was struck violently by a defender's elbow when neither had got anywhere near the ball. Clearly it would be a red card. Everyone would expect the restart to be a penalty. It would be ludicrous to re-start with an indirect free-kick to the defending team just because the victim had been in an offside position."

[dsr]

There are far to many grey areas that get the ref off the hook. Take them all out. Handball is handball, offside is offside, elbow to head is red card, stopping the taking of a FK is a yellow card, etc.,
Diving and clock management need a major look at also.

I can't agree. Do you really want forwards aiming the ball at the defenders to get penalties, goals where the winger has crossed from the goal-line to be automatically disallowed, and a red card every time a player manages to head his opponent's arm?

[dsr]

This situation was put forward by a member of the referees' board to which I subscribe and it shows just how crazy the game is going:-

"Although in an offside position Harry Maguire had not, at the time of the contact with the defender, committed an offside offence as the Laws are currently framed. However absurd that may seem at first glance, imagine a scenario where, instead a contentious foul / no foul situation, a player who was in an offside position when the ball was played was struck violently by a defender's elbow when neither had got anywhere near the ball. Clearly it would be a red card. Everyone would expect the restart to be a penalty. It would be ludicrous to re-start with an indirect free-kick to the defending team just because the victim had been in an offside position."

Maybe they should change the law to something like "a player will only be given offside if he is interfering with play or attempting to gain an advantage". That makes it clear that Maguire would have been offside while your hypothetical elbow victim would not.

I believe it is Elleray who is chief proponent of the "I know more than everyone else in history" school of law amendments. Whoever it is, can he be sacked immediately, please?

[huw.Y.WattfromWare]

I can't agree. Do you really want forwards aiming the ball at the defenders to get penalties, goals where the winger has crossed from the goal-line to be automatically disallowed, and a red card every time a player manages to head his opponent's arm?

Not sure about your thinking on a winger crossing leading to an offside? But yes to the rest.
I’m firmly of the opinion that more dementia cases are caused by head to head and elbow to head collisions than by heading a bag of air. Head to heads are accidental most elbow to heads are not and please forget all that guff about needing your arms to jump, it is a myth. Watch anybody head a ball unchallenged and their arms are never to high. I think it started as a means of protection but has changed to being a free hit on an opponent.
I’d be surprised if players deliberately aimed for the handball, as they do at the feet in field hockey, they look a cock if they miss and an opportunity is wasted.

[dsr]

Not sure about your thinking on a winger crossing leading to an offside?

Remember Francis' winning goal against York in 1992? They came to York in their thousands and are going home as champions? If offside is offside regardless of whether you are interfering with play (I assume that's what you meant?) then that goal would be disallowed because Conroy was in an offside position when Francis put it in the net.

Our first and third goals against Palace would be disallowed - Rodriguez offside for the first, Barnes for the third. Both Chelsea's goals tonight would have been disallowed, one of them for the exact reason I quoted - that the winger got to the goal-line and hadn't time to get back onside before the man in the middle scored the goal.

[Bordeauxclaret]

Neither Conroy or Rodriguez would have been in an offside position.

[huw.Y.WattfromWare]

I’ve just re-watched Saturdays match and following my comment above about blows to the head it was noticeable that the players were keeping their arms down whilst challenging in the air. The only incident of note was when Ben Mee took an arm across his face in the build up to Matt’s goal and that wasn’t malicious. It’s got me wondering if a directive hasn’t already gone out telling them to keep them down.

[ClaretTony]

So a free kick is played into the box towards a player who is clearly in an offside position but he's not deemed to be actively offside? These referees are making them up as they go along. VAR isn't the problem is it, it's the shocking quality of official who is operating it and then talking about it.

Similar situation last night at West Ham with Craig Dawson. Ball played in, Dawson, like Maguire at West Brom, in an offside position but the ball wasn't played to Dawson as it was to Maguire. The Blades goalkeeper saves, Dawson scores and they then go back to the initial offside. That was, in my view, the correct decision. Not to give Maguire offside remains to me an utter nonsense.

[Ashingtonclaret46]

Similar situation last night at West Ham with Craig Dawson. Ball played in, Dawson, like Maguire at West Brom, in an offside position but the ball wasn't played to Dawson as it was to Maguire. The Blades goalkeeper saves, Dawson scores and they then go back to the initial offside. That was, in my view, the correct decision. Not to give Maguire offside remains to me an utter nonsense.

According to Dale Johnson, ESPN, PGMO have told him it would/should have been offside ---he has covered this on twitter amongst other stuff.
Does anybody really know what is going on?

The good thing is that, in all probability, David Elleray and his IFAB colleagues will be along shortly with numerous other changes/additions to TLOG and their interpretation and we can all bask in further confusion ---aided and abetted by officials trying to do their best and ex-officials/pundits always arguing their case.

[ClaretTony]

According to Dale Johnson, ESPN, PGMO have told him it would/should have been offside ---he has covered this on twitter amongst other stuff.
Does anybody really know what is going on?

The good thing is that, in all probability, David Elleray and his IFAB colleagues will be along shortly with numerous other changes/additions to TLOG and their interpretation and we can all bask in further confusion ---aided and abetted by officials trying to do their best and ex-officials/pundits always arguing their case.

I'll look forward to my meeting with Mike Riley tonight

[Bordeauxclaret]

As we are seeing here, it’s a constant case of those in charge of VAR making ridiculous decisions and then having the rest of them scramble around to try and defend them. Often tying themselves in knots in the process.