**** VAR

[Rileybobs]

The contention is surely that the very point at which the ball leaves the passer’s foot cannot be accurately captured by camera freeze frame. So in the Foster offside decision where the margin is in millimetres, how can we be certain that the freeze frame image we’ve been shown of a small amount of his shirt being past the last defender’s fractional amount of shirt correlates with the exact moment the ball left the passer’s foot?

Yes I agree. But that situation is not unique to the Foster offside decision. We know about the inaccuracies of the system, but people are saying that the graphic is contentious, when it really isn’t - it shows Foster in an offside position by the laws of the game. And in any case, the assistant ref flagged for offside so this goal would have been chalked out regardless of VAR.

[burnleymik]

In consideration to the offsides, if they have to draw lines, then instantly it's not clear and obvious and so should just re-iterate that straight to the referee and run with whatever the on-field decision was.

[RVclaret]

Yes I agree. But that situation is not unique to the Foster offside decision. We know about the inaccuracies of the system, but people are saying that the graphic is contentious, when it really isn’t - it shows Foster in an offside position by the laws of the game. And in any case, the assistant ref flagged for offside so this goal would have been chalked out regardless of VAR.

My question in this thread on the image was regarding why any part of the defenders shirt appears in colour, and not greyed out. My understanding was this technology would grey out the entire part of the ‘last possible onside line’. So I was wondering why it cuts through that sleeve of the defender, in the image.

[Steve-Harpers-perm]

Let’s not forget with VAR you’ve got the officials watching from a screen a few hundred miles away who feel the need to be part of the ‘show’ every week. Keep their names in the press.

[agreenwood]

On the offside yesterday there is a different graphic now realised which clarifies this a little.

Sorry, there’s a different graphic for the offside?

Aren’t they meant to release the graphic that led them to their decision? What’s this latest graphic then?

I’m not sure issuing new graphics hours after the decision is going to quieten down accusations that the system doesn’t work!

[Rileybobs]

My question in this thread on the image was regarding why any part of the defenders shirt appears in colour, and not greyed out. My understanding was this technology would grey out the entire part of the ‘last possible onside line’. So I was wondering why it cuts through that sleeve of the defender, in the image.

I’m not sure what the graphics are usually supposed to show - I’ve probably only seen a handful since the semi automated system was introduced.

But the graphic shows the offside line at the part of Foster’s body with which he could score a goal (in this case the shoulder), and demonstrates that this is forward of the part of the defender’s body with which he could score.

If the offside line is usually shown on the furthest part of the defenders body then I can understand the confusion and also lack of faith in the system. But it still shows Foster to be offside - so the decision isn’t contentious.

[claretspice]

Foster's offside is extremely tight and you can debate how VAR assesses that, but it was given offside on the field, it's offside by the automated system now in use so thems the breaks. Given we equalised subsequently I'm not sure it's that material to the outcome (you can't say had Foster's goal stood we'd have then gone 3-2 via Anthony because that's not how time works).

The penalty at the end is, presuming they are satisfied it continues into the box, a penalty. It's a clear and full blooded shirt pull. The ref has already overturned a first half penalty call because VAR spots shirt pulling on Walker so from then on you've got to be so careful. Perhaps it wouldn't be given at the other end, perhaps Diallo is theatrical but that was ever thus and it's nothing to do with VAR. You just have to avoid taking the risk that might go against you if possible - and Anthony took the risk and got burnt.

As fir United's opener, no it's not a free kick but these things happen and if we don't start defending set pieces better we'll be relegated by Easter. You can't allow Dan Ballard the free header last week or Casimero an even more danger one this week. You just can't.

[burnmark]

My two penn’orth and I realise I make some of the same points as other posters:

Just watched MOTD

1. Correct to overturn pen. Mount leans into Walker and tries to look like he’s fouled. He did the same at Fulham last week

2. Correct decision for the penalty appeal a few minutes later. Hartman wins the ball

3. Free kick that leads to the goal. Walker wins the ball. Very forceful but wins the ball

4. Offside. Still can’t weigh it up. If going off that picture they are saying the bottom of the sleeve is offside then it means that part of the arm can score a goal. That’s not football. It also makes a mockery of disallowing the goal at Forest the other year for when the ball hit Berge on the arm in the buildup

4. Penalty. Anthony makes them have to make a decision. It doesn’t get given at the other end though. No way. How does a shirt pull make you fall forward? He was looking for pens all day including five minutes earlier when he fell to the ground when Hartman was defending the ball across the goal from a cross.

[Hibsclaret]

the assistant ref flagged for offside so this goal would have been chalked out regardless of VAR.

It would but he was clearly guessing (as it was so marginal he should be keeping his flag down) as was the ref when he gave the first half penalty and when he gave the free kick for the first goal. The lino gave another dodgy offside when we were on top to curtail a second half attack and impact momentum.

When you’re at Old Trafford the officials are told to guess in favour of United at every opportunity so that on the odd occasion they fail to guess in favour of United VAR can provide the backstop for the home decision as they did in the last minute.

With no VAR United get a penalty in the first half that is not even a foul or in the box so scrapping VAR wouldn’t have helped yesterday as we would likely have been 2 down at half time. The problem is as it has always been, poor officials favouring the bigger sides at every opportunity. Further examples yesterday at Stamford Bridge.

I was watching yesterday expecting the last minute issue and to me it’s not far removed from some of the Italian corruption. You are feeling cheated basically as you watch the game and it’s like boxing with a hand tied behind your back.

[Rileybobs]

My two penn’orth and I realise I make some of the same points as other posters:

Just watched MOTD

1. Correct to overturn pen. Mount leans into Walker and tries to look like he’s fouled. He did the same at Fulham last week

2. Correct decision for the penalty appeal a few minutes later. Hartman wins the ball

3. Free kick that leads to the goal. Walker wins the ball. Very forceful but wins the ball

4. Offside. Still can’t weigh it up. If going off that picture they are saying the bottom of the sleeve is offside then it means that part of the arm can score a goal. That’s not football. It also makes a mockery of disallowing the goal at Forest the other year for when the ball hit Berge on the arm in the buildup

4. Penalty. Anthony makes them have to make a decision. It doesn’t get given at the other end though. No way. How does a shirt pull make you fall forward? He was looking for pens all day including five minutes earlier when he fell to the ground when Hartman was defending the ball across the goal from a cross.

4.) the offside line is drawn on line with Foster’s shoulder.

[Rileybobs]

It would but he was clearly guessing (as it was so marginal he should be keeping his flag down) as was the ref when he gave the first half penalty and when he gave the free kick for the first goal. The lino gave another dodgy offside when we were on top to curtail a second half attack and impact momentum.

That’s not correct. The AR thought Foster was offside, kept his flag down until Foster finished the chance, and then flagged. He did everything by the book and got an extremely marginal call correct.

The rest of your points about bias I find hard to disagree with. I can’t for one minute believe the shirt pull would even have raised more than a cursory glance from the VAR had it been Anthony attacking in their box.

[burnmark]

4.) the offside line is drawn on line with Foster’s shoulder.

Why is his shoulder ‘greyed’ out still?

[Hibsclaret]

Fair enough if he kept the flag down until he’d finished. I stick by it was still a guess though based on the other one he guessed on when someone was at least a yard on which stopped one of our attacks.

[RVclaret]

The way the image is generated is by drawing a line at the ‘last possible onside position of the defender’, then in colour, the offside component of the attacker. It’s not really that difficult a concept. Here is a clearer example. My question still remains, there is a triangle of the United defenders shirt sleeve in colour, like Foster’s, why isn’t that greyed out?

[PremierLeagueClass]

The way the image is generated is by drawing a line at the ‘last possible onside position of the defender’, then in colour, the offside component of the attacker. It’s not really that difficult a concept. Here is a clearer example. My question still remains, there is a triangle of the United defenders shirt sleeve in colour, like Foster’s, why isn’t that greyed out?

It can’t be long before this incident starts to get more coverage in the media. Something doesn’t add up here.

[Roosterbooster]

daylight is an absolute. you can either see it or you can't.

but i'll settle for clear daylight.

Offside is an absolute too
It's just not that easy to measure objectively

So how do you definitively say there is daylight or not?
You'd need the camera angle to be at exactly the right place at the right time

[Tall Paul]

It would but he was clearly guessing (as it was so marginal he should be keeping his flag down) as was the ref when he gave the first half penalty and when he gave the free kick for the first goal. The lino gave another dodgy offside when we were on top to curtail a second half attack and impact momentum.

When you’re at Old Trafford the officials are told to guess in favour of United at every opportunity so that on the odd occasion they fail to guess in favour of United VAR can provide the backstop for the home decision as they did in the last minute.

With no VAR United get a penalty in the first half that is not even a foul or in the box so scrapping VAR wouldn’t have helped yesterday as we would likely have been 2 down at half time. The problem is as it has always been, poor officials favouring the bigger sides at every opportunity. Further examples yesterday at Stamford Bridge.

I was watching yesterday expecting the last minute issue and to me it’s not far removed from some of the Italian corruption. You are feeling cheated basically as you watch the game and it’s like boxing with a hand tied behind your back.

It takes some pretty spectacular mental gymnastics to argue that the officials were biased towards Man Utd yesterday using decisions that went both for and against them.

The overturned penalty in the first half blows any suggestion of bias out of the water as it could easily have been given. I notice Parker never mentioned re-refereeing that decision in his post match interview.

[wilks_bfc]

In consideration to the offsides, if they have to draw lines, then instantly it's not clear and obvious and so should just re-iterate that straight to the referee and run with whatever the on-field decision was.

The clear & obvious guide doesn’t apply to offsides though

[CrosspoolClarets]

A newspaper, maybe The Times, had said that Anthony released the shirt before his hand got into the box, but due to the stretched shirt the player was being fouled while HE was in the box (obviously that cannot happen with a tackle). I assume that is why the review took so long.

Whether that should have been a penalty is debatable, but it should be the ref’s call and lino’s call (the lino was right in front of me, I was in a plumb location, and so was the lino).

No way was that a “clear and obvious error”. It was Attwell wanting to get involved as usual, it cost us 2 years ago, and has again. It is re-reffing the game in micro incidents that mean match going fans have their day ruined as they are in the dark and don’t know whether to celebrate.

After this, that’s my last away game. Simply isn't worth it. It’s killing the game (as are the antics when players look for VAR decisions). My younger family members didn’t have a clue what was going on.

[Procrastinate B]

I think we all felt ‘cheated’ in the immediate aftermath, but in retrospect the penalty that was overturned and the one given were both the right decisions.

It felt unfair given how we clawed our way back into the game on two occasions, but VAR, flawed as it is, got the decisions right.

The offside? By millimetres by the look of it, but the graphic just doesn’t/can’t show that clearly.

We’re complaining about the free-kick that wasn’t, but can’t have it all ways.

[wilks_bfc]

Offside is an absolute too
It's just not that easy to measure objectively

So how do you definitively say there is daylight or not?
You'd need the camera angle to be at exactly the right place at the right time

Simplest way to say is if any part of the attacking player is in line with the defending player, then he’s onside

So if the attackers back foot is in line with the defending front foot then onside

[ashtonlongsider]

I could see SP was deep in though behind the players when they came over at full time. He was clearly frustrated and I would think trying to gather his thoughts and his impeccable composure. At his post match presser he spoke with such eloquence to describe modern football. He was absolutely bang on about it being sterile. Its like everything in life, this AI affecting everything, theres just no spontaneity left. Unless theres some common sense brought into VAR, football is doomed i'm sorry to say.

[quoonbeatz]

On me jollies so only seen the MOTD highlights this morning on my phone:

1st pen isn’t a foul anyway, right decision to overturn it.

Foster’s 2nd goal looked offside in real time and offside on the freeze frame. It looks like the player at the bottom of the screen is the nearest defender to playing him on so that probably why it looks wrong on the cartoon image.

Their first goal is never a free kick, more should have been made of that.

The winning pen looks like Anthony grabs the shirt and their player dives forward into the box, which is obviously ********. The fact it apparently took 4 minutes to come up with it shows it wasn’t clear and obvious.

Either way, var is a scourge, good to see more people finally waking up to that fact.

And the Fulham one just shows how referees have zero understanding of the game they referee - that is the biggest problem of all, never mind var.

[CrosspoolClarets]

I think we all felt ‘cheated’ in the immediate aftermath, but in retrospect the penalty that was overturned and the one given were both the right decisions.

It felt unfair given how we clawed our way back into the game on two occasions, but VAR, flawed as it is, got the decisions right.

The offside? By millimetres by the look of it, but the graphic just doesn’t/can’t show that clearly.

We’re complaining about the free-kick that wasn’t, but can’t have it all ways.

But VAR wasn’t right was it? It may have been a legit pen on the field, as I say above with that weird hand outside player inside thing, but for VAR it has to be clear and obvious, and wasn’t. So it wasn’t the right decision and ruined a fair draw.

After all, Man Utd put in 1 non penalty goal yesterday, Burnley put in 3 (I remain convinced Foster was onside in that lines are meant to be thicker nowadays). They had huge luck with the OG (twice, including the free kick). So for me a draw was fair and VAR ruined it by getting involved beyond it’s remit.

[Roosterbooster]

Simplest way to say is if any part of the attacking player is in line with the defending player, then he’s onside

So if the attackers back foot is in line with the defending front foot then onside

But this just swaps one problem for another. You then sometimes have to mark the back of one player. And the front of another. Some points might be very close. So you might have to mark the ankle, head, shoulder, elbow....

Also this rule puts such a disadvantage on the defender. As a striker you just need to be touching the defender amd can keep goal side. The defender would just have to keep dropping. Then the rule becomes pointless

[ClaretLoup]

Re the stoppage time penalty: no doubt that Anthony fouls Amad, however the latter is nowhere near the ball. Even Usain Bolt wouldn't have got there, so it's a misjudgement on Anthony's part, but maybe his mind flashed back to the Spurs match when he was flattened in the box but the Spurs challenge was deemed to be legal.

I'm surprised and a bit disappointed that Parker didn't raise this point post match. I hope the club will raise this parallel with the refereeing authorities and seek clarification and at least an apology for one of the incidents.

If VAR is going to give a free kick or penalty every time there is shirt pulling or pushing in the box by players outside playing distance of the ball, if you look hard enough, then there will be a free kick or penalty at virtually every corner kick.

[Tall Paul]

A newspaper, maybe The Times, had said that Anthony released the shirt before his hand got into the box, but due to the stretched shirt the player was being fouled while HE was in the box (obviously that cannot happen with a tackle). I assume that is why the review took so long.

Whether that should have been a penalty is debatable, but it should be the ref’s call and lino’s call (the lino was right in front of me, I was in a plumb location, and so was the lino).

No way was that a “clear and obvious error”. It was Attwell wanting to get involved as usual, it cost us 2 years ago, and has again. It is re-reffing the game in micro incidents that mean match going fans have their day ruined as they are in the dark and don’t know whether to celebrate.

After this, that’s my last away game. Simply isn't worth it. It’s killing the game (as are the antics when players look for VAR decisions). My younger family members didn’t have a clue what was going on.

Does the same argument apply to the penalty overturned in the first half or was re-reffing that one fine?

[Firthy]

When you compare last season to this it's fairly obvious that VAR is ruining the game. There were wrong decisions last season and people accepted them far more readily and moved on with the attitude that some go for you and some go against you. The game was more fluent and and a mor enjoyable experience overall.

The major difference is that supporters can accept mistakes and wrong decisions made in real time. There is no excuse for wrong decisions with VAR and the time it takes is ridiculous. If a VAR decision takes 4-7 minutes then it isn't clear and obvious so shouldn't alter the onfield decision. This is where the problem lies, overturning decisions that are't clear and obvious and nearly always in favour of the bigger clubs.

Even worse is the discussions afterwards which go into the minutest detail. The game is becoming more about VAR than the football being played.

[Foulthrow]

Yes I agree. But that situation is not unique to the Foster offside decision. We know about the inaccuracies of the system, but people are saying that the graphic is contentious, when it really isn’t - it shows Foster in an offside position by the laws of the game. And in any case, the assistant ref flagged for offside so this goal would have been chalked out regardless of VAR.

We don’t know what the liner would have given without VAR. He gives the easy decision knowing should he be wrong that VAR will correct it.

[KlyBfc]

As much as i want to be outraged and feel we were cheated to vindicate my disappointment, unfortunately they got the decisions right yesterday. We can’t claim clear and obvious on the last one and yet the first one be over turned imo.

The first one wasnt a pen - correct decision to overturn
Foster is just offside (though the graphic doesn’t help)
Athony has a ‘sustained’ pull on the shirt of Amad which continues when Amad gets into the box - it’s a pen,a little soft perhaps but a pen.

What doesn’t help is that ala spurs we know its very very unlikely that we get it the other way round (thats the kick in teeth). We know with or without VAR we will always be on the wrong side of the contentious decisions against the more favoured clubs.

I put on another thread how much i despise VAR and how its ruining my love of football.

[claret wizard]

After this, that’s my last away game. Simply isn't worth it. It’s killing the game (as are the antics when players look for VAR decisions). My younger family members didn’t have a clue what was going on.

You’re bang on with this Crosspool. I’ve over 2800 loyalty points so go away a lot. This will be my last trip for a while. I didn’t celebrate our equaliser yesterday. I’d no idea if it would count. If it’s not enjoyable anymore then why spend all the money. Most of our games are on TV, so at least you’ll have an idea about what is going on.


As for the decisions yesterday, the penalty should never have been overturned as it doesn’t fit the vague description of clear and obvious error. Which is very obviously the case due to the amount of debate around it. The officials aren’t cheats, but they do have a bias, and we see it every time we play a “established premier league team”. The non penalty at Spurs vs the given one yesterday showing the different way VAR look at the incidents.


I’d like to say my actions will make it easier to get an away ticket, but that will happening anyway after yesterday.

[agreenwood]

I agree with Parker in that we’re no longer looking to favour goals being scored.

We’ve got a system now designed to find reasons (however small and fractional) to deny goals.

If the rules that denied Foster and Fulham yesterday were correctly applied, then in my opinion the rules need reviewing.

[Ilkley claret]

It can’t be long before this incident starts to get more coverage in the media. Something doesn’t add up here.

I genuinely believe that have mistakenly ruled the Utd player as being in the offside position thinking he’s the attacker and Foster is the defender

[Conroy92]

Along with the other nonsense, a goal is scored off a free kick that should not have been a free kick. Why is that incorrect decision not reviewed considering it's resulted in a goal and less than 30seconds prior?

[Conroy92]

I genuinely believe that have mistakenly ruled the Utd player as being in the offside position thinking he’s the attacker and Foster is the defender

How it looks to me too.

[Deathtrip]

The game has gone for me VAR has killed all the passion if it carries on people will stop going,there really is no point to it when you are getting robbed week in week out,we actually beat them yesterday but was cheated out of a result by a couple of morons who have probably never kicked a football in their life.

[Tall Paul]

I agree with Parker in that we’re no longer looking to favour goals being scored.

We’ve got a system now designed to find reasons (however small and fractional) to deny goals.

If the rules that denied Foster and Fulham yesterday were correctly applied, then in my opinion the rules need reviewing.

Yet since VAR was introduced in 2019/20 the total number of goals scored per season in the PL has increased.

[Woonderbah]

I agree with Parker in that we’re no longer looking to favour goals being scored.

We’ve got a system now designed to find reasons (however small and fractional) to deny goals.

If the rules that denied Foster and Fulham yesterday were correctly applied, then in my opinion the rules need reviewing.

I agree but it depends who's scoring the goal.
If Fulham's disallowed goal had been scored by Man City or similar then VAR doesn't go back that far in play looking for an excuse to rule it out.
The Foster offside is genuinely baffling as there has been no explanation or even pundit opinion of exactly how Foster was deemed offside. All we've seen is a confusing graphic.
What will it take to change things ?
Maybe a manager ordering his players off the pitch in protest after such a poor VAR decision ?
It's killing the game.

[Big Vinny K]

Does the same argument apply to the penalty overturned in the first half or was re-reffing that one fine?

The difference between the 2 is that for the first one he thought it was a penalty from his angle because he could not see that Mount was actually fouling Walker whereas on the second one he had a perfectly good view and decided that it did not warrant a foul.

I do not believe for one second that he changed his mind on the second one because he went to watch it again. The only reason he changed his mind was because someone 200 miles away told him to do so. The culture of VAR in this country now is that referees are scared to make their own decision about this as the potential fall out afterwards means it could cost them their reputation and job.

[Ric_C]

What I'll never understand is why the line isn't drawn from any part of the last defender?

Let's say a striker is onto a through ball, the defender can take him out with any part of his body, even pull him back and get a yellow card (or red). They can even save a goal with their hands (and give away a pen).

So how is it fair that when a striker can't use their hands at all, the line is drawn to the exact same rule of just above the sleeve for both players?

The whole reason offside was brought in was to stop forwards getting an unfair advantage wasn't it?

[Rileybobs]

Why is his shoulder ‘greyed’ out still?

Because the rest of his shoulder is behind the line that has been drawn on the furthest forward part of his shoulder.

[Foulthrow]

Couple of easy improvements that could be made for me would be:-

1, only give penalties for denying a genuine goal scoring opportunity. Everything else is an indirect free kick from where the offence took place. This would stop so many games being determined by disputed penalties and the added bonus of the chaos of a free kick in the penalty area.
2, give each team two or three unsuccessful appeals per match. The game continues based on the on field decision unless one side makes an appeal. This goes to VAR who don’t know the original decision.

[daveisaclaret]

VAR has made the game a lot worse. It would be a big positive if it could be run sensibly but our referees have made it clear for many years they're not capable of or willing to do so. They should get rid of it as it would make the game better.

[Culmclaret]

Some very balanced and fair minded comments on here. I accept the offside was the correct decision in that the goal was disallowed in real time and that was ‘probably’ the right decision. The penalty was not the right decision. VAR should only get involved when there is a clear and obvious error. I haven’t seen anywhere an explanation of the burden of proof but imagine that this is more towards ‘beyond reasonable doubt’ rather than ‘balance of probability’. There clearly is doubt in the case of the penalty even if you thought that on the balance of probability it might have been. As so many have said, for Burnley Bournemouth, Wolves etc the ref’s on-field decision would have stood. Everybody knows that too

[Tall Paul]

The difference between the 2 is that for the first one he thought it was a penalty from his angle because he could not see that Mount was actually fouling Walker whereas on the second one he had a perfectly good view and decided that it did not warrant a foul.

I do not believe for one second that he changed his mind on the second one because he went to watch it again. The only reason he changed his mind was because someone 200 miles away told him to do so. The culture of VAR in this country now is that referees are scared to make their own decision about this as the potential fall out afterwards means it could cost them their reputation and job.

Give over.

[Tall Paul]

Some very balanced and fair minded comments on here. I accept the offside was the correct decision in that the goal was disallowed in real time and that was ‘probably’ the right decision. The penalty was not the right decision. VAR should only get involved when there is a clear and obvious error. I haven’t seen anywhere an explanation of the burden of proof but imagine that this is more towards ‘beyond reasonable doubt’ rather than ‘balance of probability’. There clearly is doubt in the case of the penalty even if you thought that on the balance of probability it might have been. As so many have said, for Burnley Bournemouth, Wolves etc the ref’s on-field decision would have stood. Everybody knows that too

And the penalty in the first half?

[Culmclaret]

And the penalty in the first half?

The camera angle was much clearer

[aggi]

The contention is surely that the very point at which the ball leaves the passer’s foot cannot be accurately captured by camera freeze frame. So in the Foster offside decision where the margin is in millimetres, how can we be certain that the freeze frame image we’ve been shown of a small amount of his shirt being past the last defender’s fractional amount of shirt correlates with the exact moment the ball left the passer’s foot?

It isn't captured by the camera now, there's a sensor in the ball that measures 500 times a second

[Big Vinny K]

Give over.

Give over what ?

You think if he would have seen Mount pulling Walker before Walker leant on him he would have still given the penalty ?

Or do you seriously think that referees are not scared of the repercussions of turning over a VAR recommendation ? Because if they weren’t I think given how many bad VAR decisions there has been there would have been a lot decisions where the referee would have gone against VAR instead of the odd one we get every year.

Look at that one for Fulham yesterday - it was beyond shocking. You’re not telling me any referee thinks that that is a foul ? If they did they would be blowing their whistle for these during a game….and 99 times out of a 100 they are not giving free kicks for these types of incidents so what the hell is VAR seeing ?

[Row Z]

Sorry, there’s a different graphic for the offside?

Aren’t they meant to release the graphic that led them to their decision? What’s this latest graphic then?

I’m not sure issuing new graphics hours after the decision is going to quieten down accusations that the system doesn’t work!

Yes - as daft as that is… and no doubt would be ruled out for handball if he actually scored with the part of the arm that they are claiming was offside.