wait until you see the penalty Fulham were just given against Oldham - fortunately the keeper saved it

Just seen it, never a pen.

longsidepies wrote:Just seen it, never a pen.

It must have been if the referee and the VAR said it was -------musn't it? VAR is never wrong --if you believe the hype!

You're absolutely right Ashington. I can't believe my own eyes anymore. Excuse me whilst I poke them out with a spork

A good point made on MOD last night..VAR doesn't make the final decision a human does and therefore it's open to interpretation. . I still don't believe Vydra was offside and Vokes while technically offside was not interfering.

Marty Dobson wrote:A good point made on MOD last night..VAR doesn't make the final decision a human does and therefore it's open to interpretation..

That’s always been the case, bringing in ‘the technology’ really means adding a few more human opinions. Contentious decisions aren’t going to end, we’ll just have the debates during the game rather than afterwards.

Whether they’re right or wrong will be as much down to opinion as it was pre-VAR.

Marty Dobson wrote:A good point made on MOD last night..VAR doesn't make the final decision a human does and therefore it's open to interpretation. . I still don't believe Vydra was offside and Vokes while technically offside was not interfering.

That's what I don't understand...Vokes wasn't active and would not have been considered. Vydra? Well that must have been close... Very close... Laws of the game say any doubt favours the attacker.

So with VAR I think a lino may not flag when he would otherwise have done. What happens if he lets play go,the goalie makes a save and a goal he is scored from the corner....When replays show the player who took the shoot was offside?

Vydra wasn't offside but justice was done because he simply fell over

Vydra was just a few inches offside. But.some good points on other threads about whether VAR should have intervened on that specific point.

Vegas Claret wrote:Vydra wasn't offside but justice was done because he simply fell over

Ah yes, however, in the modern game ---He felt contact so he was entitled to go down ---again something else which is over-hyped by the media circus!

He was a toe offside from the graphic I saw. I really feel VAR is going to spoil football for fans. Just go with the ref...it has worked for the last 130+ years and at least when they get it wrong it gives us something to moan about over a pint

Wouldn't it be helpful if explanations of all VAR decisions were published? This is a great opportunity to promote consistency of interpretation. What's the downside other than 10 mins of admin?

UTC!

for me fulham player dives, gets a penalty. so FA now need to ban him for a game and Fulham fined

This happened in a game in Australia this weekend. Through ball, striker runs onto it, one on one with keeper, flag goes up, everyone stops. On replay the striker is clearly onside, at least a yard. If he’d continued and stuck the ball in the net, what would’ve happened with VAR?

Just happy for Oldham. Historic club with still a lot of true passionate fans behind them. Was Paul Scholes in the crowd today?

That Fulham decision looks like the FA are using the same interpretation of a foul as many TV pundits - "If there is contact in the box, it's a penalty".

In which case Dyche had better bring in a diving coach next season because it's going to be a penalty-fest.

Duffer_ wrote:Wouldn't it be helpful if explanations of all VAR decisions were published? This is a great opportunity to promote consistency of interpretation. What's the downside other than 10 mins of admin?

UTC!

Or we could just go back to football being something we enjoy on a Saturday at 3pm, debate afterwards and think about sometimes during the week. As opposed to a brand new "Sky Sports VAR" channel. It's not going to happen - but it would be better.

The Fulham one was a similar but worse example of the one given at Man City last season when Bernardo Silva dived.

Surely the Var person can decide whether there is enough contact to fall like a dying swan and then give no pen. The he was touched it’s a foul argument is ridiculous.

I have this awful feeling that we've not really asked the FAs in Germany, Spain and Italy about how to do this properly.

It appears to work pretty well in those leagues, and they would have had the same teething problems we are having.

I used to be dead against VAR but having seen it in the above countries and the World Cup I reckon it probably essential. I just hope we get it right as soon as possible.

Would it be possible to beam the real time footage of VAR onto the big screen as it's being analysed or is this a bad idea?

Lancasterclaret wrote:I have this awful feeling that we've not really asked the FAs in Germany, Spain and Italy about how to do this properly.

It appears to work pretty well in those leagues, and they would have had the same teething problems we are having.

I used to be dead against VAR but having seen it in the above countries and the World Cup I reckon it probably essential. I just hope we get it right as soon as possible.

Surely thats too simplistic for our "Wonderful" FA to contemplate, far easier for them to make it as complicated as they can, so everyone hates it.

I assume that the decision to award a penalty was given at Fulham because he was touched, ever so slightly, but he was touched. So that's the VAR rule then now. If you are touched and its confirmed on VAR its a penalty. Pathetic, gives the benefit of doubt to the divers

Footy is a spontaneous sport with mixed emotions.
Stop starting with VAR is going to kill the game, we will be forever looking at the Big Screen for information

They didn't use the VAR for the blatant handball outside the area by their goalie, or is that not part of its remit?

Lancasterclaret wrote:I have this awful feeling that we've not really asked the FAs in Germany, Spain and Italy about how to do this properly.

It appears to work pretty well in those leagues, and they would have had the same teething problems we are having.

I used to be dead against VAR but having seen it in the above countries and the World Cup I reckon it probably essential. I just hope we get it right as soon as possible.

Here you go:
https://www.dw.com/en/opinion-var-is-he ... a-41815786" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Whichever way you look at it, this is just another opinion, or two, given by people who are not even part of the onfield game.
Any official who is worth his salt knows exactly what is happening on the field, which players are getting on each others' backs, which players are likely to overstep the mark etc., etc. The VAR officials are far removed from the actualities of the game and can just give an opinion on what they see and this could be far removed from what the onfield officials see and hear.

nonayclaret wrote:They didn't use the VAR for the blatant handball outside the area by their goalie, or is that not part of its remit?

First glance it did look handball but replays showed it was in the box.

nonayclaret wrote:They didn't use the VAR for the blatant handball outside the area by their goalie, or is that not part of its remit?

No. VAR is for penalties, goals, and mistaken identity; not for free kicks outside the box.

Mind you, I don't know what would happen if the ref misses a blatant handball on the edge of the box and the VAR man stops play to have a closer look. If it was handball, but six inches outside, would he tell the ref to give a free kick, or would he say play on with a drop ball?

Dsr, VAR can be used for red card decisions which presumably handball by a keeper still is?

Ashingtonclaret46 wrote:Whichever way you look at it, this is just another opinion, or two, given by people who are not even part of the onfield game.
Any official who is worth his salt knows exactly what is happening on the field, which players are getting on each others' backs, which players are likely to overstep the mark etc., etc. The VAR officials are far removed from the actualities of the game and can just give an opinion on what they see and this could be far removed from what the onfield officials see and hear.

How does what refs see and hear from players on the pitch influence if it’s a foul or offside?

'No. VAR is for penalties, goals, and mistaken identity; not for free kicks outside the box.'

So not for offside then? Can we have our penalty back?

Bordeauxclaret wrote:How does what refs see and hear from players on the pitch influence if it’s a foul or offside?

You have obviously not officiated at any decent level otherwise you would know what I am talking about.
The game is about much more than fouls and offsides and VAR.

Ashingtonclaret46 wrote:You have obviously not officiated at any decent level otherwise you would know what I am talking about.
The game is about much more than fouls and offsides and VAR.

I haven’t done it at any level.
What else are the officials in the studio supposed to be looking at?
If the left back calls the right winger a knobhead does that somehow influence if an incident is a foul or not or if a player is offside?

Bordeauxclaret wrote:I haven’t done it at any level.
What else are the officials in the studio supposed to be looking at?
If the left back calls the right winger a knobhead does that somehow influence if an incident is a foul or not or if a player is offside?

No it doesn't.
When they introduce VAR they should get rid of the onfield officials and use VAR for every decision because no one decision is more important than another.
Simple and effective and totally crazy it may be, however, it will be fair to everyone according to the hype about VAR.
It is surprising what you pick up on the field when playing or officiating a game but VAR will be impervious to all of that because it will make every foul black and white --won't it? ----- and every decision will be correct. Except that it won't because they are being selective about its use.

To be honest I was against VAR until relatively recently.
Then I finally got fed up of referees not being good enough, brave enough, or worse, honest enough to give the big decisions against certain teams.
I’m in agreement with Dyche, it needs speeding up but they need all the help they can get.

I can see you are worried and upset about it. Unfortunately there isn’t a lot you can do so there is no point worrying.
Ultimately if standards were higher it wouldn’t be needed.

The trouble is it still comes down to a referee's interpretation, so even when presented with a clear dive like Cairney's you'll still get weak refs who will bottle it and give the decision to the bigger side, with the excuse that there was "contact". Look at Dermot Gallagher's interpretation of the "push" on Ramsey last season vs the exact same challenge on Long at the Emirates- if he was the video ref he'd have given Arsenal that penalty but not us.

I’m not advocating that it will solve all the issues, but it will certainly clear more of them up.

Marty Dobson wrote:A good point made on MOD last night..VAR doesn't make the final decision a human does and therefore it's open to interpretation. . I still don't believe Vydra was offside and Vokes while technically offside was not interfering.

Fatty Mason was in charge in the VAR shed watching the screens he must have been creaming his shreddies when it was a Burnley possible Pen. He must have thought f*ck em its Burnley we don't give them Pens.

Couldn't not give the 2nd one

Bordeauxclaret wrote:To be honest I was against VAR until relatively recently.
Then I finally got fed up of referees not being good enough, brave enough, or worse, honest enough to give the big decisions against certain teams.
I’m in agreement with Dyche, it needs speeding up but they need all the help they can get.

I can see you are worried and upset about it. Unfortunately there isn’t a lot you can do so there is no point worrying.
Ultimately if standards were higher it wouldn’t be needed.

Fair enough Bordeaux. I am not worried about it because it only relates to a game of football, therefore, it is not life threatening and will have no real impact on my life.

As far as standards getting higher are concerned with officials, this will only happpen if they get the experience officiating at lower levels and we are losing an inordinate amount of young referees because of the abuse they are receiving and also because local leagues are having to disband because of the lack of teams and lack of money, with charges for pitches having increased whilst maintenance has decreased.
You only get better through practice and that involves being in the middle and refereeing a match. Officials give the decisions that they see and not what the fans think that they have seen. Those decisions are made in a split second and not looking at a TV screen. By introducing VAR they are just introducing another opinion or two, or three or four ---as in the World Cup where the referee in the final changed a decision, not after his initial viewing of the incident on screen but after he had been called back again and probably told that he must give a penalty for an offence which he had correctly given as a corner.

It is not VAR that is the worry ---it is the way that the game is going in general. We are fast approaching the day when we will have more physicality in netball than there will be in football at the top level.

If implemented properly VAR could actually stop the current trend for refs giving pens and fouls for minimum contact. Thought it worked this way in the World Cup and reinforced the point that football is a contact sport and not all contact constitutes a foul.

I can almost guarantee it will go the other way.

On the issue of abuse referees get, that needs to start at the very top, not just pushing an occasional ‘Respect’ message. They need a big push, starting with a crack down on any players abusing refs. Rare to every watch a game on TV now without multiple players calling the ref a **** or saying he’s ****. It seems an accepted part of the game that goes unpunished.
Physical assaults should be dealt with as they would it any other wall of life.

Another reason I see for the poor standard at the toll level is there is little or no accountability when they do get things wrong.

It’s not going to be 100% correct but it’ll improve accuracy I’m sure.

Bordeauxclaret wrote:On the issue of abuse referees get, that needs to start at the very top, not just pushing an occasional ‘Respect’ message. They need a big push, starting with a crack down on any players abusing refs. Rare to every watch a game on TV now without multiple players calling the ref a **** or saying he’s ****. It seems an accepted part of the game that goes unpunished.
Physical assaults should be dealt with as they would it any other wall of life.

Another reason I see for the poor standard at the toll level is there is little or no accountability when they do get things wrong.

It’s not going to be 100% correct but it’ll improve accuracy I’m sure.

Interesting that you mention that the stopping of abuse needs to start at the top because the FA view is exactly the opposite, in that they say it needs to be stamped out at the lower echelons of the game and this will filter through to the top where they view the abuse and foul language as normal in a work environment. They still thing that the RESPECT campaign will eventually win through! They should come and watch a few games around any area of the UK and see just how the lack of respect at the top level of the game affects those trying to deal with it at grassroots level.

Used again in the Spurs game.

Lino flagged for offside, tight one. Reply shows it’s on and from the following foul they get a pen.
Correct decision, what they need to clamp down on early is players surrounding the ref when he’s getting his instructions.

agree 100%

25 mins
PENALTY TO SPURS
Tottenham 0-0 Chelsea Penalty decision VAR

Given it!

The VAR shows that Harry Kane was just about level, so he's not offside, and therefore it has to be a penalty.

Hmmmmmmm Vydra just about level but Fatty Mason gives us "The House on the Hill" Bugger Hall....... typucal

Interesting one on VAR this. He's onside on the official VAR camera. He's offside on another camera Chelsea were using, which is actually inline with play.

This is going to be ace, we can now have VAR during the game. Then we can still have the debate after the game, when more footage turns up showing how VAR was wrong. It's going to be loads better.

Incidentally, the linesman got it right in a split second with one look at it.

Not "clear and obvious" so should have stuck with the on-field decision.

VAR is going to be a mess.

NottsClaret wrote:Interesting one on VAR this. He's onside on the official VAR camera. He's offside on another camera Chelsea were using, which is actually inline with play.

This is going to be ace, we can now have VAR during the game. Then we can still have the debate after the game, when more footage turns up showing how VAR was wrong. It's going to be loads better.

Incidentally, the linesman got it right in a split second with one look at it.

Except that the Chelsea one is shown slightly after the ball has left the boot rather than at the point that the ball was actually kicked ----Sarri doesn't like it, Pocchetino doesn't like it ---well guys ---you had better get used to it because it is the media that is putting lots of money into the game at this level and it is they who are driving the VAR revolution ---or is it mess?

VAR proven correct again, no matter how much Sarri wants to moan about it.