VAR

This Forum is the main messageboard to discuss all things Claret and Blue and beyond
Post Reply
conyoviejo
Posts: 5829
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:38 pm
Been Liked: 2491 times
Has Liked: 1477 times
Location: On the high seas chasing Pirates

VAR

Post by conyoviejo » Sat Mar 06, 2021 2:44 pm

Would the first Pieters handball have been a penalty before the rule change ? :D

ClaretMat
Posts: 250
Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2016 10:26 am
Been Liked: 62 times
Has Liked: 22 times

Re: VAR

Post by ClaretMat » Sat Mar 06, 2021 2:45 pm

Why is there so much scrutiny of this one yet nothing for the one we should have had against West Brom?
These 2 users liked this post: bfcmartin tiger76

DAVETHEVICAR
Posts: 2980
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2016 11:33 pm
Been Liked: 826 times
Has Liked: 1609 times
Location: Lincoln

Re: VAR

Post by DAVETHEVICAR » Sat Mar 06, 2021 2:48 pm

Without Var Arsenal would have probably gone away with 3 points again with a very late goal that should not have been
These 6 users liked this post: Elizabeth Dark Cloud ClaretMat Zlatan IanMcL Leisure

Tall Paul
Posts: 7171
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:07 am
Been Liked: 2560 times
Has Liked: 690 times

Re: VAR

Post by Tall Paul » Sat Mar 06, 2021 2:48 pm

conyoviejo wrote:
Sat Mar 06, 2021 2:44 pm
Would the first Pieters handball have been a penalty before the rule change ? :D
What rule change?

NewClaret
Posts: 13225
Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2019 9:51 am
Been Liked: 3037 times
Has Liked: 3759 times

Re: VAR

Post by NewClaret » Sat Mar 06, 2021 2:49 pm

I personally think it’s absolutely reasonable to change handball rules mid-season.

Elizabeth
Posts: 4378
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 12:13 am
Been Liked: 1250 times
Has Liked: 1367 times

Re: VAR

Post by Elizabeth » Sat Mar 06, 2021 2:52 pm

Excellent point made vicar
Nearly as good as our point today

Grumps
Posts: 4145
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:15 am
Been Liked: 954 times
Has Liked: 359 times

Re: VAR

Post by Grumps » Sat Mar 06, 2021 2:54 pm

conyoviejo wrote:
Sat Mar 06, 2021 2:44 pm
Would the first Pieters handball have been a penalty before the rule change ? :D
Which rule change?

BleedingClaret
Posts: 3302
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:06 am
Been Liked: 985 times
Has Liked: 1656 times
Location: Burnley Boy exiled in Nelson

Re: VAR

Post by BleedingClaret » Sat Mar 06, 2021 2:54 pm

conyoviejo wrote:
Sat Mar 06, 2021 2:44 pm
Would the first Pieters handball have been a penalty before the rule change ? :D
Isn’t the rule change for the start of next season?
This user liked this post: Leisure

Elizabeth
Posts: 4378
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 12:13 am
Been Liked: 1250 times
Has Liked: 1367 times

Re: VAR

Post by Elizabeth » Sat Mar 06, 2021 2:57 pm

International change to the handball law however it has been left to individual nations if they want to bring it in earlier .

conyoviejo
Posts: 5829
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:38 pm
Been Liked: 2491 times
Has Liked: 1477 times
Location: On the high seas chasing Pirates

Re: VAR

Post by conyoviejo » Sat Mar 06, 2021 2:58 pm

Yes it is ,sorry. Lol

NottsClaret
Posts: 3577
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:05 am
Been Liked: 2590 times
Has Liked: 1 time

Re: VAR

Post by NottsClaret » Sat Mar 06, 2021 2:58 pm

ClaretMat wrote:
Sat Mar 06, 2021 2:45 pm
Why is there so much scrutiny of this one yet nothing for the one we should have had against West Brom?
Both are penalties, under any version of the rules. If both are given and scored, we're a point better off than we are now. But still, lucky Burnley eh?

conyoviejo
Posts: 5829
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:38 pm
Been Liked: 2491 times
Has Liked: 1477 times
Location: On the high seas chasing Pirates

Re: VAR

Post by conyoviejo » Sat Mar 06, 2021 2:58 pm

Elizabeth wrote:
Sat Mar 06, 2021 2:57 pm
International change to the handball law however it has been left to individual nations if they want to bring it in earlier .
Maybe we've brought it in early then Elizabeth.

dougcollins
Posts: 6601
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2016 12:23 am
Been Liked: 1780 times
Has Liked: 1777 times
Location: Yarkshire

Re: VAR

Post by dougcollins » Sat Mar 06, 2021 2:59 pm

Different 'rule', the change refers to attacking teams, not defending.
This user liked this post: dpinsussex

Elizabeth
Posts: 4378
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 12:13 am
Been Liked: 1250 times
Has Liked: 1367 times

Re: VAR

Post by Elizabeth » Sat Mar 06, 2021 3:02 pm

Have heard nothing as to whether we will so I think today would be operated using the law that’s going to be replaced. Happy to be corrected
Now for that blasted offside law to be changed.
VAR has had many problems but it has highlighted laws that are currently not fit for purpose.
Eventually we will get rid of referees ruling over other referees but probably not before they go kicking and squealing

ClaretMat
Posts: 250
Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2016 10:26 am
Been Liked: 62 times
Has Liked: 22 times

Re: VAR

Post by ClaretMat » Sat Mar 06, 2021 3:05 pm

NottsClaret wrote:
Sat Mar 06, 2021 2:58 pm
Both are penalties, under any version of the rules. If both are given and scored, we're a point better off than we are now. But still, lucky Burnley eh?
I agree - I think there was more argument for ours v west brom purely because there was no need to have arms that high but almost nothing was said on that one. Pieters arm was in a natural position and had it there for balance but couldn't have any major complaints had it been given.

Struggle to have any sympathy for Arsenal given some of the blatantly wrong decisions theyve had against us over the years.

Imagine there would have been a lot more made of the Saka contact om Vydra also had it been the other way around.

Rowls
Posts: 13163
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2016 11:00 pm
Been Liked: 5065 times
Has Liked: 5124 times
Location: Montpellier, France

Re: VAR

Post by Rowls » Sat Mar 06, 2021 3:05 pm

DAVETHEVICAR wrote:
Sat Mar 06, 2021 2:48 pm
Without Var Arsenal would have probably gone away with 3 points again with a very late goal that should not have been
This is true but if it had been working properly we could have come away with three points having been awarded a penalty for the foul on Vydra.

Tall Paul
Posts: 7171
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:07 am
Been Liked: 2560 times
Has Liked: 690 times

Re: VAR

Post by Tall Paul » Sat Mar 06, 2021 3:10 pm

The change in the handball law would make no difference whatsoever to this incident.

mill hill claret
Posts: 617
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:57 am
Been Liked: 205 times
Has Liked: 726 times

Re: VAR

Post by mill hill claret » Sat Mar 06, 2021 3:16 pm

I like var...and today justified it

Tribesmen
Posts: 5064
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 11:15 am
Been Liked: 1176 times
Has Liked: 635 times
Location: Tibet

Re: VAR

Post by Tribesmen » Sat Mar 06, 2021 3:16 pm

That was a pen , hey we lucked out

Rileybobs
Posts: 16689
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:37 pm
Been Liked: 6902 times
Has Liked: 1471 times
Location: Leeds

Re: VAR

Post by Rileybobs » Sat Mar 06, 2021 3:30 pm

I think it shows how ridiculous the laws have gotten when the vast majority of people seem to think that should have been a penalty.

IanMcL
Posts: 30129
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 5:27 pm
Been Liked: 6340 times
Has Liked: 8654 times

Re: VAR

Post by IanMcL » Sat Mar 06, 2021 3:41 pm

I don't!

Burnley1989
Posts: 7346
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2018 2:19 am
Been Liked: 2275 times
Has Liked: 2154 times

Re: VAR

Post by Burnley1989 » Sat Mar 06, 2021 3:45 pm

DAVETHEVICAR wrote:
Sat Mar 06, 2021 2:48 pm
Without Var Arsenal would have probably gone away with 3 points again with a very late goal that should not have been
Absolutely bang on

longhair
Posts: 169
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 7:58 am
Been Liked: 27 times
Has Liked: 231 times

Re: VAR

Post by longhair » Sat Mar 06, 2021 3:52 pm

Nice to be not robbed by the arse

bfcmik
Posts: 3594
Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2016 2:03 pm
Been Liked: 891 times
Has Liked: 1100 times
Location: Solihull Geriatric Centre

Re: VAR

Post by bfcmik » Sat Mar 06, 2021 5:51 pm

Rocky VAR.jpg
Rocky VAR.jpg (53.38 KiB) Viewed 2211 times
These 2 users liked this post: gawthorpe_view jrgbfc

superdimitri
Posts: 4936
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 6:04 pm
Been Liked: 1005 times
Has Liked: 725 times

Re: VAR

Post by superdimitri » Sat Mar 06, 2021 6:11 pm

The VAR haters are quiet tonight.

Rileybobs
Posts: 16689
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:37 pm
Been Liked: 6902 times
Has Liked: 1471 times
Location: Leeds

Re: VAR

Post by Rileybobs » Sat Mar 06, 2021 6:15 pm

superdimitri wrote:
Sat Mar 06, 2021 6:11 pm
The VAR haters are quiet tonight.
I wouldn’t count myself as a VAR hater, I’d definitely prefer we didn’t have it though. However I’m obviously going to be happy when the VAR intervenes to overturn a bad decision in our favour.

I do question how the referee was certain enough that Pieters handled the ball to give the pen and second yellow, when he in fact didn’t handle the ball.

RalphCoatesComb
Posts: 8049
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2016 2:38 pm
Been Liked: 2415 times
Has Liked: 2115 times

Re: VAR

Post by RalphCoatesComb » Sat Mar 06, 2021 6:33 pm

bfcmik wrote:
Sat Mar 06, 2021 5:51 pm
Rocky VAR.jpg
:lol: :lol: :lol:

KRBFC
Posts: 18018
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:18 am
Been Liked: 3784 times
Has Liked: 1071 times

Re: VAR

Post by KRBFC » Sat Mar 06, 2021 6:47 pm

Looked like an absolute nailed on penalty to me, arm stretched out to the max, the ball is in the air, not blasted at him and he moves his arm towards the ball.

The Lowton one is never a penalty in a million years though.

bfcmik
Posts: 3594
Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2016 2:03 pm
Been Liked: 891 times
Has Liked: 1100 times
Location: Solihull Geriatric Centre

Re: VAR

Post by bfcmik » Sat Mar 06, 2021 6:47 pm

Rileybobs wrote:
Sat Mar 06, 2021 6:15 pm
I do question how the referee was certain enough that Pieters handled the ball to give the pen and second yellow, when he in fact didn’t handle the ball.
If you only see the incident from behind the referee, and at normal speed, then it appears Pieters raises his arm and knocks the ball up onto the bar - which is a penalty and red card. It is only the alternative angles and slow mo that prove it was off the shoulder.

Rileybobs
Posts: 16689
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:37 pm
Been Liked: 6902 times
Has Liked: 1471 times
Location: Leeds

Re: VAR

Post by Rileybobs » Sat Mar 06, 2021 7:26 pm

bfcmik wrote:
Sat Mar 06, 2021 6:47 pm
If you only see the incident from behind the referee, and at normal speed, then it appears Pieters raises his arm and knocks the ball up onto the bar - which is a penalty and red card. It is only the alternative angles and slow mo that prove it was off the shoulder.
I'll take your word for it - but from the replays I saw Pieters had his arm behind his back. But my point is that such a pivotal decision as a penalty should only be awarded if the referee is certain that a foul has been committed, which in this case he obviously couldn't have been.

SurreyClaret
Posts: 66
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 1:45 pm
Been Liked: 32 times
Has Liked: 10 times

Re: VAR

Post by SurreyClaret » Sat Mar 06, 2021 8:08 pm

I think the issue is that most people including pundits just ignore the 'clear and obvious' element of VAR. If there is any debate at all you stay with the Referees decision (think of it like the 'umpires call' decisions from Cricket). In other words, if the referee had given the pen it wouldn't have been overturned.

If that is the case, then football should follow Cricket, and make it known it was a 'Referees call', and make that clear both on the TV and on the field. Everyone then has the understanding that the referee hasn't made a clear and obvious error (like Pieter's shoulder), and that's why it wasn't a penalty.

Whilst I think it was a penalty tbh, it's not clear cut and could be argued against, so VAR stays as the referees call. The issue at the moment is that viewers and pundits seem to be interpreting it as VAR thought it wasn't a penalty, whereas actually they are probably saying there is some degree of debate, so it's not a clear and obvious error, hence not a penalty.

If that makes sense! 🤣

Tall Paul
Posts: 7171
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:07 am
Been Liked: 2560 times
Has Liked: 690 times

Re: VAR

Post by Tall Paul » Sat Mar 06, 2021 8:10 pm

Rileybobs wrote:
Sat Mar 06, 2021 7:26 pm
I'll take your word for it - but from the replays I saw Pieters had his arm behind his back. But my point is that such a pivotal decision as a penalty should only be awarded if the referee is certain that a foul has been committed, which in this case he obviously couldn't have been.
Why couldn't he?

Top Claret
Posts: 5125
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2016 11:50 am
Been Liked: 1127 times
Has Liked: 1238 times

Re: VAR

Post by Top Claret » Sat Mar 06, 2021 8:12 pm

Best thing to happen in football is VAR. Var favours the under dogs and makes a level playing field

Rileybobs
Posts: 16689
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:37 pm
Been Liked: 6902 times
Has Liked: 1471 times
Location: Leeds

Re: VAR

Post by Rileybobs » Sat Mar 06, 2021 8:13 pm

Tall Paul wrote:
Sat Mar 06, 2021 8:10 pm
Why couldn't he?
Because it didn't hit his arm, so the ref couldn't be certain that it did.

Tall Paul
Posts: 7171
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:07 am
Been Liked: 2560 times
Has Liked: 690 times

Re: VAR

Post by Tall Paul » Sat Mar 06, 2021 8:13 pm

Rileybobs wrote:
Sat Mar 06, 2021 8:13 pm
Because it didn't hit his arm, so the ref couldn't be certain that it did.
He can be certain, but he'd have been wrong.

Rileybobs
Posts: 16689
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:37 pm
Been Liked: 6902 times
Has Liked: 1471 times
Location: Leeds

Re: VAR

Post by Rileybobs » Sat Mar 06, 2021 8:19 pm

Tall Paul wrote:
Sat Mar 06, 2021 8:13 pm
He can be certain, but he'd have been wrong.
Split hairs if you like, he didn't see the ball hit Pieters arm because it didn't hit Pieter's arm, which incidentally was behind his back. For me it is much more forgivable for a referee to fail to give a decision for not seeing an incident, than to give a decision for something that he didn't see.

Tall Paul
Posts: 7171
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:07 am
Been Liked: 2560 times
Has Liked: 690 times

Re: VAR

Post by Tall Paul » Sat Mar 06, 2021 8:30 pm

Rileybobs wrote:
Sat Mar 06, 2021 8:19 pm
Split hairs if you like, he didn't see the ball hit Pieters arm because it didn't hit Pieter's arm, which incidentally was behind his back. For me it is much more forgivable for a referee to fail to give a decision for not seeing an incident, than to give a decision for something that he didn't see.
I'm not splitting hairs. I hope he was certain that he thought it hit Pieters arm.

As you say, they shouldn't be giving those decisions if they're not certain, but we can't know if he was certain or not.
Last edited by Tall Paul on Sat Mar 06, 2021 8:31 pm, edited 2 times in total.

yorkyclaret
Posts: 838
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:55 pm
Been Liked: 246 times
Has Liked: 118 times

Re: VAR

Post by yorkyclaret » Sat Mar 06, 2021 8:31 pm

Seemed to take a hell of a long time to spot that the on field call was a (very) clear and obvious mistake.

Rileybobs
Posts: 16689
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:37 pm
Been Liked: 6902 times
Has Liked: 1471 times
Location: Leeds

Re: VAR

Post by Rileybobs » Sat Mar 06, 2021 8:41 pm

Tall Paul wrote:
Sat Mar 06, 2021 8:30 pm
I'm not splitting hairs. I hope he was certain that he thought it hit Pieters arm.

As you say, they shouldn't be giving those decisions if they're not certain, but we can't know if he was certain or not.
Fair enough. My use of the word certain was probably not the correct choice. I just find it hard to conclude that there wasn’t an element of guesswork in awarding the penalty, which shouldn’t be the case with such a match-defining decision.
This user liked this post: Tall Paul

Rowls
Posts: 13163
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2016 11:00 pm
Been Liked: 5065 times
Has Liked: 5124 times
Location: Montpellier, France

Re: VAR

Post by Rowls » Sat Mar 06, 2021 8:43 pm

superdimitri wrote:
Sat Mar 06, 2021 6:11 pm
The VAR haters are quiet tonight.
I don’t hate it but it’s not worked properly today.

Chalking off their penalty and the red card is such a blatant decision we shouldn’t have to be “grateful” for it.

The bigger question here is “why was the ref so keen to rush into such a bad decision?”

And then there’s the question as to why Vydra wasn’t awarded a penalty. They didn’t even seem to review it yet I was convinced they’d have no choice but to give us the penalty.

The law on tripping is very, very clear. It’s a foul. No ifs no buts. No wiggle room for “accidentally” tripping somebody.

Ours was a clear penalty. Theirs wasn’t.

As for their claim for the earlier handball, that is subjective at best.

SurreyClaret
Posts: 66
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 1:45 pm
Been Liked: 32 times
Has Liked: 10 times

Re: VAR

Post by SurreyClaret » Sat Mar 06, 2021 8:44 pm

VAR if used correctly shouldn't impact the Referee at all, he should just make calls as he sees them, rightly or wrongly and VAR overturns the calls that are clearly wrong i.e. not debateable. The issue is that it's not made clear to people that if there is any doubt, it stays with the referees original call.

superdimitri
Posts: 4936
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 6:04 pm
Been Liked: 1005 times
Has Liked: 725 times

Re: VAR

Post by superdimitri » Sat Mar 06, 2021 9:08 pm

Rowls wrote:
Sat Mar 06, 2021 8:43 pm
I don’t hate it but it’s not worked properly today.

Chalking off their penalty and the red card is such a blatant decision we shouldn’t have to be “grateful” for it.

The bigger question here is “why was the ref so keen to rush into such a bad decision?”

And then there’s the question as to why Vydra wasn’t awarded a penalty. They didn’t even seem to review it yet I was convinced they’d have no choice but to give us the penalty.

The law on tripping is very, very clear. It’s a foul. No ifs no buts. No wiggle room for “accidentally” tripping somebody.

Ours was a clear penalty. Theirs wasn’t.

As for their claim for the earlier handball, that is subjective at best.
I don't dispute what you're saying, but I feel VAR gets the blame from many when decisions don't go our way. Today we had a big decision which went our way so people aren't blaming it. The first thing you usually see on here is a four letter word followed by a three letter one.

At the end of the day its there needs to be consistency, and I don't think you can really say after today's game whether the decisions were right or not we came away unlucky, because like other incorrect calls decisions like these two could have and will be called wrongly against us. Rules are rules, but in the context of what we see given, and what we don't see given (rightly or wrongly) we were lucky imo.

Rowls
Posts: 13163
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2016 11:00 pm
Been Liked: 5065 times
Has Liked: 5124 times
Location: Montpellier, France

Re: VAR

Post by Rowls » Sat Mar 06, 2021 9:17 pm

Well we can look at it both ways:

We can say that VAR went “our way”.

Certainly the VAR decision was in our favour.

But it was also the correct decision.

So in that respect, nothing has gone “our way” at all - we’ve simply had one remarkably dreadful decision put right.

The original call by the referee was *impossibly* bad.

superdimitri
Posts: 4936
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 6:04 pm
Been Liked: 1005 times
Has Liked: 725 times

Re: VAR

Post by superdimitri » Sat Mar 06, 2021 9:21 pm

Rowls wrote:
Sat Mar 06, 2021 9:17 pm
Well we can look at it both ways:

We can say that VAR went “our way”.

Certainly the VAR decision was in our favour.

But it was also the correct decision.

So in that respect, nothing has gone “our way” at all - we’ve simply had one remarkably dreadful decision put right.

The original call by the referee was *impossibly* bad.
I think you look at it differently from me. Its about the likelhood of the call being made a certain way that makes me feel lucky, rather than whether it should have been called that way according to the rules.

Of course if we were playing a less reputable team with less celebrity fans then maybe the trip on Vydra would have gone our way. But knowing how it has been previously and seeing other decisions, you can only admit you wouldn't have been surprised to see both decisions go against us.

Post Reply