Refs and VAR at the World Cup

frostbite said:
Great job by VAR! Again! (Japan - Spain, second goal)

VAR has resolved correctly most of the cases, and it saved us from a lot of potential referee mistakes. Does anyone remember the World Cup 2002 in Korea?

It is a pity that some pundits (and some fans) focus so much on the very few cases where VAR got it wrong. I believe the vast majority of VAR decisions are correct.
Click to expand...
I totally agree (even though I was watching the other game so cant comment on that Japan Spain decicison). Most VAR calls have been on point, including all those offside on freekicks that have denied a lot of goals, but with good reasons. It kills a bit of the hype of scoring a goal knowing it could be disallowed but it's better to have a fair result.
Also for the first time a female trio officiated at the world cup, Frappart, Back and Diaz have done an excellent job.
 
I haven't watched every minute of the world cup by any means, but it really feels like they've done an excellent job so far
 
huyn said:
I totally agree (even though I was watching the other game so cant comment on that Japan Spain decicison). Most VAR calls have been on point, including all those offside on freekicks that have denied a lot of goals, but with good reasons. It kills a bit of the hype of scoring a goal knowing it could be disallowed but it's better to have a fair result.
Also for the first time a female trio officiated at the world cup, Frappart, Back and Diaz have done an excellent job.
Click to expand...

I was watching the game live and I was sure the ball was out and the Japan goal would not count. I was surprised when VAR decided the ball was in play. Only afterwards, when I saw the pictures, I understood it was the correct decision. VAR got it right.

It is cases like this that we really need VAR. I don't think that the referee or the linesman would ever be able to really see if the ball was in or out, it is not possible for a human on the field to do this. Basically, without VAR the referee would make a random decision. It is much better with VAR.
 
Was this the closest margin in goal-line VAR history?

Fi7EaZWaYAADuuT
 


Another angle on that goal just to make it clear it was in.
 
saivet said:
Ridiculously tight but the Croatia man is interfering with play so offside is the right call. I didn't think the Griezman goal yesterday should have been disallowed though as I don't think he's interfering with play even if he was clearly in an offside position when the initial cross went in.
Click to expand...
but he would have distracted the keeper (or at least should have, otherwise, as I think Brian Clough said, "what the hell is he doing there"?) :devil:
 
mitchmouse said:
surely this shows that the ball was out or am I missing something? you can see the side of the net...
Click to expand...
The angle makes it look out, from above the highlighted part of the ball is clearly in. It's just the part that isn't touching the ground.
 
pauldyson1uk said:
does the white bit not show that that part was on the line ?
Click to expand...
Am I being really dim (no need for some here to answer that)? what white bit? Totally honest question, not saying you are wrong or trying to start an argument. Am I looking in the wrong place/at wrong angle?
 
mitchmouse said:
Am I being really dim (no need for some here to answer that)? what white bit? Totally honest question, not saying you are wrong or trying to start an argument. Am I looking in the wrong place/at wrong angle?
Click to expand...
The right side of the ball is highlighted white.
 
Pintu said:
Was this the closest margin in goal-line VAR history?

Fi7EaZWaYAADuuT
Click to expand...
That’s out of play :lol: I’m not even bothered that 1mm is on line with the very edge of a line.

Imagine not getting a goal for that if it was between the posts.
 
Berbasbullet said:
The right side of the ball is highlighted white.
Click to expand...
ah, I see. thanks. How weird because the ball looks well out and this would suggest the goal line is not level with the deadball line, which obviously can't be right. As ever, ITV, rather than wait for this and discuss it, decided it was more important to show a ninth repeat of Animals Do the Dumbest Things - or some such (shades of 1999). Would have been fun to see Souness and Gary Nev argue about it :cool::D
 
mitchmouse said:
ah, I see. thanks. How weird because the ball looks well out and this would suggest the goal line is not level with the deadball line, which obviously can't be right. As ever, ITV, rather than wait for this and discuss it, decided it was more important to show a ninth repeat of Animals Do the Dumbest Things - or some such (shades of 1999). Would have been fun to see Souness and Gary Nev argue about it :cool::D
Click to expand...
No worries, it's probably the tightest line call ive ever seen, and the daylight between the ball and the line gives the illusion it's out. But as ever the entire ball needs to cross the line (not just the part on the grass), so it's in play at that highlighted part hasn't crossed the line.
 
Berbasbullet said:
No worries, it's probably the tightest line call ive ever seen, and the daylight between the ball and the line gives the illusion it's out. But as ever the entire ball needs to cross the line (not just the part on the grass), so it's in play at that highlighted part hasn't crossed the line.
Click to expand...

Exactly - It's clear that some people don't understand the rules of football. It's a bird's eye view including the curvature of the ball that decides if it's in or out so side angles showing daylight between the ball and line are irrelevant
 
Berbasbullet said:
No worries, it's probably the tightest line call ive ever seen, and the daylight between the ball and the line gives the illusion it's out. But as ever the entire ball needs to cross the line (not just the part on the grass), so it's in play at that highlighted part hasn't crossed the line.
Click to expand...

I think it's confusing some people. It's not the part touching the ground but as you said it's the whole ball needs to be out. The old rule was the part that is touching but it has been changed for a long time now.
 
I love cafe experts saying I dont care the minumum part of the ball is over the line - its out!!
 
Foxbatt said:
I think it's confusing some people. It's not the part touching the ground but as you said it's the whole ball needs to be out. The old rule was the part that is touching but it has been changed for a long time now.
Click to expand...
Yep! It's an incredible call and a credit to the tech they can use now.

Actually think mostly VAR has a decent world cup, and have found a lot of the complaining very confusing.
 
cyberman said:
At this stage I’m blaming the players making the runs
Click to expand...
VAR has been shambles this tournament. Complete shambles. And refs think every time VAR call them even in situations they shouldnt call they need to change their decision. Uruguay - Portugal and Argentina - Poland pens spring to mind. One worse than the other.

Yesterday situation was crazy too. There was a good question in the studio of Croatian tv yesterday, someone asked where does the shoulder starts and arm stops and vice versa cause Lovren's shoulder was in offside position.
 
Real Name said:
VAR has been shambles this tournament. Complete shambles. And refs think every time VAR call them even in situations they shouldnt call they need to change their decision. Uruguay - Portugal and Argentina - Poland pens spring to mind. One worse than the other.

Yesterday situation was crazy too. There was a good question in the studio of Croatian tv yesterday, someone asked where does the shoulder starts and arm stops and vice versa cause Lovren's shoulder was in offside position.
Click to expand...
Players don’t have to play on the shoulder, they should time it better. It’s ok pushing the boundaries when it was down to human error and you could still be rewarded for a bad run but it’s 2022. Time it better
 
cyberman said:
Players don’t have to play on the shoulder, they should time it better. It’s ok pushing the boundaries when it was down to human error and you could still be rewarded for a bad run but it’s 2022. Time it better
Click to expand...
Yeah but he had a perfectly normal run, as I said it was 2 or 3 milimetres at most on the imaginary line. Ref should have stayed with this decision with it being so close.
 
Real Name said:
Yeah but he had a perfectly normal run, as I said it was 2 or 3 milimetres at most on the imaginary line. Ref should have stayed with this decision with it being so close.
Click to expand...
Close but still correct. Offside really is a black and white decision
 
Real Name said:
Yeah but he had a perfectly normal run, as I said it was 2 or 3 milimetres at most on the imaginary line. Ref should have stayed with this decision with it being so close.
Click to expand...
But he doesn’t have to be relying on mm. take someone like a Cavani, I honestly can’t remember a run he made that resulted in VAR disallowing a goal. It is possible to adjust to VAR.
 
Real Name said:
I love cafe experts saying I dont care the minumum part of the ball is over the line - its out!!
Click to expand...

It's not really about being an expert to see the ball isn't 100% out of play, its basic and that's all there is to it. If we had a shot from above the ball, this conversation would die hilariously quickly.
 
Untitled%20design%20%2838%29.jpg


For all the techonlogy line is actually on his arm, not the shoulder.
 
Judas said:
It's not really about being an expert to see the ball isn't 100% out of play, its basic and that's all there is to it. If we had a shot from above the ball, this conversation would die hilariously quickly.
Click to expand...
That's what I'm saying.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.