Refs & VAR 2020/2021 Discussion

sullydnl said:
Click to expand...


That explanation is bullshit. Shaw plays the ball off the Burnley player (or, in Gary Neville land, never touches it) How can an attacking phase of play involve a touch from an opposition player?

The move that ended in the DOGOF (awful acronym btw) clearly began with Maguire picking up a loose ball after the Shaw tackle.
 
I was happy that my prayer for Maguire to finally head a ball below the bar was answered but VAR reminded me that 2021 is just 2020 extended like the FT whistle today
 
Pogue Mahone said:
That explanation is bullshit. Shaw plays the ball off the Burnley player (or, in Gary Neville land, never touches it) How can an attacking phase of play involve a touch from an opposition player? That move clearly began with Maguire picking up a loose ball after the Shaw tackle.
Click to expand...
I have no problems with checking something that happened 11 seconds before, if it's the right decision. Shaw touches the ball first, then follows through and kicks the Burnley player). It's a foul and a yellow all day long.
 
I can accept the Shaw-decision - that can be justified. But Maguires header was ridiculous! That was a clear goal
 
The only thing that VAR has proven is that even with multiple replays and plenty of time to look at stuff, there will still always be incidents in football which are inconclusive and controversial.

Now we have the same thing but with loads more stoppages and a pause before we can ever really celebrate any goal thats ever scored
 
ArmchairCritic said:
Not at all related to the scoreline I'm sure.
Click to expand...

Especially after his heroic act of "not letting the players rule the game" in the first half
Moonwalker said:
I have no problems with checking something that happened 11 seconds before, if it's the right decision.
Click to expand...
Yeah in all fairness, a Shaw yellow is probably the correct decision if you take that event in isolation.

What irks me the most is it was against Burnley - their whole game plan is putting in physical challenges all game - drawing them from their opponents in the process. Then as soon as someone brushes them they collapse like a ragdoll for that freekick so they can pump it into the box.

And I thought Kevin friend wasn't going to let the players ref the game.....
 
Pogue Mahone said:
Doesn’t really matter whether you have a problem with it or not. The explanation is still bullshit. Maguire started the move after picking up a ball played forward by a Burnley player. No way in hell was that touch from the Burnley player part of the “attacking phase of play”.
Click to expand...
I wasn't the one providing that explanation.
 
Bilbo said:
The only thing that VAR has proven is that even with multiple replays and plenty of time to look at stuff, there will still always be incidents in football which are inconclusive and controversial.

Now we have the same thing but with loads more stoppages and a pause before we can ever really celebrate any goal thats ever scored
Click to expand...

And we didn’t need VAR to know this would happen. All we needed to do was watch an episode of MOTD.
 
People keep flip flopping about this from one argument to the complete opposite next game. This week it's too slow, before that it was 'where is the other line!?' that was too quick'. One week it's all about the integrity of the ref, not meddling in his decisions, respecting them. Now people are up in arms because VAR didn't intervene, wasn't hands on enough, and proactive enough.

The only common denominator is that it has to be a negative view on VAR, whoever makes the decision and however they make it.
 
Moonwalker said:
People keep flip flopping about this from one argument to the complete opposite next game. This week it's too slow, before that it was 'where is the other line!?' that was too quick'. One week it's all about the integrity of the ref, not meddling in his decisions, respecting them. Now people are up in arms because VAR didn't intervene, wasn't hands on enough, and proactive enough.

The only common denominator is that it has to be a negative view on VAR, whoever makes the decision and however they make it.
Click to expand...

That is because there are many different people who all agree that VAR is shit, with different reasons to be pissed off with it every week. .
 
If we are gonna go with this respecting the refs decision and only overruling him if it's something he clearly missed, then we will have to accept that a lot of these decisions that don't make sense to us and we feel the ref made a wrong call, are gonna stay.

Friend rules Maguire made a foul. VAR probably looks at that and sees contact and they go with what the on field ref decided. They may feel it's soft (as I do) but they will still see contact, and defer because it's within the realms of interpretation that Friend doesn't see that as too soft to be a foul. They may have a different interpretation, but can't overrule him on the strength of the interpretation. It's a different thing if it's something he hasn't seen.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
That is because there are many different people who all agree that VAR is shit, with different reasons to be pissed off with it every week. .
Click to expand...
That's very true. But then among them, there are a fair few who are fickle and use any argument, regardless of what they argued for earlier.
 
Bilbo said:
The only thing that VAR has proven is that even with multiple replays and plenty of time to look at stuff, there will still always be incidents in football which are inconclusive and controversial.

Now we have the same thing but with loads more stoppages and a pause before we can ever really celebrate any goal thats ever scored
Click to expand...

Absolutely spot on.

Its made me completely reconsider spending thousands a season following Utd.

Horrible.
 
Bilbo said:
The only thing that VAR has proven is that even with multiple replays and plenty of time to look at stuff, there will still always be incidents in football which are inconclusive and controversial.

Now we have the same thing but with loads more stoppages and a pause before we can ever really celebrate any goal thats ever scored
Click to expand...

Yup.

I still don’t know what to think about the Shaw one after multiple viewings, other than that we could likely chalk off every single goal ever scored if we went back and slow-moed enough.
 
Moonwalker said:
If we are gonna go with this respecting the refs decision and only overruling him if it's something he clearly missed, then we will have to accept that a lot of these decisions that don't make sense to us and we feel the ref made a wrong call, are gonna stay.

Friend rules Maguire made a foul. VAR probably looks at that and sees contact and they go with what the on field ref decided. They may feel it's soft (as I do) but they will still see contact, and defer because it's within the realms of interpretation that Friend doesn't see that as too soft to be a foul. They may have a different interpretation, but can't overrule him on the strength of the interpretation. It's a different thing if it's something he hasn't seen.
Click to expand...

But Friend saw Shaw’s tackle and didn’t think it was a foul. They made him watch multiple replays until he changed his mind. Why not do that with the Maguire header?
 
The way I look at it, if an argument can be made for it, then it can't be the wrong call. For example, I don't think that was a foul by Shaw but I can see the argument for it, so it must be the right call. Where I have a problem is that VAR isn't meant to be used to check yellow cards. So why a yellow? Personally, I thought the refs initial call was right. No foul against Shaw and a yellow card and free kick at the other end of the field.

Now the second big decision is the one that really bothers me. There was absolutely nothing wrong with Maguire's goal. Is he all of a sudden getting penalized for attacking the ball while their player stays still? Absolute BS. If that's a foul then just about every header ever scored off a corner will be a foul. Shambles of a call...
 
I just read the rules and it made me calm down a just a little bit about the Shaw thing. However while some of it makes sense, some of it does not. I was previously told that VAR never could intervene if an action wasn't a clear and obvious error, something Shaw wasn't as proved by the yellow card. So even if it's warranted to review it for a red card, and warranted to bring back play to the Shaw incident if deemed correct because we were denied a goalscoring opportunity and therefor not send the Burnley man off... How can they possibly intervene for a simple foul when they didn't deem it a clear and obvious error, checked for a red card and deemed that it wasn't a red and give a foul and a yellow card? That's not in the rules and hasn't been explained.

I get that they can pick up the rulebook and use rhetoric to justify their actions but the fact is, by giving a yellow card under further inspection it's then accepted that not giving a red wasn't a clear and obvious error from the ref, so how can they justify using VAR to rescind all decisions for a situation that they categorically attest to not being clear and obvious thus the yellow card. They have to give a red card to Shaw for the situation to be pulled back, and not until then can they prove the ref made an error that was clear and obvious. They overturned the refs decision on a foul, after a red card check. That hasn't happened this season yet.

Saying Shaw incident was then reviewed not for a red card, but for a foul in the build up to the DOGSO situation is BOLD when you've just reviewed it for a red card. However maybe that is what they're saying. That the foul is clear and obvious and leading up to the DOGSO.

The crazy thing then is.. If the foul on Cavani was just a cynical foul and wasn't deemed as them denying a goalscoring opportunity, VAR would not be allowed to intervene at all within the rulebook. Burnley player would have at least a yellow card and we would have the free kick and Shaw would never see a speculative yellow given for his foul.

At least now we get it? So in similar situations where a foul has been made against your team in the build up, and they're coming at you, you'd actually want to foul the opposition in a way that can be a categorised as denying a goalscoring opportunity to make absolutely sure the foul you conceded in the other end will be reviewed and awarded, the risk is low and you'd actually be awarded by fouling a player with getting the ball back in a good position. Why run the risk of waiting and maybe concede a goal right after losing out on a freekick you should have had. You can actually get away with an ugly foul above the knees too and you wont see a yellow. I can see Dyche using this as a tactic going forward after the success he had with this situation.
 
Last edited:
Moonwalker said:
If we are gonna go with this respecting the refs decision and only overruling him if it's something he clearly missed, then we will have to accept that a lot of these decisions that don't make sense to us and we feel the ref made a wrong call, are gonna stay.
Click to expand...
That wasn’t what we got tonight though. What we got was forensic analysis of a foul and yellow card and nothing for a goal being scored.
 


Liverpool fans thought it wasn't red and the Maguire one was a goal.

No chance the Shaw one was a red, he got the ball first and his foot wasn't even high, it was a challenge aimed at the ball and he got it. If he didn't even got the touch on the ball or nowhere near the ball then I would say it's a red.

The Maguire one was not even a question, that was a goal, no push, no pulling, no climbing on the defender's shoulder, pure very good heading goal.
 
Eternitiy said:
This wasn't football. The officials are arbitrarily going back in time to invent decisions to prevent a difficult and game changing decision. Shaw's phantom 'foul' and yellow card was invented because the officials were scared to send off the Burnley player. Maguire's superb headed goal was disallowed - for what? One of the worst decisions I have ever seen and yet the VAR doesn't even review it for accuracy.
Click to expand...
They didn't invent a foul. :lol:
 
For me the referee got the Shaw decision correct. Not a red but a foul and the next phase led to Cavani being fouled (which would’ve been a red) so it was right to bring it back.

Maguire’s one is harder. His arm in the back of the Burnley player takes him down but I’ve seen so many incidents like that where no foul is given. Not sure it’s enough of a refereeing error to overturn via VAR though. VAR wouldn’t give it as a foul if the referee doesn’t blow either. One of those entirely left up to the referee to decide. .
 
Maguire's was a great header. They ought to be ashamed of themselves. Kevin friend has form for ludicrous decisions. My son informs me he's the cretin that didn't send Mings off for stamping on Zlatan.
 
Moonwalker said:
I have no problems with checking something that happened 11 seconds before, if it's the right decision. Shaw touches the ball first, then follows through and kicks the Burnley player). It's a foul and a yellow all day long.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure that they even work from a time. Was it West Ham who scored a goal at the start of the season after a handball? I feel Chelsea had one was well.
 
Klopper76 said:
For me the referee got the Shaw decision correct. Not a red but a foul and the next phase led to Cavani being fouled (which would’ve been a red) so it was right to bring it back.

Maguire’s one is harder. His arm in the back of the Burnley player takes him down but I’ve seen so many incidents like that where no foul is given. Not sure it’s enough of a refereeing error to overturn via VAR though. VAR wouldn’t give it as a foul if the referee doesn’t blow either. One of those entirely left up to the referee to decide. .
Click to expand...
The thing being overlooked here, in the clamour to judge the Shaw foul, is that the most obvious denial of a goalscoring opportunity was committed by clearly the last defender, with a knee high foul, and Friend gave a YELLOW card!

Add to that, the disallowed goal, and you can see why there is a narrative of United being stitched up.

Everything else was preceded by the obscene failure to show a red. The Shaw decision bookended by that and Maguire's goal.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
But Friend saw Shaw’s tackle and didn’t think it was a foul. They made him watch multiple replays until he changed his mind. Why not do that with the Maguire header?
Click to expand...
If they didn't make the ref change his mind on the Shaw foul, then he'd probably have had to have sent off the Burnley defender at the other end. Basically they were trying to avoid the contraversy of giving Burnley a red when they should have had a free kick at the other end not long before.

Maguire header they probably agreed it was foul and so didn't want to waste more time getting the ref to confirm what he'd already given.
 
Klopper76 said:
For me the referee got the Shaw decision correct. Not a red but a foul and the next phase led to Cavani being fouled (which would’ve been a red) so it was right to bring it back.

Maguire’s one is harder. His arm in the back of the Burnley player takes him down but I’ve seen so many incidents like that where no foul is given. Not sure it’s enough of a refereeing error to overturn via VAR though. VAR wouldn’t give it as a foul if the referee doesn’t blow either. One of those entirely left up to the referee to decide. .
Click to expand...

The Maguire one will only be considered as foul if he was climbing or pushing or grabbing. He was purely jumping, no pushing and no climbing on player’s shoulder, the arm did nothing and was natural position.
 
UNITED ACADEMY said:
The Maguire one will only be considered as foul if he was climbing or pushing or grabbing. He was purely jumping, no pushing and no climbing on player’s shoulder, the arm did nothing and was natural position.
Click to expand...
His momentum and the position of his arm does take out the Burnley defender though.
 
Klopper76 said:
His momentum and the position of his arm does take out the Burnley defender though.
Click to expand...

To me if that momentum wasn’t intentional but a natural reaction and is just soft one (which I consider soft) then it’s fine. I don’t know may be just my biased view but being honest myself I have seen something harsher given as goal, and this one is nothing.
 
An absolute disgrace. If that header is not a goal, then 75% of all header goals are not goals either. Sad state of affairs when a clean goal like that is even being discussed as foul play.
 
The issue I have with the Shaw-Brady incident is that I don't see how the ref can just ignore Brady's challenge like it never happened. He completely cleaned out Cavani wtih a dangerous tackle that had zero intent to win the ball. I can accept that Shaw's challenge was a yellow after being looked at as a possible red. But if you're going to let play go on (which they should) when the ref misses something, there still has to be consequences if something happens during the continued play; you can't just give a free pass because the ref missed the Shaw challenge. It's absolutely absurd. I 100% believe Friend took the opportunity to re-write history to award the Shaw yellow to avoid giving Brady a red or really having to make any decision on that challenge. VAR was not intended to re-officiate the game, but that's exactly what happened.

Then they didn't even look at the Maguire goal. Anyone who's ever played at any level can clearly see that Maguire just absolutely dominated the defender, who had zero chance to win that header. Maguire didn't push off or use his arms to any unfair advantage; he put his arms out for balance. You see worse on any free kick with all the tackling they still allow in the box of which I will admit, Maguire is a beneficiary of many times but isn't the point in this case.
 
what would have happened after the Shaw tackle if the ball went to a burnley player, they crossed it in and scored? would they have brought it back for the foul ? or would they just have booked shaw and gave the goal ?
 
Murray3007 said:
what would have happened after the Shaw tackle if the ball went to a burnley player, they crossed it in and scored? would they have brought it back for the foul ? or would they just have booked shaw and gave the goal ?
Click to expand...

They wouldn't have done anything because Friend didn't initially think it was a foul - VAR only intervened when a Friend made a mistake, in your scenario i think too much time would have passed for them to go back.

Which leads to another point, how much time passes before an incident becomes irrelevant? Could we play an extra 2 minutes of a games, then VAR happens to say "check that incident 2 minutes back".

VAR was supposed to clear things up, like obvious goals, penalties etc, Friend made his decision (which I think was correct) with Shaw, 15 seconds later another incident occurs, the only think that should be under review there is the Brady red card, we can't keep playing football only for it to be called back all the time.
 
Not sure where to put this, but were our short corners not offside. All the passes went forwards and they didnt seem to have anyone on the posts?
 
Ole'sattheWheel said:
Especially after his heroic act of "not letting the players rule the game" in the first half

Yeah in all fairness, a Shaw yellow is probably the correct decision if you take that event in isolation.

What irks me the most is it was against Burnley - their whole game plan is putting in physical challenges all game - drawing them from their opponents in the process. Then as soon as someone brushes them they collapse like a ragdoll for that freekick so they can pump it into the box.

And I thought Kevin friend wasn't going to let the players ref the game.....
Click to expand...

This.

Friend is a ref who loves the physical game and wants to punish any team that doesn't play that way. Makes it so easy for teams like Burnley who the league would be better off without.

As soon as Fernandes and Cavani were in his ear he made his mind up Burnley were going to get every decision.
 
arnie_ni said:
Not sure where to put this, but were our short corners not offside. All the passes went forwards and they didnt seem to have anyone on the posts?
Click to expand...

You cannot be offside from a corner kick. If you could be then there would be nothing to prevent a defence from holding a high line
 
You must log in or register to reply here.