Refs & VAR 2020/2021 Discussion

[Pickle85]

Terrible decision. McTom essentially penalised for trying to protect himself from a Son shirt grab. Looks a worse decision every time you watch it.

 

[Welbeckham]

Son clearly fouls McTominay first, so that’s just terrible refereeing. It’s a foul from McTominay but only because Son fouls him first. And lying down for two minutes is just pathetic.

 

[Drainy]

Gonna get flamed but I don’t think it’s really controversial. The way football is these days you can’t touch anyone’s face.

then why was Rashford kicked through the ankle and elbowed in the chin and nothing given?

 

[Get In Scholesy]

Ref didn’t have the guts to stick by his original decision. Spurs players have played him like a fiddle all game.

This sums it up right here.

 

[Ibi Dreams]

The fact that it's being discussed this much and half time commentators can't agree shows it wasn't a clear and obvious error, which is what VAR is meant to be for.

It's so frustrating that we have the technology there and it's being used in such a piss poor way. No consistency and frequent deviations from what it's supposed to do

 

[Idxomer]

What makes it even worse is Son tries to grab McTominay .
It’s an absolute train wreck of a decision.

Doesn’t get given if Son doesn’t go down like a sack of shit either.

That's my argument, Scott caresses his face due to the difference in height between them.

 

[acnumber9]

Gonna get flamed but I don’t think it’s really controversial. The way football is these days you can’t touch anyone’s face.

Except the several other occasions in this very match where players did and no foul was given once.

 

[Harry190]

Son clearly fouls McTominay first, so that’s just terrible refereeing. It’s a foul from McTominay but only because Son fouls him first. And lying down for two minutes is just pathetic.

This. They're not taking that part into consideration.

 

[Berbaclass]

then why was Rashford kicked through the ankle and elbowed in the chin and nothing given?

Wasn’t in the build up to a goal. VAR don’t intervene to just give random free kicks.

 

[Varun]

Because he was told he’d made the wrong decision. That’s when they’re sent to view it. The tech is a tv. A ref watching tv. Therefore there is something wrong with the ‘tech’.

No, they aren't told it's wrong, just that it's something they might want look at. He could very easily (and sensibly) have looked at that and done nothing. Mind you, this call to view it again is also made my another inept ref, not an automated system.

 

[OneUnited24]

What annoys me the most about that decision is Son is looking to grab McTom and hold him back. In that situation you’re going to try and brush him off.

I’m just shocked it was pulled back for that. If it’s accidental then surely it’s not a foul. If it’s not then there’s intent and a second yellow

 

[Drainy]

Wasn’t in the build up to a goal. VAR don’t intervene to just give random free kicks.

it was in the penalty area. Are you even watching the game?

 

[giorno]

I'm more pissed about the fact rashford got wiped out previously and absolutely nothing happened.

You can't pick and choose which challenges to look at.

Foul on rashford was outside the box therefore non-reviewable

The intent is for VAR to only enter into play for the big, game-changing decisions(goals, red cards)

 

[Jeppers7]

That is an absolutely horrendous decision. To overturn a goal....for that. And Son is a disgrace. The biggest cheat and a sneaky spineless cnut too.

 

[acnumber9]

No, they aren't told it's wrong, just that it's something they might want look at. He could very easily (and sensibly) have looked at that and done nothing. Mind you, this call to view it again is also made my another inept ref, not an automated system.

They only do that if they think they’re wrong.

 

[Berbaclass]

it was in the penalty area. Are you even watching the game?

It was outside

 

[Berbasbullet]

If I was a player I’d be screaming my lungs out at all times when I go down

 

[Hephaestus]

Gonna get flamed but I don’t think it’s really controversial. The way football is these days you can’t touch anyone’s face.

Unless you're playing against Lindelof, then you can use shove a hand in his face and VAR will say "that's fine".

 

[Berbasbullet]

Unless you're playing against Lindelof, then you can use shove a hand in his face and VAR will say "that's fine".

I forgot that! Oh Christ yeah that’s ridiculous, how is there any consistency? Grab lindelof by the face? Fine!

 

[Bobcat]

Obvious decision. McT with a challenge that could be a yellow or even red if deemed intentional.

Feck off. If we are going to set the bar there for "violent conduct" then we would have 2-3 red cards in every game

 

[Klopper76]

Yeah, but if we kept it for a minute and scored would it be disallowed? Where is the arbitrary line drawn?

Hard to say on that. Chelsea had one chalked off against us last season for an offside in the build up. There was a significant amount of time between the offside and the goal though. VAR ruled the goal out.

 

[Annihilate Now!]

Slow motion is probably the dumbest thing about VAR

Well OK its not, the people using it are definitely the dumbest... But its up there

 

[#07]

The instruction from Ole at halftime has to be run your faces into their hands and go down wailing.

 

[El Zoido]

VAR didn’t even look at the Lindelof one against West Brom. Why is VAR telling the ref to look at this but not a peep for Lindelof getting manhandled? Someone please explain it.

 

[11101]

Wasn’t in the build up to a goal. VAR don’t intervene to just give random free kicks.

Commentary said they initially looked at it for a red card. They didn't bother with Rashford's challenge at all.

 

[Berbaclass]

Commentary said they initially looked at it for a red card. They didn't bother with Rashford's challenge at all.

Outside the box.

 

[bosnian_red]

Complete joke of a decision yet again

 

[Annihilate Now!]

Obvious decision. McT with a challenge that could be a yellow or even red if deemed intentional.

Thats not in the rules though... Contact with the face has to be above negligible force, think its hard to argue this was anything above negligible.

 

[ivaldo]

It might sound RAWKish but we really have been fecked over by VAR this season.

 

[11101]

Outside the box.

What's that got to do with it? If they look at it for a red card it doesn't matter where it is.

 

[Berbaclass]

What's that got to do with it? If they look at it for a red card it doesn't matter where it is.

It wasn’t a red.

 

[sullydnl]

The fact that it's being discussed this much and half time commentators can't agree shows it wasn't a clear and obvious error, which is what VAR is meant to be for.

It's so frustrating that we have the technology there and it's being used in such a piss poor way. No consistency and frequent deviations from what it's supposed to do

It's not exactly that simple.

They have to judge whether the ref's decision is a clear and obvious error, based on what the ref tells them he saw. It's therefore hard for us to know exactly what's clear and obvious, as we don't know what the ref initially thought happened and what the VAR are judging the "clear and obvious" call off. There can be situations where it seems a 50/50 call to us but the ref gets it so wrong to begin with that the VAR have to call it an error.

Even if we imagine that was the case here though (and it absolutely may not have been) the ref still has the option of deciding "yeah, I missed what happened there initially, but having looked at it now I still don't think it's any more of a foul than others I already haven't given today, so the goal can stand".

 

[El Zoido]

Should just use VAR for offsides and nothing more.

 

[Amarsdd]

It might sound RAWKish but we really have been fecked over by VAR this season.

I was asking previously, I don't remember us getting a 50-50 or even a 60-40 VAR decision going our way after Klopp starting whining about us.

 

[Berbaclass]

It's not exactly that simple.

They have to judge whether the ref's decision is a clear and obvious error, based on what the ref tells them he saw. It's therefore hard for us to know exactly what's clear and obvious, as we don't know what the ref initially thought happened and what the VAR are judging the "clear and obvious" call off. There can be situations where it seems a 50/50 call to us but the ref gets it so wrong to begin with that the VAR have to call it an error.

Even if we imagine that was the case here though (and it absolutely may not have been) the the ref still has the option of deciding "yeah, I missed what happened there initially, but having looked at it now I still don't think it's any more of a foul than others I already haven't given today, so the goal can stand".

Good post.

 

[11101]

It wasn’t a red.

I know it wasnt, but they initially looked at it to see if it was, before they looked at it in the context of the build up to the goal.

They didn't look at the challenge on Rashford at all.

 

[Hephaestus]

I forgot that! Oh Christ yeah that’s ridiculous, how is there any consistency? Grab lindelof by the face? Fine!

Yeah, exactly. If it was a hard rule like you suggested, I'd be frustrated but I could accept it. But it's the inconsistency that kills me, especially when there are no excuses with VAR. They have time, all the angles and a second pair of eyes to help out and still wind up with stuff like this being overturned but Lindelof's or the Newcastle player being kicked in the face earlier in the area being kept as is despite being more egregious.

 

[arthurka]

I'm more pissed about the fact rashford got wiped out previously and absolutely nothing happened.

You can't pick and choose which challenges to look at.

So if Rashford stays down and cries and gets all the docs attending to him, the team hammers the ref then it gets looked at right?

 

[Berbaclass]

I know it wasnt, but they initially looked at it to see if it was, before they looked at it in the context of the build up to the goal.

They didn't look at the challenge on Rashford at all.

It wasn’t deemed violent conduct so couldn’t be checked as it wasn’t inside the box. It was just a standard foul that got missed. The difference with our goal was the goal and buildup is always checked and again was a standard foul but this time they are allowed to pull it back in that scenario.

 

[YAMS49]

Absolutely embarrassing. Live football is dead.