Can only assume you’ve never played any kind of sport. Or really ever even moved around beyond a walking pace.
VAR, Refs and Linesmen | General Discussion
- Thread starter Samid
- Start date
Can only assume you’ve never played any kind of sport. Or really ever even moved around beyond a walking pace.
We all know the way VAR works. So do referees. They only get asked to check it the VAR operators thinks they should change their call. And none of them have the stones to contradict someone who’s already had more time and different camera angles to form an opinion. The bit when they look at the monitor and pretend to think long and hard is a charade.
Haven't seen today's but even if I did, probably not. I've given up on trying to understand the nuances of the handball rule when it's a mess that seems to change slightly every season.
He hardly did that against Arsenal.
My personal opinion is that VAR has been a catalyst for the handball SNAFU. It’s put the calls under much more scrutiny than before which, in turn, creates this relentless need for changes in the way it’s interpreted. Season after season after season.
I know that many people disagree with my opinion on this but surely we can all agree that VAR isn’t anywhere near to fixing the issue of controversial hand ball decisions. Which makes it essentially pointless. All downside, no upside.
VAR is being used as a barefaced vehicle for referees to manipulate results. I think we all thought they would have the brass to do it, but it's basically like putting up CCTV for the thief to just put two fingers up at it without a mask on
VAR is a bigger failure than Smart Motorways.
They will intervene if they feel the handball was deliberate in the build up and call it back. Only accidental handballs can carry on, which is fecking mental to say it’s a foul for one person if it scored, but not a foul if it’s passed.
Who comes up with these daft rules
Yeh it’s not like I didn’t grow up playing football all my life, like the majority of people on a football forum. Lovely try at a bit of banter though.
Then you take the chance trying to ‘jump effectively’ or ‘block effectively’ by doing so and you pay the consequences for what happens. What happened to putting your hands behind your back? So maybe it’s not as effective as using your arms for balance but it still makes the whole situation way less muddied if there’s contact.
You have to swing your arms to run, you have to use your arms to jump, you have to use your arms for balance when moving, sliding and diving to make a block. Yes, there are instances where you can put your hands behind your back.
But, by and large, you cannot expect players to defend inside the box with their arms behind their back, it's ludicrous. You cannot make up ground quick enough or jump high enough with your arms behind your back. It would be like a bunch of penguins moving around inside the box.
The hand ball rule should be for deliberate handball only, as in hand to ball, if their is no movement by the player to intentionally deflect the path of the ball with their hand then it's not handball.
All of last season we kept hearing how not giving a yellow card for studs-up tackles like these
aren't high enough for it to constitute a clear and obvious error (even if they didn't get the ball), but today, Gusto's yellow was such an egregious error that it had to be upgraded from yellow to red despite getting the ball first and then making contact at ankle height just like the two tackles above.
What is it about these refs that make them so bloody stupid that they can't understand that if an incident that may warrant a red card occurs, then it's less of an error to give a yellow card than not even giving a bloody foul or a yellow? Surely not giving anything for contact like the one in the pictures is more of an error than giving a yellow card? Same happened to Casemiro obviously, where getting the ball, then studs making contact warranting yellow was a worse mistake than not giving a yellow in the first place for the two tackles above.
I would love to see those types of questions asked of Howard Webb, or what the difference between Romero's two handballs is in terms of interpretation? Not this stupid "why is this straight-forward decision correct" bollocks that they come out with in an effort to increase transparency.
aren't high enough for it to constitute a clear and obvious error (even if they didn't get the ball), but today, Gusto's yellow was such an egregious error that it had to be upgraded from yellow to red despite getting the ball first and then making contact at ankle height just like the two tackles above.
What is it about these refs that make them so bloody stupid that they can't understand that if an incident that may warrant a red card occurs, then it's less of an error to give a yellow card than not even giving a bloody foul or a yellow? Surely not giving anything for contact like the one in the pictures is more of an error than giving a yellow card? Same happened to Casemiro obviously, where getting the ball, then studs making contact warranting yellow was a worse mistake than not giving a yellow in the first place for the two tackles above.
I would love to see those types of questions asked of Howard Webb, or what the difference between Romero's two handballs is in terms of interpretation? Not this stupid "why is this straight-forward decision correct" bollocks that they come out with in an effort to increase transparency.
Another thing about VAR as I'm going through the lowlights of the day.
They need about 20 replays to see not whether Romero's handball hits the hand, but whether it clearly and obviously is intentional or in an unnatural position. Surely by the tenth replay they should conclude that it's not a clear and obvious mistake. And once they'd decided that it was "clear and obvious" and they were going through with the recommendation to overturn the decision, they did another seven or eight replays to check the foul on Maddison (who was taken out of the situation and could've defended the shot in the first place from that position). Why doesn't the VAR show that potential foul to the ref in the context of it being important to the handball decision?
They need about 20 replays to see not whether Romero's handball hits the hand, but whether it clearly and obviously is intentional or in an unnatural position. Surely by the tenth replay they should conclude that it's not a clear and obvious mistake. And once they'd decided that it was "clear and obvious" and they were going through with the recommendation to overturn the decision, they did another seven or eight replays to check the foul on Maddison (who was taken out of the situation and could've defended the shot in the first place from that position). Why doesn't the VAR show that potential foul to the ref in the context of it being important to the handball decision?
And why is the Udogie handball not a penalty then? Arm above head is defined as an unnatural position yet they just don't give that here?
Absolute farce
Absolute farce
just watching motd and that first newcastle goal was a clear as day handball leading directly to a goal. if that was us, 100% would've been chalked off
One of the things a Super league might improve is refereeing. Then again, the clubs must love the drama, so who knows.
We definitely need an expert panel of VAR refs independent of the clowns in charge at the moment
We definitely need an expert panel of VAR refs independent of the clowns in charge at the moment
Something needs to be done, every club gets fecked over, it's clearly not fit for purpose. I don't remember it being this bad before VAR.
I think Ten Hag needs to get a bit meaner in the press. We’ve had some absolute shockers go against us, denied blatant penalties and still this myth about us getting all the decisions persists. Klopp makes one comment and suddenly they’re getting favourable calls.
Maybe a Benitez-style "fahcts" but on decisions against us?
The funny thing with the Romero situation is that the one against Arsenal, according to the rules, should be less of a penalty than the one they didn’t give us when we played them. Proximity, which they for some reason started talking about when we were involved, has never been used that way before. Proximity has always been about situations where a player is more or less standing still in a position before the shot is taken, where the player doesn’t have time to react because of proximity and pace. Romero just decided to go into the situation with his arms out, which should’ve been a clear penalty. It is beyond me how you can have two such similar situations and have VAR come up with different outcomes.
I can’t for the life of me understand why the Gusto situation gets upgraded to a red card, while Nketiah’s tackle where he comes flying in, barely misses the goalkeeper with his studs which are very high up his foot, and is then inches away from completely locking the goalkeepers foot between Nketias body and the grass, simply remains a yellow card. The distance he slides after the impact with the goalkeeper. It’s nothing but insane luck that the tackle attempt doesn’t end with a long term injury. Gusto is unlucky with the outcome, while Nketiah is insane with the way he goes flying in.
The only way to get rid of the problem is by removing the clear and obvious obstacle, which is meaningless, and use VAR as a proper tool where there is natural dialogue between the referee on the pitch and the VAR, rather than VAR being forced to consider clear and obvious before getting involved
I've just seen the Nketiah tackle as well and body weight going through a joint is much more dangerous than studs on an unplanted leg. Just look at how many injuries are caused by studs-up tackles as opposed to rolling ankles due to centre of gravity going through them. Garnacho and Eriksen were taken out by scissor tackles last season and missed about four months of football between them last season. But, considering that referees are too dumb to understand that I've just given up on anything being seen as dangerous that doesn't involve studs touching an opponent. And even then, it seems like hitting an opponent in the head is a mitigating factor (Haaland, Jota kicking opponents in the head, Azpi being knocked unconscious by a bicycle kick attempt, Shaw being struck in the head by a failed bicycle kick) in terms of being seen as dangerous. Those are things that endanger the safety of an opponent (red card according to the rules), but the referees seem to think that because their own heads are filled with nothing but air then the heads of footballers aren't anatomically important other than being used to head the ball.
The clear and obvious bar (or rather, the bar for intervention in general) is the biggest problem with all VAR implementation. In the CL, we see a situation where proximity would apply (Eriksen) being overturned because the bar for intervention is much lower there, and in the PL we see wildly different interpretations depending on who the ref is, which teams are involved and whether the VAR fancies checking a situation or not. We've seen situations that have definitely warranted intervention seemingly not even being checked because the ref just seemingly couldn't be bothered.
I've been banging on about this, but if we want VAR to be a tool where teams can stop feeling aggrieved by perceived injustices, the clear and obvious bar needs to go. They don't even want to re-referee the games, so why not put the system in the hands of a) the teams on the pitch, and b) the referee who has decided how he wants the game to be refereed on the particular day.
So how would we do that? Just make it so that pitchside reviews can be unilaterally triggered by a) the team that feels that they've been on the end of a poor decision, or b) the ref who might feel that he didn't have a great view of a situation. Remove the clear and obvious bar and just have the ref decide what's the more correct decision in relation to how he wants the game to be refereed.
When it comes to the "it'll take so much time if the ref runs out there every time" argument, let's take today as an example. If Arsenal had challenged the Romero handball, would it really have taken longer for the ref to run out there and watch the replays before deciding on the outcome? So much time is wasted by VARs deciding whether "clear and obvious" is satisfied, as opposed to deciding "is this a pen/red card?". Even if the ref doesn't think the Romero handball is unnatural, how the feck is he supposed to reject the review once every person at the Emirates knows that he's been sent out there because his colleague has told him he's made a clear and obvious mistake in not awarding Arsenal a penalty?
Obviously there would be a limit on team-initiated challenges, like two or three, but I would make it so that any decision can be reviewed. If you want to risk wasting it on a throw-in in the fourth minute, then don't cry when you're out of challenges when an Henry-handball-like situation happens in the 98th minute and you can't challenge it. And who are we to say what decisions may or may not be consequential? Imagine a team fighting relegation being 1-0 up in the 95th minute when the referee gives a corner to the opposition that is blatantly wrong. If the team wants to challenge that, why shouldn't they? Imagine they concede from a last minute corner and end up being relegated due to a refereeing mistake? What then? Tough titties?
Mics and cam on referees and in VAR room. We want to hear them every second of the game.
Explain decisions instantly after games on tv why decisions are taken.
If possible recruit referees from other countries. Germany for example.
What our club and manager need to do is make this VAR stupidity that goes against us into the light. Use other teams and similiar situations as example in press conference regardless if we win or not. We need to show that we are getting important decisions against us pretty much every game.
Explain decisions instantly after games on tv why decisions are taken.
If possible recruit referees from other countries. Germany for example.
What our club and manager need to do is make this VAR stupidity that goes against us into the light. Use other teams and similiar situations as example in press conference regardless if we win or not. We need to show that we are getting important decisions against us pretty much every game.
Im so agains the ESL but, honestly, the standard of reffing in the PL is so poor I can’t help but think it’s corrupt in some way. I refuse to believe a professional group of adults can consistently feck up so many times with all the technology they have. If the ESL brought its own refs and VAR experts (and paid them a shit load so you got smart people not these halfwits) I’d be a bought man.
I’m not saying come out with a sheet of A4 like a proper sad act, just put some pressure on the officials. Everybody does it, and it works
Learn the rules
We heard then on that City goal. They sounded like panicked children that are doing their homework before class.
It's clearly a personnel issue for at least 80% and maybe the system for the other 20% (I'm being generous).
The fecking thing should be abolished.
Refs (or rather, VAR) is still a huge talking point after every bloody game.
Doesn't seem to have diminished the number of controversial incidents one bit.
Add to that the fact that you can't celebrate a goal anymore without it being checked...
It's a disaster.
I swear I'd rather lose titles because of shitty calls if I was given the chance to celebrate goals week in week out like we used to.
Refs (or rather, VAR) is still a huge talking point after every bloody game.
Doesn't seem to have diminished the number of controversial incidents one bit.
Add to that the fact that you can't celebrate a goal anymore without it being checked...
It's a disaster.
I swear I'd rather lose titles because of shitty calls if I was given the chance to celebrate goals week in week out like we used to.
It's horrible.
They should have a DRS like in cricket. 2 opportunitiesper side to appeal each game, captain needs to initiate the appeal within 20 seconds. Would make it more exciting. Referee doesn't get to initiate appeals, he has to take responsibility and do his job. Added bonus, linesmen become relevant again.
They should have a DRS like in cricket. 2 opportunitiesper side to appeal each game, captain needs to initiate the appeal within 20 seconds. Would make it more exciting. Referee doesn't get to initiate appeals, he has to take responsibility and do his job. Added bonus, linesmen become relevant again.
At this point I'm not really sure it'd be wise for Ten Hag to make any comments about referees; he'd just be labelled as "pathetic" and "making excuses" no matter how valid his criticisms might be.
It's pretty fecking patently obvious why these inconsistencies keep cropping up in our matches, though. Any time a questionable VAR call goes in our favour there is an apoplectic shitestorm from the media. The reaction to the non-penalty call on Onana against Wolves was absolutely insane. I myself think it should've been given but you see those types of challenges where the keeper clatters an opponent after the ball has gone not given as penalties all the fecking time.
And what happens in the next match? The Romero handball is, predictably, not given as a penalty. Do we see the same outrage in the media? No, of course we don't. That wouldn't fit the narrative that the refs are all in Fergie's pockets.
It's clear as day that refereeing decisions are influenced by media scrutiny. I can't even entirely blame them for it. They're human at the end of the day, and I probably wouldn't enjoy having every idiot screaming bloody murder because I gave a decision in favour of the team nobody likes.
It's pretty fecking patently obvious why these inconsistencies keep cropping up in our matches, though. Any time a questionable VAR call goes in our favour there is an apoplectic shitestorm from the media. The reaction to the non-penalty call on Onana against Wolves was absolutely insane. I myself think it should've been given but you see those types of challenges where the keeper clatters an opponent after the ball has gone not given as penalties all the fecking time.
And what happens in the next match? The Romero handball is, predictably, not given as a penalty. Do we see the same outrage in the media? No, of course we don't. That wouldn't fit the narrative that the refs are all in Fergie's pockets.
It's clear as day that refereeing decisions are influenced by media scrutiny. I can't even entirely blame them for it. They're human at the end of the day, and I probably wouldn't enjoy having every idiot screaming bloody murder because I gave a decision in favour of the team nobody likes.
If anyone claims the media dont treat our players differently, show them this:
Said it before. Respect the ref has failed and what they need is to accept that they make mistakes, accept criticism, work on improving and stop the circlejerking.
I don't get how Nketiah got away with that one either. Putting it down to either a directive to "let things go a bit more because it's a derby". Or where referees need a steer from people who have played the game who understand instantly how dangerous that challenge was. Either way, it's as poor a decision as I've seen in the league this year.
"Fun" thing about us and Var is that media don't cover decisions against us. So far there are 6 big decisions against us. Saka tackle on Bruno was potential red card, Evans goal was 50:50 decision, Romero handball was clear penalty, Garnacho's offside vs Arsenal, foul on Evans for Arsenal winning goal and potential penalty on Hojlund vs Arsenal.
The inconsistency of decisions is the biggest issue.
What if there was a centralized VAR system where you have for example 11 refs (or another non binary number) watching the replay and then they get to vote for the outcome of the situation? They are located in different offices so they can't discuss with others and have limited time to submit their decision. If multiple matches are going on at the same time there could be two sets of refs? I doubt there are more than two VAR checks at the same time even if there are 5 or more matches at the same time.
What if there was a centralized VAR system where you have for example 11 refs (or another non binary number) watching the replay and then they get to vote for the outcome of the situation? They are located in different offices so they can't discuss with others and have limited time to submit their decision. If multiple matches are going on at the same time there could be two sets of refs? I doubt there are more than two VAR checks at the same time even if there are 5 or more matches at the same time.
It probably was, but wrong calls were made in an instant and it was just the referee got more slack, because of that. Now with VAR loads of screens, replays and feck knows how many people in a VAR room, they are still making too many wrong calls.
Think that's why there's more focus on these decisions, by trying to make it better they've actually made it worse. Once they started calling people offside by an ear and and arm pit they made a rod for their own backs.
There is no common sense approach,it just doesn't exist anymore. The game isn't black and white, there's too much grey area for VAR to referee every game perfectly.
I'd prefer if it was scrapped, it was tried, clearly isn't fit for purpose, let's just go back to how it was.
Gusto's challenge was not red worthy. I can't understand how that's deemed to be a clear an obvious error by VAR. The initial yellow was a fair call. 3 game ban for that challenge is a joke.
Every weekend, there are at least a couple horrible decisions that change games.
Every weekend, there are at least a couple horrible decisions that change games.
All we want is consistency. VAR was meant to give us that, but it's failed miserably. Decisions still seem to be on the whim of the referee or the VAR and don't really seem to be based on any logic or common sense.
The Handball law needs compleatly re-writing possibly to include indirect free kicks for when a cross is stopped unintentionally or possibly free kicks on the edge of the area as close to the handball as possible. At the moment more often than not the punishment dosent fit the crime and you either end up with. Daft amount of soft penalties (see Europe) or wild inconsistencies in an attempt to stem the flow of soft penalties (see the EPL).
Handball law was to stop played using there hands to gain a unfair advantage not really for when ball get smashed against hands/arms in what are more often than not natural positions. It's was never meant to be so cut and dry.
The Handball law needs compleatly re-writing possibly to include indirect free kicks for when a cross is stopped unintentionally or possibly free kicks on the edge of the area as close to the handball as possible. At the moment more often than not the punishment dosent fit the crime and you either end up with. Daft amount of soft penalties (see Europe) or wild inconsistencies in an attempt to stem the flow of soft penalties (see the EPL).
Handball law was to stop played using there hands to gain a unfair advantage not really for when ball get smashed against hands/arms in what are more often than not natural positions. It's was never meant to be so cut and dry.
Yeah, definitely not "clear & obvious"
The main problem with VAR in my mind is that they've created an enviornment that gives too much weight to the VAR decision. The framing of "clear and obvious" and then "presenting evidence to back the decision" means that the refs more or less will always side with VAR because that's how it goes.
I have no problem with VAR thinking something might be a red if that's their opinion, but then it should be a discussion with the ref - not "presenting the best evidence to suggest its a red", not telling the ref what they've done is clear and obivously wrong - just a normal discussion between two refs about what the right decisin should be.