Not even close to being the same thing.
VAR, Refs and Linesmen | General Discussion
- Thread starter Samid
- Start date
Not even close to being the same thing.
I agree he cant stop his motion so dont get me wrong, but i feel thats not a reason for it not being a foul.
Many tackles are the player not being able to stop their motion when they see they are not getting the ball.
If two players runs for the ball and the defender tries to kick it out, but the attacker gets his foot just on the ball first so the defender ends up taking the attacker instead its a foul.
In this situation its the goalkeepers responsibility to know that its a player behind him who can take the ball, so he should not be starting the motion to kick the ball at all if he dont want it to be a chance for Wissa to reach it first.
Means absolutely nothing. The volume of incorrect decisions made is completely inexcusable given that they have the technology available. This is just another one in a long line of them.
Why? Explain what part of my second sentence you disagree with?
But they still have the exact same outcome - upending a player.
Surely, any action - whether you meant to kick the ball or you're just sliding in like a lunatic - where you don't get the ball and take an opposition player (who has played the ball) off their feet is a foul?
Where does this data even come from? Who decides on the expected decisions?
I mean I’m glad Liverpool have come out with what they have.
The more pressure to increase transparency and have real time mic conversations on and off pitch the better.
In addition make the match referee give an interview post match.
The more pressure to increase transparency and have real time mic conversations on and off pitch the better.
In addition make the match referee give an interview post match.
So now we're angry that Liverpool got robbed by VAR? Are we .. Liverpool fans now?
Yeah, was going to say the same as @Annihilate Now!
Most challenges are 50/50 but if youre late, take out a player and not the ball, youre committing a foul.
And the Diaz goal was obviously offside, since the goal wasnt given??
That is going towards the same logic right?
I think it will be the opposite.
Liverpool will become public enemy number one amongst referees and the PGMOL and they will be looking for every excuse to come down hard on them.
Wishful thinking imho.
Half a dozen VAR calls go against United, nothing said. One goes against Liverpool and its not fit for purpose and should be investigated. Have I got this right? 
The refs can use this to make some changes.
Two easy fixes for me:
1, The ref in the VAR studio has the ultimate say on decisions, not the ref on the pitch. Not only will this avoid any confusion but also no more wasting time with one qualified ref telling another (equally) qualified ref to go and look at a screen.
2, All comms between the VAR room and the on field ref is available in real time to broadcasters.
There needs to be less uncertainty and more transparency with the whole process.
Two easy fixes for me:
1, The ref in the VAR studio has the ultimate say on decisions, not the ref on the pitch. Not only will this avoid any confusion but also no more wasting time with one qualified ref telling another (equally) qualified ref to go and look at a screen.
2, All comms between the VAR room and the on field ref is available in real time to broadcasters.
There needs to be less uncertainty and more transparency with the whole process.
How the feck do you not decisively confirm "goal or no goal" as VAR?
I mean this is schoolboy stuff that junior officers get wrong because of a misunderstanding.
Half a dozen VAR calls go against United, nothing said. One goes against Liverpool and its not fit for purpose and should be investigated. Have I got this right?
Yep. Lot of journos have let their mask slip the last few days
Get those T-shirts printed
To me that isn't the the worst thing though - mis-communication can happen (it shouldn't, but it can)... the worst thing is 10 seconds when they realised there was a miscommunication, they made the actual concious decision not to stop the game, give the goal and restart.
Mistakes (whilst shit) happen, but actual concious decisions to do whats clearly the wrong thing is absurd.
Agreed that there should be no involvement of other parties. Some people are calling for a manager to have a right to request a check whenever he deems it necessary but I don't see how that would lead to better decisions. If a manager requests a check he'd be by definition entirely convinced that the referee made a mistake, so if a referee sticks with his initial decision the manager and their team would still be incensed and feel double hard-done by. If a referee changes their mind after a manager's challenge then the claims that referees are influenced by certain managers will dominate the whole thing and nothing will fundamentally change.
Off-field parties really should be removed from the process. In its current form, I wonder if those in the VAR room are even able to 'read' a game. If you have a particularly physical game where the pushing and shoving has been allowed to occur around the pitch without fouls because, say, it's a match between big rivals, then that same level of pushing and shoving may also occur in the build-up to a goal, and its legality may be debatable but if a referee has allowed it to occur in order to allow for a better and fair flow of a match given its circumstances, then I struggle to imagine that the VAR would be aligned with the referee or the game in the same way, they'd be out of touch with the nature of that game. It's be like we have one rule for the general play and another for an important play.
How the feck have you came to that conclusion based on what’s been said?
It’s hilarious they’ve been robbed for once but it won’t be funny in the long run as they’ll now be given every decision in their favour to make up for it.
The reason i don't like this is because things can definitely feel different down on the pitch then they do when watched in slow-mo over and over again.
For me its just about getting rid of "clear and obvious" and having the Ref and the VAR work together on decisions, not almost indepedently from each other which is how it currently works.
Also true. This isn't like an entire half passed by where the other team could say "we would've played differently had the goal counted/not counted".
He could've legit stopped the free kick and given the goal and I don't think anyone would have complained.
I might be wrong but I think Webb said that this was against Fifa regulations as it currently stands
I don't think the on-pitch refs "feelings" should have any impact at all. The rules are the rules. A fouls is a foul and offside is offside.
Refs making a decision to "direct" the tone of a game leads to shit like the "Battle of Stamford Bridge", where the ref has admitted to throwing the rule book out the window.
They can change the rules then. It's not as though VAR is some treasured and long-term part of the game.
100%. Easy solution. Bin VAR.
Yeah but a "red card" challenge for a guy on VAR, who's going super slow-mo and only looking at where impact was made, could not be a red card challenge for the ref on the pitch who had a clear view of the tackle and knew there was minimal force involved..
Basically I don't trust the opinion of one VAR ref - who we know at this point can quite clearly get things very wrong even with the benefit of replays. Think much better decisions would be reached if you had the opinions of both refs involved.
Never happened that way before. Every time they have come out complaining before they've had favourable decisions for weeks afterwards.
Will never happen because it will be hard to hear over the noise from all the players telling the ref to fvck off and because of the damage this will do to the football brand. Remember when they mic'd up David Elleray?
It was the main discussion on gmtv this morning how dare those lovable rascals get cheated out of a win heads must certainly rollHalf a dozen VAR calls go against United, nothing said. One goes against Liverpool and its not fit for purpose and should be investigated. Have I got this right?
At the moment, the on pitch ref is still seeing that slowed down replay, it's just taking longer to reach the same conclusion he has to go and look at the screen.
It should be an incredibly rare thing for two equally qualified refs to reach a different decision to the same incident. Putting it in the hands of the ref in the VAR room would only benefit the on-field ref.
Oh my sweet summer child. That will absolutely not happen quite the opposite in fact as we've seen time and time again when their's been a high profile cock up affecting them
I'm not saying it needs to be broadcast live to the nation but the feed should be live to broadcasters so they can relay what happened straight away.
Mistiming or making a bad tackle and catching a player who runs right across you as you go to kick the ball are two different things. Nothing identical about them.
I don't think it's worthy of a foul in the box, he's not intentionally cleaned him out. Wissa didn't think so either, he just got up and got on with it.
Not in this instance, not every bit of physical contact has to be a foul.
Oh I think for the current system that would be fine. Ref never overrules the VAR so yeah, whats the point in going to the monitor.
My perfect VAR world, where you totally eliminate "Clear and Obvious" (so one ref doesn't have to guess what decisions clear some weird arbitary undefined line) and you just have a VAR refs opinion (I think thats a pen, I think thats a red) should then have both officials have a conversation in front of the monitor to reach the right decision together. (Think in that scenario you'd see more situations where the on-field ref overrules the VAR ref - because it'll come down to opinions).
The poster you are replying to is a Liverpool fan. I rumbled him ages ago. He's just being pessimistic regarding his club.
Oh my sweet summer child. That will absolutely not happen quite the opposite in fact as we've seen time and time again when their's been a high profile cock up affecting them
They're not identical. I was exaggerating to make a point. But the similarities are more important than the differences.
Both scenarios involve a genuine attempt by the defender to play the ball.
Both scenarios involve an attacking player getting to the ball ahead of the defender, so the defender misses the ball.
Both scenarios involve the attacking player being kicked/tripped up by the defender.
Both scenarios should be a free kick to the attacking player.
Genuinely surprised that anyone who regularly plays/watches football could see this as anything other than an obvious penalty.
I had to watch that like 17 times to be sure it came off Ward's hand. First couple of views I was certain the ball just bounced off Rashford's thigh.