VAR, Refs and Linesmen | General Discussion

[Oranges038]

I think this angle from behind the goal gives the best view of the McTominay non-goal.

https://x.com/viaplaysportsuk/status/1712564534454480939?s=46&t=r8QrK9qI12I8pp7QbO3tsg

I genuinely can’t see anything close to a foul here. The keeper seems to be just wanting to avoid any physical contact by jumping behind the line, DDG-style. He makes absolutely no effort to move towards the ball. And there’s a defender who’s pretty much on the line when the free kick is taken so it can’t be offside either. Incredibly soft decision. Scotland and McT very hard done by.

Pause this video between 38/39 seconds. At the point he connects with the ball, it's almost impossible to say if Hendry is offside given how much he moves between frames.

This is what the referee was shown on the screen. How can he be 100% sure that's the point of contact with the ball when he can't even see the ball or McTominay's foot connecting with it.

 

[Vault Dweller]

The reverse angle shows Hendry barely touching him. Joke of a decision.

 

[Lyng]

I’m telling you! VAR is killing football.

It really is. That goal was such a beauty. For that to be called off by yet another dodgy VAR decision is a travesty. I feel for the Scottish fans and especially for McT.

 

[SilentWitness]

The decision is a farce for multiple reasons. Firstly I don't feel like there is much, if any interference to the keeper who doesn't seem to have any intention of getting the ball. Secondly, to claim a foul for that is laughable, it's minimal contact. Thirdly, to be told initially it was ruled out for a foul and then changed to it being for offside highlights the weird inconsistencies and absolute negligence of refereeing standards currently.

 

[Jeppers7]

That’s about as corrupt as it gets!

 

[Telsim]

VAR has fixed absolutely nothing, has added absolutely nothing. It has made the game so much worse. It was sold as a tool that will be used only in clear and obvious situations, but instead it's used to measure lines and interactions that no human eye can possibly discern. And that's before adding the human factor in the decision making. It needs to be removed indefinitely. The game is significantly lesser now. VAR has optimised the fun out of football. I no longer bother celebrating goals. Instead, I just wait and sigh in relief when a goal is given. It's a travesty.

Get rid of it.

 

[DanNistelrooy]

I am no VAR fan but that was offside yesterday due to Hendry interfering with the keeper - I think the drama around it has been created by people thinking it was given for a foul on the keeper which would have been an outrageous decision (the ref's signal didn't help this). Stupid from Hendry as he's looking right across the line so could see the defenders and must have known he was offside. Gutted for McTominay - not convinced the keeper would have got there if Hendry was there or not.

 

[ShinjiNinja26]

What a joke. Get it in the bin!

 

[Devil77]

VAR has fixed absolutely nothing, has added absolutely nothing. It has made the game so much worse. It was sold as a tool that will be used only in clear and obvious situations, but instead it's used to measure lines and interactions that no human eye can possibly discern. And that's before adding the human factor in the decision making. It needs to be removed indefinitely. The game is significantly lesser now. VAR has optimised the fun out of football. I no longer bother celebrating goals. Instead, I just wait and sigh in relief when a goal is given. It's a travesty.

Get rid of it.

Amen to this! Fans all over should unite in protests to abolish this farce!

 

[Dr. StrangeHate]

Its weird seeing this called off. Teams used to do much worse to De Gea but that was never called out. To me that should be allowed and its simply a weak goalkeeper.

I member when De Gea was speared by Andy Caroll and the goal was not only allowed, commentators called De Gea a softie.

 

[Gio]

I am no VAR fan but that was offside yesterday due to Hendry interfering with the keeper - I think the drama around it has been created by people thinking it was given for a foul on the keeper which would have been an outrageous decision (the ref's signal didn't help this). Stupid from Hendry as he's looking right across the line so could see the defenders and must have known he was offside. Gutted for McTominay - not convinced the keeper would have got there if Hendry was there or not.

I'd agree. Under the rules he is interfering with the keeper in an offside position. It was stupid from Hendry really.

But the drama was created by the referee. Despite the offside, he gave it for a foul on the keeper. Hence the signal. He then told players on the park that he gave it for a foul. And that is what UEFA told the media, until they soon realised it looked ridiculous and changed their position on it. Which just looks dodgy and suggests they have something to hide.

 

[TrustInJanuzaj]

Amen to this! Fans all over should unite in protests to abolish this farce!

It won’t happen though as just two posts above you’ve got someone claiming it’s the correct decision (it clearly isn’t). Still too many people who think it’s impossible to go back but there’s absolutely no way it’s made the game better to watch and whatever else you think, that was the true purpose!

 

[Andersonson]

Has there been anything official on this? Did it end up as offisde?

 

[SuperiorXI]

I member when De Gea was speared by Andy Caroll and the goal was not only allowed, commentators called De Gea a softie.

De Gea got routinely crowded out Royal Rumble style and never got anything from the refs/no sympathy from pundits.

 

[DanNistelrooy]

I'd agree. Under the rules he is interfering with the keeper in an offside position. It was stupid from Hendry really.

But the drama was created by the referee. Despite the offside, he gave it for a foul on the keeper. Hence the signal. He then told players on the park that he gave it for a foul. And that is what UEFA told the media, until they soon realised it looked ridiculous and changed their position on it. Which just looks dodgy and suggests they have something to hide.

I think it's just another case of poor communication from the officials. The angle they were showing in the check indicated it was an offside check as does the image below. They got to the right decision but then for whatever reason (assume its poor communication again) said it was for a foul.

 

[Withnail]

Pause this video between 38/39 seconds. At the point he connects with the ball, it's almost impossible to say if Hendry is offside given how much he moves between frames.

This is what the referee was shown on the screen. How can he be 100% sure that's the point of contact with the ball when he can't even see the ball or McTominay's foot connecting with it.

The ref doesn't go to the screen to adjudicate on off-sides so he can't have been checking for off-side.

He can only have determined that it was a foul.

 

[Salford_Red83]

I am no VAR fan but that was offside yesterday due to Hendry interfering with the keeper - I think the drama around it has been created by people thinking it was given for a foul on the keeper which would have been an outrageous decision (the ref's signal didn't help this). Stupid from Hendry as he's looking right across the line so could see the defenders and must have known he was offside. Gutted for McTominay - not convinced the keeper would have got there if Hendry was there or not.

Can't see Hendry in an offside position here:

 

[stevoc]

Pause this video between 38/39 seconds. At the point he connects with the ball, it's almost impossible to say if Hendry is offside given how much he moves between frames.

This is what the referee was shown on the screen. How can he be 100% sure that's the point of contact with the ball when he can't even see the ball or McTominay's foot connecting with it.

Ridiculous. VAR is destroying football. Even when it works it's shite, kills all passion and excitement in the game. Ugh, just feck it off.

 

[DanNistelrooy]

The ref doesn't go to the screen to adjudicate on off-sides so he can't have been checking for off-side.

He can only have determined that it was a foul.

The ref does go to the screen for offsides if there's an element of subjectivity to the offside. If it's a clear black and white offside with a player who touches the ball in an offside decision then the VAR will make the decision for the ref. But for cases when there's subjectivity to the offside e.g. interfering with the keeper or defender, then the ref will go to the screen to determine if they have interfered.

Has happened a few times over recent seasons, this one below comes to mind (go to 1:14 in the video)

 

[Oranges038]

The ref doesn't go to the screen to adjudicate on off-sides so he can't have been checking for off-side.

He can only have determined that it was a foul.

Yes, but as else someone said yesterday, he can go to check for interference from offside. But there was no confirmation for offside in the initial decision. He called a foul.

 

[DanNistelrooy]

Can't see Hendry in an offside position here:

That's not a great pic but I think you can see he's off? You can see a white sock ahead of play below the Spain defender's shirt - grainy pic though. You can see a clearer pic above on this page

 

[Withnail]

The ref does go to the screen for offsides if there's an element of subjectivity to the offside. If it's a clear black and white offside with a player who touches the ball then the VAR will make the decision for the ref. But for cases when there's subjectivity to the offisde e.g. interfering with the keeper or defender, then the ref will go to the screen to determine if they have interfered.

Has happened a few times over recent seasons, this one below comes to mind (go to 1:14 in the video)

Yes, but as else someone said yesterday, he can go to check for interference from offside. But there was no confirmation for offside in the initial decision. He called a foul.

Fair enough and thaks for the clarification.

Even if it was called off-side and interfering from the get-go it's still very, very soft. The keeper didn't even attempt to go for it.

 

[Changeisgood]

It really is. That goal was such a beauty. For that to be called off by yet another dodgy VAR decision is a travesty. I feel for the Scottish fans and especially for McT.

The reason why we decided to go with VAR is because of poor refereeing. I do not see the standards as having improved since VAR has gone in, in fact it has gotten worse. It is up to the referees to correctly utilize VAR.

I do believe we need to remove some of the subjectivity from the rules of the game so that the on the field referee and VAR can rule consistently...i.e. offside/handball.

 

[Oranges038]

That's not a great pic but I think you can see he's off? You can see a white sock ahead of play below the Spain defender's shirt - grainy pic though. You can see a clearer pic above on this page

The problem with those still images though is that they still have motion blur and there's player movement between each frame, action is recorded at something like 50/60 fps. In both you can see the ball has already started to move, offside is supposed to be the first point of contact.

It's a human pausing a video, they are not pinpointing that moment of contact with 100% accuracy. If they can't do that then VAR shouldn't be used to call offsides like this.

 

[Krny]

Hendry is Offside and interferes with the keeper. Dissallowed goal is ultimately the correct decision. How they got that decision is the only possible controversy, but the right decision they got.

 

[reddyornot]

Well, he is a Manchester United player.

 

[Mb194dc]

If it's offside why use the monitor? Wrong VAR protocol.

There's no foul and I don't think the player is interfering even if stood offside.

Pretty good example of VAR making football worse...

 

[stevoc]

That's not a great pic but I think you can see he's off? You can see a white sock ahead of play below the Spain defender's shirt - grainy pic though. You can see a clearer pic above on this page

Yeah but what advantage was gained by his sock being slightly offside in this scenario?

This is my problem with using VAR to enforce offsides. The vast majority of goals ruled out by VAR for offside, there was no tangiable advantage withi having a small part of an attackers body being a few mm offside. That's not what the offside rule was introduced for. Using the rule to wipe off what would have been perfectly good goals pre-VAR is nonsense.

 

[DanNistelrooy]

Yeah but what advantage was gained by his sock being slightly offside in this scenario?

This is my problem with using VAR to enforce offsides. The vast majority of goals ruled out by VAR for offside, there was no tangiable advantage withi having a small part of an attackers body being a few mm offside. That's not what the offside rule was introduced for. Using the rule to wipe off what would have been perfectly good goals pre-VAR is nonsense.

That's another debate on the actual offside law itself - but you can be offside for any part of your body you can score with. Hendry didn't really gain an advantage he's still offside - I think he's just been really thick as he must have known he was at risk of being offside by standing next to the keeper with the defenders in behind him in his line of sight.

 

[stevoc]

That's another debate on the actual offside law itself - but you can be offside for any part of your body you can score with. Hendry didn't really gain an advantage he's still offside - I think he's just been really thick as he must have known he was at risk of being offside by standing next to the keeper with the defenders in behind him in his line of sight.

I'm aware and the fact that most people know and accept that there's no real advantage in having a small part of your body in an offside position, is the really dumb thing about how it's currently implemented.

VAR shouldn't be used for offsides well at least not in situations like that and definitely not in situations where an attacker's big toe is 3mm offside before he proceeds to run another 20 yeards, holding off a defender and smashing it past a keeper to score.

The whole rule needs revising, there should be clear daylight or at least a significant part of an attackers body past the last defender before it gets ruled out.

 

[TrustInJanuzaj]

The fact the player is in an offside position is irrelevant, he’s not interfering with play in any way. Barely touches the keeper who wouldn’t have saved it anyway. VAR just completely removes any common sense from footballing decisions.

 

[LDUred]

The Spanish players barely reacted after the goal. They were instinctively heading towards their positions for the restart.

VAR has simply found a way to rule the goal out to get the desired result.

This is completely ruining the game.

 

[SteveCoppellFan]

VAR has simply found a way to rule the goal out to get the desired result.

Maybe this was the intention of VAR all along ?

Waaaay too much money in football these days, so get someone in some room somewhere to step in and make sure things are going to plan if required.

I thought VAR was brought in to be used sporadically and only for something that is glaringly a mistake ?, seems to me they have some guy in a room trying to officiate the game at every opportunity.

 

[Cloudface]

The fact the player is in an offside position is irrelevant, he’s not interfering with play in any way. Barely touches the keeper who wouldn’t have saved it anyway. VAR just completely removes any common sense from footballing decisions.

This is obviously nonsense. Being in physical contact with the keeper is as interfering as anyone could be in this situation. If Hendry was deemed offside then this was the only possible conclusion here.

 

[HackeyC]

The keeper was fully sighted on the ball all the way. Common sense says there was nothing wrong with this goal.

Frankly I would just find a way to scrap offsides from situations arising from corners and free kicks until the ball crosses back over the half way line. You can't be offside from a throw in, but can from a free kick? The point of offside was to stop half the team camping in the opposition box waiting for hoof-balls, not this nonsense.

 

[Oranges038]

If it's offside why use the monitor? Wrong VAR protocol.

There's no foul and I don't think the player is interfering even if stood offside.

Pretty good example of VAR making football worse...

He was checking for a foul on the keeper. Then gave a foul. 20 mins later they decided to call it an offside for interfering with play. Referee was only shown a clip of an angle that only showed McTominay's head, not the moment he struck the ball.

They used two different cameras and replays from different angles to pinpoint the same moment. Absolute dog shit call in my view, the stills they used to call the offside are too blurry to confirm if it's the first contact on the ball or not.

 

[TrustInJanuzaj]

This is obviously nonsense. Being in physical contact with the keeper is as interfering as anyone could be in this situation. If Hendry was deemed offside then this was the only possible conclusion here.

Common sense would say, is he blocking the keepers view? No. Is the keeper saving it if the player isn't there? No. Is an unfair advantage gained? No. All of which would have been applied pre VAR. This slow motion micro-analysis of football was always going to be, and proves to be absolutely shite.

 

[Cloudface]

Common sense would say, is he blocking the keepers view? No. Is the keeper saving it if the player isn't there? No. Is an unfair advantage gained? No. All of which would have been applied pre VAR. This slow motion micro-analysis of football was always going to be, and proves to be absolutely shite.

VAR is shite and should be ditched. And it's unfortunate that McT had this goal chalked off as it's a great hit. But the situation here is clear. Hendry had his hands on and was trying to push the keeper having been offside, there was no other decision to make as he is clearly intefering.

 

[Oranges038]

VAR is shite and should be ditched. And it's unfortunate that McT had this goal chalked off as it's a great hit. But the situation here is clear. Hendry had his hands on and was trying to push the keeper having been offside, there was no other decision to make as he is clearly intefering.

But the main problem with that explanation, is that it's not 100% clear that he was offside, as you can see from the still they used, there is a motion blur on the ball, which would suggest that it's already in motion and the lines are being drawn after it's been kicked and not from the initial point of contact.

The referee did not signal for offside either and instead signalled for a foul, if they were indeed looking at offside, we should have seen it at the time and they should have drawn the lines before the decision was made. Not 20 mins later.

It was a farcical decision making process.

 

[CoopersDream]

According to the rules:

• a player moving from, or standing in, an offside position is in the way of an opponent and interferes with the movement of the opponent towards the ball this is an offside offence if it impacts on the ability of the opponent to play or challenge for the ball; if the player moves into the way of an opponent and impedes the opponent's progress (e.g blocks the opponent) the offence should be penalised under Law 12

where Law 12 is foul. I think what he did pretty clearly falls under this. This means that if Hendry was offside a foul should indeed be called.

Regarding whether they use the correct frame or not, they clearly always use the frame where they can be sure that the ball has been played. It might say in the rules that they offside is from the first contact, but that's clearly not how VAR implements it. So yes, by the instructions VAR has, Hendry was offside and thus did physically interfere with the goalkeeper and a foul should be given. Correct call.