Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Forum index | Previous Thread | Next thread
VAR - Thread number 7025 21:55 - Mar 6 with 3258 viewsdaveB

More i see of it less i like it, that penalty decision tonight was an absolute joke and i say that as someone who wanted to see United win, it's supposed to help the game not decide it
0

VAR - Thread number 7025 on 13:54 - Mar 7 with 902 viewsDavieQPR

His arm did appear to come up and out before he spun round. Shouldn't have turned his back.
1

VAR - Thread number 7025 on 14:09 - Mar 7 with 881 viewsCLAREMAN1995

I was shocked it was given because he was jumping and turning his back and his arm was just hanging there .Every week the commentators defend players jumping for headers when their arms contact faces necks etc.
Lost in all that controversy is how poor PSG were .They basically handed Utd 3 goals and missed probably 4 themselves .Mbappe was shocking IMO and fell over the ball at the critical time plus played the wrong ball most of the night .

Over the 2 legs PSG were miles ahead and should have moved on but that is why they play the games
0
VAR - Thread number 7025 on 16:07 - Mar 7 with 847 viewsPinnerPaul

VAR - Thread number 7025 on 07:56 - Mar 7 by Northernr

I want to know what happened to clear and obvious error?

That's what got it through the world cup reasonably successfully after a dreadful start but it seems to have been abandoned. The nonsense offside at Juve v Samporia, another ridiculous handball at the weekend Juve v Napoli, the farcical Southampton Derby game and that penalty last night are all caused by slowing the thing down frame by frame and trying to pick out the tiny marginal little thing that makes it not a goal. That's not what we were told it was there for, and not what it should be there for.

Rugby League got like that with the video a few years ago and they've tried to row back a bit from it because it ruins it, though it's still way too intrusive there.


Bad news - its here to stay - this from the latest IFAB meeting, where several law changes were approved but not the exact wording - will post that on another thread

"Following the historic decision taken a year ago at the 132nd IFAB AGM to approve the use of VARs, the FIFA President Gianni Infantino in unity with fellow members of The IFAB expressed their satisfaction with the significant impact and success VAR has had. Partly as a result of its success in the 2018 FIFA World Cup™ in Russia, VAR is now an accepted part of football and has brought greater fairness to the game without any significant interruption with reviews on average taking just over a minute once every three games. The members were also updated on the current worldwide use of VARs and The IFAB/FIFA approval process which all competitions wishing to use VARs must complete and it was agreed that FIFA, together with The IFAB, will continue to drive and assist the global implementation of VAR.
0
VAR - Thread number 7025 on 16:14 - Mar 7 with 834 viewsPinnerPaul

VAR - Thread number 7025 on 12:07 - Mar 7 by YorkRanger

I've no problem with VAR, we all want to see correct decisions made and this will clearly help. I agree the system itself needs some evolution, but its still relatively early days.

So my issue isn't with VAR but the penalty itself. I just cant see how anyone can view that as an intended handball


BUT its what I've said all along - the 'VARs' are the same referees you all moan about every week!

Very few penalty decisions get 100% agreement and having another referee look at them isn't going to change that.
0
VAR - Thread number 7025 on 16:15 - Mar 7 with 831 viewsPinnerPaul

VAR - Thread number 7025 on 13:24 - Mar 7 by Northernr

Which is why it won't help make correct decisions or end arguments or stop teams feeling they've been cheated. It'll just create new types of controversy.


Yep & slow the game down whilst doing all that!
0
VAR - Thread number 7025 on 16:30 - Mar 7 with 807 viewsNorthernr

VAR - Thread number 7025 on 16:07 - Mar 7 by PinnerPaul

Bad news - its here to stay - this from the latest IFAB meeting, where several law changes were approved but not the exact wording - will post that on another thread

"Following the historic decision taken a year ago at the 132nd IFAB AGM to approve the use of VARs, the FIFA President Gianni Infantino in unity with fellow members of The IFAB expressed their satisfaction with the significant impact and success VAR has had. Partly as a result of its success in the 2018 FIFA World Cup™ in Russia, VAR is now an accepted part of football and has brought greater fairness to the game without any significant interruption with reviews on average taking just over a minute once every three games. The members were also updated on the current worldwide use of VARs and The IFAB/FIFA approval process which all competitions wishing to use VARs must complete and it was agreed that FIFA, together with The IFAB, will continue to drive and assist the global implementation of VAR.


I love this thing you can do in today's world where if you want something to be true, you just say it, and it becomes fact.


" VAR is now an accepted part of football and has brought greater fairness to the game without any significant interruption with reviews on average taking just over a minute once every three games."

No it isn't, not it hasn't, no it doesn't, no they don't, and that's bolox.
2
VAR - Thread number 7025 on 16:40 - Mar 7 with 784 viewsPinnerPaul

VAR - Thread number 7025 on 13:45 - Mar 7 by Northernr

The law, or at least the interpretation of the law, is being changed for VAR coming in here next season. It's getting much, much harsher than the way we currently apply it here. You're going to see some laughable handball penalty decisions given in this country next season.


Think we have to wait and see the exact text

Elleray has claimed that defenders will NOT have to put arms behind their backs any longer and there is talk of a 'natural body shape' being taken into consideration- whatever that's supposed to mean!
0
VAR - Thread number 7025 on 16:43 - Mar 7 with 782 viewsPinnerPaul

VAR - Thread number 7025 on 16:30 - Mar 7 by Northernr

I love this thing you can do in today's world where if you want something to be true, you just say it, and it becomes fact.


" VAR is now an accepted part of football and has brought greater fairness to the game without any significant interruption with reviews on average taking just over a minute once every three games."

No it isn't, not it hasn't, no it doesn't, no they don't, and that's bolox.


Couldn't agree more
0
Login to get fewer ads


VAR - Thread number 7025 on 17:01 - Mar 7 with 764 viewssimmo

It's been approved. Some preferred companies are making a lot of money out of it and that's that.

ask Beavis I get nothing Butthead

0

VAR - Thread number 7025 on 17:30 - Mar 7 with 735 viewsFDC

The fact that there isn't even consensus on this thread having all seen the replays multiple times goes to show that it just isn't possible to remove all ambiguity from the game. As such, VAR really should only be used as originally intended (as I understood it) which was, as North says, to allow the referee to review things that he clearly missed that are clear and obvious.

If it's going to be used for such borderline decisions it won't do anything to clear up ambiguities and just adds delay to the game.

No one would deny how dramatic the Utd game was, but in general surely we don't want games hanging on the decision of a bloke looking at TV screen.

I was a fan of VAR at the world cup, but not the way it seems to be headed now.
2
VAR - Thread number 7025 on 12:37 - Mar 8 with 561 viewsYorkRanger

VAR - Thread number 7025 on 16:14 - Mar 7 by PinnerPaul

BUT its what I've said all along - the 'VARs' are the same referees you all moan about every week!

Very few penalty decisions get 100% agreement and having another referee look at them isn't going to change that.


I accept that and we will never get 100% consensus but isn't part of the value allowing a decision that is made (or not made) in real time to be reviewed to improve the chance of a correct outcome?
0
VAR - Thread number 7025 on 13:28 - Mar 8 with 531 viewsLongsufferingR

VAR - Thread number 7025 on 12:37 - Mar 8 by YorkRanger

I accept that and we will never get 100% consensus but isn't part of the value allowing a decision that is made (or not made) in real time to be reviewed to improve the chance of a correct outcome?


...but in this case you've said that the wrong outcome has come from the review and the on-field ref was right in the first place!
0

VAR - Thread number 7025 on 14:55 - Mar 8 with 482 viewspastieR

I initially thought it was never a pen, as he seemed to be a natural position.
But it seems all the benefit is now with the attacker, so if a defender takes any risk.
For example a defender making a slide tackle and it hits his arm which he is using to support his fall, then it is a pen.
So as he jumped, his armed was probably deemed to be unnatural. (not sure I agree with this risk logic), but it seems to be a simplification so they can get consistency in decision making.
Video explaining the hand ball rule (if you're a geek like me)
0

VAR - Thread number 7025 on 14:57 - Mar 8 with 473 viewspastieR

From SkySports:

UEFA has issued an explanation for the late penalty awarded for handball which helped Manchester United progress past Paris Saint-Germain in the Champions League.

Referee Damir Skomina was alerted by the video assistant referee under the 'serious missed incident' VAR protocol late on in United's last-16 second-leg tie in Paris.


After viewing replays, UEFA said the referee awarded the spot-kick against PSG defender Presnel Kimpembe because "his arm was not close to his body" when Diogo Dalot's shot struck it.

"Following the on-field review, the referee confirmed that the distance that the ball travelled was not short and the impact could therefore not be unexpected," a UEFA statement said.

"The defender's arm was not close to the body, which made the defender's body bigger thus resulting in the ball being stopped from travelling in the direction of the goal. The referee, therefore, awarded a penalty kick."

Marcus Rashford scored the penalty to take United through to the quarter-finals on away goals.

Guidance from UEFA referee's chief Roberto Rosetti appeared to be consistent with Skomina's decision, as he advised officials in January that "if the defender is making the body bigger to block the ball it is not fair".

Football's law-making body the International Football Association Board (IFAB) moved to clarify the interpretation of handball at its annual general meeting last weekend.

Its position is that if the ball strikes a player's arm when it is extended beyond the body's "natural silhouette" then a penalty should be awarded.

It also said that, from next season, goals scored or created with use of the hand - even accidental use - will be disallowed.
0
VAR - Thread number 7025 on 07:03 - Mar 9 with 374 viewsYorkRanger

VAR - Thread number 7025 on 13:28 - Mar 8 by LongsufferingR

...but in this case you've said that the wrong outcome has come from the review and the on-field ref was right in the first place!


I'm not sure that not seeing it makes the on field ref right in the first place....
0

VAR - Thread number 7025 on 08:29 - Mar 9 with 335 viewsMCterminator

Call me old fashioned/naive, but I feel like I have the perfect alternative to VAR that would also solve the problem of diving: people (fans, players, managers, commentators), acting like grown ups and remembering how to play the game of football properly. I would suggest a whole raft of new initiatives like: acting like grown ups; getting some perspective; having some self respect; not blaming everyone else for your own mistakes; ; setting an example to children; believing that sport is about fun and not money; getting on with the f'ing game. obviously this would all be ridiculous though because...actually can someone explain to me why this wouldn't work...?
3
VAR - Thread number 7025 on 09:34 - Mar 9 with 287 viewsLongsufferingR

VAR - Thread number 7025 on 07:03 - Mar 9 by YorkRanger

I'm not sure that not seeing it makes the on field ref right in the first place....


I'm not saying what was the right decision, I'm just pointing out the contradiction in what you've said, ie that you're all in favour of VAR because it gets to the right decision, but in this case you said it wasn't a penalty, so VAR would appear to have turned a correct decision into a wrong one, and taken a long time to do it.
0
About Us Contact Us Terms & Conditions Privacy Cookies Advertising
© FansNetwork 2019