DAFC.net
Home 20 November 2019 
 Post Message  |  Top of Board  |  Go to Topic  |  Search  |  Twitter Updates  |  Log In   Forum Rules  |  Newer Topic  |  Older Topic  |  end 
[ please login to use the Like feature ]
 VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: Parahandy  
Date:   Wed 5 Jun 20:59

There you have it again - absolutely ridiculous. Wasting the game
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: dafc-chris1  
Date:   Wed 5 Jun 21:02

This is a shambles
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: Andrew283  
Date:   Wed 5 Jun 21:09

That decision was all on the referee. Only thing I could see was Semedo possibly tripping Zuber but even that wasn't clear cut from the angle

Post Edited (Wed 05 Jun 21:11)
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: KilsythPar  
Date:   Wed 5 Jun 21:15

Can't blame VAR. The ref made the decision based on the video evidence. You may or may not agree with his decision, but that one was solely down to the ref.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: Parahandy  
Date:   Wed 5 Jun 21:33

No it wasn't - no penalty one end play on. Penalty other end 2-0 Portugal instead its 1-1 that is all down to footering about with VAR. No VAR - then would never have happened
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: Andrew283  
Date:   Wed 5 Jun 21:36

Do you honestly believe that the Portugal call was more deserving than the Swiss one? I'm baffled
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: KilsythPar  
Date:   Wed 5 Jun 21:47

Parahandy is a bit of a luddite methinks.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: Parahandy  
Date:   Thu 6 Jun 00:14

Ref makes a penalty decision at one end and then goes into the VAR time machine to meddle with the time continuum and the future is changed as back in the present the penalty is taken by the other team at the other end. VAR is warping the very nature of reality.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: SergioDuarte  
Date:   Thu 6 Jun 06:59

VAR has ripped the erse out the game. The game is losing fans in record numbers and it’s hardly any wonder. They are making a simple game extremely difficult and it’s getting harder to watch.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: Bandy  
Date:   Thu 6 Jun 07:07

I don’t think the game is losing fans - I think there are more fans than ever (certainly if you’re looking globally). Problem is that they are migrating to rich clubs with global exposure, leaving smaller clubs with fewer fans
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: kelty_par  
Date:   Thu 6 Jun 07:40

This was exactly the scenario I suggested might happen with VAR and asked what people thought the reaction would be in a Sevco v Celtic game or a Barcelona v Real Madrid game or whatever. "Come on now, that's so unlikely it'll never happen" was the common response. Oops.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks  
Date:   Thu 6 Jun 08:44

So because people get upset the right decision shouldn't be made?

Turn on, Tune in, Drop out.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: 1985Par  
Date:   Thu 6 Jun 09:51

VAR isn't the problem. Can't see anything wrong with a ref getting a second or third look at an incident. It's the ludicrous conclusions they come to having seen it again that baffle me. The swiss player tripped himself up last night -no penalty.

Would like to see a panel of 3 looking at these decisions. Take the decision out of the refs hands .1 ex ref and 2 ex players. Majority opinion wins.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: CrossPar  
Date:   Thu 6 Jun 10:12

Quote:

Parahandy, Wed 5 Jun 21:33

No VAR - then would never have happened


That's a bit like saying if we hadn't invented cars, we wouldn't have any road traffic accidents.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: SergioDuarte  
Date:   Thu 6 Jun 10:33

The right decisions aren’t getting made that’s the problem. I think it’s a silly gimmick to create “excitement”. It’s not exciting at all. It’s just confusing to the vast majority of supporters. Where will this madness end?
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: Andrew283  
Date:   Thu 6 Jun 10:35

The vast majority of supporters are thick as mince in that case then.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks  
Date:   Thu 6 Jun 10:35

On the most part it is getting the right decisions. Certainly more right than if it was left up to the on field officials.

Turn on, Tune in, Drop out.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: DRreturns  
Date:   Thu 6 Jun 11:15

Var worked perfectly. The ref was always going to check the first incident but allowed play to continue as the law requires. A very odd situation but the correct decisions was made.

I’m here to take over!!
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: Andrew283  
Date:   Thu 6 Jun 13:07

Yup, play continues after a possible call, only gets pulled back if it is flagged by the VAR team.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: Parahandy  
Date:   Fri 7 Jun 23:00

And now we don’t know when the linesman is going to flag for offside!
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: saltonsgonagetu  
Date:   Fri 7 Jun 23:29

Offside is black and white you are onside or off, grey area

[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: wee eck  
Date:   Sun 9 Jun 12:56

Another controversial VAR decision has arisen at the Women's World Cup. An Italian goal has been disallowed because it appeared that the scorer's arm was ahead of the last defender when the ball was played through. I thought offside was judged on the position of a part of the body which could be used to score a goal, in which case the position of the arm was irrelevant?
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: moviescot  
Date:   Sun 9 Jun 13:05

Quote:

wee eck, Sun 9 Jun 12:56

Another controversial VAR decision has arisen at the Women's World Cup. An Italian goal has been disallowed because it appeared that the scorer's arm was ahead of the last defender when the ball was played through. I thought offside was judged on the position of a part of the body which could be used to score a goal, in which case the position of the arm was irrelevant?


You are correct. Arms and hands do not count. Must be head, body or feet.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: DBP  
Date:   Sun 9 Jun 13:06

How is that VAR lunacy. VAR is a technology that allows refs to make better and ultimately fair and objective decisions.

Surely your question is about the offside rule and not about the technology (or about poor refereeing despite the benefit of VAR). Maybe its any body part in which case I assume we'll all be applauding VAR but even if it's not, it's not a controversial VAR decision but a plain and simple controversial refereeing decision.

Post Edited (Sun 09 Jun 13:09)
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks  
Date:   Sun 9 Jun 13:14

I have always felt it should be if any part of your goalscoring body is onside your are on.

Turn on, Tune in, Drop out.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: moviescot  
Date:   Sun 9 Jun 13:24

I never saw the incident. Did the VAR flag it up or actually make the decision? If the VAR flagged it surely it's up to the referee to make the final decision. If the VAR made the decision for the referee that's a worry.

The rule is as follows:-

A player is in an offside position if:

any part of the head, body or feet is in the opponents’ half (excluding the halfway line) and

any part of the head, body or feet is nearer to the opponents’ goal line than both the ball and the second-last opponent

The hands and arms of all playyers, including the goalkeepers, are not considered.

A player is not in an offside position if level with the:

second-last opponent or

last two opponents

So either the referee or the VAR assistant needs to read their rules.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: Parsweep  
Date:   Sun 9 Jun 13:31

It's just a matter of time till there's a serious injury due to use of VAR .
Playing on instead of raising the flag .

Bobvo
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks  
Date:   Sun 9 Jun 13:34

Did serious injuries not happen in football before var?

Turn on, Tune in, Drop out.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: Parsweep  
Date:   Sun 9 Jun 13:41

Not usually after play stops for offside .

Bobvo
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks  
Date:   Sun 9 Jun 13:48

Did serious injuries ever occur when a team was chasing a goal after going behind to a goal that was wrongly given?

Turn on, Tune in, Drop out.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: wee eck  
Date:   Sun 9 Jun 14:07

''Topic Originator: moviescot like | nolike
Date: Sun 9 Jun 13:24

I never saw the incident. Did the VAR flag it up or actually make the decision? If the VAR flagged it surely it's up to the referee to make the final decision. If the VAR made the decision for the referee that's a worry.''

I didn't see the incident 'live' but I think VAR confirmed the decision the officials had made.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: MikeyLeonard  
Date:   Sun 9 Jun 15:45

VAR gets it right again. Blatant pull back by Calum Wilson and goal rightly ruled out.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: Parahandy  
Date:   Sun 9 Jun 15:48

Eventually we will get an announcement the day after games confirming the result after every last bit of footage is trawled over.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: MikeyLeonard  
Date:   Sun 9 Jun 15:58

As long as it's the correct result.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: Parsweep  
Date:   Sun 9 Jun 16:00

Game killer for me .
Not , and never will be a fan of this .

Bobvo
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: MikeyLeonard  
Date:   Sun 9 Jun 16:07

Personally, I think it works well and I very much welcome it.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: Parsweep  
Date:   Sun 9 Jun 17:13

Suppose you agree with that as well . Farcical !

Bobvo
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks  
Date:   Sun 9 Jun 17:16

It's the laws that need changed not how you detect the laws being broken. Var is a hammer blow to cheats.

Turn on, Tune in, Drop out.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: nazpar  
Date:   Sun 9 Jun 17:17

Harsh var penalty given against Scotland's Women .I think

nazpar
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: MikeyLeonard  
Date:   Sun 9 Jun 17:19

Quote:

Parsweep, Sun 9 Jun 17:13

Suppose you agree with that as well . Farcical !


See TOWK's reply.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: Par  
Date:   Sun 9 Jun 17:20

Was harsh, but under the new rules if the arm is away from the body it is a penalty. It will lead to players aiming for their opponents arms a bit of a joke.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: Parsweep  
Date:   Sun 9 Jun 17:20

If I was coaching now , I'd be telling wingers to aim at the blocker all the time . Defenders are going to have to learn to try and block with their hands in their pockets .
The law makers have made a difficult job nigh on impossible for defenders and a rod for their own back imo .

Bobvo
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: Jacko Par42  
Date:   Sun 9 Jun 17:20

No one claimed for a penalty, how can a player get there arm out of the way in that circumstance, farcical decision
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks  
Date:   Sun 9 Jun 17:23

The same rules apply to both sides though. Defenders are going to have to learn to keep their arms down by their sides.

Turn on, Tune in, Drop out.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: moviescot  
Date:   Sun 9 Jun 17:24

Quote:

Jacko Par42, Sun 9 Jun 17:20

No one claimed for a penalty, how can a player get there arm out of the way in that circumstance, farcical decision


Correct decision. Farcical rule. In this case var and officials just following rules.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: 1985Par  
Date:   Sun 9 Jun 17:25

Her arm was in an un-natural position. As we all know - when you are running at speed and stretching with your leg to block a cross with your foot, the natural position for your arms is clasped behind your back. Anyhow, the ball travelled all of 2 yards so she had time to get it out of the way! Utter Bol**cks! An absolute howler of a rule.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: Parsweep  
Date:   Sun 9 Jun 17:26

TOWK I would love to see you trying to defend crosses lol !

Bobvo
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks  
Date:   Sun 9 Jun 17:28

Yep it won't be easy and the players that can learn and adapt will give away less penalties than those who can't.

Turn on, Tune in, Drop out.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: DBP  
Date:   Sun 9 Jun 17:52

Quote:

Par, Sun 9 Jun 17:20

Was harsh, but under the new rules if the arm is away from the body it is a penalty. It will lead to players aiming for their opponents arms a bit of a joke.


Had to smile at this thinking about the number of times we were in the box, would shoot and miss the target... And here we think players will be good enough to hit a moving hand! 😂
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: SergioDuarte  
Date:   Sun 9 Jun 17:53

VAR is possibly the worst thing to happen to the game. It is absolutely shambolic. Ruined the game imo.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: SergioDuarte  
Date:   Sun 9 Jun 17:54

Quote:

The One Who Knocks, Sun 09 Jun 17:28

Yep it won't be easy and the players that can learn and adapt will give away less penalties than those who can't.


You’ve clearly never played football in your life.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: Socks  
Date:   Sun 9 Jun 17:59

I'm not keen on VAR, but that one is down to a referee following a rule that is ridiculous. Nothing to do with VAR, nothing to do with the referee - all to do with the utter horseshit that is the updated wording on handball.

In an attempt to clear it up, all the law change has done is make it a nonsense. If it didn't annoy me so much, it would amuse me that it also says 'it is usually an offence' , without any mention of the exceptions that would mean it isn't an offence.

It's a dreadful ruling, and is just plainly wrong.



Post Edited (Sun 09 Jun 18:00)
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: wee eck  
Date:   Sun 9 Jun 19:08

To give a team a free shot at goal from 12 yards because of an accidental handball is ridiculous. Who decides these changes in the laws? Is it ex-referees, ex-players, or administrators?
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: red-star-par  
Date:   Sun 9 Jun 19:54

Of course the American broadcasters will love VAR which is why it was brought in. They will be able to have several minute long breaks per half, enough time for a few adverts while the ref checks the footage. It is ruining the human aspect of the game. - "This VAR break was brought to you by McDonalds"
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks  
Date:   Sun 9 Jun 20:08

What nonsense.

Turn on, Tune in, Drop out.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: SergioDuarte  
Date:   Sun 9 Jun 20:13

Red Star nails it. VAR was never brought in for the good of the game. It’s the Americanisation of the beautiful game. Goal line technology is fine but this stop start confusion nonsense needs to stop. Has anyone been at a live game where VAR is in use ? It’s no laughing matter.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks  
Date:   Sun 9 Jun 20:19

What nonsense.

Turn on, Tune in, Drop out.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: RhinoPars  
Date:   Sun 9 Jun 20:37

As others have pointed out the problem here was not VAR but an idiotic change to the handball rule where accidental handball with no intent to foul now gets penalized. Cue many more games being spoilt by players deliberately aiming to kick the ball into defender’s arms from close range to try to win penalties.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: JTH123  
Date:   Sun 9 Jun 21:11

The handball rule is utter bobbins and this change has made it even worse.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: Parahandy  
Date:   Sun 9 Jun 22:42

No it’s vars fault this stupid handball interpretation was brought in - completely tv led
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: CrossPar  
Date:   Mon 10 Jun 00:29

VAR is the antichrist, Belzebub himself, the end of the world is near..... what a load of hysterical nonsense. It's only a camera that allows people to make better informed decisions and its hear to stay so get used to it and stop whinging.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: SergioDuarte  
Date:   Mon 10 Jun 13:19

I don’t think it will last. It’s maybe about 50/50 at the moment but the longer it goes on the more frustrating it’s going to become . I really don’t think it makes enough difference to rip up the entire sport .
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: Andrew283  
Date:   Mon 10 Jun 13:37

Bunch of utter drama queens. VAR along with the Nations League are 2 of the only positives that the governing bodies ave imposed in recent years
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: Parsweep  
Date:   Mon 10 Jun 19:09

Nations league looks a promising inovation but VAR is the pits .
Fitba survived well over 100 years without it . I'll be surprised if VAR survives 5 years .

Bobvo
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: londonparsfan  
Date:   Mon 10 Jun 19:19

No it didnt. The game's history is littered with p!ss poor refereeing decisions not to mention the large numbers of refs that have been bribed in crucial competitions.

On top of the obvious benefits of being able to see multiple angles of an incident itll be far harder to bribe teams of VAR analysts compared to one ref.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: parathletic  
Date:   Mon 10 Jun 20:10

I've no problem with VAR being used for black and white incidents-was it onside/offside,did the ball go out of play or not etc and goal line technology was long overdue.
I don't agree with it when it's analysing fouls watching them in slow motion from different angles-then it just becomes another refs interpretation.You can slow down an incident and see there is no contact-that doesn't mean it wasn't a foul.VAR decisions shouldn't be up for debate as they need to be clear cut IMO. There are still constant instances where people disagree. When hawk-eye shows a ball is out at tennis I've yet to see a player complain.

The handball incident in the Scotland ladies game the other night was partly down to the rules but if it was a yard outside the box no VAR would have been used is my understanding-how does that make decision making consistent? Top players are perfectly capable of curling in a free-kick from 19 yards and would see it as a decent goal-scoring opportunity. I've also witnessed several occasions when the VAR decision has taken several minutes and yet the time taken hasn't been fully added on. In the Portugal-Switzerland game the play went on for a couple of ,what turned out to be meaningless, minutes of football until it was called back-were these minutes replayed at the end of the game? If someone had been sent off before the game was recalled for the penalty would the red card then be reversed like the penalty at the other end?
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: Parsweep  
Date:   Mon 10 Jun 20:18

Londonparsfan . In your post you say "no it didn't"
Can you clarify for me ? What "didn't" ?

Bobvo
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: londonparsfan  
Date:   Mon 10 Jun 20:30

Apologies Parsweep I misread your post. With the double space I inserted an imaginary "for" into the equation so I read your post as stating: football survived well for over a hundred years and I have always thought the game has had quite a few issues relating to the refereeing especially the corruption. My bad.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: SergioDuarte  
Date:   Mon 10 Jun 20:36

Can’t debate reasonably ?. Call other posters drama queens.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: KilsythPar  
Date:   Mon 10 Jun 20:57

Tennis, Cricket, Rugby Union, Rugby League and various other sports have all successfully embraced video technology as a means to improving the decision making in each of these sports. Why should football not do the same. VAR is simply a tool to assist the referee make the correct decision possible. Ultimately, the referee still has the final decision. It seems to me that some posters are blaming VAR when they either do not agree with the refs decisions, or indeed the current laws of the game. VAR is here to stay. It may be tweaked now and again but people better get used to it. It is for the betterment of the game. Some people objected when round goal posts replaced square ones and placed footballs were phased out. It's called progress!
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: KilsythPar  
Date:   Mon 10 Jun 21:01

Should have said laced footballs (not placed)
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: parathletic  
Date:   Mon 10 Jun 21:14

The other sports you mention mostly use them to make black and white calls-there is no interpretation involved.In tennis and cricket the technology is making the decisions not the referees.

Tennis-In or Out
Cricket-was the ball pitching in line of the stumps, did the ball carry etc
Rugby-was the ball grounded, was there a foot in touch?, was it a forward pass?

The other difference is that these sports are already stopped in those instances-play isn't continuing in the interim.

I think it should be used but football waited so long to introduce it and then seemed to dive straight in without any thought or clarity on if and when it should be used.

In the example I gave in my last post about a player being red carded would the red card be reversed as Portugal's penalty was?

The cost of VAR is such that I don't think we need to worry about it being introduced to Scottish football anytime soon unless somebody else pays for it.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: DBP  
Date:   Tue 11 Jun 16:06

Rugby successfully use it for lots of things, offside, forward pass, illegal contact, yellow cards, etc
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: KilsythPar  
Date:   Tue 11 Jun 16:25

Football should follow rugby in that the referee can stop the clock until the decision is confirmed. This would be better than waiting to see how much additional time is to be added at the end of 90 minutes.
Furthermore, the day will eventually come when we won't need any officials on the field of play. How much better will that be!
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: Parsweep  
Date:   Tue 11 Jun 17:23

Yip . There'll be precious few fans left by then as well .
How good will that be ?

Bobvo
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: moviescot  
Date:   Tue 11 Jun 19:40

Quote:

Parsweep, Tue 11 Jun 17:23

Yip . There'll be precious few fans left by then as well .
How good will that be ?


I don't think the crowds at rugby, cricket or tennis have suffered via var. There are much more serious issues that could affect crowds.

I would rather go to game knowing that most of the decisions by the referee were correct or could be corrected.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: Bandy  
Date:   Tue 11 Jun 20:19

Quote:

DBP, Tue 11 Jun 16:06

Rugby successfully use it for lots of things, offside, forward pass, illegal contact, yellow cards, etc


I don’t agree there - rugby games now last far too long, well over 2 hours in most cases.

Furthermore it had fundamentally changed how the game is played - because there are so many breaks in play, rugby teams are filled with ‘absolute units’ who would normally be out of gas after 20 minutes, but can now last the whole game because they get so much time to recover during the stoppages.

That, in turn, makes it a game of power, rather than a game of skill, which, personally, I find far less interesting to watch.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: Andrew283  
Date:   Tue 11 Jun 20:34

Well that's untrue, rugby VAR is one of the least time consuming parts of the game set piece set ups take up far far more time.

I honestly don't get the types who are so against it. Are you honestly happy with game changing mistakes being made?

Let's look at it this way, we're 1-0 up against Celtic at Hampden in '04, corner in their box, Balde punches it clear and Larsen goes up the pitch to score and in effect change the games momentum. VAR would have stopped that after review and we would have had a penalty instead.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: parathletic  
Date:   Tue 11 Jun 20:56

Some of the instances that VAR is currently being used for is ultimately just another ref watching the TV so mistakes are still being made.It shouldn't be compared to other sports where the technology actually makes the decision.

You can watch Match of the Day on a weekly basis and 2 ex pros who have had the benefit of 10 hours after the match having reviewed every angle possible and at different speeds and they still can't arrive at a general consensus.It should only be used for 'clear and obvious' incidents and I don't believe it is in it's current guise.

I think used correctly it can be of benefit but it was supposed to remove debate and nobody can argue that has been the case.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: KilsythPar  
Date:   Tue 11 Jun 21:05

De Bruyne clearly offside at 2nd goal. If only we had VA.R
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: RhinoPars  
Date:   Tue 11 Jun 21:09

I also thought it looked like De Bryne came back from offside position to get ball in build up to second goal. Did VAR not look at that?
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: allparone  
Date:   Tue 11 Jun 21:13

I don’t think var is being used in this competition
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: RhinoPars  
Date:   Tue 11 Jun 21:39

Thanks allparone. Pity.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: Bandy  
Date:   Wed 12 Jun 13:13

Which bits are untrue Andrew? - Rugby games are lasting too long AND the game is shifting to be ever more power based.

I’ll believe that the use of the TMO is a contributory factor in both of those things, until you can convince me otherwise!
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: wee eck  
Date:   Wed 12 Jun 17:17

In rugby it is normal now for all 8 replacements to be used regardless of the incidence of TMO stoppages and the front rows are usually changed before an hour is played.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: Parahandy  
Date:   Wed 19 Jun 21:52

Ruining football now
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: d3monstrate  
Date:   Wed 19 Jun 21:56

Dont think it was VAR that ruined it, that was fully on the ref. It was a penalty, and the keeper left her line before the ball was kicked. The decisions were correct
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: londonparsfan  
Date:   Wed 19 Jun 21:57

The only thing that ultimately ended up the wrong decision was the lack of stoppage time.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: SergioDuarte  
Date:   Wed 19 Jun 21:58

VAR again. Ripping the erse out the game. Said it was a lot of utter nonsense and here we have it again.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: londonparsfan  
Date:   Wed 19 Jun 21:59

The decisions were correct unfortunately.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: Berry  
Date:   Wed 19 Jun 21:59

VAR has the potential to be brilliant for the game. All it's doing is allowing a review of play.

It's the rules in how it's used which is ruining this.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: DBP  
Date:   Wed 19 Jun 22:00

It's not var, it's the use of VAR and the regulations being applied
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: Par  
Date:   Wed 19 Jun 22:00

Never mind VAR, independent timekeeping has to be looked at. The ref obviously lost the place regarding time
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: londonparsfan  
Date:   Wed 19 Jun 22:01

Quote:

Par, Wed 19 Jun 22:00

Never mind VAR, independent timekeeping has to be looked at. The ref obviously lost the place regarding time


That was my point on the other thread. You have to add the correct time back for the decisions.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: Bandy  
Date:   Wed 19 Jun 22:05

Quote:

londonparsfan, Wed 19 Jun 22:01

Quote:

Par, Wed 19 Jun 22:00

Never mind VAR, independent timekeeping has to be looked at. The ref obviously lost the place regarding time


That was my point on the other thread. You have to add the correct time back for the decisions.


Didn’t watch the game, but the bbc says the var review started at 86 mins, the penalty finally scored at 90+4, and the ref blew for full time pretty much immediately afterwards. That doesn’t seem right.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: SergioDuarte  
Date:   Wed 19 Jun 22:05

VAR hasn’t made the game any better. It has ruined football imo. Any sane person can see that.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: Berry  
Date:   Wed 19 Jun 22:06

Quote:

Bandy, Wed 19 Jun 22:05

Quote:

londonparsfan, Wed 19 Jun 22:01

Quote:

Par, Wed 19 Jun 22:00

Never mind VAR, independent timekeeping has to be looked at. The ref obviously lost the place regarding time


That was my point on the other thread. You have to add the correct time back for the decisions.


Didn’t watch the game, but the bbc says the var review started at 86 mins, the penalty finally scored at 90+4, and the ref blew for full time pretty much immediately afterwards. That doesn’t seem right.


Its surely in the rules the time has to stop whilst VAR is under review?
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: londonparsfan  
Date:   Wed 19 Jun 22:07

Wasn't far off that. There was some play in between that was effectively lost (for want of a better phrase) after the decisions were reviewed and I think that has to be taken into consideration timings wise.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: londonparsfan  
Date:   Wed 19 Jun 22:09

Quote:

Berry, Wed 19 Jun 22:06

Quote:

Bandy, Wed 19 Jun 22:05

Quote:

londonparsfan, Wed 19 Jun 22:01

Quote:

Par, Wed 19 Jun 22:00

Never mind VAR, independent timekeeping has to be looked at. The ref obviously lost the place regarding time


That was my point on the other thread. You have to add the correct time back for the decisions.


Didn’t watch the game, but the bbc says the var review started at 86 mins, the penalty finally scored at 90+4, and the ref blew for full time pretty much immediately afterwards. That doesn’t seem right.


Its surely in the rules the time has to stop whilst VAR is under review?


It wasnt just the stoppage time, there was the time the ball was in play while the ref couldn't stop the game to review the VAR. The review time is obviously the biggest but there was possibly 2 mins of the ball being in play that counted for nothing after the reviews.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: 1985Par  
Date:   Wed 19 Jun 22:11

VAR, the rules of football and the numerous grey areas within them just aren't compatible. Was it a penalty? Technically, yes. Was it a "clear and obvious mistake"? Well it only took 5 minutes of slow motion replays to clear it up. Did the keeper come of her line? Yes. Did anyone on the pitch notice and claim for a retake? No. "Clear and obvious error"? No. The introduction of VAR has coincided with pathetic new rules regarding handball and now this penalty thing whereby if a keeper steps a foot off their line it's a retake.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: londonparsfan  
Date:   Wed 19 Jun 22:13

I think they should drop the clear and obvious bit because as much as I like VAR it's just daft to say that's what it's used for.

Some decisions are just incredibly difficult and even with video evidence some of them are still incredibly difficult to judge.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: wee eck  
Date:   Wed 19 Jun 22:16

That's the only game I've watched at this World Cup where the fourth official hasn't displayed the board showing how much time was to be added at the end.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: 1985Par  
Date:   Wed 19 Jun 22:17

No, they should keep the clear and obvious bit, because unlike many sports, a lot of decisions/incidents are not clear and obvious, are not black and white and need some discretion to be applied.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: londonparsfan  
Date:   Wed 19 Jun 22:18

Agreed which is exactly why its useful to have video replays.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: kelty_par  
Date:   Wed 19 Jun 22:26

"That's the only game I've watched at this World Cup where the fourth official hasn't displayed the board showing how much time was to be added at the end."

4 minutes were signalled but it was during the penalty drama so they didn't show the board being held up. It did appear on the screen though next to the timer.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: yorkiepar  
Date:   Wed 19 Jun 22:29

Where does VAR end? Potential penalties, offsides, ball crossing line (or not) ........ and then maybe reviewed fouls, use of foul and abusive language ........ This is not football as I recognise it or want to see in the future. But I fear it's here to stay. Teams and their supporters have always felt hard done by for whatever reason but it was accepted that that was just the way it was: sometimes luck was on your side, sometimes not. I suppose though that wrong decisions now can have such a massive financial impact that they have to be factored out. A sad development in my view.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: londonparsfan  
Date:   Wed 19 Jun 22:35

Theres separate technology for the ball crossing the line and that works almost instantly and seems to be almost completely accurate.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: wee eck  
Date:   Wed 19 Jun 22:39

There will be a bigger fuss when this competition gets to the knockout stages and one of the favourites is on the wrong end of a controversial VAR decision.

It will be absolute mayhem if a match goes to a penalty shoot-out and each kick is examined by the VAR officials.



Post Edited (Wed 19 Jun 22:52)
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: parbucks  
Date:   Wed 19 Jun 22:49

VAR has taken over any decision making by the ref and his assistants.
It happens now in rugby when most tries are sent for review for events that could have happened minutes before,

Football is heading down that path.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: SergioDuarte  
Date:   Wed 19 Jun 23:02

I don’t think VAR is here to stay. In theory it’s a great idea put it in to practice and has ripped the heart out of the game. Let the referee do their job.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: wee eck  
Date:   Wed 19 Jun 23:12

I thought it was only meant for errors which were 'clear and obvious'? Considering how many replays the VAR officials and the ref must have looked at, it could hardly be said to have been a 'clear and obvious' error. In real time I thought it was a penalty but there was one angle shown in the replays which suggested Howard might have got a touch on the ball.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: wee eck  
Date:   Wed 19 Jun 23:18

I think someone suggested it has been introduced to satisfy the US TV market which welcomes stoppages in play which are common in other sports. Do they have commercial breaks while VAR is being applied?
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: londonparsfan  
Date:   Wed 19 Jun 23:31

I think that's completely wrong. It's far more likely to be the fact that in a televised game in the UK they can be showing replays of refs mistakes within minutes and when a ref goes in at half time and he's confronted with that mistake he has to ref an entire second half after making a mistake under the pressure of knowing he's inadvertently benefited one team. Its ludicrous to know that TV companies can spot a mistake in minutes and not use the same technology to ref the games.

US TV audiences has hee haw to do with it and whoever posted that on here was a million miles off the mark.

Post Edited (Wed 19 Jun 23:31)
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: parathletic  
Date:   Wed 19 Jun 23:31

If it can't be replicated in every game in every league then why further widen the gap between 'top level' football and the rest? If the answer to that is prize money then that is the wrong reason imo. If i'm not mistaken we had the farcical situation in last season's FA cup when it was applied in some matches but not others.

I wouldn't bet against some company ultimately sponsoring VAR reviews-you certainly get it all the time in the Big Bash cricket.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: Bandy  
Date:   Wed 19 Jun 23:40

I’ve not checked myself but apparently FIFA have quietly dropped the ‘clear and obvious’ directive
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: Livingston Par  
Date:   Wed 19 Jun 23:42

More VAR nonsense in Copa America game Colombia v Qatar
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: Parahandy  
Date:   Fri 21 Jun 11:38

Var really is idiotic - it randomly is used it seems for some decisions. The logical use of Var if you want to remove all wrong decisions from the game is to use it to see if a goalkeeper takes more than six seconds when holding the ball, that every throw in is checked for a foul throw, that every corner the ball is on the arc and every free kick sees defenders 10 yards back, etc. Then you’d have what the proponents of VAR say they want at the expense of the game - a game which their dabbling is already damaging
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: parathletic  
Date:   Fri 21 Jun 12:32

More shenanigans in the Uruguay v Japan game in the Copa America last night. Uruguay got a VAR penalty that wasn't-ref looked at it and it was clear Cavani kicked the defender but the defender was penalised. Japan should have had a penalty that wasn't reviewed.

What is clear ,VAR or not ,is that there has been some terrible refereeing over the last few days in both the Copa America and Women's World Cup. We need to improve refereeing standards as a priority before VAR imo.

Almost every game at the moment the after match talk is about VAR-it's as if the actual football gets forgotten.



Post Edited (Fri 21 Jun 12:43)
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: Turps  
Date:   Fri 21 Jun 12:47

Wait am I missing something. Why are Japan in the Copa America?
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: parathletic  
Date:   Fri 21 Jun 12:55

2 invited teams(Japan and Qatar)
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: kelty_par  
Date:   Fri 21 Jun 12:59

There aren't enough teams in South America so they invite a couple of others to make up the numbers. Japan has been in it a few times. They like inviting Mexico and the USA for TV money and since they are part of the American continent but the Gold Cup is on at the moment.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: Turps  
Date:   Fri 21 Jun 13:01

Ah cool.

Come on Scotland, get in there.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: Parsweep  
Date:   Sat 22 Jun 17:24

VAR up and running again today . Game spoiled by constant stoppages and still coming up with pihs decisions , even after 4 mins of studying

Bobvo
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: SergioDuarte  
Date:   Sat 22 Jun 17:53

VAR has been a complete disaster at this tournament. I preferred honest mistakes . Goal line technology is fine but VAR really is a complete brain fart from FIFA and does nothing to improve the game .
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: wee eck  
Date:   Sat 22 Jun 20:59

VAR overruled a ref's penalty award tonight in the Norway v Australia match. It looked a good call.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: JnrB  
Date:   Sat 22 Jun 21:53

I watched some of the Germany v Nigeria game and it was an utter farce. Var has worked fine when it’s been used sparingly for clear cut incidents. They seem to just want to use it for everything.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: Parahandy  
Date:   Sun 23 Jun 17:26

And here we go again - VAR gives us another 'sensation' - Cameroon almost refusing to play on. Let's not hear any more about VAR getting the decision right - it is destroying the referee as the ultimate decision maker and that just isn't right for football.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: widtink  
Date:   Sun 23 Jun 17:34

But the VAR decision was correct



[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks  
Date:   Sun 23 Jun 17:38

VAR is going to change the game. Cheats and rule breakers have no hiding place. There will be no more 'home team' decisions.

Turn on, Tune in, Drop out.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: Parahandy  
Date:   Sun 23 Jun 17:44

So what if the VAR decision was correct - the referee had already made a decision. VAR isn't deciding who gets a throw in or a corner or if there is encroachment at a free kick or if the six second rule is being broken by goalkeepers. If you want no more rule breakers then VAR will be deciding all of these - each of which could lead to a decisive moment in the game. Instead we have VAR which looks at the big decisions to satisfy the TV audience when many small decisions influence a game. Thus the referee gets to make all the small decisions and TV decides the rest and tells the ref what to decide. That isn't helping referees that is supplanting them - time to cut their wages as they no longer carry responsibility for the match.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: widtink  
Date:   Sun 23 Jun 17:48

Calm doon... 🤣
So you're not a fan of VAR I'm guessing?



[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: Parahandy  
Date:   Sun 23 Jun 18:06

Perfectly calm - just calling it as it is. VAR is for couch potatoes and TV cash - with its imaginary fairness
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: Bandy  
Date:   Sun 23 Jun 18:09

Quote:

Parahandy, Sun 23 Jun 18:06

Perfectly calm - just calling it as it is. VAR is for couch potatoes and TV cash - with its imaginary fairness


I’ve not the analysis but the VAR calls (or indeed the ‘non-VAR’ calls (I.e Scotland v Japan)) all seem to be favouring the ‘big’ team
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks  
Date:   Sun 23 Jun 18:11

Para you kinda lost your way with your reply of "So what if the var decision was correct".



Turn on, Tune in, Drop out.

Post Edited (Sun 23 Jun 18:11)
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: Parsweep  
Date:   Sun 23 Jun 18:22

Completely agree with psrahandy .
Seen umpteen occasions when corners , throw ins have not been awarded when they should have been . Take it the var controllers decided no goals could result from them . Either use it for all decisions , or get it to eff .

Bobvo
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: parathletic  
Date:   Sun 23 Jun 18:34

More shocking refereeing on show in that game.VAR is no use with poor officials.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: Parahandy  
Date:   Sun 23 Jun 18:37

I didn't lose my way - I am arguing for the lesser of two evils
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: parbucks  
Date:   Sun 23 Jun 19:50

Was this the same ref as in the last Scotland game?
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: widtink  
Date:   Sun 23 Jun 20:01

It has to be said that the ref kinda lost control a few times when the Cameroon players kicked off at a few decisions.



[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: veteraneastender  
Date:   Sun 23 Jun 20:05

"I watched some of the Germany v Nigeria game and it was an utter farce. Var has worked fine when it’s been used sparingly for clear cut incidents. They seem to just want to use it for everything."

If an incident is clear cut then there is no need for VAR, surely ?
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: parbucks  
Date:   Sun 23 Jun 20:42

VEE

That doesn’t work if you have incompetent referees and assistants as in the England game.

Eg: Late tackle on England player at the end by the touch line should have been a red card. Ref didn’t see it and went to watch on VAR. After an interminable delay finally gave a yellow.
Commentators reckoned it was not given as red because seconds to go.

Ref lost control during the game and was not helped by her assistants.
Got a feeling she might have ref’d the last Scotland game.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: parathletic  
Date:   Sun 23 Jun 20:53

It was a different ref to Scotland game. How that wasn't given as a red at the end I'll never know-no attempt to play the ball whatsoever. Also anyone who says that women don't complain to the ref need to watch that game. Ref should have handed out plenty cards for dissent.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: steaua  
Date:   Mon 24 Jun 09:34

The heading says it all for me. I hope it never comes to Scotland. Football is a continuous game and to stop and start a game as has been witnessed in the Women's World Cup Finals, this would seriously disrupt our football as we know it and also kill the game as we know it. A big NO, NO ftom me.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: Raymie the Legend  
Date:   Mon 24 Jun 09:56

VAR is good but it's been used too much in the Women's WC. It could be that is because the refs have been poor and need more help than the men would?

It should be restricted to checking if there is any dubiety about a goal.

Having a set number of challenges, in addition, perhaps one in each half, could work?




It's bloody tough being a legend
Ron Atkinson - 1983
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: MikeyLeonard  
Date:   Mon 24 Jun 11:51

Quote:

Raymie the Legend, Mon 24 Jun 09:56
It could be that is because the refs have been poor and need more help than the men would?


Better get the tin hat on after that comment Raymie. . .😁
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks  
Date:   Mon 24 Jun 11:57

I believe its been men in the var room.

Turn on, Tune in, Drop out.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: widtink  
Date:   Mon 24 Jun 11:59

There was a phone in on bbc5 live yesterday after the Englandlandshireshire match and a fair few of the callers and studio guests were asking why men were not refereeing in this world cup.
Some suggested that female referees are not as good as male referees as they lack big match/ tournament experience .
Thoughts?



[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: wee eck  
Date:   Mon 24 Jun 12:02

How are they going to get 'big match' experience if they don't get to officiate in tournaments like this?

Are there any British refs in the tournament? I haven't noticed any.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: veteraneastender  
Date:   Mon 24 Jun 12:17

"That doesn’t work if you have incompetent referees and assistants as in the England game."

Just watched the highlights.

Agreed on the shocking challenge near the end.

However on the VAR calls which impacted on goals allowed/disallowed, I reckon the correct decisions were arrived at.

The Cameroon offside situation was unbelievably close - but isn't that a classic VAR scenario, the reason it has been introduced.

Looks as if the ocassion was too much for the referee.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: Playup_Pompey  
Date:   Mon 24 Jun 12:43

Yes we have Scottish officials out at the tournament.

[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: SergioDuarte  
Date:   Mon 24 Jun 13:16

TOWKs comments are stunningly naive . If you honestly believe that football is rotten to the core to that extent then it’s surely going to take more than VAR to clean up the game.? Pretty sure if you can buy a ref you can buy a VAR team. Parahandy nails it. It’s for armchair tv fans. Folk that have never kicked a baw in their puff and don’t understand the game. Get the nachos oot it’s the VAR decider . Phone lines are closed. Results after the news... zzzz
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks  
Date:   Mon 24 Jun 15:22

What comments?

Turn on, Tune in, Drop out.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: parathletic  
Date:   Mon 24 Jun 17:39

The over usage and controversy hasn't been exclusive to the Women's World Cup.The Copa America and Gold Cup are only just underway and there have been plenty examples there already.In that sense I feel a bit sorry for the women-it's the pinnacle of their football at a time when they are trying to promote the game in a positive manner and with them being the first to trial some new regulations they have been used as guinea pigs to an extent.More talk of VAR than the football.

Just because technology is there doesn't mean it has used to be used constantly to the detriment of the overall product.If you take tennis as an example if they used hawk-eye for every call technically there would never been an incorrect decision and you could do away with line judges altogether.I watched a game at Queens the other day at the end of a tight match(can't recall who was playing) and the player had used all of their challenges, hawk-eye showed the ball was out but was called in but the decision had to stand despite it possibly having an effect on the outcome of the match.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: sammer  
Date:   Mon 24 Jun 18:12

VEE,

Like you I only saw highlights of the England v Cameroon match, but I can understand why the Cameroon women were angry at how two of the VAR incidents were judged.

The England ‘offside’ goal which was given looked clearly offside at first, particularly as the scorer was not running forward when she received the final pass. For me the slow-mo replay suggested she might have been on-side, but here comes part of the problem. First of all the player making the pass was hidden on camera by a Cameroon defender so it was not possible to identify exactly when she made the pass. And what do we mean by ‘when’ she made the pass. There are micro-seconds between the ball being struck and actually starting to leave the foot, but as we often see that can be significant in terms of yards covered by a player. Is the wording of the offside law clear on this distinction?

The offside Cameroon goal was very harshly judged I thought. A Cameroon attacker had chased down a back pass to the England keeper and was attempting to run back onside when the ball came back into her zone. She made no attempt to play the ball and could not be accused of seeking any advantage or interfering with play so far as I could see. The resulting shot was beautifully stuck as well which no doubt added to the Cameroon sense of injustice.

The point has been well made on this site many times: VAR does not necessarily produce black and white decisions; all it can do is offer better evidence from which to make a decision.

sammer

Post Edited (Mon 24 Jun 18:13)
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: veteraneastender  
Date:   Mon 24 Jun 20:40

"Like you I only saw highlights of the England v Cameroon match, but I can understand why the Cameroon women were angry at how two of the VAR incidents were judged."

England could have just as easily been aggrieved if the decisions had gone the other way.

Both calls were incredibly close - just confirms how difficult it is for assistant referees (either gender) to judge close plays.

"She made no attempt to play the ball and could not be accused of seeking any advantage or interfering with play so far as I could see."

Going by the VAR footage she was in an offside position when she received the ball - therefore offside.

Setting up the pass for a goal is clearly interfering with play as I understand the rule interpretation.

Have any prominent officials commented publicly ?



Post Edited (Mon 24 Jun 20:41)
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: Bandy  
Date:   Mon 24 Jun 22:29

I'm confused by the new goalkeeper rule on penalties again...I thought that when the ball was struck the keeper had to have a foot on the line - i.e not behind or in front. The behind thing is specifically mentioned.

When the Canadian struck her penalty the Swedish keeper had one foot in front of the line, one foot behind the line, but nothing actually 'on it'? Is that OK? If it's Ok then what exactly is the point of the 'behind the line' wording in the rule?
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: wee eck  
Date:   Mon 24 Jun 22:34

Apparently there have been 22 penalties awarded in the 42 games so far and 16 have been converted. If the laws are applied as strictly by the refs in Scotland as they have been in the WWC, defenders are going to have to drastically change how they defend inside the penalty box. Arms will have to be held firmly by the side or behind the back and tackles should be avoided unless no contact with an opponent is assured. I think there may be even more simulation than before.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: Bandy  
Date:   Mon 24 Jun 22:40

"Arms will have to be held firmly by the side or behind the back" - there's a real irony in that, as having your hands behind your back whilst shaping your body to react quickly is pretty much the definition of an 'unnatural position'.

The rule has been totally ballsed up. In the same way that the offside rule has been totally ballsed up.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: sammer  
Date:   Mon 24 Jun 23:08

VEE,
I misread the controversial Cameroon ‘goal.’ It was not the chaser down of the pass back who was ruled offside, but a player pretty much in line with the English back four who was marginal when she received the ball before putting in the telling cross.

The problem still remains however. How much of her body, or her foot, was deemed to be behind the last English defender? Practically none, so far as I could see. As a decision it could have justifiably gone either way. Is a hand or an eyebrow enough to make a player offside? I genuinely do not know.

Which is why I think VAR has to be seen by fans for all its limitations. Back in 1966 Geoff Hurst hit a shot which bounced behind the line, and the goal was reasonably enough given. We now know that although the ball struck behind the line that not the entire ball had crossed the line, so the goal should not have been awarded. Well done modern goal line technology- that is good. Whether a ball crossed the line has now got something close to quick, mathematical certainty.

However an offside pass or a tackle inside the box or a handball has so much less than that. At what point is the pass ‘made?’ VAR cannot settle these arguments easily.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: Bandy  
Date:   Mon 24 Jun 23:12

"Is a hand or an eyebrow enough to make a player offside?"

Taking the question literally, an eyebrow is enough. A hand isn't. Reason being you can score with your eyebrow, but not your hand.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: sammer  
Date:   Mon 24 Jun 23:24

Bandy,

Your wit is appreciated. As is your pithy point about 'unnatural' positions. Common sense has to be applied to any law otherwise it becomes an imposition. A future of macho defenders running around with their arms by their sides like River Dances makes the game look stupid.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: veteraneastender  
Date:   Tue 25 Jun 09:02

"The problem still remains however. How much of her body, or her foot, was deemed to be behind the last English defender? Practically none, so far as I could see. As a decision it could have justifiably gone either way. Is a hand or an eyebrow enough to make a player offside? I genuinely do not know."

Ditto for the last sentence.

The "problem" now is that if the technology is available and accurate there will be a move to have it used.

Had there been no VAR at the England v Cameroon game then those two disputed offside plays would have resulted in a campaign to have it introduced.

Seems to have become a "can't live with it, can't live without it" situation.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: Andrew283  
Date:   Tue 25 Jun 11:18

These issues are clearly related to the new rules and less to to VAR. Both however need to be looked into as the system seems to be heavily flawed right now with everyone's understanding of the rules etc
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: Bandy  
Date:   Tue 25 Jun 22:19

Tonight's game confirming that the new handball rule is a load of utter crap - not the fault of VAR I might add, but still. Utter utter crap.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: wee eck  
Date:   Tue 25 Jun 23:19

Mind you when Scotland played Japan and a shot struck a Japanese arm in the box it wasn't even considered by VAR apparently, so maybe the decision against them tonight was karma.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: Parahandy  
Date:   Tue 2 Jul 21:40

Yet another batch of nonsense served up in the Women's Varball Cup
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: allparone  
Date:   Tue 2 Jul 21:42

Definite penalty. My question is, is it a penalty when the USA team cuddle the keeper, touching the ball in the process when the ball is in play?

Post Edited (Tue 02 Jul 21:42)
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: londonparsfan  
Date:   Tue 2 Jul 21:42

Correctly ruled out an England goal for offside and then allowed the ref to see the slightest of clips to award what was a soft but correct penalty.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: cmonpar  
Date:   Tue 2 Jul 21:45

Loving the un biased commentary
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: allparone  
Date:   Tue 2 Jul 21:47

Quote:

cmonpar, Tue 02 Jul 21:45

Loving the un biased commentary


Ha, I was thinking the same when the co commentator said “she’s not offside” when the tv showed the replay of the disallowed goal. She was clearly offside but hey, we’ve all made that shout when it’s been our team I suppose.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: londonparsfan  
Date:   Tue 2 Jul 21:47

I'm not sure why they seem to think neutrals want England to win 🤣
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: parsfan  
Date:   Tue 2 Jul 21:51

Quote:

cmonpar, Tue 2 Jul 21:45

Loving the un biased commentary


While I agree, do you think for one second the American commentary isn't worse?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The universe is ruled by chance and indifference
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: 1970par  
Date:   Tue 2 Jul 21:56

Oh dear what a shame, never mind, bad luck again Eeengurlund. Always the bridesmaids
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: cmonpar  
Date:   Tue 2 Jul 22:02

Quote:

parsfan, Tue 02 Jul 21:51

Quote:

cmonpar, Tue 2 Jul 21:45

Loving the un biased commentary


While I agree, do you think for one second the American commentary isn't worse?


I think the American commentary would be unbearable tbh
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: wetherby  
Date:   Tue 2 Jul 22:02

was watching game in New York on an American channel and would have to say the commentary was very balanced and actually rather good surprisingly.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: parbucks  
Date:   Tue 2 Jul 22:14

Surely cuddling the goalie with the ball in her arms is foul play?

England could have edged it but Yanks more clinical and streetwise at this level.



Post Edited (Tue 02 Jul 22:16)
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: allparone  
Date:   Tue 2 Jul 22:18

Quote:

parbucks, Tue 02 Jul 22:14

Surely cuddling the goalie with the ball in her arms is foul play.


I thought that too (and asked above) at first but on watching the replay it’s hard to say if any of them touched the ball. I’ve never seen it happen before though so I’m still unsure if it would be a foul. If the keeper has it in his hands and another player touches it, is it a foul? I would think it is but I’m not sure. As I said, I’ve never seen that before.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: nazpar  
Date:   Tue 2 Jul 22:20

Living in Newcastle .the English media are going overboard again .your right not all neutrals are supporting England .it's the top story on the 10 o'clock news .

nazpar
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: allparone  
Date:   Tue 2 Jul 22:25

Maybe one day we’ll be able to comment on how our media reacts when we get to a World Cup semi final.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: Parahandy  
Date:   Tue 2 Jul 22:25

Clear and obvious nonsense again. How is it a penalty when an attacker goes to shoot and when she takes her leg back it touches the defender - an accidental contact. Then the Ref doesn't have a clue - watches it again and again and decides eventually she better do something before the last bus home.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: allparone  
Date:   Tue 2 Jul 22:27

There’s nothing that says a foul has to be deliberate. That was a foul according to the laws of the game.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: parbucks  
Date:   Tue 2 Jul 22:34

She was impeded. End of. Penalty. Correct if belated decision.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: londonparsfan  
Date:   Tue 2 Jul 22:41

I think you're on the wind up now. VAR was brought in precisely to allow refs to get a look at close calls from multiple angles.

It wasn't deliberate and there wasn't a huge amount of contact but shes clipped her just as she's opening her body up to shoot and stops her playing the ball so it's a penalty.

If that had been against the Pars and we didnt get it and saw the hilights afterwards showing it was a penalty we would all be moaning like fook.

Its yet another good decision made through the use of technology.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: parsfan  
Date:   Tue 2 Jul 23:27

Quote:

allparone, Tue 2 Jul 22:27

There’s nothing that says a foul has to be deliberate. That was a foul according to the laws of the game.


Fine with that, but why was she booked? The same thing anywhere else it's not a foul or a booking. Here it's both.

It's another rules of the game thing rather than VAR, but the foul was clearly an accident, why the booking? Are accidental fouls outside the box also yellow card offenses? What about if the ref had called the penalty at the time? Can you have a penalty nowadays without someone getting booked?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The universe is ruled by chance and indifference
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: wee eck  
Date:   Tue 2 Jul 23:31

Maybe there was contact but in that instance I don't see how anyone can say it was instigated by the US player. To give a yellow card just adds insult to injury.

Penalty saves don't seem to be coming under such close scrutiny in the knockout games either.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: kelty_par  
Date:   Tue 2 Jul 23:33

Wait, there are people out there that thought that was a penalty? Seriously thought it was a penalty, or are trolling? Because I'm honestly confused here. How is a defender having their shin touched by the backswing of a forwards boot in any way foul play? Are these people those types that say "there was contact" and somehow think we've stopped playing football and have went over to basketball or netball or something? The bigger issue of course is that slowing things down, rock and rolling the footage and showing multiple angles make almost anything look like a foul, and that once a referee is asked to take a look at the pitch-side monitor, it takes a very brave, very strong referee to tell the VAR "nah, I'm happy I got that right". It's amazing to think there are still people out there who want this extended further.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: londonparsfan  
Date:   Tue 2 Jul 23:35

It was the denial of a clear goal scoring opportunity. In the past it should have been a red card but they relaxed it a couple of years ago so that if it's an accidental foul in the denial of a clear goal scoring opportunity it's a booking. If it is an accidental foul in the box when it's not a clear goal scoring opportunity then it's probably not a booking.

Personally I agree with you, I think the yellow in this scenario is harsh.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: Parahandy  
Date:   Tue 2 Jul 23:43

Look at it another way - the attacker took her foot back and accidentally made contact with the defender. Free kick to USA for accidental foul on defender - that is equally as valid as the daft views about it being an accidental foul worthy of a penalty. There is no foul there at all
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: londonparsfan  
Date:   Tue 2 Jul 23:46

She gets clipped from behind it's a clear penalty and foul anywhere else in the park. The attacker makes her move first and then gets clipped by the defender.

You'll be raging if it's against you as it doesn't feel like much contact but if that doesn't go for you as the attacking team you'd also be raging.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: allparone  
Date:   Wed 3 Jul 00:11

Parsfan, I’m not sure why it was a booking either tbh. Definite foul - regardless of where it was on the pitch - but I thought the laws had changed about clear goal scoring opportunities. I was of the understanding that if a player made a genuine attempt at playing the ball then it was no longer a sending off? In this instance the USA player never attempted to play the ball so should it have been a red? If the referee deemed it accidental does that change it? Not sure tbh.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: londonparsfan  
Date:   Wed 3 Jul 00:35

Denying a goal or an obvious goal-scoring opportunity

Where a player denies the opposing team a goal or an obvious goal-scoring opportunity by a handball offence, the player is sent off wherever the offence occurs.

Where a player commits an offence against an opponent within their own penalty area which denies an opponent an obvious goal-scoring opportunity and the referee awards a penalty kick, the offender is cautioned if the offence was an attempt to play the ball; in all other circumstances (e.g. holding, pulling, pushing, no possibility to play the ball etc.) the offending player must be sent off.

I'm assuming the ref has taken the decision that as it was an accident, a red card would have been excessive so opted for a yellow.

I think when a penalty is given for denying a clear goal scoring opportunity the ref has to issue either a yellow or a red card, there doesn't appear to be a no card option.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: kelty_par  
Date:   Wed 3 Jul 09:23

"an accidental foul"

Come on lpf, now you're just making things up. Where exactly in the laws is the term "accidental foul" used?
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: londonparsfan  
Date:   Wed 3 Jul 10:45

Accidental foul isnt used in the rules specifically but deliberate is used in relation to quite a few fouls so if something isn't deliberate then surely it must be...

Fouls that are accidents happen all the time. People running across each other and clipping each other accidently being the most apt in this case.

There's no way in my mind the US player has tried to take out the attacker but she's clipped her while she is trying to play the ball. It's pretty clear that falls under "impeding with contact" which is a direct free kick or a penalty in the box.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: wee eck  
Date:   Wed 3 Jul 10:51

Penalising that kind of 'foul' just encourages simulation in my opinion and the 'entitled to go down' attitude beloved of so many pundits.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: londonparsfan  
Date:   Wed 3 Jul 10:57

I dont see why that would encourage diving. On review you can see the contact and it completely stops the attacker from the playing the ball - it's a foul.

If there had been no contact on the VAR review it could/should have been a booking for a dive.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: wee eck  
Date:   Wed 3 Jul 11:07

Can you be sure the US player instigated the contact? It would be so easy for an attacking player to instigate 'accidental' contact but it seems to me the defender is always punished in these situations now. That will just encourage simulation.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: Bandy  
Date:   Wed 3 Jul 11:37

I'm siding with lpf on this one - it's a foul and a penalty. VAR has seen contact that the ref and officials couldn't.

Where I have concerns (for officials mostly) is that there are clear differences in officiating 'best practices' for games when VAR is in place, and for games it's not. The rules stay the same, but how you officiate the rules doesn't.

Take England's disallowed goal last night. The lino didn't flag, as per directive to allow leeway in close offside decisions, before flagging - White scored and the goal was (marginally, but correctly) ruled out.

In a non-VAR the lino needs to make an instant judgement and flag (or not-flag) immediately. That's a totally different decision making process and I suspect, for those experienced in officiating VAR games will 'lapse' into safety first mode and not flag if it's close. I therefore expect a slight increase in 'offside' goals in non-VAR games, which, personally, I don't think is a good thing.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks  
Date:   Wed 3 Jul 11:47

I'd personally like the offside rule changed so that if any part of your goalscoring body is onside then you are onside. Much in the same way as the entire ball has to cross the line your whole goal scoring body parts should have crossed the notional 'offside line'.

Turn on, Tune in, Drop out.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: moviescot  
Date:   Wed 3 Jul 11:48

Quote:

wee eck, Wed 3 Jul 11:07

Can you be sure the US player instigated the contact? It would be so easy for an attacking player to instigate 'accidental' contact but it seems to me the defender is always punished in these situations now. That will just encourage simulation.


I do not see what the issue is. Stonewall penalty. Called it at full speed and surprised it took so long to award. Foot was caught by defender in the act of shooting.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: londonparsfan  
Date:   Wed 3 Jul 11:59

When you watch it on the replay you can see that the striker has pulled her leg back and is in the process of shooting when she gets clipped by the defender.

Players leave their legs in all the time looking for penalties but I'd argue the penalty incident last night is one of the least likely times a player is ever going to do that.

For what it's worth this is a quote from the player herself:

"England was awarded the penalty and Sauerbrunn was handed a yellow card for the foul. "I thought there was contact, but if I didn't go for it, she was going to score," Sauerbrunn said after the match. "But it was a legitimate move for the ball."
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks  
Date:   Wed 3 Jul 12:09

Straight from the horses mouth that it was definitely a penalty and to be honest probably should have been a red because if that was an attempt to play the ball she was miles away from succeeding.

Turn on, Tune in, Drop out.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: wee eck  
Date:   Wed 3 Jul 12:09

'Stonewall' penalty that took multiple replays for it to be confirmed after the ref decided it wasn't a foul.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: londonparsfan  
Date:   Wed 3 Jul 12:16

@TOWK yeah to be honest when I saw that I thought I was wrong about my earlier post about it not being worthy of a yellow.

Just goes to show how difficult it is for refs to judge intent or deliberate motions.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: kelty_par  
Date:   Wed 3 Jul 14:05

"On review you can see the contact and it completely stops the attacker from the playing the ball - it's a foul."

The fact that there is contact does not necessarily make it a foul. If we are allowing penalties for that and accidental contacts of that nature (not "accidental fouls" btw, you can have a "deliberate foul" as in that is your intention to foul the player like pulling back a shirt or taking someone out at knee height, versus a "non-deliberate foul" where the defender does genuinely try to win the ball but mistimes it, or the attacker is too quick or whatever - accidental contact is not a foul in of itself) then I agree with wee eck above, the "talented divers" such as Delle Alli, Mo Salah, Raheem Sterling etc. will just dangle a leg out when they are in close proximity to a defender and go down, knowing that an ultra slow-mo from twelve angles will show "contact" and the apologists for this sort of thing like Jermaine Jenas, Danny Murphy and your good self will all say "there was contact, he's entitled to go down, it's a penalty).
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: wee eck  
Date:   Wed 3 Jul 15:13

You make the point a lot more eloquently than I did, kp!
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks  
Date:   Wed 3 Jul 15:15

But the USA defender admitted it wasn't accidental! I'd say she was trying to be clever by dangling her foot out so it would catch the strikers leg. Fortunately var was there to punish a rule breaker.

Turn on, Tune in, Drop out.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: 1985Par  
Date:   Wed 3 Jul 15:17

My own thoughts on last nights incidents.

The offside goal - Would like to see the rule changed to favour the attacker so that ALL the body is offside ie clear daylight exists between attacker and defender. We've seen a few good goals recently chalked off for someone's big toe being in an offside position. No doubt the technology exists nowadays to determine whether an attacker is a millimetre/micron/bawhair offside - what we would call "level" before VAR came along.

The penalty - Seen the incident a hundred times and still can't figure out who made contact with who. Looked like the American was running in a straight line and the English lassie got her legs tangled up in the americans - can't see how the American was at fault or could have done anything to avoid it.


If we're going to scrutinise everything with VAR the rules need to evolve with it. It would be good if a group of people who had played the game and had some appreciation of it's many grey areas could have a look at the rules and see how they can be made more compatible with VAR - clearly something needs to give. Those who see football in black and white should stay well away.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: wee eck  
Date:   Wed 3 Jul 15:18

The scenarios suggested by kelty par are highly likely though and VAR will inVARiably support the 'simulator'.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: londonparsfan  
Date:   Wed 3 Jul 15:21

"The fact that there is contact does not necessarily make it a foul."

I completely agree, players can run into each other and no foul is committed by either (one example).

In this case though the question has to be has the attacker been impeded by the contact from the defender and I can't see any other answer than yes she was.

She's pulled her foot back to strike the ball and the contact from behind by the defender has caused her to miss the ball completely when it's a clear goal scoring opportunity.

Initially I thought it was an accident but that's not the deciding factor on whether the contact is a foul, it's a question as to whether she was impeded. Accidental or not it's still a foul IMP and a penalty in this scenario as the attacker was impeded as they are striking the ball. I cant see any argument that the attacker wasn't impeded?

I was using the term accidental foul mainly for the sanction afterwards as a foul preventing a goal scoring attempt in the box from a genuine attempt to play the ball is regarded as a booking whereas everything else is a red. Although strictly not in the rules, the difference is often described as accidental vs deliberate, hence why I used the term an accidental foul. Slightly lazy on my part admittedly but the term is used pretty frequently in discussions:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/36047575

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2018/05/19/phil-jones-not-sent-last-man-foul-eden-hazard/amp/

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.reddit.com/r/soccer/comments/4esjp3/denying_a_goalscoring_opportunity_with_an/

That's just from a quick search.

Players already leave their legs out looking for contact to win penalties now and have done for a while. I still cant see how this VAR incident where an attacker is in the process of shooting and gets impeded from behind is going to encourage diving. Even the defender didn't argue and appears to think it was a penalty.

In the future VAR will give the opportunity for refs to have multiple views of an incident to determine whether any contact is a foul. If a player is impeded then it will likely be a penalty but that's going to be scenario specific and I don't see any precedent coming out of last nights decision as fouls have been given for ages when defenders are the wrong side of attackers, clip them and bring them down. It's not a new thing.

Post Edited (Wed 03 Jul 15:26)
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: londonparsfan  
Date:   Wed 3 Jul 15:26

Sorry quite a few typos in there I'm correcting!
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: moviescot  
Date:   Wed 3 Jul 16:29

Quote:

wee eck, Wed 3 Jul 12:09

'Stonewall' penalty that took multiple replays for it to be confirmed after the ref decided it wasn't a foul.


Yes. That's called poor refereeing. Something this tournament has been riddled with. Nothing to do with the fact it was a clear penalty. A level of cowardice from the ref I think.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: moviescot  
Date:   Wed 3 Jul 16:31

Quote:

kelty_par, Wed 3 Jul 14:05

"On review you can see the contact and it completely stops the attacker from the playing the ball - it's a foul."

The fact that there is contact does not necessarily make it a foul. If we are allowing penalties for that and accidental contacts of that nature (not "accidental fouls" btw, you can have a "deliberate foul" as in that is your intention to foul the player like pulling back a shirt or taking someone out at knee height, versus a "non-deliberate foul" where the defender does genuinely try to win the ball but mistimes it, or the attacker is too quick or whatever - accidental contact is not a foul in of itself) then I agree with wee eck above, the "talented divers" such as Delle Alli, Mo Salah, Raheem Sterling etc. will just dangle a leg out when they are in close proximity to a defender and go down, knowing that an ultra slow-mo from twelve angles will show "contact" and the apologists for this sort of thing like Jermaine Jenas, Danny Murphy and your good self will all say "there was contact, he's entitled to go down, it's a penalty).


Funny. The "great' players already dangle legs out to get contact. In this case the leg was not dangled out it was caught by the defender. The defender involved even admits to committing the foul. I really don't understand the issue.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: moviescot  
Date:   Wed 3 Jul 16:34

Quote:

1985Par, Wed 3 Jul

The penalty - Seen the incident a hundred times and still can't figure out who made contact with who. Looked like the American was running in a straight line and the English lassie got her legs tangled up in the americans - can't see how the American was at fault or could have done anything to avoid it.


Eh??? The defender admitted it was deliberate.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: londonparsfan  
Date:   Wed 3 Jul 16:45

And even if it wasn't deliberate it was still a penalty 😂
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: kelty_par  
Date:   Wed 3 Jul 16:47

Eh, no she didn't. She said that she went for the ball (not a foul), and that there was contact (still not a foul). Are you trying to suggest that the American player had the wherewithal to anticipate that the Wnglish player was going to draw their foot back to that extent and to then make sure her shin (not her foot, which would be a deliberate action) made contact with said foot and that the touch itself was enough to warrant a penalty? If all of that is the case then we have very different interpretations of what constitutes a penalty, and I fear we're going to end up with some ridiculous score lines, especially in games with a VAR.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: moviescot  
Date:   Wed 3 Jul 17:00

Quote:

kelty_par, Wed 3 Jul 16:47

Eh, no she didn't. She said that she went for the ball (not a foul), and that there was contact (still not a foul). Are you trying to suggest that the American player had the wherewithal to anticipate that the Wnglish player was going to draw their foot back to that extent and to then make sure her shin (not her foot, which would be a deliberate action) made contact with said foot and that the touch itself was enough to warrant a penalty? If all of that is the case then we have very different interpretations of what constitutes a penalty, and I fear we're going to end up with some ridiculous score lines, especially in games with a VAR.


Yes. She went for the ball. Missed the ball. Hit the opponent. That's a foul. Simple really.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: 1985Par  
Date:   Wed 3 Jul 17:23

The American player did nothing other than run in a straight line. She didn't try to make a tackle or even reach for the ball. She ran in a straight line, the English player runs across her, tangling of legs, both players end up on the deck. No foul on either part.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: wee eck  
Date:   Wed 3 Jul 17:46

What's happened to the good, old-fashioned 'coming together'? The laws don't seem to cater for that any more. Any bodily contact has to be a foul apparently.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: 1985Par  
Date:   Wed 3 Jul 17:54

That would require " discretion" wee eck, and an understanding that football is less black and white than any other sport I can think of. The refs and the rule makers don't do discretion.



Post Edited (Wed 03 Jul 17:55)
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: londonparsfan  
Date:   Wed 3 Jul 18:08

They quite clearly do as the ref at her discretion, changed her mind from no penalty to a penalty....

Coming togethers happen all the time and no fouls are given.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: wee eck  
Date:   Wed 3 Jul 18:32

It's hardly the ref's discretion when three VAR officials, who have looked at an incident multiple times, are suggesting she has another look at it on the screen.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: londonparsfan  
Date:   Wed 3 Jul 19:01

They've still got the final say. Not every VAR review results in a foul sometimes the game continues. In some cases refs have immediately asked for a replay without any input from the VAR refs.

It's very much at the refs discretion hence the controversy around some decisions that come down to interpretation.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: kelty_par  
Date:   Wed 3 Jul 21:58

There is no way on Earth a relatively inexperienced referee is going to go over to the monitor and have the guts to tell the VAR room that they are fine with their original decision. I'd say there's almost no way on Earth that even an experienced referee is going to do that.

If we must have VAR, then if the decision can't be overturned after say 30 seconds, then the original decision should stand (like "umpire's call in cricket). That way clear mistakes and offside decisions can be corrected while still allowing the referee to be the main decision maker.

As for this "Yes. She went for the ball. Missed the ball. Hit the opponent. That's a foul. Simple really." The fourth sentence sums up why you're wrong - she didn't "hit the opponent", there was contact between the two where a more accurate statement might be "the opponent hit her" making your final two sentences moot. I get the impression you want to have penalty kicks given for all contact in the box which is a perfectly valid opinion but one which would turn football into a joke sport like netball where contact fouls are given every few seconds. That may be good for some but it's not what I want to watch.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: moviescot  
Date:   Thu 4 Jul 08:26

Quote:

kelty_par, Wed 3 Jul 21:58

There is no way on Earth a relatively inexperienced referee is going to go over to the monitor and have the guts to tell the VAR room that they are fine with their original decision. I'd say there's almost no way on Earth that even an experienced referee is going to do that.

If we must have VAR, then if the decision can't be overturned after say 30 seconds, then the original decision should stand (like "umpire's call in cricket). That way clear mistakes and offside decisions can be corrected while still allowing the referee to be the main decision maker.

As for this "Yes. She went for the ball. Missed the ball. Hit the opponent. That's a foul. Simple really." The fourth sentence sums up why you're wrong - she didn't "hit the opponent", there was contact between the two where a more accurate statement might be "the opponent hit her" making your final two sentences moot. I get the impression you want to have penalty kicks given for all contact in the box which is a perfectly valid opinion but one which would turn football into a joke sport like netball where contact fouls are given every few seconds. That may be good for some but it's not what I want to watch.


Ok. She made contact with opponent which caused her to be unable to complete her shot. Funny that we are on here arguing about a decision that even the defender involved thought was correct.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: Lambo1885  
Date:   Thu 4 Jul 08:57

"Ok. She made contact with opponent which caused her to be unable to complete her shot. Funny that we are on here arguing about a decision that even the defender involved thought was correct."

No she didn't, she said she felt she made a legitimate move. I'd agree with her.
I also agree with what Kelty's been saying....
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: AJ27  
Date:   Thu 4 Jul 09:30

“She made contact with the defender which caused her to be unable to complete her shot” and that makes it a penalty - complete lunacy.

On this basis any contact in the box will be up for debate - ie in trying to attack a ball I run straight into a defender who is in my way - penalty as they caused me to be unable to get my shot in - generally the women set a much better example in playing fair. Once the men get used to this there’ll be bodies going down all over the place. It’s a good job we don’t have it here - the Old Firm would get so many penalties it would be unbelievable.

If that penalty had been given to the US there would have been an outcry about England being cheated out of the World Cup that was rightfully theirs.

As it is on Sunday we’re all going to have to listen to 90 minutes of how it would have been much better game if only England had been there.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: SergioDuarte  
Date:   Thu 4 Jul 16:32

Jesus wept lads. It’s woman’s fitba ffs. The competition has been an absolute farce. If this happens in the men’s game then we can worry
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: wee eck  
Date:   Thu 4 Jul 16:51

Why wouldn't it? The Laws of the Game apply to all football.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: SergioDuarte  
Date:   Thu 4 Jul 16:53

Quote:

wee eck, Thu 04 Jul 16:51

Why wouldn't it? The Laws of the Game apply to all football.


Lol
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: Buspasspar  
Date:   Thu 4 Jul 18:58

Only my opinion but the game has been crying out for a system like VAR
Too many relegation/promotion/cupgames/groupgames/finals have been won or lost on real time decisions by a referee (which were proved wrong in replays)
VAR gives the ref the chance to review what he thought was correct in real time and allow him or her to stick by the original decision or change it ..... I would like to see a time off or time out called when reviewing Var
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: VAR Lunacy
Topic Originator: wee eck  
Date:   Thu 4 Jul 22:33

Topic Originator: SergioDuarte like | nolike
Date: Thu 4 Jul 16:53

Quote:

wee eck, Thu 04 Jul 16:51

Why wouldn't it? The Laws of the Game apply to all football.


Lol


😊😊😊😊😊😊
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Top of Board  |  Forum List  |  Threaded View   Forum Rules  |  Newer Topic  |  Older Topic  |  end 


 Forum List  |  Need a Login? Register Here 
 User Login
 User Name:
 Password:
 Remember my login:
   
 Forgot Your Password?
Enter your email address or user name below and a new password will be sent to the email address associated with your profile.
Security : type 'pars' in the box:
email: