VAR... really??

[PaddockLad 17262]

If you want to know what Danny Baker thinks then PL has you covered in here.

 

only just noticed this

 

Ahem..

 

 

 

 

 

 

[RobinRobin 11272]

Not sure why the blatant shoulder in the back of the Moroccan player was not VAR'd for a penalty.

[PaddockLad 17262]

3 hours ago, RobinRobin said:

Not sure why the blatant shoulder in the back of the Moroccan player was not VAR'd for a penalty.

 

Because those operating it are no better informed even with all the tech at their fingertips than the ref on the pitch? 

 

 

[Gemmill 44881]

But that's not true. Because more decisions are right now than they used to be.

 

Danny Baker is too obsessed with nostalgia. "Ah the joys of a completely incorrect penalty decision..."

[ewerk 30611]

Quite like PL, Baker's best days were twenty years ago.

[PaddockLad 17262]

53 minutes ago, ewerk said:

Quite like PL, Baker's best days were twenty years ago.

 

 

 

[PaddockLad 17262]

1 hour ago, Gemmill said:

But that's not true. Because more decisions are right now than they used to be.

 

Danny Baker is too obsessed with nostalgia. "Ah the joys of a completely incorrect penalty decision..."

 

Yeah but at what cost to the actual game? The ref suddenly blowing up 15 seconds after an offence has been commited when the play has moved to a different area of the pitch fundamentally changes the game of football. Both codes of rugby, tennis and cricket all have far more organised set piece, time consuming stoppages than football ever has had. That's why it's successful in those sports and not in football where the ref can blow for a free kick and it can be taken within 5 seconds or some times even less. Football flows in a way other sports who have successfully incorporated video replays etc just don't. I accept there's no stopping it now but that changes nothing, it's still poorly thought out media driven fuckin nonsense. 

[ohhh_yeah 2966]

 

One of Iran's coaching staff had to be rushed to the hospital after the VAR decision.

 

[adios 717]

I honestly thought that was a joke about them play acting.   

 

  

[Kid Dynamite 7029]

Not a big fan of VAR tbh. Celebrating a goal, then having to hang around in limbo for 30 seconds until they decide whether to cancel it is shite.

 

And how was the Croat not given a red for stamping on an argies shin?

 

[Alex 35083]

On 20/06/2018 at 07:03, The Fish said:

I don't want an appeal system. You'd get dickheads like Allardyce or Mourinho appealing an obvious offside just to waste time.

They'll get better at implementing it, it'll just take time.

You’d only have a limited number though. Say 1 or 2 per half. You lose one if you appeal and it’s incorrect. An offside would take very little time to review. 

[RobinRobin 11272]

20 hours ago, PaddockLad said:

 

Because those operating it are no better informed even with all the tech at their fingertips than the ref on the pitch? 

 

 

Not sure how he missed it either, given he had a perfect view 

[The Fish 10857]

7 hours ago, Alex said:

You’d only have a limited number though. Say 1 or 2 per half. You lose one if you appeal and it’s incorrect. An offside would take very little time to review. 

Even with a limited number of appeals managers whose design is to deny the opposition points will use VAR to kill the tempo, just as they do with "injuries", and substitutions.

Also, what if a team requires more than the permitted appeals? I know we've had games where 3 or 4 incidents deserved a better review. If we're only allowed to appeal 2 then the others go by without proper scrutiny.

[Alex 35083]

33 minutes ago, The Fish said:

Even with a limited number of appeals managers whose design is to deny the opposition points will use VAR to kill the tempo, just as they do with "injuries", and substitutions.

Also, what if a team requires more than the permitted appeals? I know we've had games where 3 or 4 incidents deserved a better review. If we're only allowed to appeal 2 then the others go by without proper scrutiny.

The ref could still use at their discretion, you only lose an appeal if it’s incorrect so if you’ve wasted your appeals then tough titties 

[ewerk 30611]

And allow the FA to retrospectively punish frivilous challenges.

[Alex 35083]

With frivolous punishments

[ohhh_yeah 2966]

 

VAR at the World Cup: the big decisions, game by game

 

 

Diego Costa: Spain v Portugal

What happened: In the build-up to Diego Costa’s 24th minute equaliser, he challenged Pepe for the ball, leaving the Portuguese defender on the floor, dramatically clutching his jaw.

What should have happened: Portugal were after more VAR-VAR than jaw-jaw, but the goal should have stood, and it did.

VAR verdict: 👍

 

 

Risdon and Griezmann: Australia v France

What happened: Josh Risdon dived in and tripped Antoine Griezmann just inside the box, in a tackle which the referee initially waved on as good. A shout in his earpiece from the VAR room led Andrés Cunha to the pitch-side screen, and he awarded the penalty.

 

 

What happened: Even with multiple angles, TV pundits still argued over whether Risdon had got enough of the ball before touching the man to make it a legal challenge. VAR seemed to have swapped one borderline decision for the opposite borderline decision.

VAR verdict: 👎

 

Kim and Claesson: South Korea v Sweden

What happened: Play was called back after Kim Min-woo’s forceful challengeand follow through upended Viktor Claesson.

What should have happened: Sweden’s coach said it was “crystal clear” and it was. The correct decision.

VAR verdict: 👍

 

Harry Kane: England v Tunisia

What happened: Nothing, despite Kane repeatedly being wrestled to the ground when Tunisia were defending corners.

What should have happened: Kane should have been awarded at least one penalty during the match. He described his eventual last minute winner as a form of “justice”.

VAR verdict: 👎

 

Mohamed Salah: Egypt v Russia

What happened: The referee awarded Egypt a free-kick on the very edge of the box after Salah was hauled over by Roman Zobnin for the hosts.

What should have happened: The foul on Salah continued into the box, and the correct decision was a penalty. After the review, the spot kick was given, and Salah smashed in his debut World Cup goal.

VAR verdict: 👍

 

Guerreiro and Amrabat: Portugal v Morocco

What happened: Morocco’s Nordin Amrabat and Portugal’s Raphaël Guerreiro tangled in the box. Morocco appealed for a penalty that was not forthcoming. Morocco coach Hervé Renard was furious, making the TV review signal to the fourth official on the sidelines, and was ultimately spoken to by the referee. Guerreiro later lifted his shirt which appeared to show marks left on his skin where he had been on the receiving end during the exchange, possibly from Amrabat’s boot as they fell.

What should have happened: Replays suggested that both players had a firm grasp on each other’s shirts, and that no penalty was probably the correct call.

VAR verdict: 👍

 

Cristiano Ronaldo: Portugal v Morocco

What happened: In the 85th minute, with Portugal still only leading 1-0, Ronaldo took a free-kick on the edge of the box which struck the wall. Running in to the box to try and pick up the rebound, he fell under a challenge. Ronaldo himself made the gestrue to ask for VAR when the penalty was not awarded.

What should have happened: It may have been an exaggerated fall, and there was a lot of criticism on social media of CR7 for daring to dive and then ask for VAR himself, but the still images speak for themselves, there was definitely contact in the box, and it should have been a penalty.

VAR verdict: 👎

 

Pepe: Portugal v Morocco

What happened: In the 90th minute, Moroccan captain Medhi Benatia tapped Pepe on the shoulder to get his attention when the ball was out of play. Pepe collapsed to the ground. Gary Lineker tweeted “See Pepe is still a dick”.

What should have happened: Retrospective punishment for Pepe for simulation

VAR verdict: 👎

 

Ezatolahi: Iran v Spain

What happened: Saeid Ezatolahi appeared to equalise against Spain, and all hell broke loose as the Iranians celebrated. But the referee’s arm was raised to caution them to wait for the VAR check.

What should have happened: The goal was correctly disallowed for offside. The looks on the faces of the referee and his assistants suggested that is the verdict they would have reached more quickly left to their own devices, but VAR made the right call.

VAR verdict: 👍

 

Poulsen: Denmark v Australia

What happened: The referee consulted the pitch-side screen and awarded a penalty against Yussuf Poulsen for handball. Poulsen was three feet away from where the ball was headed, had his arm out because he was jumping, and didn’t move it towards the ball - but having viewed it, the referee did move his hand to point to the spot.

What should have happened: Probably not a penalty, but it wasn’t clear cut. ITV pundits Eni Aluko, Slavan Bilic and Martin O’Neil argued about it for most of half-time. It was a harsh decision - but maybe, given how Australia fell foul of a VAR penalty in their opening game, just like old-fashioned refereeing mistakes, VAR will also even itself out over the course of a tournament?

VAR verdict: 👎

 

Aquino: Peru v France

What happened: The referee was going to issue a yellow card to the wrong player.

What should have happened: He should have booked Pedro Aquino. VAR stepped in, and he did, exactly as the system was designed.

VAR verdict: 👍

 

Rebic: Croatia v Argentina

What happened: In the 40th minute Ante Rebic plants his studs on Eduardo Salvio’s shin. The referee brandishes his yellow card quickly, so VAR isn’t used to turn it into the red it should have been.

What should have happened: Croatia should have been down to 10 men, and Rebic should not have been on the pitch to profit from Willy Caballero’s howler to later give Croatia the lead and set them on their way to demolishing Argentina.

VAR verdict: 👎

 

 

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2018/jun/22/var-at-the-world-cup-the-big-decisions-game-by-game

 

[Andrew 4748]

Why are all of the borderline cases considered failures? In the cases of Griezmann and Poulsen its been, correctly, a case of the VAR saying that the Ref should have a look at it again, both of which times the penalty was given but that call is on the referee, VAR has done precisely what it should in that it has higlighted something the referee apparently missed which has lead to a change of decision.

[acrossthepond 877]

I think both of those were penalties. Poulsen is not a mug, he knows that when you jump with your arms up in the box you're risking giving away a penalty and that's exactly what happened. And as Andrew says, it's still up to the man in the middle to give the penalty or not. 

[OTF 7295]

Pretty much agree with the rest however disagree on the analysis of the Poulson one. He basically left the ground at the same time as Leckie was heading the ball and brought his arm up over his shoulder height into what was the subsequent flight path of the ball off Leckie's head. He never had a chance of heading the ball.

 

To all of the never headed a ball experts out there suggesting that that is a natural position for your arm to be in when jumping to head a ball have a look at Leckie, a player actually heading a ball in a leap higher than Poulson's. His arms don't even go close to being shoulder height let alone above. Players with their hands up in the box are cheating and/or daft.

Edited June 22, 2018 by OTF

[OTF 7295]

5 hours ago, Andrew said:

Why are all of the borderline cases considered failures? In the cases of Griezmann and Poulsen its been, correctly, a case of the VAR saying that the Ref should have a look at it again, both of which times the penalty was given but that call is on the referee, VAR has done precisely what it should in that it has higlighted something the referee apparently missed which has lead to a change of decision.

 

The Griezmann one is tough because the replays they saw didn't show clear contact of the ball from Risdon. There was another made available afterwards that showed a clear deviation. Now I know that the ball then came back off Griezmann before the contact, so Risdon touching the ball on his tackle doesn't rule out a penalty still, so there's still a decision to be made. What works in the defender's behaviour is that after getting to the ball he doesn't make any additional movement to get to Griezmann, it's his rear leg that slides in from the momentum of the tackle for the contact. Griezmann's touch at this point is too heavy and he would not have beat the keeper to the ball. He goes to ground easilt knowing this. It's 50/50 IMO and I'm biased so I say no penalty.

[Sonatine 11378]

 

[Tdansmith 3259]

I guess the answer is yes, far to much to ask.

[ohhh_yeah 2966]

 

Charlie Austin's post Watford match interview.   

 

[Sonatine 11378]