Topic: VAR! Video Assistant Referee & Shite Referees in General

[The G in Gerrard]

Not giving a penalty isn't a "clear and obvious error"? How Saliba didn't give one or get sent off is pathetic.

[The G in Gerrard]

Not giving a penalty isn't a "clear and obvious error"? How Saliba didn't give one or get sent off is pathetic.

Just saw the reasoning given on Match of the day. If referee has given wrong decision then isn't this is what VAR is for?

[The G in Gerrard]

https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11095/12747374/ref-watch-did-arsenal-tottenham-get-lucky-and-why-werent-brighton-given-penalty-dermot-gallagher-assesses

Jeez.

[cdav]

https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11095/12747374/ref-watch-did-arsenal-tottenham-get-lucky-and-why-werent-brighton-given-penalty-dermot-gallagher-assesses

Jeez.

No mention of the stonewall Salah pen, doesn't fit the narrative

[farawayred]

https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11095/12747374/ref-watch-did-arsenal-tottenham-get-lucky-and-why-werent-brighton-given-penalty-dermot-gallagher-assesses

Jeez.

This is like eight-grade refereeing school. "Children, you had bad test scores this week. You should do better next time."

[KissThisGuy]

https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11095/12747374/ref-watch-did-arsenal-tottenham-get-lucky-and-why-werent-brighton-given-penalty-dermot-gallagher-assesses

Jeez.

He's full of shit too. The flag clearly goes up after the foul in the Arsenal game. In their explanation they said it wasn't offside but they didn't think it was a foul. Dermot talking pure ring on that one. He must be a Tory.

[stewil007]

He's full of shit too. The flag clearly goes up after the foul in the Arsenal game. In their explanation they said it wasn't offside but they didn't think it was a foul. Dermot talking pure ring on that one. He must be a Tory.

the mental gymnastics they play to justify why the decision on the pitch and VAR is right 99% of the time is a sight to behold.  The 1% where they say an error has been made is usually caveated with some bollocks which makes very little sense.

I end up watching this just for comedy value, because there is no way any of this can be taken seriously

[Knight]

lol VAR. It's a shocking system. Has got to go. Although the bemusement of the commentators is quite amusing to listen too.

[mainone]

var is great shows how refs linesman are corrupt

[PaulF]

Was talking to a rugby fan at the weekend. Many say how it works well there. He thinks it's ruined the game. According to him the dark arts are a major part of the game and var ruins that.
I hate rugby so no idea if it's a valid point. Just thought I'd throw it in here.

[4pool]

As this thread has hardly been bumped since the Sports Washing Cup has started, I take it there's been no controversies with VAR. ( I haven't read the match thread for the SWC).

[Avens]

As this thread has hardly been bumped since the Sports Washing Cup has started, I take it there's been no controversies with VAR. ( I haven't read the match thread for the SWC).

There have been plenty. I'm guessing most of the conversation has been in there because there have been lots of inconsistencies, some very soft overturned decisions and lots of delays.

[kj999]

I'm a fan of the semi-automatic offsides. Takes the decision out of the hands of a bent 5th official drawing slopey lines on a screen to suit his bent agenda.

[JRed]

I'm a fan of the semi-automatic offsides. Takes the decision out of the hands of a bent 5th official drawing slopey lines on a screen to suit his bent agenda.

If only there was a way to have an automated referee, we might actually have a fair game. ( Apart from all the off field cheating of course)

[thaddeus]

As this thread has hardly been bumped since the Sports Washing Cup has started, I take it there's been no controversies with VAR. ( I haven't read the match thread for the SWC).

I saw a short clip on Twatter that showed one of the offsides from the Argentina defeat against Saudi Arabia.  It looked onside but was given offside by about 2mm of t-shirt line on the arm.  I'd have been very annoyed had it been given against us.  There also seemed to be a lot of noise about some Iranian defenders having a ride on Buffalo Maguire from a corner that VAR didn't intervene on.

I'm sure there have been loads more but I've not been watching so feeding on scraps that filter through news or social media.

Are the modelled 3D depictions of offsides being shown live or are they generated afterwards?  I quite like them but they further give the illusion of these decisions being watertight when there's actually still a degree of interpretation involved (not least which frame to freeze on!).

[moondog]

How on earth Portugal get that penalty v Uruguay I will never understand. The guy is falling backwards and puts his arm out to break his fall , the ball hits him with him facing the other direction but pressure on the referee from Fernandez gets the VAR to overturn it. Fucking ridiculous.

[KillieRed]

The game’s gone, Brian.

[Lee1-6Liv]

Why waste time going over to the monitor when we all know he is going to change his mind anyway.

[Fromola]

Dreadful decision but a nice novelty for VAR to do something different than be a killjoy in chalking off a load of goals for marginal offsides.

[red_Mark1980]

How on earth Portugal get that penalty v Uruguay I will never understand. The guy is falling backwards and puts his arm out to break his fall , the ball hits him with him facing the other direction but pressure on the referee from Fernandez gets the VAR to overturn it. Fucking ridiculous.

It's actually not a penalty as set out in the rules when they clarified handball a few seasons back. That arm is to break his fall. Simply not a penalty

[Charlie Adams fried egg]

It's actually not a penalty as set out in the rules when they clarified handball a few seasons back. That arm is to break his fall. Simply not a penalty

Peter Walton surpassed himself last night. Apart from his usual back the ref bollocks he came out with a sentence that made no sense whatsoever.

[rob1966]

It's actually not a penalty as set out in the rules when they clarified handball a few seasons back. That arm is to break his fall. Simply not a penalty

Haven't they changed that again?

I've seen the incident this morning, never a fucking penalty. That crying fucking rat faced c*nt was screaming for it straight away.

[[new username under construction]]

FIFA desperate to get the Genius to the final

[red_Mark1980]

Haven't they changed that again?

I've seen the incident this morning, never a fucking penalty. That crying fucking rat faced c*nt was screaming for it straight away.

I'm not aware they've changed anything. FWIW the confirmation would need to effectively say that it's handball if you're supporting your body or attempting to.

Doesn't get given at the other end of the pitch

[thaddeus]

I've just seen the VAR decision that awarded a penalty to Argentina.  I just don't get it.

Stills here as the videos have been rapidly removed: https://twitter.com/JacobsBen/status/1598041848177692694

[Ravishing Rick Dude]

Yeah, that penalty was ridiculous. They would never give that if that wasn't Messi.

[LovelyCushionedHeader]

So apparently not only was the France goal being disallowed an horrendous decision, it also shouldn't have been allowed to be overturned because the referee resumed the game (and then blew for full time) before the review.

[Fromola]

VAR generally worked in 2018 World Cup if only because it was rarely used. How has it got so much worse in 4 years? Just get rid of it.

[PaulF]

FIFA desperate to get the Genius to the final

The tears if he missed a pen to lose the final would be a joy to behold.

[Zimagic]

Can someone explain why the VAR called the Griezmann goal offside?

[thaddeus]

Can someone explain why the VAR called the Griezmann goal offside?

I *think* it's because Griezmann was offside for the original cross and the defender possibly only headed the ball because he was doing so to stop the ball reaching Griezmann.  It seemed to go to the on-pitch ref rather than a simple VAR overturn because there was interpretation over whether the defender had headed the ball because he was concerned Griezmann was going to get on the end of the cross.  He didn't, he headed it as the onside player he was marking would otherwise have scored.

I guess the VAR officials asked the referee to decide if the defender's decision making had been affected by Griezmann's (offside) presence.  The on-pitch referee thought it had 

It didn't really matter anyway and it's always funny when ill-fate befalls Griezmann as he's just a naturally obnoxious person.  The VAR officials should have just put Griezmann's celebration on the screen and asked the referee to decide if the goal should stand based on that.

[rob1966]

I *think* it's because Griezmann was offside for the original cross and the defender possibly only headed the ball because he was doing so to stop the ball reaching Griezmann. It seemed to go to the on-pitch ref rather than a simple VAR overturn because there was interpretation over whether the defender had headed the ball because he was concerned Griezmann was going to get on the end of the cross.  He didn't, he headed it as the onside player he was marking would otherwise have scored.

I guess the VAR officials asked the referee to decide if the defender's decision making had been affected by Griezmann's (offside) presence.  The on-pitch referee thought it had 

It didn't really matter anyway and it's always funny when ill-fate befalls Griezmann as he's just a naturally obnoxious person.  The VAR officials should have just put Griezmann's celebration on the screen and asked the referee to decide if the goal should stand based on that.

Think back to the Spurs game and that dodgy penalty, where Kane was stood in an offside position, Lovren tried to block the pass and by playing the ball, reset the phase and then this played Kane onside. We all went mad, but PoP explained the rule and while its bollocks, Kane being where he was isn't an offence within the laws, once Lovren played the ball. That goal last night was the same and should have stood.

That's also not how it works. The problem for us is that Lovren attempted to play the ball. If he'd stood still and it rebounded off his leg, Kane would have been called offside (by the LOTG). But by attempting to play it, he negated the offside. It's dumb, but that's what the interpretation is.

The offside law is shite - City away for their 2nd last season, about 3 were offside from the freekick, all in Ali's line of site, but because the ball cleared the lot and went to Jesus, none where classed as interfering with play, which is bollocks.

[LovelyCushionedHeader]

Think back to the Spurs game and that dodgy penalty, where Kane was stood in an offside position, Lovren tried to block the pass and by playing the ball, reset the phase and then this played Kane onside. We all went mad, but PoP explained the rule and while its bollocks, Kane being where he was isn't an offence within the laws, once Lovren played the ball. That goal last night was the same and should have stood.

The offside law is shite - City away for their 2nd last season, about 3 were offside from the freekick, all in Ali's line of site, but because the ball cleared the lot and went to Jesus, none where classed as interfering with play, which is bollocks.

The Lovren/Kane one was much more debatable as the ball was clearly intended for Kane, and Kane was always actively trying to get it. Last night, Griezemann basically removed himself from the picture by not contesting the ball (whilst another French player did), so how it could be argued that he was interfering I'll never know. It goes against everything we've been told over the last few years.

[Zimagic]

I *think* it's because Griezmann was offside for the original cross and the defender possibly only headed the ball because he was doing so to stop the ball reaching Griezmann.  It seemed to go to the on-pitch ref rather than a simple VAR overturn because there was interpretation over whether the defender had headed the ball because he was concerned Griezmann was going to get on the end of the cross.  He didn't, he headed it as the onside player he was marking would otherwise have scored.

I guess the VAR officials asked the referee to decide if the defender's decision making had been affected by Griezmann's (offside) presence.  The on-pitch referee thought it had 

Surely the defender went for the ball because of the onside player he was marking also trying to get the ball. He would have gone for it even if Griezmann wasn't there.

The French are saying that the game was restarted before end of game whistle and the ref (regardless of the validity of the VAR intervention) wasn't permitted by the rules to go back and recheck. He should have checked with VAR before restarting the game and, having failed to do that, couldn't change the decision to award the goal.
That sounds even worse to me, because a ref could "forget" to check, quickly restart the game and validate a non-valid goal.

What a shit-show.

[LovelyCushionedHeader]

Surely the defender went for the ball because of the onside player he was marking also trying to get the ball. He would have gone for it even if Griezmann wasn't there.

The French are saying that the game was restarted before end of game whistle and the ref (regardless of the validity of the VAR intervention) wasn't permitted by the rules to go back and recheck. He should have checked with VAR before restarting the game and, having failed to do that, couldn't change the decision to award the goal.
That sounds even worse to me, because a ref could "forget" to check, quickly restart the game and validate a non-valid goal.

What a shit-show.

Imagine how much of a shit show it would have been had Australia and Denmark drew. The farce of a decision and how it came about would have knocked Australia out.

[BoRed]

Think back to the Spurs game and that dodgy penalty, where Kane was stood in an offside position, Lovren tried to block the pass and by playing the ball, reset the phase and then this played Kane onside. We all went mad, but PoP explained the rule and while its bollocks, Kane being where he was isn't an offence within the laws, once Lovren played the ball. That goal last night was the same and should have stood.

The Lovren/Kane one was much more debatable as the ball was clearly intended for Kane, and Kane was always actively trying to get it. Last night, Griezemann basically removed himself from the picture by not contesting the ball (whilst another French player did), so how it could be argued that he was interfering I'll never know. It goes against everything we've been told over the last few years.

Not saying I agree with the decision, but apparently this rule has been changed/clarified since then, mainly because of Mbappe's goal in the Nations League final. It now says the defender has to be in control of the ball (meaning being able to keep it or pass/kick it in whatever direction he wants), and not just touch it. Which only makes even more subjective.

Essentially, a "deliberate play" is about the defender being in control of his actions. It's not purely about a player trying to kick or head a ball. If the defender has to stretch to play the ball, and can't have true influence about where it goes, that's not considered a "deliberate play." Whether a player is being challenged at that time is also a factor.

This is a hugely subjective area of the offside law, which is why referee Matthew Conger of New Zealand had to go to the pitchside monitor to make the decision.

The VAR, Abdullah al-Marri -- who was also on duty for the controversial handball penalty given to Portugal against Uruguay on Monday -- and his Qatari colleague acting as the offside VAR, Taleb al-Marri, will have advised that Talbi wasn't in control of the header and was stretching, therefore this cannot be a "deliberate play."

https://www.espn.com/soccer/fifa-world-cup/story/4820758/why-var-disallowed-griezmanns-goal-for-france-for-offside

And not dealing with this before restarting the game made it even more of a mess.

[Barneylfc∗]

Not saying I agree with the decision, but apparently this rule has been changed/clarified since then, mainly because of Mbappe's goal in the Nations League final. It now says the defender has to be in control of the ball (meaning being able to keep it or pass/kick it in whatever direction he wants), and not just touch it. Which only makes even more subjective.

https://www.espn.com/soccer/fifa-world-cup/story/4820758/why-var-disallowed-griezmanns-goal-for-france-for-offside

And not dealing with this before restarting the game made it even more of a mess.

Didn't we benefit from a similar incident in the Cup Final v Madrid a few months ago when Fabinho knocked the ball on to someone who scored, but because Fabinho wasn't deemed in control of the ball it was ruled out?

[rob1966]

Not saying I agree with the decision, but apparently this rule has been changed/clarified since then, mainly because of Mbappe's goal in the Nations League final. It now says the defender has to be in control of the ball (meaning being able to keep it or pass/kick it in whatever direction he wants), and not just touch it. Which only makes even more subjective.

https://www.espn.com/soccer/fifa-world-cup/story/4820758/why-var-disallowed-griezmanns-goal-for-france-for-offside

And not dealing with this before restarting the game made it even more of a mess.

God that change makes it worse, Maguire is never fucking in control of what he does, so he's always going to get the decision regardless...

[Craig S]

Surely the defender went for the ball because of the onside player he was marking also trying to get the ball. He would have gone for it even if Griezmann wasn't there.

The French are saying that the game was restarted before end of game whistle and the ref (regardless of the validity of the VAR intervention) wasn't permitted by the rules to go back and recheck. He should have checked with VAR before restarting the game and, having failed to do that, couldn't change the decision to award the goal.
That sounds even worse to me, because a ref could "forget" to check, quickly restart the game and validate a non-valid goal.

What a shit-show.

I am not sure that is true from the French. There was one in the Bundesliga when the team had to come back from the changing rooms for a pen.
Pretty sure United got a pen after the full time whistle v Brighton.

[Barneylfc∗]

I am not sure that is true from the French. There was one in the Bundesliga when the team had to come back from the changing rooms for a pen.
Pretty sure United got a pen after the full time whistle v Brighton.

Not exactly the same scenario though.
The Bundesliga one was at half time, and the United one was essentially the final act of the game.

I haven't seen the France incident, but from what Zimagic has said, the goal was scored then everyone lined up and the game was allowed to restart. The game shouldn't have been allowed to restart if the VAR check wasn't finished. And the VAR check shouldn't have started, or should have been binned once the ref decided the game was good to restart.