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

[TheShanklyGates]

At least the people in the stadium knew what was going on, right? And that's why we're the real winners here.

Good thing it avoids people double celebrating and doesn't stop the flow of the game.

[Zlen]

Still wouldn't have it.

Absolute bullshit man.
It needs ironing out, but days like today are killing the sport.

[PhaseOfPlay]

Absolute bullshit man.
It needs ironing out, but days like today are killing the sport.

Nope. There's a bigger picture than "Big Team X vs Big Team Y on the telly screen". Because that's all VAR is being considered for. Nobody gives a flying monkeys about Belgium Division 4. Because that's not what VAR is for. It's for the money-maker leagues. That's where my reservation is. If they can put VAR in every professional league going, I might be for it. But they won't. Because the lower leagues don't matter. This is ALL about television, not football.

[Caligula?]

I've criticized it, but I'll take it in a heartbeat. I'll gladly take 1-2 mins out of the game for the ref to review that and make the CORRECT decision rather than fuck it up, as Moss did twice tosay. Besides, he twice consulted his assistant anyway and stopped the game so bring in VAR as quick as possible.

[Caligula?]

Nope. There's a bigger picture than "Big Team X vs Big Team X on the telly screen". Because that's all VAR is being considered for. Nobody gives a flying monkeys about Belgium Division 4. Because that's not what VAR is for. It's for the money-maker leagues. That's where my reservation is. If they can put VAR in every professional league going, I might be for it. But they won't. Because the lower leagues don't matter. This is ALL about television, not football.

Would you still be saying that if Spurs finish above us in 4th by just a point at the end of the season, knowing that VAR might have not given that second penalty tonight?

[PhaseOfPlay]

Would you still be saying that if Spurs finish above us in 4th by just a point at the end of the season, knowing that VAR might have not given that second penalty tonight?

Yep.

[Caligula?]

Yep.

Odd really. We all want the correct decisions to be made, so I don't see why the odd stoppage from time to time should be an issue. How long did Moss and his assistant confer for both penalties tonight? And all your talk about VAR and televised football - no shit? Do you really expect the Bulgarian 2nd league to have the funds readily available to implement it the way the Premier League would be able to do?

[kloppismydad]

Yep.

What an odd stance to take.

[deFacto please, you bastards]

The quicker it's used in the league, the better.

[Libertine]

Today showed exactly why this won't work.

An hour after the game, people are still arguing abouth both penalties and will continue to do so for the rest of the week.

This is because there is no objective truth in these circumtances. Is there contact in both penalties? Yes. Is it enough to award a penalty? Depends on who you support. It's completely marginal and subjective.

[TepidT2O]

Totally agree. It will ruin the British game

[Caligula?]

Today showed exactly why this won't work.

An hour after the game, people are still arguing abouth both penalties and will continue to do so for the rest of the week.

This is because there is no objective truth in these circumtances. Is there contact in both penalties? Yes. Is it enough to award a penalty? Depends on who you support. It's completely marginal and subjective.

Nope. First one wouldn't have been given, as Lovren didn't touch the ball. The assistant told the ref as much yet he still decided to give it. Don't tell me that with a monitor staring him in the face and multiple replays he'll still throw a coin to decide the outcome?

[Something Worse]

For starters this whole "contact = penalty" shit needs to be be killed off. The contact with Lamela was minimal. The reaction was extreme. If the ref sees that looking for contact, he's giving a penalty no matter what. Embellishment needs to be punished just as harshly as diving. It's embarrassing and then you have mouthbreathers in the studio saying "you can see his left index finger grazes xx's thigh, for me that's a penalty". Then perhaps we'll see a lot less of this weird "jumping across a defender looking for a penalty", Everton and Spurs both got penalties off us this way and it makes no sense. If a player is jumping sideways without making any effort for the ball, he's not going to suddenly trap it, turn and pass or shoot is he?

Once these things are established, VAR can be brought in. I think Moss would for sure have given that last penalty based on the current accepted wisdom with regard to the rules.

[Alan_X]

Would you still be saying that if Spurs finish above us in 4th by just a point at the end of the season, knowing that VAR might have not given that second penalty tonight?

Yes for me too. We have the same people watching the second penalty video and people have different opinions about whether there was contact. The reason we 'lost' the second half was that our energy levels dropped and we let them come on to us. As it is, we drew and we move on to the next game.

[The G in Gerrard]

Yeah VAR won't make a difference to football.

[Upinsmoke]

Infuriating on days like today but I'm still not convinced it would of changed anything. The officials seem to think they made the right calls and whoever was in the VAR van or wherever would of gone along with them calls I reckon. More a sign of incompetence across the board.

[Barneylfc∗]

Nope. First one wouldn't have been given, as Lovren didn't touch the ball. The assistant told the ref as much yet he still decided to give it. Don't tell me that with a monitor staring him in the face and multiple replays he'll still throw a coin to decide the outcome?

Lovren did touch it

[PhaseOfPlay]

What an odd stance to take.

It really isn't. Football is available to more players and people across the world precisely because it's the same game at every level, with minor regional differences. Adding a rule to the game that allows TV cameras to influence decisions changes the game from a single game with different tiers, to two different games altogether, with different rule books. That's the issue for me. We didn't draw today because of lack of VAR, and if we fail to finish fourth, it won't be because of lack of VAR either. It will be because over 38 games we didn't do enough to finish fourth.

[PhaseOfPlay]

Odd really. We all want the correct decisions to be made, so I don't see why the odd stoppage from time to time should be an issue. How long did Moss and his assistant confer for both penalties tonight? And all your talk about VAR and televised football - no shit? Do you really expect the Bulgarian 2nd league to have the funds readily available to implement it the way the Premier League would be able to do?

My argument has never really been about the time taken, though Caligula, mate. Look back at the posts I made. My main concern is making two different sets of rules. That takes the game away from the players, and makes it a TV sport that will then have to bow to more demands from TV, which changes the game even more. That's the issue for me.

[LanceLink!!!!!]

Both penalties would probably of stood if VAR was used.

It will just make fans even more frustrated.

Even after that shitshow, I'm still against it. Nothing will change my mind.

[Midget]

It really isn't. Football is available to more players and people across the world precisely because it's the same game at every level, with minor regional differences. Adding a rule to the game that allows TV cameras to influence decisions changes the game from a single game with different tiers, to two different games altogether, with different rule books. That's the issue for me. We didn't draw today because of lack of VAR, and if we fail to finish fourth, it won't be because of lack of VAR either. It will be because over 38 games we didn't do enough to finish fourth.

Not sure if I'm for VAR either, but you can't argue we've lost at least 6 points this season (Watford, Everton, Tottenham) to refereeing decision. That's a significant swing.

[Upinsmoke]

Both penalties would probably of stood if VAR was used.

It will just make fans even more frustrated.

Even after that shitshow, I'm still against it. Nothing will change my mind.

I agree

[Gerry Attrick]

It really isn't. Football is available to more players and people across the world precisely because it's the same game at every level, with minor regional differences. Adding a rule to the game that allows TV cameras to influence decisions changes the game from a single game with different tiers, to two different games altogether, with different rule books. That's the issue for me. We didn't draw today because of lack of VAR, and if we fail to finish fourth, it won't be because of lack of VAR either. It will be because over 38 games we didn't do enough to finish fourth.

This applies to goal line technology too though, are you in favour of binning that?

[Cu Chulainn]

I was watching England vs Italy in rugby earlier, as someone who very rarely watches and doesn't understand rugby. I don't like it because the game is constantly stop-start and it's so hard to watch when you're used to how free flowing football is. I'm against VAR in its current form because I'd hate football to be constantly interrupted like that, and I actually wouldn't bother watching it.

But after watching another team get fucked over by dreadful decisions today (today it was us, but it happens to someone basically every week), something really has to be done. I don't know what, but loads of ordinary people invest a lot of hard-earned money that they don't have much of into football. They deserve to watch a contest that has integrity, not this shambles. It can't go on.

[Cu Chulainn]

Also, going slightly off-topic here, but isn't it about time the clock was stopped when the ball is not in play? It would kill time-wasting - one of the worst forms of cheating in the game - instantly.

[Ravishing Rick Dude]

We need this ASAP.

[PhaseOfPlay]

This applies to goal line technology too though, are you in favour of binning that?

Goal-line technology didn't require a rule change, though. FIFA would have to write two sets of rules for VAR - one that takes it into account as a deciding factor, and one that doesn't (the current one).

GLT only gives the ref more confirmation if the whole of the ball crosses the line, which is already in the rules. There's nothing in the laws, right now, that says "a goal is a goal unless the video referee decides it isn't".

Right now, the current 17 FIFA laws of the game can be used at the World Cup final, or the Whizzer and Chips Under 16s Shield.

A VAR version couldn't do that.

[Alan_X]

Both penalties would probably of stood if VAR was used.

It will just make fans even more frustrated.

Even after that shitshow, I'm still against it. Nothing will change my mind.

Having watched it on a bigger screen I think the second would probably have been given again. The first comes down to whether Lovren touched it and the referee's interpretation of Lovren's actions if he did touch it.

If there had been VAR it would have ruined the game and probably made no difference to the outcome.

[PhaseOfPlay]

Also, going slightly off-topic here, but isn't it about time the clock was stopped when the ball is not in play? It would kill time-wasting - one of the worst forms of cheating in the game - instantly.

No. The ref adds time on if there's time wasting. In a stopped-clock, the clock only gets stopped if the ref deems there to be timewasting.

Ask anyone who has played or coached in US high school or college footy - there really isn't any difference, other than not knowing for sure when a game will end.

[Alan_X]

Also, going slightly off-topic here, but isn't it about time the clock was stopped when the ball is not in play? It would kill time-wasting - one of the worst forms of cheating in the game - instantly.

No. It wouldn't kill time wasting at all - it would encourage it.

[xhaxhi]

Today showed exactly why this won't work.

An hour after the game, people are still arguing abouth both penalties and will continue to do so for the rest of the week.

This is because there is no objective truth in these circumtances. Is there contact in both penalties? Yes. Is it enough to award a penalty? Depends on who you support. It's completely marginal and subjective.

Some decisions will always be subjective but I feel VAR will help remove some clear cut decisions such as whether someone is offside or not...

[LanceLink!!!!!]

Also, going slightly off-topic here, but isn't it about time the clock was stopped when the ball is not in play? It would kill time-wasting - one of the worst forms of cheating in the game - instantly.

No, just another step towards turning football into rugby, why don't we squash the ball out of shape whilst were at it.

Liverpool were masters of time wasting in the 80's. Tricky European Cup away game, time waste as much as possible in the first 20 minutes, quieten the crowd as much as possible.

[xhaxhi]

Both penalties would probably of stood if VAR was used.

It will just make fans even more frustrated.

Even after that shitshow, I'm still against it. Nothing will change my mind.

Both were offside...Introduction of VAR should remove any doubt about such clear cut decissions

[Caligula?]

My argument has never really been about the time taken, though Caligula, mate. Look back at the posts I made. My main concern is making two different sets of rules. That takes the game away from the players, and makes it a TV sport that will then have to bow to more demands from TV, which changes the game even more. That's the issue for me.

Fair enough, perhaps the result tonight is still bugging me. Ref waves it off and the linesman flags. With VAR Moss would just reiterate his initial decision. Whether or not it'll become a tv sport - I'm afraid we're well past that PoP.

[LanceLink!!!!!]

The offside law needs to be changed, as it too now is subjective.

Offside or not. Black or white. None of this interfering with play or second phase bullshit.

[Alan_X]

The offside law needs to be changed, as it to now is subjective.

Offside or not. Black or white. None of this interfering with play or second phase bullshit.

So if an attacker pulls up with a calf strain and can't get back on side you would disallow a goal? Even though he's clearly not capable of influencing play?

[oldfordie]

Am not sure FIFA or anyone else really wants VAR anyway, some of the problems the other night were so obvious before the game started, keeping the crowd informed for one, I just get the impression football wants to say we give it a try and it dosen't work ,lets dump it and move on.
Goal line technology works. we introduced it by itself and it worked so it stays.
Next should be offsides, introduce it by itself and see how it works.
Offside VAR decisions can be made without stopping the game.  it will work and people will rarely disagree with the decision given.
Penalties are a matter of opinion so I can't see how it will work but we shouldn't rule VAR out straight away for everything, introduce VAR by stages , right now we're lumping all VAR decisions into one bag and people are arguing against it because it doesn't work for penalties.

[The North Bank]

What we need is better trained and more professional officials. Not VAR.
Incompetent referees is a problem VAR cant solve, unless we want the match to last 7 hours because every decision could influence a game.

[foreverred1983]

The offside law needs to be changed, as it to now is subjective.

Offside or not. Black or white. None of this interfering with play or second phase bullshit.

100%

It seems to be the case, based on what ive read and heard from former refs after the match, that kane was not offside because Lovren touched the ball.

That is utterly ridiculous if thats the way offside rules are done now.

Lovren has to take the chance that no one else is playing Kane onside and leave the ball go through to kane or else make sure he clears the ball being played to a man who is offside in the first place. Farcical.

VAR miht have settled the second penalty as a dive and the first too but thats just me reading the situations with red tinted glasses

[Alan_X]

100%

It seems to be the case, based on what ive read and heard from former refs after the match, that kane was not offside because Lovren touched the ball.

That is utterly ridiculous if thats the way offside rules are done now.

Lovren has to take the chance that no one else is playing Kane onside and leave the ball go through to kane or else make sure he clears the ball being played to a man who is offside in the first place. Farcical.

VAR miht have settled the second penalty as a dive and the first too but thats just me reading the situations with red tinted glasses

In the context of Law 11 – Offside, the following definitions apply:

• “nearer to his opponents’ goal line” means that any part of a player’s head, body or feet is nearer to his opponents’ goal line than both the ball and the
second-last opponent. The arms are not included in this definition

• “interfering with play” means playing or touching the ball passed or
touched by a team-mate

• “interfering with an opponent” means preventing an opponent from
playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent’s
line of vision or challenging an opponent for the ball

• “gaining an advantage by being in that position” means playing a ball
i. that rebounds or is deflected to him off the goalpost, crossbar or an opponent having been in an offside position
ii. that rebounds, is deflected or is played to him from a deliberate save by an opponent having been in an offside position

A player in an offside position receiving the ball from an opponent, who deliberately plays the ball (except from a deliberate save), is not considered to have gained an advantage.

http://www.thefa.com/~/media/files/thefaportal/governance-docs/laws-of-the-game/11-v-11/interpretation-of-laws---2013-14/law-11---interpretations-of-the-laws-of-the-game.ashx

The Law is clear. The only issue is whether Lovren's touch was a 'save' or not. I'm not a trained ref so I don't know but my interpretation would be that Lovren was attempting to kick the ball away and it should have been called a 'save' so Kane was gaining advantage. But then Lovren was on the edge of the area so the ref clearly thought it was Lovren deliberately playing the ball, just that he fucked it up.