Any time a keeper whacks a ball clear, a forward should just run into him and catch his studs. Will be a red everytime apparently.
No it won't. You know keepers are protected like an endangered species.Any time a keeper whacks a ball clear, a forward should just run into him and catch his studs. Will be a red everytime apparently.
What else should Balbuena do? Kick the ball softer?Just seen the West Ham red card and I don't think that's a shocker of a decision to be honest. Even in real time, it looked like a nasty follow through. It's definitely at least a yellow, even if the red does seem a bit harsh to me
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Yeah, I think so. It’s exposed that refs are sometimes out of sync with how players almost unanimously view incidents.Time to put ex football players in the VAR room alongside refs, this is beyond ridiculous.
Passing the ball forwards /backwards doesn't matter... Its whether you're ahead of the ball or not.Fecking hell what a joke VAR is.
Brighton scores like this:
1: A Brighton man heads the ball BACKWARDS by mistake effectively making an assist for a goal (always a no-offside, right?)
2: A Brighton man who is in front of the guy who heads the ball runs back and picks up the ball to shoot and score (Had he passed forwards he'd been offside, but that's not the case)
3: VAR calls it offside and cancels the goal in under 20 seconds.
Hmm, maybe I got it wrong then Still this thread could need a bump after the weekly feckups thoughPassing the ball forwards /backwards doesn't matter... Its whether you're ahead of the ball or not.
These type of situations is where VAR will always fault if human intuition in the VAR room is not allowed. Same type with the Son eye pop-incident. You need human intuition, to understand the context of why a move is done and the overall context of the situation. If you just go straight binary on whether a hand has hit a head for instance, yes Son's a red.West Ham sending off is an absolutely textbook example of VAR feckery. In real time you can clearly see it’s an unavoidable accident. Watch it in slow motion enough times and it’s easy for a referee to fool himself into thinking that, despite kicking the ball as hard as he can, it’s possible for the defender to somehow halt the follow through mid-swing. This bullshit is ruining the game.
It’s not unavoidable at all. If Chilwell doesn’t arrive late and runs into the west ham player the situation never happens. The entire situation is caused by Chilwell arriving late and putting himself in front of the foot. I’d class that in the same category as lowering your head, ie putting yourself in danger which is an offence against yourself and not against the opponent.West Ham sending off is an absolutely textbook example of VAR feckery. In real time you can clearly see it’s an unavoidable accident. Watch it in slow motion enough times and it’s easy for a referee to fool himself into thinking that, despite kicking the ball as hard as he can, it’s possible for the defender to somehow halt the follow through mid-swing. This bullshit is ruining the game.
It’s unavoidable from the perspective of the player getting sent off. I can only assume the referee thought the follow through was malicious. Which is obviously stupid but watching repeated super slo mo replays (i.e. what VAR makes them do) can be deceptive.It’s not unavoidable at all. If Chilwell doesn’t arrive late and runs into the west ham player the situation never happens. The entire situation is caused by Chilwell arriving late and putting himself in front of the foot. I’d class that in the same category as lowering your head, ie putting yourself in danger which is an offence against yourself and not against the opponent.
This bonkers decision means that players can routinely enter situations late and get their opponents sent off if they manage to get hit by their studs as they’re shooting the ball.
It reminds me of the Nani incident v real. Nani jumps to control the ball and out of nowhere he gets blindsided by a player running into his studs, while he himself is only trying to play a bit of football.
It’s unavoidable from the perspective of the player getting sent off. I can only assume the referee thought the follow through was malicious. Which is obviously stupid but watching repeated super slo mo replays (i.e. what VAR makes them do) can be deceptive.It’s not unavoidable at all. If Chilwell doesn’t arrive late and runs into the west ham player the situation never happens. The entire situation is caused by Chilwell arriving late and putting himself in front of the foot. I’d class that in the same category as lowering your head, ie putting yourself in danger which is an offence against yourself and not against the opponent.
This bonkers decision means that players can routinely enter situations late and get their opponents sent off if they manage to get hit by their studs as they’re shooting the ball.
It reminds me of the Nani incident v real. Nani jumps to control the ball and out of nowhere he gets blindsided by a player running into his studs, while he himself is only trying to play a bit of football.
Was thinking this myself, they should watch the incident at normal speed a couple of times first and check it slower if they need to. At normal speed, today's was a completely accidental collision. No malice, no foul.It’s unavoidable from the perspective of the player getting sent off. I can only assume the referee thought the follow through was malicious. Which is obviously stupid but watching repeated super slo mo replays (i.e. what VAR makes them do) can be deceptive.
It works ok in rugby because it’s usually used for black and white stuff, where real time opinions don’t matter. Was there a foot in touch? Did the ball get touched down? Likewise in cricket or tennis where the main priority is working out where the ball is.
VAR never made sense in football so, surprise surprise, it’s churning out stupid decisions every week. As infuriating as it was predictable
They should give the second one a retrospective red and thank that West Ham fan for bringing it to their attention., just for the chuckles.Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
In rugby when they’re looking at stuff which isn’t black and white like I described above they make a big deal of looking at real time replays. They also give the decision made in the moment a lot of weight when working out the final call. I still think it will always be shite in football but they could easily make it a lot less shite.Was thinking this myself, they should watch the incident at normal speed a couple of times first and check it slower if they need to. At normal speed, today's was a completely accidental collision. No malice, no foul.
Same ref who disallowed Cavani's goal. Guy looks well out of his depth tbf.
Makes sense. Slow mo is only really needed for offsides and maybe penalties. If they're looking at fouls, especially outside the box, the emphasis should always be on real time, as it's the only context that doesn't totally warp the incident.In rugby when they’re looking at stuff which isn’t black and white like I described above they make a big deal of looking at real time replays. They also give the decision made in the moment a lot of weight when working out the final call. I still think it will always be shite in football but they could easily make it a lot less shite.
I agree with you, of course. I was just trying to make a point about Chilwell being the instigator of the entire situation with his late attempt at a challenge, and not the poor guy getting his marching orders for having someone run into him as he’s doing a very natural thing during a football game, ie kicking the ball.It’s unavoidable from the perspective of the player getting sent off. I can only assume the referee thought the follow through was malicious. Which is obviously stupid but watching repeated super slo mo replays (i.e. what VAR makes them do) can be deceptive.
I certainly agree that Valbuena didn't foul Mount at all today.I think Valbuena leans back to try and avoid colliding with Mount as he does his standing foot gives way and he almost ends up sliding Into Mount studs showing on his follow through.
Got me before my hasty edit, well played.I certainly agree that Valbuena didn't foul Mount at all today.
It's Balbuena as well. Valbuena is that short-arse who plays for Olympiakos.Got me before my hasty edit, well played.
Yes I remember him being the next zidane or something when he was emerging at Marseille, never quite worked out for him.It's Balbuena as well. Valbuena is that short-arse who plays for Olympiakos.
TO be honest, I thought the West Ham player was also called "Valbuena" until he got sent off tonight. It just made me chuckle that you got both players wrong as it's something I would do!Yes I remember him being the next zidane or something when he was emerging at Marseille, never quite worked out for him.
More to the point I think I'm gonna retire for evening had a nightmare in that post.
The referees are constantly being called out. Every second post in this thread is complaining about a referee being crap at his job.I seriously think VAR is letting the referees and law makers off to be honest. We never blame the refs anymore - just this mythical thing called VAR. Michael Oliver watched that for 2 minutes and decided the referee on the pitch should review it - he wouldn’t have just been looking at slow motion. What the feck was he thinking? The handball today for Newcastle is a rule issue not a VAR issue. It’s also about to get even more ludicrous - because from next year if Wilson handles it then taps it in it’s disallowed - if he passes the ball to another team mate to tap in it won’t be. Think about how insane that is...
For tight offsides we need to go to the foot - hopefully this Wenger rule will improve that.
The refs got called out before too. There wasn’t any utopia pre VAR. The stats I’ve seen show there are fewer incorrect decisions per game - so it hasn’t had the opposite impact. It just feels like more because BT devote 24 minutes of their 25 minute post match coverage to talking about fecking VAR! It definitely improves decisions from an outcome basis - whether it’s worth the hassle is the argument.The referees are constantly being called out. Every second post in this thread is complaining about a referee being crap at his job.
The issue with VAR is that it was supported to make referees better. When a new technology is intended to improve refereeing performances and turns out to have the opposite effect then I’d say the main problem is the new technology.
Ok, yeah, I maybe worded it wrong. It feels like it’s having the opposite effect. We sacrifice the flow of the game for the sake of tedious pedantry. And yet we’re still seeing terrible decisions every week. Which means all the collateral damage isn’t worth it.The refs got called out before too. There wasn’t any utopia pre VAR. The stats I’ve seen show there are fewer incorrect decisions per game - so it hasn’t had the opposite impact. It just feels like more because BT devote 24 minutes of their 25 minute post match coverage to talking about fecking VAR! It definitely improves decisions from an outcome basis - whether it’s worth the hassle is the argument.
Of course it is. It's a matchday.Shit day for the officials.