Was not in any way clear and obvious. VAR should not be overturning the decision unless there’s conclusive evidence, and they did not have the right angle for that.
VAR and Refs | General Discussion | May 15: Premier League clubs to vote on proposal to scrap VAR from next season
- Thread starter Samid
- Start date
It looked quite clearly over the line from the angle we saw I thought. Would be fuming if that counted against us
No zoom, no nothing. It looks out but the ball is sphere. So it is not 100%.
This is difference from Arsenal game. When it comes to us, We never get 50/50 decision.
This is difference from Arsenal game. When it comes to us, We never get 50/50 decision.
To be honest I think it is out but it’s strange to make calls like that when you need pinpoint to the CM technology to make similar calls for offside and goal line technology.
You can’t tell from that angle definitively
It was out. It's fine. Unfortunate as it's millimeters but it's out
It looked out of play but the two angles didn't make it obvious. Looked out in one angle and in in the other so how do they come to the conclusion its out if its not definitive?
Looks out with the daylight, but obviously with it being a sphere its impossible.
The angle from behind Rashford didn't look like it went out but obviously they didn't check that one 12 times.
Wasn’t clear from the 2 camera angles.
Hard to call it a clear and obvious error.
But it’s a United so we aren’t allowed to complain.
Just score twice in the second half so it doesn’t matter.
Hard to call it a clear and obvious error.
But it’s a United so we aren’t allowed to complain.
Just score twice in the second half so it doesn’t matter.
It's boring having to repeat this in the fifth season of VAR but the "clear and obvious" test only applies to subjective decisions such as foul or not, yellow or red, etc.
Offsides, out of play, handballs (contact immediately before scoring) are objective checks, i.e. did it happen or not?
Yeah that was not out
https://x.com/muppetiers/status/1703057532967952492?s=46&t=Hap1n7LFSNzDoQ9PKvrMhA
https://x.com/muppetiers/status/1703057532967952492?s=46&t=Hap1n7LFSNzDoQ9PKvrMhA
It felt like they went "oh god it looks in here, go back! Go back!"
The other angle shows it’s clearly in. It’s a sphere, surely the benefit of the doubt should be given when they did the same for West Ham against us last season? We’ve been robbed two weeks in a row.
Hey, Japan scored one against Spain like that last year. FIFA's own tech gave a solid explanation at the end of the day.
That being said, the Premier League looks like a pub league with VAR still using obsolete methods this year. How many more controversial calls must be made until the whole VAR system is upgraded to international standards?
Correct.
There can be a visible gap between the bottom of the ball and the line, without the ball being out of play. They disallowed the goal because of that visible gap, in a blurry freeze frame. The only way to know for certain whether or not the widest part of the ball is clipping the line is a view from directly above, looking straight down. Which obviously isn’t possible.
If they’re going to use technology for these decisions at all then they need to use the goal line technology for the whole end line. Or don’t use VAR at all My preference is, obviously, binning VAR. It’s fecking horrible and is ruining the sport
Clearly out of bounds. You're all foaming over the frame before Rashford makes contact. It goes out
Penalty on Hojlund and onside from Garnacho. Those are the kind of calls that are problematic.
Penalty on Hojlund and onside from Garnacho. Those are the kind of calls that are problematic.
I hope we get an apology from PGMOL.
Not holding my breath…
Not holding my breath…
Clearly based on what? Flawed logic
I realise there's extreme bias at play but even still, if anyone is seriously complaining that this was deemed to be out of play then there's something actively wrong with you.
If that goal was allowed against us, we'd be screaming conspiracy. You can't complain about every decision.
It is basically the same as the Japan goal from the WC which was ruled legit. People are judging it from the base of the ball, but it depends on whether any part of the ball is on the line, which it probably is.
In any case, there is not enough evidence to rule out the goal.
In any case, there is not enough evidence to rule out the goal.
Pen call on Hojlund? Early in the game. Looked like Dunk put his hand on him.
Nowadays whenever there is VAR review, I feel that 90% of time it will be against us. There are some angles that showed out and some that showed in. If that was the case, I dont think VAR should overturn the original decision. But let's face it, we are not liVARpool who is on the other extreme of decisions.
That angle is not definitive proof.
I realise there's extreme bias at play but even still, if anyone is seriously complaining that this was deemed to be out of play then there's something actively wrong with you.
So you’ve got behind Rashford which made it look in and then a thousand different angles where it looks out and in.
Which is definitive and which do you use to make this decision? Does it need to be clear and obvious?
Which is definitive and which do you use to make this decision? Does it need to be clear and obvious?
Nah, the widest part of the ball could definitely be clipping the line if you’re looking from directly above. We’re not looking at it from directly above, so don’t know if it is or not. There is absolutely no way of being 100% certain in a tight call like that without that view.
I realise there's extreme bias at play but even still, if anyone is seriously complaining that this was deemed to be out of play then there's something actively wrong with you.
You literally cannot be 100% sure it's out... It's impossible to tell
Seems like nothing was learned from the Japan WC incident
Seems like nothing was learned from the Japan WC incident
Edge of the ball is over the edge of the line.
I realise there's extreme bias at play but even still, if anyone is seriously complaining that this was deemed to be out of play then there's something actively wrong with you.
If that goal was allowed against us, we'd be screaming conspiracy. You can't complain about every decision.
The whole image shows that the camera is at an adverse angle too. We shouldn't be able to see the post of the goal if camera is aligned but we clearly can.
If adjusting for that, it's clearly in play.
This is where referees piss people off in this league. Unless it's a clear and obvious error, the decision must stand; it's a fundamental law that stands across team sports.
Looks clearly out. People just love to moan. Imagine if the shoe was on the other foot
I realise there's extreme bias at play but even still, if anyone is seriously complaining that this was deemed to be out of play then there's something actively wrong with you.
If that goal was allowed against us, we'd be screaming conspiracy. You can't complain about every decision.
The white line of the touchline bulges because of the curvature of the ball. It could be touching. Why else is the white line not perfectly symmetrical where the ball is? The ball has indented the extremity of the touchline.
There is not enough evidence to rule the goal out but Brighton have got the benefit of the doubt because refs don't want a TalkSport led witch-hunt for an entire week.
There is not enough evidence to rule the goal out but Brighton have got the benefit of the doubt because refs don't want a TalkSport led witch-hunt for an entire week.
It looks clearly out because of the angle, the camera is to the left of the line, not directly above it.
I'm going to go out on a limb and say they used multiple camera angles.
Japan’s goal vs Spain looked clearly out, but it wasn’t
More annoyed about the lack of any lengthy check on Hojlund being ‘offside’ at the end of the half when it could’ve been a red.
Well, first off, this clearly is a subjective decision. So for VAR to overturn it, they have to be sure an error has made. There simply is not the proof.
Offsides are reviewed in exactly the same way. If it was so close as to be inconclusive, the goal would be given.
Regardless of the clear and obvious terminology, this descion shouldn't have been overturned.
Second, yellow cards aren't even reviewed by VAR.
VAR feed is provided to broadcasters. We've seen the angle they looked at, an inaccurate one. The same as the Garnacho onside winner against Arsenal.
I don't find myself able to give them that sort of benefit of the doubt, given recent performances.
Except that also looked much closer to the line than ours regardless.
Just because a ball that looked to have crossed the line didn't, that doesn't mean that every ball ball that looks to have crossed the line might not have.
i can see the green grass in between the line and the ball IIRC it was touching the line for Japan.