VAR and Refs | General Discussion | May 15: Premier League clubs to vote on proposal to scrap VAR from next season

[Fluctuation0161]

ABU agenda. We know that is a issue for long time but this season has been nothing short of scandal.


Everybody knows that. It is even worse than what they think. That is why I want to see our club go with official statement that we are not going to accept this anymore and that we want investigations by external part if this happens again. We don’t want apology. We want justice. Next time we get crazy decisions against us, pretty much every game, manager should take players off field. Enough is enough.

Lost games against Arsenal, Tottenham, CP and Man City are all because of some wierd crazy stuff we have been served by refs and VAR. Not to mention that same thing have been happening against Wolves, Burnley and now Fulham. We are lucky we won those games.

My only criticism of Erik is he doesn't try to influence the referees. He is very much a believer in fair play and focusing on what his team can deliver, which is admirable, but when the officials are this incompetent and biased they need to be called out.

 

[cyberman]

My only criticism of Erik is he doesn't try to influence the referees. He is very much a believer in fair play and focusing on what his team can deliver, which is admirable, but when the officials are this incompetent and biased they need to be called out.

He’s tried but gets called Ten excuses Hag and everyone laughs at us.
it’s no good preaching to the media when those reacting to the media doesn’t give a feck

 

[Giggsyking]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[bleedred]

One thing that should also be noted is that they made this whole deal about var being away from the stadium to stop any influence, but they still act based on the game situation. If a goal is very early, late or a possible decider it's scrutinized even more than say a 3rd goal in a 3-0 win.

 

[Jippy]

How come it's not a problem in other sports?

I don't know enough about other sports and their referees and use of tech. One point I'd be interested in is whether other sports change their rules or interpretation of them so often, eg handballs, offside, fouls incurring a yellow etc...

 

[Yorke to Cole]

Does anyone AI could be used in VAR? If so how and would be positive or a dangerous path?

 

[DownRiver]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

I hope Ratcliff gives some backbone to this club and puts pressure on these shit refs and technology they use.

We had Fergie who admittedly put pressure on the refs, and we need to do this in Ratcliff’s tenure.

 

[Fr. Todd Unctious]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

More than twice the amount of the next team. Fecking joke.

 

[TsuWave]

Are these numbers accurate:

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

if so, that’s insane. especially when you see the stone-wallers in those screenshots that we weren’t given

 

[Garnacho's Shoelaces]

This all implies that there are obvious “true” answers that these incompetents are failing to spot. I defy you to find one controversial decision which has got 100% consensus on this place. The whole world is raging about the Newcastle goal this morning but you can easily argue that both giving it and not giving it would have been the correct decision. Likewise the penalty we conceded against City. There is only very rarely a “true” answer for tight calls and there will always be subjectivity for most big decisions in football.

The narrative all this post-VAR moaning creates about officials being corrupt or profoundly incompetent is as damaging to the game as the poxy technology itself.

Objectively
1) Brighton game - standard of proof not met that ball went out of play. No evidence.
2) Spurs game - unless holding your arm above your head is now natural, it's a penalty objectively.
3) Arsenal game - Garnacho is onside. Objectively an inadequate angle used, wrong frame used and lines drawn from wrong body part of defender.
4) City game - Rodri clearly simulates the extent of the contact. It's obvious cheating and you can objectively show the same contact at least 20+ times in every game not intervened for.

These aren't close calls open to interpretation and debate. They are now a pattern of behaviour which gives rise to it being deliberate rather than merely unconscious bias against United.

 

[GazTheLegend]

I heard Dermot Gallacher on Talksport today defending VAR by saying that some of the decisions in football are "subjective", as in one foul for one referee is not a foul for another etc. That's not good enough frankly and it's infuriating: there simply aren't -that- many borderline decisions, they just decide them seemingly on a whim, for instance last week Vs city and yesterday with Maguire.

But as per the stats above: Why are we losing 5 goals - goals that could change the outlook of our entire season - to subjective decisions? I can't help but think that this mean that EVERY time there's a "subjective" decision it's going to go against us simply because otherwise there's an insane level of pressure on the referees from the media - if not to really pursue an anti United agenda than to generate clicks - and that, subjectively, since Klopps moaning they've collectively decided it's just easier to rule against us every time? If I was Ten Hag I'd be taking the 50-100k fines every game to call it out and force the media to talk about it, because it's getting a bit outrageous.

 

[Paul the Wolf]

Does anyone AI could be used in VAR? If so how and would be positive or a dangerous path?

Absolute Incompetence is already in use.

 

[sullydnl]

Objectively
1) Brighton game - standard of proof not met that ball went out of play. No evidence.
2) Spurs game - unless holding your arm above your head is now natural, it's a penalty objectively.
3) Arsenal game - Garnacho is onside. Objectively an inadequate angle used, wrong frame used and lines drawn from wrong body part of defender.
4) City game - Rodri clearly simulates the extent of the contact. It's obvious cheating and you can objectively show the same contact at least 20+ times in every game not intervened for.

These aren't close calls open to interpretation and debate. They are now a pattern of behaviour which gives rise to it being deliberate rather than merely unconscious bias against United.

The Garnacho offside decision was, factually, made completely in line with VAR protocol and in line with other offside decisions that get made every single week.

The fact that you have managed to convince yourself that it was not only wrong but objectively wrong and not open to debate is quite funny and evidence of the bias people view these decisions through. Unfortunately, it is not evidence of deliberate bias against United.

 

[Heinzesight]

The officials are just shit scared of the scrutiny they will be under if they allow a United goal that has the slightest hint of any wrongdoing no matter how minimal. Nothing to do with the UAE payments, no siree.

 

[Pexbo]

The Garnacho offside decision was, factually, made completely in line with VAR protocol and in line with other offside decisions that get made every single week.

The fact that you have managed to convince yourself that it was not only wrong but objectively wrong and not open to debate is quite funny and evidence of the bias people view these decisions through. Unfortunately, it is not evidence of deliberate bias against United.

There was a parallel camera angle and they chose the angle from behind, which is objectively worse for a call which if we are honest was too tight for the technology anyway. Why did they not use the better angle?

 

[stevoc]

The Maguire one was clear, that's why MOTD didn't go over it for those Utd fans shouting conspiracy. Plus Utd won anyway so who cares. I get the argument over consistency as City had one allowed just like that but what do you want refs to do? Just keep making the wrong decision over and over again because one went against Utd?

It was so clear it took Var, the Ref and a monitor check nearly 5 minutes to make a decision on it.

 

[stevoc]

Are these numbers accurate:

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

if so, that’s insane. especially when you see the stone-wallers in those screenshots that we weren’t given

Surely that can't be true?

 

[Wumminator]

Surely that can't be true?

Course it is! We are routinely screwed over.

 

[kiristao]

So Maguire was marginally offside when a freekick came in that sailed over his head but was occupying a defender that theoretically could have been covering the other attacker behind him who is onside and eventually crosses to another attacker who is onside and scores. Yeah if that was applied to every game and every scenario we'd see a lot more offsides and a lot less goals scored.

So by this logic if any attacking player is offside when the ball is played that leads to a goal, then that goal has to be ruled out yes?

As they're potentially tying up a defender who could have covered the onside players who score or assist.

Let's see if that interpretation of the rules gets applied again this season.

I think it was a combination of occupying a defender and attempting to play the ball that resulted in him being given offside.

 

[Red Dreams]

While we are enjoying Arteta's meltdown, until we have an overhead camera to prove if a ball is in play or not these type of debates will keep occurring.
The Rashford pass that was deemed out of play is the reverse of this.

Until then we simply have to move on.

 

[Lash]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

This is a stupid stat that doesn't mean much without any context. VAR gets generalised too much and this stuff doesn't really help.

 

[Withnail]

The Garnacho offside decision was, factually, made completely in line with VAR protocol and in line with other offside decisions that get made every single week.

The fact that you have managed to convince yourself that it was not only wrong but objectively wrong and not open to debate is quite funny and evidence of the bias people view these decisions through. Unfortunately, it is not evidence of deliberate bias against United.

I don't really get the wailing and gnashing of teeth about the Garnacho one. While it was tight I thought he was off and don't really see the controversy at all.

Someone mentioned so many subjective ones going against us. For me once it becomes subjective they should err on the side of the attacking team and give the goal. If it's subjective then by definition it's not objectively an infringement of the rules.

 

[Jeppers7]

Has anyone got stats for bookings for and against this season?

 

[Lay]

This is a stupid stat that doesn't mean much without any context. VAR gets generalised too much and this stuff doesn't really help.

Considering the other teams get into the box far more than United do.. might have something to do with it

 

[MikeKing]

Does anyone AI could be used in VAR? If so how and would be positive or a dangerous path?

You could use it to ensure greater consistency. If they built a simulation system similar to FM to monitor games in real time, by feeding the system information on correct decisions, the bot referee should be able after some time to calculate the most consistent decision. You'd need chips in alle the balls, all the boots and maybe even censors in the shirts. Their weight, height and body strength could be measured beforehand. Let's say a player is bumping into Salah and Salah removes his footing to go down, system should be able to detect that in real time and give a decision on that to a ref in less than a second. Beep - no foul on his watch. Another situation is when a defender goes down to protect the ball out wide when being pressured in a defensive position, usually a free kick no matter how hard the contact, here the system could make a non biased decision based on impact. Does that constitute a penalty if it happened in the box? You could really plot in a blueprint for how the rules should work and use that as a reference point for consistency. How are you going to argue something was soft, if even if it's soft, it's always soft.

For me it would be the most important change in refereeing with the use of technology because it actually improves a system. It wont completely remove human error, but it will take a lot of the guesswork out of the simple decisions and make the game run more smoothly. It would be a lot less fuss if everyone would just agree on the rules and focus on playing football.

These days we have rule changes every year, different practices are introduced and thrown out as soon as they come. Nobody can agree on what the rules should be, and a different explanation is used for the same situation each week depending on who gets the decision in their favour. The integrity is at an all time low for me and it's killing the sport. The competitive element is threatened by oil money and political investment as it is. I also think such a system could be rendered out for the public to explore, not hidden. Every decision would then have an explanation behind it and updating it by public opinion would be easier than having a meeting with 23 refs who should all just change at once.

 

[Garnacho's Shoelaces]

The Garnacho offside decision was, factually, made completely in line with VAR protocol and in line with other offside decisions that get made every single week.

The fact that you have managed to convince yourself that it was not only wrong but objectively wrong and not open to debate is quite funny and evidence of the bias people view these decisions through. Unfortunately, it is not evidence of deliberate bias against United.

There's literally a camera angle showing it was onside. You are incorrect.

 

[duffer]

Has anyone got stats for bookings for and against this season?

https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/

You can get that kinda stuff on there. Find out and let us know.

 

[CoopersDream]

The penalty stat posted in this thread is obviously bs. United received 5 more penalties just the season Klopp made those comments.

We haven't gotten a lot of penalties under Ten Hag though, but we got a huge amount under Ole. Make of that what you want.

 

[ROFLUTION]

You could use it to ensure greater consistency. If they built a simulation system similar to FM to monitor games in real time, by feeding the system information on correct decisions, the bot referee should be able after some time to calculate the most consistent decision. You'd need chips in alle the balls, all the boots and maybe even censors in the shirts. Their weight, height and body strength could be measured beforehand. Let's say a player is bumping into Salah and Salah removes his footing to go down, system should be able to detect that in real time and give a decision on that to a ref in less than a second. Beep - no foul on his watch. Another situation is when a defender goes down to protect the ball out wide when being pressured in a defensive position, usually a free kick no matter how hard the contact, here the system could make a non biased decision based on impact. Does that constitute a penalty if it happened in the box? You could really plot in a blueprint for how the rules should work and use that as a reference point for consistency. How are you going to argue something was soft, if even if it's soft, it's always soft.

For me it would be the most important change in refereeing with the use of technology because it actually improves a system. It wont completely remove human error, but it will take a lot of the guesswork out of the simple decisions and make the game run more smoothly. It would be a lot less fuss if everyone would just agree on the rules and focus on playing football.

These days we have rule changes every year, different practices are introduced and thrown out as soon as they come. Nobody can agree on what the rules should be, and a different explanation is used for the same situation each week depending on who gets the decision in their favour. The integrity is at an all time low for me and it's killing the sport. The competitive element is threatened by oil money and political investment as it is. I also think such a system could be rendered out for the public to explore, not hidden. Every decision would then have an explanation behind it and updating it by public opinion would be easier than having a meeting with 23 refs who should all just change at once.

… Or just get the fembot from Austin Powers to automatically shoot divers

 

[ROFLUTION]

Out of curiosity: where is goal line technology “placed”?

Couldnt that just be used to decide questions like yesterday’s with Arsenal? Or where Rashford passed to Højlund and he scored?

 

[stevoc]

I think it was a combination of occupying a defender and attempting to play the ball that resulted in him being given offside.

But surely by that stage he wasn't actually offside and wasn't it the second phase of play after Garnacho took possession of the ball?

 

[stevoc]

Course it is! We are routinely screwed over.

Well yes but if those numbers are true then there must be an explanation.

 

[Pexbo]

Well yes but if those numbers are true then there must be an explanation.

There was a Twitter thread by the Swedish Rumble which showed that the number of touches we take in the box per penalty is way outside of the average.

 

[stevoc]

There was a Twitter thread by the Swedish Rumble which showed that the number of touches we take in the box per penalty is way outside of the average.

As in we have a lot less touches inside the opposition box compared to other top teams?

Or that we have to have way more touches inside the opposition box before we get awarded one?

 

[CoopersDream]

But surely by that stage he wasn't actually offside and wasn't it the second phase of play after Garnacho took possession of the ball?

So you are telling me that he didn't attempt to play the ball before Garnacho got it? Just because he didn't actually reach the ball doesn't mean that he didn't attempt to play. In doing so he also physically interfered with an opponent that also attempted to play the ball. That is two bullet points right there in the offside rule. It's a pretty obvious offside.

 

[Pexbo]

As in we have a lot less touches inside the opposition box compared to other top teams?

Or that we have to have way more touches inside the opposition box before we get awarded one?

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[Lash]

Considering the other teams get into the box far more than United do.. might have something to do with it

It's hard to even take anything from it, are we bad at holding our runs or defensive line, so a lot are overturned offside goals? Are they pens? Are they handballs ruling out goals? They need to be categorised to try and understand anything from it.

 

[Yorke to Cole]

You could use it to ensure greater consistency. If they built a simulation system similar to FM to monitor games in real time, by feeding the system information on correct decisions, the bot referee should be able after some time to calculate the most consistent decision. You'd need chips in alle the balls, all the boots and maybe even censors in the shirts. Their weight, height and body strength could be measured beforehand. Let's say a player is bumping into Salah and Salah removes his footing to go down, system should be able to detect that in real time and give a decision on that to a ref in less than a second. Beep - no foul on his watch. Another situation is when a defender goes down to protect the ball out wide when being pressured in a defensive position, usually a free kick no matter how hard the contact, here the system could make a non biased decision based on impact. Does that constitute a penalty if it happened in the box? You could really plot in a blueprint for how the rules should work and use that as a reference point for consistency. How are you going to argue something was soft, if even if it's soft, it's always soft.

For me it would be the most important change in refereeing with the use of technology because it actually improves a system. It wont completely remove human error, but it will take a lot of the guesswork out of the simple decisions and make the game run more smoothly. It would be a lot less fuss if everyone would just agree on the rules and focus on playing football.

These days we have rule changes every year, different practices are introduced and thrown out as soon as they come. Nobody can agree on what the rules should be, and a different explanation is used for the same situation each week depending on who gets the decision in their favour. The integrity is at an all time low for me and it's killing the sport. The competitive element is threatened by oil money and political investment as it is. I also think such a system could be rendered out for the public to explore, not hidden. Every decision would then have an explanation behind it and updating it by public opinion would be easier than having a meeting with 23 refs who should all just change at once.

Thank you for the reply. I do not know much or read much about this technology as an innovation.

I completely agree with everything you say. I think realignment of the rules each season also makes it difficult for supporters.

I think referees also should explain their decision like it does in Rugby. Last week when the penalty was given to Man City, the play went on for approximately a minute and a half after the free kick incident. This is unacceptable when you consider the match going supporters.

 

[Longshanks]

So you are telling me that he didn't attempt to play the ball before Garnacho got it? Just because he didn't actually reach the ball doesn't mean that he didn't attempt to play. In doing so he also physically interfered with an opponent that also attempted to play the ball. That is two bullet points right there in the offside rule. It's a pretty obvious offside.

Attempting to play the ball dosent automatically make you offside but if you attempt to play the ball and that impedes an opponents ability to play the ball then your offside.

So the question is does Maguire in attempting to play the ball impede the ability of the defender to play the ball. Its very debatable. I understand how they decided that he did but I'm not sure I really agree with it.

 

[duffer]

Well yes but if those numbers are true then there must be an explanation.

You've have at least 9 pens awarded in the prem since Klopp whinged about it (which was in January 2021 according to a google search)...
https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11661/12179737/is-liverpool-boss-jurgen-klopps-man-utd-penalty-claim-correct#:~:text=The champions slipped to a,two second-half penalty appeals.

You've had 1 this season, 3 in 2022/23 and 5 in 2021/22. I don't know if you had any more in the 2020/21 season after theJanuary that Klopp moaned, I'm not that bored to check.