g = window.googletag || {}; googletag.cmd = googletag.cmd || []; window.googletag = googletag; googletag.cmd.push(function() { var interstitialSlot = googletag.defineOutOfPageSlot('/17085479/redcafe_gam_interstitial', googletag.enums.OutOfPageFormat.INTERSTITIAL); if (interstitialSlot) { interstitialSlot.addService(googletag.pubads()); } });

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

Pogue Mahone

The caf's Camus.
Joined
Feb 22, 2006
Messages
134,309
Location
"like a man in silk pyjamas shooting pigeons
I think the point was that 5 in 3 games is a considerably higher rate than we’ve seen all season. Which would clearly be true. You could argue that United dissent more but when you see what Gibbs White got away with in the same game it doesn’t really wash.
Or Nunez in the same match that saw Dalot sent off. It really couldn’t be any more obvious that the way dissent has been handled in our last few games is not even close to even handed.
 

Annihilate Now!

...or later, I'm not fussy
Scout
Joined
Nov 4, 2010
Messages
50,003
Location
W.Yorks
How is it sensible? You can score from any part of your body apart from your hands/arms. Why arbitrarily choose feet? Because it’s called “football”?
Because a) it's more accurate for a human to draw lines from feet then arbitrary picking points on an arm and b) the idea of gaining an "advantage" from simply leaning forward (when attackers and defenders will by nature be going on different directions) is negligible.
 
Last edited:

cyberman

Full Member
Joined
May 26, 2010
Messages
37,331
Because a) it's more accurate for a human to draw lines from feet then arbitrary picking points on an arm and b) the idea of gaining an "advantage" from simply leaning forward (when attackers and defenders will by nature be going on different directions) is my negligible.
How, in the Christ, are VAR meant to pick out feet from a crowded penalty area?
 

Flying high

Full Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2015
Messages
1,785
Or Nunez in the same match that saw Dalot sent off. It really couldn’t be any more obvious that the way dissent has been handled in our last few games is not even close to even handed.
Refs see us a soft target these days. You can't moan about such things and be taken seriously when you're losing every other week.

I don't know if it's a UK thing, or more generally a human trait, but when you complain from a position of weakness you're typically ignored. You can moan like hell about a bad decision when you're doing well, but are simply making excuses if you lose.

Same goes for talking about 115 charges FC. Any team who beats city to the league is allowed to berate them for their cheating and be listened to. The rest just have to take it on the chin. Good old stiff upper lip kind of bollox.
 

Garnacho's Shoelaces

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Nov 6, 2022
Messages
787
Location
In Garnacho's boots but untied
I could get on board with this. I think the actual motivation for the offside rule has been forgotten - it’s about stopping a striker camping in the opposition’s area waiting for the long ball. If the technology was up to scratch it would actually be the easiest rule to implement but for that you need more cameras, higher definition and higher frame rate and a sensor on the ball which determines the exact moment the player makes contact for the pass. The only concern I have with your suggestion is that when it comes down to it, all you are really doing is arbitrarily deciding where the edge of a line needs to be to determine if a player is offside.
Agreed - the current application is not in the spirit of why they legislated the rule initially. It's now solving a problem nobody wants.
 

Mb194dc

Full Member
Joined
Dec 8, 2015
Messages
4,714
Supports
Chelsea
So those thinking "daylight offside" would be better, you'd be happy to see something like this given as a goal?


They introduced thicker lines for the defenders this season and it's working well, it's only people not understanding how angles work and how they're accounted for that have any problem with it.
I'd rather scrap VAR entirely or only use it in the most extreme circumstances (like the Thatcher elbow on Pedro Mendes or if goal line tech fails). It ruins goal celebrations, it's inconsistently applied, you can't use it for second yellow's, offside isn't even 100% accurate due to a number of variables including the speed of the player and the fps of the camera capturing when the ball is played . Then there's the outright mistakes of course as well and the constant delays it causes...

Football is an analogue game and digital refereeing ruins it as a spectacle, VAR is shite, frankly. The early rounds of the league cup are so much better to watch without it. I'd rather have mistakes made by humans and everyone just getting on with it, as they used to, than 300+ pages of moaning about how imperfect the system is and always will be.
 

Garnacho's Shoelaces

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Nov 6, 2022
Messages
787
Location
In Garnacho's boots but untied
I'd rather scrap VAR entirely or only use it in the most extreme circumstances (like the Thatcher elbow on Pedro Mendes or if goal line tech fails). It ruins goal celebrations, it's inconsistently applied, you can't use it for second yellow's, offside isn't even 100% accurate due to a number of variables including the speed of the player and the fps of the camera capturing when the ball is played . Then there's the outright mistakes of course as well and the constant delays it causes...

Football is an analogue game and digital refereeing ruins it as a spectacle, VAR is shite, frankly. The early rounds of the league cup are so much better to watch without it. I'd rather have mistakes made by humans and everyone just getting on with it, as they used to, than 300+ pages of moaning about how imperfect the system is and always will be.
Very good summary.
 

WeePat

Full Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2015
Messages
17,547
Supports
Chelsea
I’m convinced the dissent rule only applies to us. I don’t even know what Eriksen did To get booked, it was far less than what MGW did
Jackson has 7 bookings this season and I’m pretty sure they’re all for dissent or talking to the ref.
 

cyberman

Full Member
Joined
May 26, 2010
Messages
37,331
He throws himself down independently from the tackle. Just because you’re touched doesn’t mean you can throw yourself to the ground otherwise it’s a dive because you’re throwing yourself to the fecking ground
 

Shane88

Actually Nostradamus
Joined
Jan 12, 2011
Messages
35,334
Location
Targaryen loyalist
You get nothing for being honest so you may as well go down because referees are the biggest proponents for diving by rewarding stuff like that.
 

Zed is not dead

Full Member
Joined
Apr 9, 2023
Messages
1,543
The offside rule is quite stupid as it is today.
The attacker will naturally have his upper body going towards the goal and be in front of the defender, while the defender will usually be playing the offside with his upper body going the opposite direction.

Feet position should be the determining factor when judging an offside, not a shoulder or a knee!!
 

90 + 5min

Full Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2019
Messages
5,370
The fact Mike Dean said that's not a yellow for Joelinton just shows that's he's just PGMOL propaganda.
Did he? Serious?

I saw lot of dissent now. No cards except Diaz. Should have been at least to Salah and vanDijk to. Dalot rule was just poor excuse.
 

Moonwalker

Full Member
Joined
Oct 30, 2009
Messages
3,821
He throws himself down independently from the tackle. Just because you’re touched doesn’t mean you can throw yourself to the ground otherwise it’s a dive because you’re throwing yourself to the fecking ground
It's a sad state of affairs that a player needs to go to the ground for a thought of a penalty to be even entertained. VAR was a great opportunity to amend that, but due to how unpopular it already is, it's not surprising they were reluctant to push for even more strictness, adding even more penalties (which would be bound to happen, at least in the short term). Angry grandpas would riot about it.

The thought of something being both a dive and a penalty seems absurd to people because they think those two things are antithetic, but this was a case of just that. He gets fouled initially, but the foul isn't forceful enough to knock him off balance so he then throws himself to the ground in the most shameless manner possible. It's as clear a dive as you'll see, but that doesn't mean he wasn't fouled initially. And if he was fouled it's a penalty.
 

90 + 5min

Full Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2019
Messages
5,370
Salah, van Dijk and Klopp all remonstrating with officials about Newcastle ‘offences’ yet Taylor et al just accept it.

Incredible.
I would say that he missed at least 5-6 more yellow cards. For both teams.

Dalot-rule don't get applied here what it seams.
 

Oranges038

Full Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2020
Messages
12,400
That’s a clear penalty tbh
There was 3 like that yesterday and only 1 was given. Gallagher was asked about them on ref watch and he wouldn't give a straight answer about any of them yes or no.

Diaz should have been booked for diving.
 

eire-red

Full Member
Joined
Aug 9, 2018
Messages
2,680
The fact Mike Dean said that's not a yellow for Joelinton just shows that's he's just PGMOL propaganda.
That was an outrageous comment. Like how many times have we seen refs go back and book players after playing advantage.

Dean and Gallagher are adding zero value on TV and should be removed. They are clearly just backing the refs all the time.
 

Bangor_Red

Full Member
Joined
Aug 29, 2006
Messages
735
Location
Bangor,NI
It's a sad state of affairs that a player needs to go to the ground for a thought of a penalty to be even entertained. VAR was a great opportunity to amend that, but due to how unpopular it already is, it's not surprising they were reluctant to push for even more strictness, adding even more penalties (which would be bound to happen, at least in the short term). Angry grandpas would riot about it.

The thought of something being both a dive and a penalty seems absurd to people because they think those two things are antithetic, but this was a case of just that. He gets fouled initially, but the foul isn't forceful enough to knock him off balance so he then throws himself to the ground in the most shameless manner possible. It's as clear a dive as you'll see, but that doesn't mean he wasn't fouled initially. And if he was fouled it's a penalty.
This is a great explanation. There was a foul so should be a pen. Albeit soft. But the way he goes down is a dive. I've seen so many go against us for exaggerating the contact. It's annoying and as usual Liverpool get the rub of the green but it is a pen
 

Anustart89

Full Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2013
Messages
15,960
That was an outrageous comment. Like how many times have we seen refs go back and book players after playing advantage.

Dean and Gallagher are adding zero value on TV and should be removed. They are clearly just backing the refs all the time.
They're right and you're wrong.


Obviously, if it's a tough tackle that would be booked by virtue of being reckless, then the booking would be issued.