This only applies to subjective decisions. 99% of offsides are objective.
VAR and Refs | General Discussion | Forest go into meltdown
- Thread starter Samid
- Start date
The fact you could see the players shirt number. Cas was half a body behind him. Literally a glance showed he wasn't off
Yet when Bruno puts his hands in the air it’s worthy of 10 mins commentary coverage. 
It’s beyond doubt now that the team, not the technology needs replacing. Perfect camera view of choking a player (not like Case’s where one view showed he wasn’t actually doing anything) and not a peep from up top. It’s clearly violent conduct so why aren’t VAR getting involved there?
True, but they use that approach for subjective decisions as well. Handballs are a good example.
And is this particular case, it seemed clear from the pictures that were shown that you couldn’t possibly tell whether Casemiro was offside, because he was obscured by a bunch of other players. But they kept looking and looking for an excuse to disallow it.
And literally right after Casemiro got sent off that game - hence why they didn't send off the Palace guy who did very similar in the same melee. That mid-Match rule change saved him just in time!
Couldn't believe they didn't send off the Forest guy tonight. Couldn't have been more blatant. How VAR can look at that and not see it as a red is incredible.
The "clear and obvious" thing is flawed anyway.
Aside from it not being a thing for offside calls, where having a thread of your shirt sleeve ahead of the last defender means being called off, it also means that near identical incidents can "correctly" be called entirely differently.
Two players (even within the same game) can make pretty much the same challenge, with one being sent off, the other not, and VAR can do nothing and still be "right" if they're not blatan reds (e.g. if it's maybe a bit iffy if he was the last man).
I swear the only added the "clear and obvious" thing to give themselves some wiggle room for inevitably fecking up, but even that's created a load of drama.
They did their best tonight.
They've access to all of the angles though. It was clear in the replay they showed after the game that he was well onside.
Was a little surprised given it wouldnt have affected this match so would barely have been mentioned following. Wasn't even mentioned in post match analysis
But the on-field decision was goal so why do they have to go through all that? If they don’t have the angles to say whether he’s on or off then on-field decision should stand, which was goal?
Plus there were definitely angles showing that it was very unlikely that he was offside anyway.
I’m guessing that Varane’s position is going to be a bigger talking point than how a supposedly professional referee can watch a guy grab another player by the throat on a video and say that it isn’t violent conduct.
While offside as thing is objective, the way VAR looks at it is definitely subjective considering you've just got some bloke skipping between frames to decide which one the ball left the foot in, which can make a reasonable difference alone, and he then decides which pixels represent the defender and attacker for the lines.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Still can’t believe there were posters in the match day thread who thought this was a shoulder charge.
Clearly goes in with an arm and a hip and makes zero attempt to play the ball, he’s not even looking at it.
A United defender does that and I’d think “you idiot”.
Clearly goes in with an arm and a hip and makes zero attempt to play the ball, he’s not even looking at it.
A United defender does that and I’d think “you idiot”.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Never a penalty, 2 players got their bodies across and shield him off the ball. That's just good defending.
Yup. Rashford had let the ball get away from him, which made it an easy decision.
I’m not sure on the rashford one. Rashford was mid sprint and off balance and the defender shoved his elbow into his rib cage at full pelt, with no attempt to get the ball. Part of me thinks it’s a foul and part of me thinks it’s just part of a physical game
It's one of those ones that's more likely to be called as a foul the closer you get to your own goal.
If that happens just outside our box as he tries to start a counter, the ref probably blows for a free-kick.
I've thought this for years but it's not even a debate now whether VAR take incidents more seriously based on the minute of the game it took place.
Hand near someone's throat in the 50th minute of a tight game? "Clear red card - go to the monitor".
Hand literally on someone's throat in the last minute of stoppage time? "Meh, don't worry about it - the game will be over in a minute anyway. Not worth the drama".
What pissed me off most was that Forest had one last attack to potentially score afterwards to take it to extra time, and that negligence from VAR could've cost us.
Hand near someone's throat in the 50th minute of a tight game? "Clear red card - go to the monitor".
Hand literally on someone's throat in the last minute of stoppage time? "Meh, don't worry about it - the game will be over in a minute anyway. Not worth the drama".
What pissed me off most was that Forest had one last attack to potentially score afterwards to take it to extra time, and that negligence from VAR could've cost us.
Think the Rashford one is one of those that could be given, but wouldn't often be. So not much of a surprise, or a story, that it wasn't given.
That said, pretty sure much more would be made of it in the media had it been our defenders doing that to one of their strikers. One of those were they, justifiably, gloss over it when it's us appealing for a soft pen for it. But suddenly becomes a much bigger penalty shout and talking point if it's at the other end.
That said, pretty sure much more would be made of it in the media had it been our defenders doing that to one of their strikers. One of those were they, justifiably, gloss over it when it's us appealing for a soft pen for it. But suddenly becomes a much bigger penalty shout and talking point if it's at the other end.
It’s been like this all season, we’ve seen the impact managers can have on referees. Remember when we stopped getting penalties for ages after Klopp complained we were getting too many. Unless Ten Hag starts putting serious pressure on the officials we will continue to be hard done by. Fergie was a master at getting into referees heads.
Possibly comes under the umbrella of not being overturned if the ref awards it, but not being awarded if he doesn't.
Regardless, you're absolutely right that it'd be a massive talking point if it was Elanga going down between Varane and Lindelof in those circumstances and nothing was given.
This theme of “we won’t get hard done by if our manager causes a fuss” is pure conjecture. Show me the evidence that a managers words have any effect whatsoever in generating favorable outcomes from e refereeing decisions
Klopp post Spurs game after Diaz was incorrectly given offside.
Konate doesn't get sent off for a clear second bookable offence vs Everton a couple of weeks later.
For me, that was a clear-as-day example of the refs being overly lenient after knowing a club was hard done by in a recent game.
I think there's definitely examples of managers mouthing off about us getting decisions that leads to us being screwed for the next few games. That does suggest referees can be influenced - consciously or subconsciously - by manager comments / media talk.
The media aren't going to highlight the decisions that go against us - while simultaneously going OTT in highlighting decisions that go in our favour. And giving voice and credence to opposition managers complaints. I guess if the club don't do their part in highlighting the big calls that go against us, then it feels that that false narrative is allowed to be taken as correct and puts pressure on officials - again, conscious or subconscious - when reffing our games.
Look at the amount of favourable decisions Liverpool have gotten this season. Every man and his dog knew that once that mistake was made against Liverpool in the Spurs game they would start to get one favourable decision after another and they have.
Look also when Klopp had a good cry about the amount of penalties we were getting, we only got about 1 in the 40 odd games that followed that. Not only are officials incompetent but they are also human and to suggest they can not be influenced by powerful managers is naive.
This was madness!
I hate conspiracy stuff... but wtf!!!
I hate conspiracy stuff... but wtf!!!
Its amazing how many people are claiming that our goal should have been ruled out as Varane did the same thing Endo did on VVD's disallowed goal on Sunday when they wernt the same as Endo committed an offside offence and Varane didnt.
I wish Onana had conceded a foul for that punch at the start of the season, we'd have had 3 or 4 extra pens by now.
Surely the Felipe/Bruno incident was just a bit of routine sex-play and therefore more affectionate than aggressive!
Liverpool have also been on the receiving end of atrocious decisions. You can't look at one thing and not the other.
An opposing player could pull out a gun and shoot a United player dead in the box and there would be 30+ posts saying "nah, never a pen."
And so would the commentators in the studio.
when a decision goes against Liverpool there is a national scandal and the FA apologise.
The Rashford one for me should be a pen as it would have been called a foul outside the box. The worst part is it was a sandwich which means as both Forest players ensured he went nowhere.
The lengthy VAR check was a joke as they were looking for any reason not to give it. This was to ensure it fit into the narrative of then wanting a cup upset.
The Felipe non red card was a joke.
The lengthy VAR check was a joke as they were looking for any reason not to give it. This was to ensure it fit into the narrative of then wanting a cup upset.
The Felipe non red card was a joke.
https://www.skysports.com/football/video/30998/12722953/ref-watch-it-was-100-a-penalt
For reference on how incidents are judged when a defender steps across an attacker without getting the ball - sometimes
For reference on how incidents are judged when a defender steps across an attacker without getting the ball - sometimes
You don't need to prove he's onside though, or at least you shouldn't. An image showing he isn't offside should be enough
Klopp complains about our penalty numbers on ole season and we've hardly had one since.
In Portuguese culture it’s a sign of affection and respect, which is why Casemiro also did it earlier in the season but the ref misinterpreted it then
I sometimes feel a bit mad looking at stuff like this. It's quite obviously a foul anywhere else on the pitch, yet wasn't given and the commentators made nothing of it at all either. It makes me question if I even know what a foul is, which I think I do!
The 2 minute wait for a very clear onside goal was just bizarre.