Get rid of VAR NOW! We want our game back! (...or not, some are happy)

VAR - Love or Hate?


  • Total voters
    1,268

Pogue Mahone

Poster of the year 2008
Joined
Feb 22, 2006
Messages
102,175
Location
"like a man in silk pyjamas shooting pigeons
True but you'd hope some common sense is applied.

If it was the other way round I'd be fuming to get a red card for that.
It’s not a red card but it’s a blatant foul. It looked extremely close to the line too. Fecking mental if VAR was not used for that incident. Aren’t we putting up with all this stop start bollox to cut out obviously poor decisions like that one?
 

Revan

Assumptionman
Joined
Dec 19, 2011
Messages
41,504
Location
CA
It's a foul but not a red card in my opinion. Would be harsh to send someone off for a total accident.
It is, but VAR cannot intervene for a foul. If it was inside the box, very likely would have given a penalty.
 

TheReligion

Abusive
Joined
Nov 22, 2006
Messages
28,099
Location
Manchester
I wouldn't say so... He had to kick the ball,and both their feet are at the exact same height.
If you're going to give the foul surely he's got to go? It's a goalscoring opportunity. He's fecked up and then tried to hoof it away knowing Martial was coming though. For me its clumsy and a red.
 

filibuster

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Aug 3, 2018
Messages
82
Supports
Chelsea FC
It kind of puts things in perspective what type of decision MU were getting, if so many posters think that was a red card or a penalty.
 

11101

Full Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2014
Messages
12,395
Really? I didn’t see any replays that showed it was clearly outside the box. Surely close enough for VAR to get involved anyway.
They will have looked at it but not bothered to alert the ref as it was outside.

Red card maybe, but it wasnt exactly a clear scoring opportunity at that point.
 

padr81

Full Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2015
Messages
6,939
Supports
Man City
That was never a pen nor a red. It was though the wrong call and should have been a free for United imho of course.
 

Anustart89

Full Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2013
Messages
9,570
Give what? It's outside the box, VAR is for penalties and red cards.
If it's inside the box it's a VAR check for a penalty (in which case it would've been a yellow for Chelsea player since it's an attempt to play the ball).

Outside the box though denial of goalscoring opportunity is a red card even if it's an attempt to play the ball, so there should've been a red card review.
 

montpelier

Full Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2011
Messages
10,626
I didn't think it was clear enough again.

Especially if you watch it quickly and don't want to get involved.
 

padr81

Full Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2015
Messages
6,939
Supports
Man City
If it's inside the box it's a VAR check for a penalty (in which case it would've been a yellow for Chelsea player since it's an attempt to play the ball).

Outside the box though denial of goalscoring opportunity is a red card even if it's an attempt to play the ball, so there should've been a red card review.
They use the acronym dogso, denial of an obvious goal scoring opportunity. That wasn't and obvious opportunity because of where the ball went and Martial never had it under control going in on goal. They've been denied before for strikers running wide with the ball, taking a heavy touch they still would have made etc...
 

Anustart89

Full Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2013
Messages
9,570
They use the acronym dogso, denial of an obvious goal scoring opportunity. That wasn't and obvious opportunity because of where the ball went and Martial never had it under control going in on goal. They've been denied before for strikers running wide with the ball, taking a heavy touch they still would have made etc...
Martial never got to take the touch that he wanted because his leg was kicked up into the ball. With the touch that Martial would've taken (unimpeded by being kicked from behind), do you think that would've been the flight of the ball? I've never seen a player lightly control the ball and have it fly ten yards up in the air. He was going in front of the player and could've been coming at the goal from 18 yards at a 45 degree angle. I think there's a case for dogso (I know that's the acronym but it takes me two more seconds to type it all out and avoid someone asking "what's dogso?").
 

padr81

Full Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2015
Messages
6,939
Supports
Man City
Martial never got to take the touch that he wanted because his leg was kicked up into the ball. With the touch that Martial would've taken (unimpeded by being kicked from behind), do you think that would've been the flight of the ball? I've never seen a player lightly control the ball and have it fly ten yards up in the air. He was going in front of the player and could've been coming at the goal from 18 yards at a 45 degree angle. I think there's a case for dogso (I know that's the acronym but it takes me two more seconds to type it all out and avoid someone asking "what's dogso?").
Thats my point, he never had control of the ball. So its can't be a red, stupid rule but sadly the correct one. If he'd controlled the ball and than taken the contact, would have been stone wall red. As usual its not the VAR but the silly rule thats being applied. One thing VAR has proven is how many of footballs rules have no common sense in them when applied to the letter.

As for the bolded, off topic but you guys had Lukaku up front for 3 years so I bet you have. Good strikers have often taken heavy touches too, my point is not that Martials touch was bad, its that we don't know it would have been good.
 

FootballHQ

Full Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2017
Messages
11,052
Supports
Aston Villa
True but you'd hope some common sense is applied.

If it was the other way round I'd be fuming to get a red card for that.
Jones didn't get a red in the 2018 final for a more cynical foul.

It was certainly a free kick and yellow card.
 

Anustart89

Full Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2013
Messages
9,570
Thats my point, he never had control of the ball. So its can't be a red, stupid rule but sadly the correct one. If he'd controlled the ball and than taken the contact, would have been stone wall red. As usual its not the VAR but the silly rule thats being applied. One thing VAR has proven is how many of footballs rules have no common sense in them when applied to the letter.

As for the bolded, off topic but you guys had Lukaku up front for 3 years so I bet you have. Good strikers have often taken heavy touches too, my point is not that Martials touch was bad, its that we don't know it would have been good.
I take your point but I think we might be reading the law differently

http://www.thefa.com/football-rules.../football-11-11/law-12---fouls-and-misconduct

The following must be considered:
  • distance between the offence and the goal
  • general direction of the play
  • likelihood of keeping or gaining control of the ball
  • location and number of defender
This section doesn't say that the player has to have control over the ball. If that was the case, then a player could commit a DOGSO foul with impunity on any through ball before the player's making contact with the ball. I don't think that's the spirit of the law.

So in this case, play was heading towards goal, 19 yards out, two defenders both which are behind him and I'd say that likelihood of Martial gaining control of the ball is, what, 70/30 in his favour. Not even Lukaku would kick it up ten yards in the air, more likely miscontrol it and send it out for a throw in. That flight can only come from actually kicking the ball upwards, not with a relaxed foot attempting to control it, so it's entirely down to the fact that his leg was kicked through the ball.

I definitely think there's a DOGSO case there, but obviously opinions may differ on that one. What is clear though is that it was a definite foul and the only reason we're screaming for VAR is because we have refs who are either incompetent and can't spot a foul or that we have competent refs who aren't reffing the game but the narrative and are easily influenced by nonsensical comments from managers in mid-week. Dean has had a mare all night (20 fouls from Chelsea without a yellow, so they could break up attacks with complete impunity), as has his assistant in this case who would've had a perfect angle to spot that the Chelsea player hasn't touched the ball. Obviously, VAR being there is messing with refs' heads as they're reluctant to make calls "as VAR will bail them out" but VAR can't intervene due to a) a technicality or b) because it's only a bad decision and not a horrendous one.

I've been saying it for years now, but we need a bloody challenge system that forces the referee on the pitch to go to the bloody monitor and only have to change his mind, not this "clear and obvious" bollocks from the guy at Stockley Park. Have them review what they're reviewing right now, but allow a team to force a VAR check twice per game if they're unhappy with a decision. As we saw with the Nketiah situation a few weeks ago, having the head ref go to the screen can actually speed things up. They were checking angles for two minutes whereas the ref watched the screen and made his mind up in less than ten seconds.
 

Anustart89

Full Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2013
Messages
9,570
Ah, you remind me, some people said a genuine attempt to play the ball isn't a red anymore.
Inside the box. Outside the box, it still is. It's to prevent double punishment of penalty+red, but outside the box it's a free kick so red card still applies.
 

Anustart89

Full Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2013
Messages
9,570
Jones didn't get a red in the 2018 final for a more cynical foul.

It was certainly a free kick and yellow card.
Because Jones was punished with a penalty. If inside the box, denial of goalscoring opportunity is yellow if attempting to play the ball, whereas denial of goalscoring opportunity is a red card outside the box even if it's an attempt to play the ball.
 

padr81

Full Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2015
Messages
6,939
Supports
Man City
I take your point but I think we might be reading the law differently

This section doesn't say that the player has to have control over the ball. If that was the case, then a player could commit a DOGSO foul with impunity on any through ball before the player's making contact with the ball. I don't think that's the spirit of the law.

So in this case, play was heading towards goal, 19 yards out, two defenders both which are behind him and I'd say that likelihood of Martial gaining control of the ball is, what, 70/30 in his favour. Not even Lukaku would kick it up ten yards in the air, more likely miscontrol it and send it out for a throw in. That flight can only come from actually kicking the ball upwards, not with a relaxed foot attempting to control it, so it's entirely down to the fact that his leg was kicked through the ball.

I definitely think there's a DOGSO case there, but obviously opinions may differ on that one. What is clear though is that it was a definite foul and the only reason we're screaming for VAR is because we have refs who are either incompetent and can't spot a foul or that we have competent refs who aren't reffing the game but the narrative and are easily influenced by nonsensical comments from managers in mid-week. Dean has had a mare all night (20 fouls from Chelsea without a yellow, so they could break up attacks with complete impunity), as has his assistant in this case who would've had a perfect angle to spot that the Chelsea player hasn't touched the ball. Obviously, VAR being there is messing with refs' heads as they're reluctant to make calls "as VAR will bail them out" but VAR can't intervene due to a) a technicality or b) because it's only a bad decision and not a horrendous one.

I've been saying it for years now, but we need a bloody challenge system that forces the referee on the pitch to go to the bloody monitor and only have to change his mind, not this "clear and obvious" bollocks from the guy at Stockley Park. Have them review what they're reviewing right now, but allow a team to force a VAR check twice per game if they're unhappy with a decision. As we saw with the Nketiah situation a few weeks ago, having the head ref go to the screen can actually speed things up. They were checking angles for two minutes whereas the ref watched the screen and made his mind up in less than ten seconds.
There is a lot to consider, even if he takes a good touch to cushion the ball, its going up before it comes down and the defender has a second to recover position. Don't get me wrong, it should be a red, but I'm only playing devils advocate on how I would judge it in a refs shoes. I think ref's will look at it because they seem to be taking things to a stupid extreme. You look at the Lucas handball goal and the one City scored as well not given for handball, they are genuinely looking to rule things out for zero reason.

The goals, pens and offsides we've seen this season along with some red cards not given are ridiculous, I don't blame the technology as much as the stupid implementation. You see stupid pens given etc.. for purely accidental handballs, and blatant pens not given because of stupid technicalities. Its frustrating. Football needs a rules overhaul so the VAR is not pointless or it rewards the attackers. All its essentially doing now is taking the decision from the ref to another ref in a room who is looking for excuses not to give things for an easier life. Its ridiculous and still littered with error but its also showing up how stupid and lacking common sense footballs rules are right now.
 

Anustart89

Full Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2013
Messages
9,570
There is a lot to consider, even if he takes a good touch to cushion the ball, its going up before it comes down and the defender has a second to recover position. Don't get me wrong, it should be a red, but I'm only playing devils advocate on how I would judge it in a refs shoes. I think ref's will look at it because they seem to be taking things to a stupid extreme. You look at the Lucas handball goal and the one City scored as well not given for handball, they are genuinely looking to rule things out for zero reason.

The goals, pens and offsides we've seen this season along with some red cards not given are ridiculous, I don't blame the technology as much as the stupid implementation. You see stupid pens given etc.. for purely accidental handballs, and blatant pens not given because of stupid technicalities. Its frustrating. Football needs a rules overhaul so the VAR is not pointless or it rewards the attackers. All its essentially doing now is taking the decision from the ref to another ref in a room who is looking for excuses not to give things for an easier life. Its ridiculous and still littered with error but its also showing up how stupid and lacking common sense footballs rules are right now.
Agree with everything you've said.

I'm not against the technology as such, the implementation is just such a massive cock-up that it's hard to believe it's not deliberate. You put the technology in there so the ref thinks "it's easier if I don't blow my whistle because if I'm wrong then VAR will help me" and then VAR doesn't help because they've chosen a ridiculously high threshold for it. I'm absolutely certain that if the monitors were used in all situations bar offside and handball leading to goal we'd see much better officiating. I do think there needs to be some way for teams to challenge decisions where VAR chooses not to intervene, such as the Romeu challenge on Greenwood or Martial today.

If the referee had seen that on a screen he'd have hade some 'splainin to do if he chose not to send Romeu off or at least give a free kick to Martial. It might seem inconsequential, but it's such bollocks that if Chelsea had gone up the other end of the pitch and scored before the ball went out of play, then VAR would've checked.

It would also be easier for the PGMOL to assess the quality of the referees and their grasp of the laws of the game, whereas this system allows them to get off on technicalities. If VAR looks at that Romeu challenge and doesn't give it he can defend himself and say that "well I think it's a red card but I didn't deem it clear and obvious at the time". If the ref looks at it himself and deems it to not be a red card then surely his boss would ask him what the feck he thinks the laws of the game state regarding late studs-up tackles.
 

montpelier

Full Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2011
Messages
10,626
I don't think we're getting that. I'd even go so far as to say it sounds like bleating.

Imagine if Liverpool got given that decision, we'd go potty.

I don't even care if the super slomo shows it as a pen on the 15th run through.

Things are getting silly.
 

montpelier

Full Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2011
Messages
10,626
You have a referee who gives what he sees first up - and that one looks fair enough to me.

(I won't mention the 20 fouls and no booking just now, obvs)

But like Zaha, not everything is straightforward, not even for the cameras.

I really don't think we've been, like done, there like it seems some people want to believe.
 

Pogue Mahone

Poster of the year 2008
Joined
Feb 22, 2006
Messages
102,175
Location
"like a man in silk pyjamas shooting pigeons
I don't think we're getting that. I'd even go so far as to say it sounds like bleating.

Imagine if Liverpool got given that decision, we'd go potty.

I don't even care if the super slomo shows it as a pen on the 15th run through.

Things are getting silly.
I’m not sure if you’re being serious. If you are, though, that was an obvious foul after one replay. Might have taken another replay or two to work out if it was in the box. Which is the sort of thing that VAR is supposedly for.
 

DevilRed

Full Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2011
Messages
9,768
Location
Stretford End
Surely should have had VAR check the foul on Martial by zouma.

If they checked that AND still found nothing wrong, then its the referees that are the issue, NOT VAR.

If we have the same incompetent cnuts on the field and in the control room making the decisions, why does anyone think things will actually get better? :lol:
 

montpelier

Full Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2011
Messages
10,626
I’m not sure if you’re being serious. If you are, though, that was an obvious foul after one replay. Might have taken another replay or two to work out if it was in the box. Which is the sort of thing that VAR is supposedly for.
My eyesight must be going, honestly.

And if it is, it's nearly always given as one of those,, ":comings together" referees use as their escape clause.

Follow up question - we expect the ref to give that in real time or we want VAR to overrule?

Never going to happen.
 

montpelier

Full Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2011
Messages
10,626
My eyesight must be going, honestly.

And if it is, it's nearly always given as one of those,, ":comings together" referees use as their escape clause.

Follow up question - we expect the ref to give that in real time or we want VAR to overrule?

Never going to happen.
I reach that conclusion based on what they HAVEN'T overruled previously.
 

Pogue Mahone

Poster of the year 2008
Joined
Feb 22, 2006
Messages
102,175
Location
"like a man in silk pyjamas shooting pigeons
My eyesight must be going, honestly.

And if it is, it's nearly always given as one of those,, ":comings together" referees use as their escape clause.

Follow up question - we expect the ref to give that in real time or we want VAR to overrule?

Never going to happen.
It’s clear as day on replay (assuming we’re discussing the same incident?) Martial kicks the ball. Zouma kicks Martial.

I don’t blame the referee for missing it in real time (referees are human, I always accepted that before this VAR bollox tried to fix it) but VAR should have reviewed it and made the correct call. Otherwise what’s the point of the fecking thing....
 

Revan

Assumptionman
Joined
Dec 19, 2011
Messages
41,504
Location
CA
Also. Why are people arguing about the red? VAR should have adjudicated on a potential penalty. Can anyone show me any footage which definitively proves that the foul was outside the box? I haven’t seen any.
When I saw it, it looked to me clearly that was out of the box, which means that VAR cannot do anything about it (and no way, it was a red, not in a million years).

I think that the rule is stupid to be fair. I don't think that VAR should check for yellows or fouls, but if it checks for penalties and reds and it finds out that yes it was a tackle outside of the box, then I don't see why it shouldn't give fouls and yellows. The entire point is to not stop the match more than needed to check for everything, but if it has already checked then why it is not allowed to make decisions is a bit beyond me. Especially in England when it is not the main referee who has to stop the match and check what happened.
 

Revan

Assumptionman
Joined
Dec 19, 2011
Messages
41,504
Location
CA
Surely should have had VAR check the foul on Martial by zouma.

If they checked that AND still found nothing wrong, then its the referees that are the issue, NOT VAR.

If we have the same incompetent cnuts on the field and in the control room making the decisions, why does anyone think things will actually get better? :lol:
It is not finding anything wrong, it is that VAR cannot give anything else except penalty, red card (direct) and offside. So if they checked and thought that it was both a foul and a yellow card (I believe it was a foul, not sure about a yellow), then VAR cannot do anything about it.
 

Chipper

Full Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2017
Messages
2,675

MikeeMike

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Oct 7, 2017
Messages
218
My time is to valuable to do extensive research of all of our var calls. You just have to watch the games with those decisions and even listen to the commentary about the calls. Recent example was Bruno pen vs Villa where he step on the villa defender yet we got the penalty. Then the offside yesterday, where no margin of error exist to account for an offside call if less than 1cm.
Offside is offside.. If it VAR shoes 1cm offside then it is offside. Simple. If ball is 1cm over line then it is a goal.
Penalty decisions are a whole different thing. Personally i don’t like technology at this level as I think there could be a penalty or free kick at every corner due to amount of contact. Then it becomes grey area.
Defenders “grapple” forwards then let go if ball is not coming that way. Can you give a foul/pen everytime.
e.g. Foul given to Utd tonight when Maguire backed into Girou, Girou won header, Maguire went down and foul given.
would that ever have been given as a penalty. Nope