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

VAR - Love or Hate?


  • Total voters
    1,296

Amarsdd

Full Member
Joined
Jun 7, 2013
Messages
3,299
Hardly, Jones was weak as piss.

Also perfectly happy with that not being given as hand ball, top of the arm was always fine in my understanding.

The problem is it's another example where they've been inconsistent with how they've applied it earlier in the season.
its perfectly fine for last season. But this season, decisions have been given for much lesser ones by VAR.
 

SER19

Full Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2008
Messages
12,478
Making the rules up depending on whether they want to make an unpopular decision or not. It blatantly hits his arm so either apply the rules or change the rules back.
If it was the tenth minute it would be disallowed. Premier league is a farce
 

TheReligion

Abusive
Joined
Nov 22, 2006
Messages
51,446
Location
Manchester
The only thing that's awful is your judgment on those 2 calls. Never ever a foul, he drops like a 10y old child and that's not handball...
That's the issue. Consistency. Jones is a foul if Lovrens was 24 hours ago. The handball is a foul it is in another game.

Why the inconsistencies? People just want a level playing field.
 

sect2k

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Mar 7, 2010
Messages
198
Location
Slovenia
Hardly, Jones was weak as piss.

Also perfectly happy with that not being given as hand ball, top of the arm was always fine in my understanding.

The problem is it's another example where they've been inconsistent with how they've applied it earlier in the season.
Jones one was as clear a foul as any, he body checks him from behind, with a little push in there as well, which causes Jones to loose balance, even the attacker was expecting a foul as he paused for a second before realizing no foul is given.

Third is a clear handball, in the old days without VAR this would have stood, but with VAR it should have been ruled out, top of the arm was never fine, and the ball making contact with his arm clearly gives him an advantage, hence handball, but I didn't realistically expect it to be pulled back with all those Scouse lowing twats in the VAR room.
 

sullydnl

Ross Kemp's caf ID
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
34,063
Making the rules up depending on whether they want to make an unpopular decision or not. It blatantly hits his arm so either apply the rules or change the rules back.
It doesn't blatantly hit his arm though. For reference, see the Alli handball from earlier in the season which was also allowed to stand.

 

acnumber9

Full Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2006
Messages
22,253
It doesn't blatantly hit his arm though. For reference, see the Alli handball from earlier in the season which was also allowed to stand.
It does though. You can see it’s below his shoulder and level with the badge on the ARM of the shirt. The Alli goal should’ve been disallowed too based on the rules.
 

Zlatan 7

We've got bush!
Joined
May 26, 2016
Messages
11,531
It doesn't blatantly hit his arm though. For reference, see the Alli handball from earlier in the season which was also allowed to stand.
It hits the top of his arm to be fair mate, I think it’s quite obvious
 

Berbaclass

Fallen Muppet. Lest we never forget
Joined
Jan 23, 2010
Messages
37,981
Location
Cooper Station
Two decisions wrong today imo. The first was a foul and more subjective but the second is clearly handball, hit his bicep FFS.
 

sharpstar69

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Dec 22, 2018
Messages
24
Supports
Liverpool
That Jones foul will be given in another game.
Too much Inconsistency
What foul? I watch league 2 football most weekends. It was shoulder to shoulder - not even close to a foul. You should be chuffed with a draw after being totally outplayed. You honestly think you deserved a win?
 

sect2k

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Mar 7, 2010
Messages
198
Location
Slovenia
It doesn't blatantly hit his arm though. For reference, see the Alli handball from earlier in the season which was also allowed to stand.
Two wrongs don't make a right, Alli is a blatant hand ball as well, even more obvious.
 

sullydnl

Ross Kemp's caf ID
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
34,063
It hits the top of his arm to be fair mate, I think it’s quite obvious
As I said, see the Alli image I edited in to the post. That goal was allowed to stand and was later deemed to have been the correct call.
 

TheReligion

Abusive
Joined
Nov 22, 2006
Messages
51,446
Location
Manchester
I'm not sure what people are on about with the equaliser. It hits his upper arm. You're blind if you can't see that. Fair or not the rules need to be consistently applied.
 

TheReligion

Abusive
Joined
Nov 22, 2006
Messages
51,446
Location
Manchester
What foul? I watch league 2 football most weekends. It was shoulder to shoulder - not even close to a foul. You should be chuffed with a draw after being totally outplayed. You honestly think you deserved a win?
It was identical to the Lovren one you got yesterday. Do you think that wasn't a foul either?
 

Ekkie Thump

Full Member
Joined
Mar 9, 2013
Messages
3,877
Supports
Leeds United
As I said, see the Alli image I edited in to the post. That goal was allowed to stand and was later deemed to have been the correct call.
Pretty confident it would also have later been deemed the "correct call" if they'd disallowed it.
 

sullydnl

Ross Kemp's caf ID
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
34,063
It does though. You can see it’s below his shoulder and level with the badge on the ARM of the shirt. The Alli goal should’ve been disallowed too based on the rules.
The Alli goal was deemed to have been correctly given upon review. Despite what you might think the rules are, the Alli goal was correct as per how the refs are told to interpret it. Which is important as refs base their decisions on the guidelines they are given. Bearing in mind that VAR have to be certain it was a handball to disallow the goal, that's more than enough reason not to disallow.
 

montpelier

Full Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2011
Messages
10,637
That still photo is a clear handball. Presumably the ref not giving it makes it less clear?
 

TheReligion

Abusive
Joined
Nov 22, 2006
Messages
51,446
Location
Manchester
All people want is consistency. Why the dumb cnuts and the FA can't apply that is beyond me. They are literally making it controversial for the sake of it.
 

sharpstar69

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Dec 22, 2018
Messages
24
Supports
Liverpool
I'm not sure what people are on about with the equaliser. It hits his upper arm. You're blind if you can't see that. Fair or not the rules need to be consistently applied.
Shoulder, is not the arm.....no way it should be chalked off.
It was identical to the Lovren one you got yesterday. Do you think that wasn't a foul either?
Not even close......your deluded if you think it is. Clear push on Lovern. Shoulder to shoulder on Jones. Not one pundit or fan has even mentioned the Jones incident.
 

montpelier

Full Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2011
Messages
10,637
Jones is probably fouled but they quite often don't get given and I don't think VAR should help us there, meself.
 

TheReligion

Abusive
Joined
Nov 22, 2006
Messages
51,446
Location
Manchester
Shoulder, is not the arm.....no way it should be chalked off.


Not even close......your deluded if you think it is. Clear push on Lovern. Shoulder to shoulder on Jones. Not one pundit or fan has even mentioned the Jones incident.
It's all over BBC as a foul. Even Mark Lawrenson thinks it was. Open your eyes and log off RAWK
 

montpelier

Full Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2011
Messages
10,637
The ref needs to confirm or overturn his own decisions now. I thought the opposite but the result is avoiding responsibility atm.

Liverpool are just getting the breaks with it.
 

christinaa

Gossip Girl
Joined
Sep 19, 2012
Messages
11,387
Now if our name was LiVARpoo then the first SU goal would have been disallowed for a blatant foul on Jones and the last SU goal would have been given as a handsball.

Poor LiVARpoo and their fans - they've been 30 years waiting to win the league again, let's just give them the trophy and make them all happy.
 

Hugh Jass

Shave Dass
Joined
Apr 16, 2016
Messages
11,244
On first viewing i thought it was a fowl on Jones. Replays kind of showed that he was just weak.

Blatant handball though for their third goal.
 

MsNuno

Full Member
Joined
Feb 4, 2019
Messages
943
Location
Sunny Wolverhampton
Supports
Wolves
Their third goal was identical to the one dendoncker scored against Leicester ruled out by var because it hit boly on the shoulder. VAR should be at least consistent
 

montpelier

Full Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2011
Messages
10,637
On first viewing i thought it was a fowl on Jones. Replays kind of showed that he was just weak.

Blatant handball though for their third goal.
Their third goal was identical to the one dendoncker scored against Leicester ruled out by var because it hit boly on the shoulder. VAR should be at least consistent
It isn't though because their primary concern is supporting whatever the ref has given.
 

sullydnl

Ross Kemp's caf ID
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
34,063
It's all over BBC as a foul. Even Mark Lawrenson thinks it was. Open your eyes and log off RAWK
The issue is that VAR aren't directly ruling on the two incidents, they're ruling based on the ref's initial interpretation of the two incidents.

So if the ref didn't see the push on Lovren at all it becomes more of a "clear and obvious error" than him seeing the Jones incident but interpreting it as shoulder to shoulder. Both could be fouls but one is more likely to be overturned as the ref has made a factual error (i.e. not seeing a push that took place) rather than an error of interpretation.

Which is why they should review such decisions again themselves.
 

Amarsdd

Full Member
Joined
Jun 7, 2013
Messages
3,299
i don't understand people defending VAR for this. People here are not saying these were clear cut decisions, but given the decisions from VAR this season, those should have been called.