Moonwalker
Full Member
- Joined
- Oct 30, 2009
- Messages
- 3,821
A goal-scoring opportunity and a red card. But then, judging by that pusma, you already know this.In the build up to what? A freekick? A red card? Has that ever happened before?
A goal-scoring opportunity and a red card. But then, judging by that pusma, you already know this.In the build up to what? A freekick? A red card? Has that ever happened before?
This is an important point and one of the problems with VAR. The slowing and freezing of replays often makes tackles and contacts look more severe than they actually are. Also one of the reasons why so many goals are chalked off due to soft free-kicks.Still not sure about the Shaw/Brady ordeal. I didn't think VAR gave free kicks for fouls in the build up to a VAR reviewed incident. I also thought the only card that could be given from a VAR was a red. I've not seen a decision reversed and a booking given the other way before. But Shaw plays the ball, the follow through looks bad if you freeze it on Shaw's foot looking like he makes studs-up contact, but he actually doesn't, it goes behind the Burnley player's leg. But VAR froze it on that more than once.
Maguire's goal was a joke decision though. Commentator said VAR looked at it, but it was very quick. The defender didn't even go for the header, does that mean Maguire isn't allowed to either?
They can review it if it’s a potential red card, but then issue a yellow if it’s decided to not be a sending off offence.Still not sure about the Shaw/Brady ordeal. I didn't think VAR gave free kicks for fouls in the build up to a VAR reviewed incident. I also thought the only card that could be given from a VAR was a red. I've not seen a decision reversed and a booking given the other way before. But Shaw plays the ball, the follow through looks bad if you freeze it on Shaw's foot looking like he makes studs-up contact, but he actually doesn't, it goes behind the Burnley player's leg. But VAR froze it on that more than once.
Total fecking farce, I agree. VAR, eh? We sacrifice entertainment to avoid controversy and eradicate obvious mistakes by referees. Going brilliantly so far.Yeah, that’s a joke though. They’re sitting on Sky talking about how lucky Shaw and how bad a tackle it is but Brady’s tackle wasn’t just denying a goal scoring opportunity, it was high and reckless with no intent of getting the ball.
Pusma? And can you name another incident in the history of VAR where they checked for a foul in the buildup to a freekick and/or red card?A goal-scoring opportunity and a red card. But then, judging by that pusma, you already know this.
I thought this.That's fine to think it should be a red and do a check. They can't end up changing a free kick and yellow to another free kick and yellow though, that's the point. There are 3 options for VAR to conclude - a red for Brady with United free kick, a red for Shaw with Burnley free kick, or keep the yellow for Brady with a United free kick. They literally aren't allowed to change it the way they did.
I suppose this at least explains why Friend was still watching the Brady clip again, even though he'd clearly decided it was a foul by Shaw by then.Amazing considering every ref knows reckless tackles can still be given as a red if the game has stopped
Not to mention the first time in about 50 attempts that he’s won a header in the opposition box and got it on target.You’d have to feel for Maguire. An absolute worldie header getting chalked off for some phantom foul. And to add to the misery, the ‘VAR check’ lasted all of 0.87 seconds.
Incredible.
I remember a weird scenario in a Liverpool game where someone arguably fouled a Liverpool player before TAA then handled it in the box.Pusma? And can you name another incident in the history of VAR where they checked for a foul in the buildup to a freekick and/or red card?
Yup. I'm ok with them thinking Shaw's should be a foul. But the only result of that is no red for Brady, and even that is questionable because according to VAR's rules, the only change there could have been if Shaw's should have been a red.I thought this.
They’ve re-refereed the game which I keep hearing is what VAR isn’t supposed to do.
Did he, though? He watched that from one camera angle, from miles away. Didn’t get anything like the scrutiny he gave Shaw.I suppose this at least explains why Friend was still watching the Brady clip again, even though he'd clearly decided it was a foul by Shaw by then.
And clearly didn't deem it a violent conduct job, which you correctly state could still be given as red, irrespective of the game being brought back.
He gets quite a few on target. But they're always exactly into the keeper's hands.Not to mention the first time in about 50 attempts that he’s won a header in the opposition box and got it on target.
Pusma is a short, emphatic rhetorical question. I can think of plenty of decisions where a penalty decision was not given because even though there was a foul, there was a previous offside call.Pusma? And can you name another incident in the history of VAR where they checked for a foul in the buildup to a freekick and/or red card?
There will never be the right decisions. Not with this stupid accuracy they’re looking et minimal contacts in slow mo, every incident could go either way. It’s a messThe problem isn’t VAR it’s that they’re still making the wrong decisions. VAR in principle is fine.
My thoughts on the matter aswell; if VAR is used like this do we have to forensically analyse throw ins/corners to ensure the ball went out off the correct player etc. prior to goals from every set piece.Yup. I'm ok with them thinking Shaw's should be a foul. But the only result of that is no red for Brady, and even that is questionable because according to VAR's rules, the only change there could have been if Shaw's should have been a red.
Yes they can, because the red card for Brady would not have been given for dangerous play. He's denied a goalscoring opportunity, and so the situation is treated the same as when a goal is scored. There is a foul in the build up. The ref can punish that foul and give Shaw a yellow for it. He can also give Shaw a yellow because VAR wanted to review his tackle for a red.That's fine to think it should be a red and do a check. They can't end up changing a free kick and yellow to another free kick and yellow though, that's the point. There are 3 options for VAR to conclude - a red for Brady with United free kick, a red for Shaw with Burnley free kick, or keep the yellow for Brady with a United free kick. They literally aren't allowed to change it the way they did.
IF they gave Brady a red, then yes they can do that. But he gave Brady a yellow. So he can't. Or shouldn't be able to. Otherwise it's a very slippery slope.Yes they can, because the red card for Brady would not have been given for dangerous play. He's denied a goalscoring opportunity, and so the situation is treated the same as when a goal is scored. There is a foul in the build up. The ref can punish that foul and give Shaw a yellow for it. He can also give Shaw a yellow because VAR wanted to review his tackle for a red.
Yeah and I remember a time when Maguire had Azpilacueta in a headlock and nothing.I remember a weird scenario in a Liverpool game where someone arguably fouled a Liverpool player before TAA then handled it in the box.
And about 10secs later Liverpool had scored and it was allowed?
Literally pulled something out of your ass.Yeah and I remember a time when Maguire had Azpilacueta in a headlock and nothing.
Only one comment: I hope he goes in harder. That's my view, take it or leave it.Literally pulled something out of your ass.
Any comments on why Klopp is allowed to influence referees without being pulled up on it?
The VAR one in which they can’t disallow it because it isn’t ‘clear and obvious’.What book is this? Since when do two players brushing against each other jumping for a header remove the possibility of a bad refereeing error?
That was for dissent if we’re remembering the same incident. De Gea against Everton I think.I'm certain Utd had a decision recently where play was pulled back aftet a yellow card was given (that was never a yellow card )
Yellow card stuck though so why didn't Bradys yellow stick when it was a stonewall yellow anywhere on the pitch.
But his foul was every bit as dangerous as Shaw’s. I don’t know why the scrutiny is only on the goal scoring chance when he lunges in at knee height.Yes they can, because the red card for Brady would not have been given for dangerous play. He's denied a goalscoring opportunity, and so the situation is treated the same as when a goal is scored. There is a foul in the build up. The ref can punish that foul and give Shaw a yellow for it. He can also give Shaw a yellow because VAR wanted to review his tackle for a red.
That's a perfectly reasonable summary of what happened and the outcome.Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
im sure we had a goal scored against us, where there was a clear foul on half the time between these incidents.How far back can they go to check a foul that the referee has played on? My understanding is that they can only go back more than a few seconds if it's a red card or a penalty, in which case they shouldn't have been able to bring the play back to the Shaw challenge unless they decided it was a red. Although I do agree it was a foul, it certainly wasn't a red and IMO even a yellow is harsh.
Back to the start of that attacking phase I think, which is a subjective call. If there had been a few more passes in-between then Brady could easily have been sent off.How far back can they go to check a foul that the referee has played on? My understanding is that they can only go back more than a few seconds if it's a red card or a penalty, in which case they shouldn't have been able to bring the play back to the Shaw challenge unless they decided it was a red. Although I do agree it was a foul, it certainly wasn't a red and IMO even a yellow is harsh.
There is 10 seconds between the two incidents.How far back can they go to check a foul that the referee has played on? My understanding is that they can only go back more than a few seconds if it's a red card or a penalty, in which case they shouldn't have been able to bring the play back to the Shaw challenge unless they decided it was a red. Although I do agree it was a foul, it certainly wasn't a red and IMO even a yellow is harsh.