wtfRefs & VAR 2021/22
- Thread starter 11101
- Start date
wtfI hate the interfering with play aspect of the offside rule. Imo if there's the remotest chance you influenced a defenders movement while in an offside position it should be offside.
Always said and always will repeat myself.
As long as we don't get any explaniation live with where people can ask questions, this will continue.
As long as we don't have mic for tv audience this will continiue.
Dissaster for a leading league in the world to have such low standards.
Have a look at the one we didn’t get at Spurs and the blatant red card not given to Saint Harry. Refereeing standards have been poor for everyone.
VAR has added a second referee into the mix and allowed uncertainty to creep in more. As soon as a referee is told to check the monitor they’re basically being told to reverse their decision even if it’s correct.
VAR has added a second referee into the mix and allowed uncertainty to creep in more. As soon as a referee is told to check the monitor they’re basically being told to reverse their decision even if it’s correct.
Agree, the standards are bad, and it's ripe for interpretation which when VAR is brought in there should be a clear rule to avoid doubt!
There isn't it's still open to interpretation of the VAR ref, so what's the point in having it for those, it should only be used after a goal is scored, and yellow or red cards. The refs in the Premier league rely to much on VAR instead of reffing whats in front of them. Clearly today there was 2 different opinions on 2 goals and both stood, I wonder if it was a different team the outcome would have been different as well. The 50 / 50 s are still going to the so called bigger clubs .
Yes, both fair points.
I don't understand the need for there to be discussion between refs and VAR other than confirming the right decision or telling them they're wrong. Why can't 2 VAR officials watch these type of penalty incidents separately and then majority rules, would rule out the need for a ref to go to a monitor (where he's under pressure to change his mind as well as the time it takes) and also emphasises the point of clear and obvious errors. Although at this point you could have 10 refs look at something and I'm still not convinced they'd come to the right decision
That is ridiculous. There are some utter imbeciles officiating these football matches.
By being there, Firmino is creating a 2 vs 1 situation at that back post while being offside. How does that not affect the defender in that situation??
Yeah this is what irritates me.
I feel VAR would work better if it was just two refs (one on the pitch, and the VAR guy) having a discussion about what they think.
As soon as you bring in "clear and obvious" then you shift the onus of what decisions should and shouldn't be given. It brings in an arbitrary line that just confuses things needlessly in my opinion.
I did initially think that the one we got against Palace wasn't a penalty but having watched it a few times I've decided it is. Jota loses control of the ball but changes direction because he thinks he can still get it. The keeper takes him out.
Does everyone think the below is a penalty? It's the same scenario. Alisson makes a bit of contact with his man but the ball is gone. The Burnley player isn't getting it.
Does everyone think the below is a penalty? It's the same scenario. Alisson makes a bit of contact with his man but the ball is gone. The Burnley player isn't getting it.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Why would he change direction when the ball is still going straight forward?
Jota is clever and makes sure the contact is there, if he'd continued forward running after the ball it's unlikely he would've been fouled, unlike the situation with Allison.
Watch the replay of it. He's running into the keeper then changes direction to follow the path of the ball just before the keeper hits him. He's not even looking at the keeper.Why would he change direction when the ball is still going straight forward?
Jota is clever and makes sure the contact is there, if he'd continued forward running after the ball it's unlikely he would've been fouled, unlike the situation with Allison.
We gave away a penalty last season against Everton where Alexander-Arnold was kicked in the head and had no way of getting out of Calvert-Lewin's way.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
It's the second one. The first tweet is from 17/18. It is a penalty though because Alexander-Arnold being there stops Calvert-Lewin from getting the ball. Palace's keeper (accidentally or not) stopped Jota from possibly getting to the ball and fouled him.
Thought this one was proper weird.
IFAB Laws of the Game: When is an opponent interfering with play?
- Preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent’s line of vision
- Challenging an opponent for the ball
- Clearly attempting to play a ball which is close when this action impacts on an opponent
- Making an obvious action which clearly impacts on the ability of an opponent to play the ball
- Gaining an advantage by playing the ball or interfering with an opponent when it has rebounded or been deflected off the goalpost, crossbar or an opponent.
Oh come on. If that's all you've got to reply with then I'll just assume you know I'm right and you don't have a decent argument to come back with.
I genuinely think you’re the only person I’ve heard think it was a penalty.
Even the die hard Liverpool pundits weren’t having it, nor anyone during sky sports ref watch this morning and that included Stephen Warnock and Dermot Gallagher.
The second goal was offside and the penalty shouldn’t have been given. VAR shouldn’t have got involved whatsoever in the latter.
If Dermot Gallagher even thought it was wrong, it was definitely wrong. 99.9% of the time, he agrees with the refs decision. I've always found it pointless him being on SSN and being asked about refereeing decisions. He practically always agrees with the officials.
Refs make the most arbitrary decisions based on what, exactly? Take Zouma's take out on Ronaldo. Many believe it is not a penalty. However, look at the disallowed goal Kane scored against Chelsea. There is far, far less contact made there, yet it is deemed an unlawful contact and thus a free kick. A penalty is basically a free kick inside the 18 yard box. Both meant a goal either way, most likely. Bruno was clipped on the foot - interfering with play - no check by VAR, as far as we could see.
Then this farce with Liverpool. The refs are abysmal - truly horrible refereeing game after game. In the past we could accept them making mistakes, but when they have VAR and professionals have cameras they spend minutes on deciding on a single incident and still getting it wrong, they are either incompetent or corrupt.
Then this farce with Liverpool. The refs are abysmal - truly horrible refereeing game after game. In the past we could accept them making mistakes, but when they have VAR and professionals have cameras they spend minutes on deciding on a single incident and still getting it wrong, they are either incompetent or corrupt.
Do you think that if the referee gives it, VAR overturns it (hard to really be certain nowadays I know).
The thing is, we've had penalties like that or similar (the Burnley and Everton ones last season for example) given against us. I initially thought that it wasn't a penalty yesterday but having watched it again you can't say that Palace's keeper doesn't take Jota out. He's clumsy in how he comes to try and get the ball and does prevent Jota from trying to get a lose ball. The argument against Jota is that he's lost control of the ball and probably won't get it, but then that same argument should be applied to any situation where a player tries to go around a keeper.
I think there's a lot of inconsistency around it.
The Firmino offside is a weird one. I guess the call is that he doesn't interfere with the keeper between Robertson playing it and Chamberlain having his shot, but you can't say that he isn't active when the ball comes in. He jumps to try and win a header and interferes in the play. That one wasn't even looked at during the game. Referees make it up as they go.
There’s been some absolute howlers this round of fixtures and that was the biggest.
Literally so much wrong with it it’s baffling why the ref just didn’t stick with his initial decision as opposed to literally going out of his way to get it wrong.
Unbelievably poor decision and amusing that Klopp refused to discuss it post game (yet was happy to speak about United last season)
Jota had totally lost control of the ball but that’s not the only reason why it shouldn’t have been a pen. If you watch it back he actually changes his direction and deliberately runs into the keeper to initiate contact. That’s the biggest tell and it’s blatantly obvious the more you see watch it.
It’s one of the worst interventions from VAR I’ve seen and that’s saying something!
Has a manager ever turned around and said that a penalty given to their team was incorrect?
Nah some of those offside calls last season where it's a finger or toe were the worst. They've done away with that now thankfully.
I don’t know, have they?
Plenty have said they’d been fortunate though or at least engaged in the topic. Klopp prefers to talk about what is happening to United though when he’s not even playing them oddly!
The key point with the Liverpool penalty is that the VAR who awarded it is the same VAR who didn't award this as a penalty
So similar incident, except with the Ederson foul obviously being far more of a penalty. So either that particular VAR is ludicrously inconsistent in what he sees as a penalty or he knew he made a mistake with the Ederson one previously and massively overcorrected here. Either way it's very poor on his part.
Even if you want to argue it's a foul on Jota, it's nowhere near enough of a foul that the ref's initial decision should be actively overturned.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
So similar incident, except with the Ederson foul obviously being far more of a penalty. So either that particular VAR is ludicrously inconsistent in what he sees as a penalty or he knew he made a mistake with the Ederson one previously and massively overcorrected here. Either way it's very poor on his part.
Even if you want to argue it's a foul on Jota, it's nowhere near enough of a foul that the ref's initial decision should be actively overturned.
I’m genuinely amazed you think the Jota penalty was legitimate and you can’t see him bend his run into the keeper when he knows he’s lost the ball.
I guess they’d say it wasn’t overturned as such given the referee watched it back.
We should get to hear what is said though 100% as the whole thing appears corrupt at the moment.
He doesn't mention United now that you've stopped getting them.
Did you know that we've been given fewer than about half the teams in the league over the last 5 or 6 years? We don't get awarded as many as people think.
I think I'm just arguing the point for the sake of it tbh. We didn't get a blatant one against Spurs where Jota was taken out and Saint Harry got away with a blatant red card challenge on Robertson in that same game. Mane got away with an elbow 30 seconds into the game against Chelsea.
Everyone's been screwed by VAR at some point.
I posted about this a while back.
As soon as Liverpool scam a penalty out of someone there is silence from the tight suit brigade while if Manchester United/City get a slightly debatable decision they cannot wait to talk about the 'shocking standards' of refereeing.
They literally take up Klopp's line of argument as if it is the gospel truth and then talk about what possible changes need to be implemented so that Liverpool get a fair shake.
As soon as Liverpool scam a penalty out of someone there is silence from the tight suit brigade while if Manchester United/City get a slightly debatable decision they cannot wait to talk about the 'shocking standards' of refereeing.
They literally take up Klopp's line of argument as if it is the gospel truth and then talk about what possible changes need to be implemented so that Liverpool get a fair shake.
I mean if you’re not trying to be objective about it that explains why. I thought that was the case as it’s such an obvious mess of a decision I didn’t think you’d genuinely believe it!
I don’t think looking at who gets the most is useful. You have to look at the decisions in isolation.
We get as much go against us with VAR and refereeing decisions as anyone else does. There's plenty of evidence of that. The difference is that Klopp moans about it more than most. He can take up a 5 minute interview with it and so it dominates the media afterwards. That's why they talk about it so much.
There are plenty of examples of us not getting decisions and getting some dodgy ones. We've had some generous decisions against City at Anfield a couple of times. I'd say it's fairly even with Liverpool so I try not to moan about it too much. The Kane challenge against Spurs annoyed me because I genuinely think he gets an easy ride because he's England captain but yeah, swings and roundabouts. We've had Mane get away with some blatant red cards at times this season.
The standard of refereeing seems to have plummeted since VAR came in.
Ita crazy they've tried to justify this one. Just admit it was the wrong decision and you are looking at it and talking the refs through it and more people while actually accept you are trying to improve and learn from your mistakes.
It's very stupid but I think (though I might be wrong) that the logic is that the action they're judging is just Firmino's attempt to head the ball, not the impact his presence had on the defender's positioning up to that point.
In other words Firmino being in an offside position isn't itself an offence. And if the defender chooses to mark an offside player rather than an onside one, that's basically tough shit as far as the refs are concerned. It still doesn't make Firmino being in an offside position an offence.
The question then is whether Firmino's actual attempt to head the ball impacted the defender's ability to win it, because if it did then that's the offence. But the answer then is no, because the defender was already in a position where he wasn't going to be able to stop the ball going to Chamberlain regardless of whether Firmino tried to head it or not. The fact that he was only in that position because of Firmino, they ignore.
It's a bit similar to those goals we've seen where a ball is played to an attacker who is miles offside, a defender tries to play it to stop it getting to that offside player, but in doing so the defender touches the ball and inadvertently plays the attacker onside again. Common sense would say the goal should be disallowed because the defender only tried to play the ball to stop it going to the offside player, but they don't care about that. All that matters to them is that the defender did play the ball for whatever reason and the attacker was onside at that point, so the goal stands.
Similarly in this case common sense would say the goal should be disallowed because the defender only left Chamberlain completely unmarked because the offside player was there, but they don't care about that either. All that matters to them is that Chamberlain was completely unmarked for whatever reason, so much so that the defender wasn't going to be able to stop the ball going to him whether Firmino tried to head it or not, and therefore Firmino's attempt to head the ball had no impact on the defender's ability to play it.
And then because that's all subjective, you'd have different refs coming to different conclusions as to at what point the defender is/isn't being impacted anyway. Very messy and stupid.
It's blatantly obvious that's what he does, those who think it's a penalty need a guide dog.
They changed the rules after the fiasco last season.
In terms of the rest, it’s fine that being in offside isn’t itself an offence, but Firminos attempt at getting the ball is having an effect on what Mitchell does. If Firmino doesn’t jump then would Mitchell jump? You could easily argue that it falls under challenging an opponent for the ball, Mitchell is being forced into making a decision on the basis of a player in offside going for the ball. If Firmino doesn’t challenge for the ball, Mitchell can focus on the path of the ball and he’ll be much closer to Chamberlain.
The situations where a defender is trying to prevent the ball from going to an offside player, with the player not competing for it, is a shit one but it’s far more complicated to have a decent set of rules for it as it would potentially have quite the negative overall effect. It’s much easier to draw the line on the basis of what the player in offside does
Imo it's rather strange that Firmino gets away with it, especially given how strict they are with checking every angle to see if a player in offside has an effect on goalkeepers.
Based on the below video it looks to me like Jota is going to collide with the keeper regardless of what he does. Jota changes direction once he see's that he's missed the ball with an attempted flick over the keeper, to try and catch up with it. The collision with Guaita probably looks less like a foul if Jota doesn't change direction, and more like a 50/50.
If you're a keeper in the box and miss the ball but take the player, you're going to give away a penalty most of the time. There must be someone out there on the Caf that sees where I'm coming from...anyone?
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
If you're a keeper in the box and miss the ball but take the player, you're going to give away a penalty most of the time. There must be someone out there on the Caf that sees where I'm coming from...anyone?
If Jota doesn't take that step and the keeper plows through him it's a definite penalty. (then it would be almost exactly like that penalty Newcastle should have got vs City). However, as soon as he takes that step, he becomes the one initiating the contact, especially as Guaita looks to be pulling out of it.
Also just contact wouldn't have been enough, if Guaita manages to stop his movement enough that contact with Jota is minimal, it wouldn't be a pen, especially as he didn't really have control of the ball.
You’ve just posted a video that shows Jota throwing himself into the keeper then suggest it actually supports your view it was a penalty? What
This is the 1st time I've seen that penalty call, it's far worse than I could imagine.