Good post, this didn't click for me.
*talking strictly about the interpretation of the law and not the law itself
VAR and Refs | General Discussion
- Thread starter Samid
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik and Imran hold a long overdue conversation about United's awful league form with 1 win in 7. They discuss a disappointing draw at Bournemouth, a not so disappointing draw against Liverpool and a crushing defeat at Chelsea - Is time nearly over for Erik Ten Hag?
Then in a special second half of the pod, Nik welcomes Natalie ( https://twitter.com/natalie_17) to discuss the fortunes of Manchester United Women as they booked a place in the FA Cup Final after a historic first ever win vs. Chelsea.
*talking strictly about the interpretation of the law and not the law itself
Fergie would make him shave his head after that.
True - but it's also blatantly obvious to the point where it should be more or less a binary decision. Just because I only step in shit every other year doesn't mean I need a tutorial to conclude it's bad!
Wil never forget Anthony Taylor giving this as a Spurs freekick. When Gazzaniga literally kung fu kicked Alonso mid air. These are just some of his BS decisions..
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
I think most people get this, however in this instance how is that not a red card? Set's a very dangerous standard if that is only considered a foul/yellow. Could be open season on any lushed locked player from here on in.
According to the law this incident should not be reviewed at all. The biggest problem is why VAR was activated at that moment, which began all the confusion and controversy.
Is it a coincidence that a bald VAR official on a hair pulling incident doesn't consider it violent conduct? I think not. He has no empathy at all for people with luscious locks.
It was activated to review a red card incident. It can be used in these situations as it’s checking an off the ball incident.
It's a red card. You can't yank his hair and pull him to the ground and not expect a red.
Fairly certain it's even a red in rugby
Because it should be a red card, that's why they looked, and got it wrong
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Fellaini didn't get a yellow for pulling someone's hair when at United (Gendouzi I think?)
This led to some pundits stating that pulling someone's hair is similar to pulling someone's shirt and a yellow card offence.
What is it with Chelsea fans and the incessant hounding of refs!
Remember Chelsea getting decision after decision in their favour against United for years, some you win some you lose.
This led to some pundits stating that pulling someone's hair is similar to pulling someone's shirt and a yellow card offence.
What is it with Chelsea fans and the incessant hounding of refs!
Remember Chelsea getting decision after decision in their favour against United for years, some you win some you lose.
Shouldn't McKenna's handball for the West Ham penalty have also been a red card? Or are they judging that Henderson would've stopped it if he hadn't?
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Thank God they have their priorities right.
Huth got a retrospective three match ban for violent conduct when video evidence showed him pulling Fellaini’s hair. So they even have a precedent.
The sooner VAR stops being about a "High-bar" and starts to be a conversation between two officials officiating the same game, the better it'll be.
I honestly think the "high-bar" thing is there to act as an excuse for when they drop absolute howlers like yesterday.
I honestly think the "high-bar" thing is there to act as an excuse for when they drop absolute howlers like yesterday.
I honestly don't think it's a red card offence, and it shouldn't trigger VAR review either.
Even Sky think it was a red card,
https://www.skysports.com/football/...e-been-red-carded-for-marc-cucrella-hair-pull
What do you mean by "even Sky think"? Skysports is now the gold standard of FIFA law?
Maguire got the ball(s) to be fair.
It's textbook violent conduct, like pushing someone in the face.
We see the propaganda machine, the like of Dale Johnson try to justify it, no surprise there that's his job. No serious referee is going to bother because it's a clear red card.
You could say it's a coincidence, then you realise in the same fixture only two years ago Lo Celso got away with an equally obvious red card that also went to VAR review.
As I always said, and will stand by it. If referees don't have to do interviews after games to explain decisions or have mics for everyone to hear, nothing will change. They can referee how they want and still TheFA will be fine with it.
Surely it's different. For starters yanking down someone to the ground from their hair in that manner hurts like a motherfecker but pulling their shirt only slightly impedes with their movement. Even the latter is an immediate foul and a yellow card but the hair pulling is about as obvious violent conduct as it gets. Taylor didn't even think it was a foul despite having a perfect line of sight to the incident.
Interesting to note Sky Sports pundits reaction after Huth and Fellaini had a similar incident...."There is a bit of a tangle and I tell you what, Huth is lucky as well as Fellaini. I say Huth is lucky because he has caught him under the chin. If that catches him full square across his face, then he's lost several teeth or broke his nose and I don't think he can stay on the pitch.
That's what Souness said, when Huth pulled Fellainis hair, not a single mention of the hair pull in his comments, so realistically what Sky sports or Dermot have to say about certain things are not worth discussing.
They contradict themselves season to season.
"Oh yeah and about those massive unbelievable refereeing errors that decided the outcome of the game, we already discussed them on Sunday" Nothing to see here, thanks David.
Weren't the VAR discussions supposed to be made public this season ?
Weren't the VAR discussions supposed to be made public this season ?
So "textbook" that there will be no retrospective action.
https://www.skysports.com/football/...ctive-action-for-pulling-marc-cucurellas-hair
When Toney had a penalty shout against Chelsea last year, the very same Taylor simply trusted the flag and gave an offside. There was no VAR review at the decision. Coincidence?
You obviously have no idea how these things work. The article you linked even explains what's going on:
There can be no retrospective action because the ref and VAR looked at it during the game. It's another one of those nonsensical rules they have in place to not have to admit they can be or are wrong.
Have they given a reason why they would look at the Cucurella incident, agree it’s not a red but then ignore that it’s a foul completely? That’s the most silly thing about VAR for me. You’re literally ignoring foul play. This clear and obvious stuff is nonsense. It’s a foul. Address it. cnuts.
Red or nothing is completely ridiculous.
Why don't you think it's a red out of curiosity? It's definitely a red for me... it's violent conduct, and players have been sent off for it in the past.
But to answer your question - unless VAR think its a red card it cannot intervene at all in this instance.
Now if they had scored, VAR would be allowed to call it as a foul - though as it didn't interfere with play i'm not sure they actually would have done.
Sorry, I do think it’s a red, what I mean is that it’s stupid that it can only see things as a red or they move on. It’s a foul at the very least. You have checked for a red, decided that it isn’t, but you’ve still observed a foul happening at the very least. Its not fair and fecking dumb that they just ignore that and move on.
Don't you think the FA would step in if the incident was so "textbook" and "violent"?
"If they confirm they did see it then in almost all cases no further action is taken. There are extraordinary exceptions, such as in the case involving Ben Thatcher [Manchester City versus Portsmouth in 2006]."
This is also a huge misconception. If the VAR suspects it's a red card incident, he could ask the referee to check the replay, whom can decide to give a red, a yellow, or just simply a foul.
That's what my understanding too. But @Chief123 explained me otherwise.
I agree they probably shouldn't be looking at every single tackle to determine if its a foul. But when somethings been potentially missed and youre are looking at it anyway to determine if it should be a pen or a red or whatever it is, they should be allowed to over rule to the correct outcome they deem it to be.
So in this case, ok I don't think it's a red but its a clear foul you missed so give a fk out.
That's wrong actually, but that's what it should be
the most stupid thing about VAR is they cannot check 2nd yellow cards.
If its a straight red they can, but if you win the ball and they think you didn't, you're off and there's no checking it. Daft.
If its a straight red they can, but if you win the ball and they think you didn't, you're off and there's no checking it. Daft.
There are plenty of examples where a yellow card is given after VAR check. Just google yourself.
Incorrect. VAR isn’t allowed to go back and give a foul or yellow card. A red card can be changed to a yellow by VAR. They can only change something to a foul if it leads to a goal or penalty. I posted the rules earlier.