VAR and Refs | General Discussion | May 15: Premier League clubs to vote on proposal to scrap VAR from next season

[90 + 5min]

When you have an absolute gentleman like Roy Hodgson upset and being booked on the touchline you know the game is gone.

Disgusting again and low and behold we know the team that benefits.

So many times. Over and over and over again, we have seen some teams get decisions with them. We know those teams.

 

[SilentWitness]

The subjectivity of those second yellow card challenges is frustrating and needs a bit of a look at over the summer. It isn't fair that refs can decide what they deem fair as a second yellow or now. The challenge Ayew put in for the second yellow would have been waved off by another ref.

 

[TheReligion]

So many times. Over and over and over again, we have seen some teams get decisions with them. We know those teams.

Klopp and co won’t be happy until they kill someone like Roy through stress induced heart failure.

They have no shame.

 

[90 + 5min]

The subjectivity of those second yellow card challenges is frustrating and needs a bit of a look at over the summer. It isn't fair that refs can decide what they deem fair as a second yellow or now. The challenge Ayew put in for the second yellow would have been waved off by another ref.

Do you think he would got that yellow if it was 0-0 or Liverpool leading game?

 

[SilentWitness]

Do you think he would got that yellow if it was 0-0 or Liverpool leading game?

Don't particularly want to get into conspiracies. It just wasn't a second yellow, that's all that needs to be said.

 

[top1whoisman]

While Reguilón was (again) rightly booked for imaginary card-waving, Kluivert did basically the same by highlighting Reguilón’s actions to the ref. As in ”look ref, give him a card!”

 

[OldSchoolManc]

While Reguilón was (again) rightly booked for imaginary card-waving, Kluivert did basically the same by highlighting Reguilón’s actions to the ref. As in ”look ref, give him a card!”

Irony at it’s highest possible level

 

[AndySmith1990]

Do you think he would got that yellow if it was 0-0 or Liverpool leading game?

I often wonder if people who say stuff like this genuinely believe football is that corrupt, and if so why they'd even bother watching a sport that's rigged

 

[90 + 5min]

I often wonder if people who say stuff like this genuinely believe football is that corrupt, and if so why they'd even bother watching a sport that's rigged

I don't think it is. Or should be.

But you have to wonder how is that second yellow card and why similiar offences just goes by without even freekick. In same game.

 

[kiristao]

How did Frank Onyeka not get a red?

 

[90 + 5min]

How did Frank Onyeka not get a red?

I wonder that to. That was some tackle.

 

[jadaba]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

It does feel that among the many impacts of VAR, discussions of football are fixating on a single refereeing decision that is seen as determining the result. Watching a single moment replayed 8 times in ultra slow motion takes away from focus on key passages that are equally important to the outcome of games.

 

[Big Ben Foster]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

It does feel that among the many impacts of VAR, discussions of football are fixating on a single refereeing decision that is seen as determining the result. Watching a single moment replayed 8 times in ultra slow motion takes away from focus on key passages that are equally important to the outcome of games.

For me the elephant in the room is this: VAR is supposed to be used to overturn calls that are made due to "clear and obvious errors".

If a check is taking several minutes and requires multiple angles of slow-motion replays, then by definition it isn't "clear and obvious".

Impose a 30 second time limit on the VAR review and if they can't overturn in that timeframe, the call stands.

 

[Mb194dc]

The use of VAR in the liverpool game is nonsense, re-refereeing what the ref has seen clearly anyway. No reason to intervene in either of the first two instances, neither is a clear error. A player going to ground to win a free kick and no idea what they saw with the other one. Then there's the second yellow which is very, very soft, play on would have been the logical call.

The handball law interpretation is still nonsense, neither of the goals for Arsenal or Bournemouth should be disallowed. There's no intention, it's ball to hand and in any other situation that won't be penalised, so why should it stop a goal. Absolute nonsense. All IFAB have done in the last 20 years is add in confusion.

 

[TwoSheds]

The use of VAR in the liverpool game is nonsense, re-refereeing what the ref has seen clearly anyway. No reason to intervene in either of the first two instances, neither is a clear error. A player going to ground to win a free kick and no idea what they saw with the other one. Then there's the second yellow which is very, very soft, play on would have been the logical call.

The handball law interpretation is still nonsense, neither of the goals for Arsenal or Bournemouth should be disallowed. There's no intention, it's ball to hand and in any other situation that won't be penalised, so why should it stop a goal. Absolute nonsense. All IFAB have done in the last 20 years is add in confusion.

Agreed. Changes for the sake of it every year, usually to try to fix what they fecked up last year, and rarely achieving it.

 

[jadaba]

For me the elephant in the room is this: VAR is supposed to be used to overturn calls that are made due to "clear and obvious errors".

If a check is taking several minutes and requires multiple angles of slow-motion replays, then by definition it isn't "clear and obvious".

Impose a 30 second time limit on the VAR review and if they can't overturn in that timeframe, the call stands.

Yeah I'd love to see its next form of enforcement heading in this direction. If anything it would at least help us just get over whatever the decision is. That way too a lot more checks would simply go unnoticed by us.

 

[whitbyviking]

That Arsenal disallowed goal was baffling. Basically saying a defender can accidentally handball but not a forward.

 

[Gator Nate]

For me the elephant in the room is this: VAR is supposed to be used to overturn calls that are made due to "clear and obvious errors".

If a check is taking several minutes and requires multiple angles of slow-motion replays, then by definition it isn't "clear and obvious".

Impose a 30 second time limit on the VAR review and if they can't overturn in that timeframe, the call stands.

This x 100. And no more slow-mo for foul checks. Only for ball position and player position checks.

 

[Zlatan 7]

That oneyake for Brentford should have been off I think in this var age, just seen it on motd

 

[FootballHQ]

That Arsenal disallowed goal was baffling. Basically saying a defender can accidentally handball but not a forward.

It's just the rule really that if it touches hand and said player scores it gets disallowed even if accidental. Clearly hits Havertz hand before he taps in (would've been more interesting if Nkeiteh had poked in instead....)

In fairness I was fully expecting VAR to intervene and instruct the ref to go to monitor when Luiz kicked Jesus in the penalty area. He dosen't get the ball, kicks Jesus on the foot and we've seen many of those instances given in last 5 years and I'd have had no issue with it so that's the debatable incident where they had a look and decided not to take things further.

More clear than a few of the penalties Wolves have conceded in last month anyway.

 

[acnumber9]

I often wonder if people who say stuff like this genuinely believe football is that corrupt, and if so why they'd even bother watching a sport that's rigged

It doesn’t have to be corrupt. Refs know what is coming if they don’t give certain decisions and it would be impossible for them to not think of the consequences we’ve seen when certain teams don’t get their way.

 

[njred]

It doesn’t have to be corrupt. Refs know what is coming if they don’t give certain decisions and it would be impossible for them to not think of the consequences we’ve seen when certain teams don’t get their way.

Refs have always been influenced by coaches without VAR. It’s part of the game. As for VAR ,it’s time the coaches call it to be scrapped or at least scaled back. I wonder if not going after the refs but going after VAR itself would the coaches fined or banned. Waiting a minute and a half to call for a penalty is absolutely a step too far. Even if VAR is getting the majority of calls right the process is broken.

 

[CannonBalls]

Refs have always been influenced by coaches without VAR. It’s part of the game. As for VAR ,it’s time the coaches call it to be scrapped or at least scaled back. I wonder if not going after the refs but going after VAR itself would the coaches fined or banned. Waiting a minute and a half to call for a penalty is absolutely a step too far. Even if VAR is getting the majority of calls right the process is broken.

The onfield ref itself gets majority of the calls right. VAR was supposed to iron out others but it's so inconsistent that it creates more problem then it solves.
Also regarding time taken by VAR. Football inherently is not a game that allows for break as against other games like cricket tennis where after a ball/point there is a logical break for the VAR to intervene and not create much difference to the experience. Also the purview is huge as things happen across the field and it's a contract sport. So it's very difficult to have VAR.
Scrap the clear and obvious error stuff and replace it officially with howlers. Or like Cricket make the team decide when to take a VAR call and like cricket allow refs to consult VAR before they give their decision.

 

[CannonBalls]

It's just the rule really that if it touches hand and said player scores it gets disallowed even if accidental. Clearly hits Havertz hand before he taps in (would've been more interesting if Nkeiteh had poked in instead....)

In fairness I was fully expecting VAR to intervene and instruct the ref to go to monitor when Luiz kicked Jesus in the penalty area. He dosen't get the ball, kicks Jesus on the foot and we've seen many of those instances given in last 5 years and I'd have had no issue with it so that's the debatable incident where they had a look and decided not to take things further.

More clear than a few of the penalties Wolves have conceded in last month anyway.

I agree with the way the rules are the Havertz goal was rightfully disallowed although not sure how the ref saw that in real time but in anycase should have been disallowed by VAR. The rule is insane the but the application of that was fine.
I just cannot understand the other two decisions. The penalty on Jesus, VAR has been awarding penalties left right centre for much less than that. And the Carlos red card which was also as clear as anything. We created a lot of chances but couldn't finish so did not deserve to win but did not deserve to lose because of that penalty incident itself.

 

[B20]

I think the new handball rule is fine. Less interpretation of intent needed and we're no longer seeing any controversial goals related to the rule as a result

 

[Doracle]

I think the new handball rule is fine. Less interpretation of intent needed and we're no longer seeing any controversial goals related to the rule as a result

Why were the goals controversial? If the Havertz goal had stood, for example, I wouldn’t regard it in any way controversial. We want more goals in the game, not less, so I’m entirely against ruling any goals out for something which is not the player’s fault.

 

[ShinjiNinja26]

The worst thing to happen to football. Absolutely destroying the game.

 

[noodlehair]

Minor complaint compared to some of the extremely suspicious rubbish they come up with multiple times a week now, but it really annoys me how they come out and publicly state an interpretation of a rule, then can't even stick with it.

We've had this big thing multiple times about how if a defending player deliberately plays the ball, it is no longer offside. It makes absolutely no sense but they literally decided this was the rule and publicly used it to defend decisions they made. So it is now the rule. Then yesterday multiple times the linesman is putting his flag up due to players chasing after or getting onto balls AFTER a defender has deliberately played it. So it isn't the rule anymore?

To me it just proves they are completely making up bollocks to justify making calls they know are incorrect. Its either that or they literally don't know the rules. Either way is not a "mistake" its either not knowing how to do your job, or deliberately doing it wrong. There's not any way around it being one of these two things.

Same in another game. Can't remember which but player goes over the ball and onto someone's leg in a challenge. VAR reviews it as a yellow. They sent Jones off for Liverpool for the exact same thing, and stuck by it. There's no subjectivity there. You can't kick the ball by stamping on it and if you manage to stamp on someone's ankle in the process of whatever it is you are doing, you're obviously reckless and out of control, so its a red card. We've established this only a few weeks ago.

 

[FootballHQ]

I agree with the way the rules are the Havertz goal was rightfully disallowed although not sure how the ref saw that in real time but in anycase should have been disallowed by VAR. The rule is insane the but the application of that was fine.
I just cannot understand the other two decisions. The penalty on Jesus, VAR has been awarding penalties left right centre for much less than that. And the Carlos red card which was also as clear as anything. We created a lot of chances but couldn't finish so did not deserve to win but did not deserve to lose because of that penalty incident itself.

I think Diego was just trying to do that defender's block when a forward starts running but of course catching him flush with elbow isn't a good look at all. All the replays from that seemed to be from the top of the stadium roof so can only think it wasn't clear and obvious from footage available.

 

[B20]

Why were the goals controversial? If the Havertz goal had stood, for example, I wouldn’t regard it in any way controversial. We want more goals in the game, not less, so I’m entirely against ruling any goals out for something which is not the player’s fault.

The goals were controversial because the rules required a lot more interpretation (and specifically on something as nebulous as intent) which led to very inconsistent refereeing.

Inconsistency is imo quite damaging to the game, moreso than a few less goals. In general, the rules should not be subject to interpretation where it can be avoided.

Why for example is Haaland not charged for harassing the referee when Van Dijk was. The answer is of course the usual - it's been four months since the directive was issued. Howard Webb is awful in his position, panders too media focus and does not know how to instruct his referees in a way that ensures consistency across the group and furthermore maintains that across a season.

 

[B20]

Minor complaint compared to some of the extremely suspicious rubbish they come up with multiple times a week now, but it really annoys me how they come out and publicly state an interpretation of a rule, then can't even stick with it.

We've had this big thing multiple times about how if a defending player deliberately plays the ball, it is no longer offside. It makes absolutely no sense but they literally decided this was the rule and publicly used it to defend decisions they made. So it is now the rule. Then yesterday multiple times the linesman is putting his flag up due to players chasing after or getting onto balls AFTER a defender has deliberately played it. So it isn't the rule anymore?

To me it just proves they are completely making up bollocks to justify making calls they know are incorrect. Its either that or they literally don't know the rules. Either way is not a "mistake" its either not knowing how to do your job, or deliberately doing it wrong. There's not any way around it being one of these two things.

Same in another game. Can't remember which but player goes over the ball and onto someone's leg in a challenge. VAR reviews it as a yellow. They sent Jones off for Liverpool for the exact same thing, and stuck by it. There's no subjectivity there. You can't kick the ball by stamping on it and if you manage to stamp on someone's ankle in the process of whatever it is you are doing, you're obviously reckless and out of control, so its a red card. We've established this only a few weeks ago.

This is the real malaise, and if they addressed this VAR would be much less of an issue.

The problem is basically Webb.

 

[Doracle]

The goals were controversial because the rules required a lot more interpretation (and specifically on something as nebulous as intent) which led to very inconsistent refereeing.

Inconsistency is imo quite damaging to the game, moreso than a few less goals. In general, the rules should not be subject to interpretation where it can be avoided.

Why for example is Haaland not charged for harassing the referee when Van Dijk was. The answer is of course the usual - it's been four months since the directive was issued. Howard Webb is awful in his position, panders too media focus and does not know how to instruct his referees in a way that ensures consistency across the group and furthermore maintains that across a season.

I just don’t agree that it’s difficult to work out intent in the context of handball. Henry v Ireland - obviously intended, shouldn’t have been allowed. Havertz yesterday - obviously accidental, should stand.

It gets more difficult in the context of defending but, even then, if you start from a position that, generally, a defender isn’t going to want to give away a penalty by deliberately handling the ball, it really shouldn’t be that hard. I have no problem with the “natural position” type approach. It just needs some understanding that it isn’t actually natural to have your hands by your side/behind your back whilst attempting to run around a football pitch.

If that leads to slightly more inconsistency, then so be it. We can all understand that referees are going to see incidents slightly differently. It’s when there is unexplainable differences or badly thought out rules that fans become really frustrated.

 

[Pexbo]

This is the real malaise, and if they addressed this VAR would be much less of an issue.

The problem is basically Webb.

I actually don’t think the problem is Webb. Webb and Gallagher are basically just covering the arses of their colleagues. They will say whatever works for that particular incident and expect us to believe that there is enough differences between every incident they review that they can’t really be compared.

The problem sits firmly with the referees. They are still of the opinion that they are the orchestrator of an entertainment piece and it’s down to them to ensure the best spectacle. They’re also heavily influenced by which team is playing which and let their own bias decide too often or they are scared of the fallout if the decision is in favour or against certain teams.

 

[B20]

I actually don’t think the problem is Webb. Webb and Gallagher are basically just covering the arses of their colleagues. They will say whatever works for that particular incident and expect us to believe that there is enough differences between every incident they review that they can’t really be compared.

The problem sits firmly with the referees. They are still of the opinion that they are the orchestrator of an entertainment piece and it’s down to them to ensure the best spectacle. They’re also heavily influenced by which team is playing which and let their own bias decide too often or they are scared of the fallout if the decision is in favour or against certain teams.

All of that is on Webb. He needs to do far more than cover their arses. He's responsible for the matey insular culture amongst them.

 

[Pexbo]

All of that is on Webb. He needs to do far more than cover their arses. He's responsible for the matey insular culture amongst them.

I mean yeah it falls at his feet but I imagine he would have a mutiny on his hands if he cracked down on them.

 

[Anustart89]

Another for the "how the feck do they decide the rules" there. Bruno Guimaraes clearly pushes his head towards Bissouma but it's not a red because Bissouma doesn't go down. If Bissouma goes down it's a definite VAR intervention, despite the action being literally the same.

 

[TheGame]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[OldSchoolManc]

Have Palace had their apology yet?

 

[Fr. Todd Unctious]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

And yet you'll still see it implied on a regular basis that the refs and FA favour United ........

 

[tomaldinho1]

How was this guy a professional ref?

https://www.skysports.com/watch/vid...mero-challenge-doesnt-leap-out-to-me-as-a-red