What is the relevance of English fans? You aren't the centre of the universe. Fans all around the world have been seeing it week in week out for 2 years and nothing has changed. If English people can't accept that then that is your problem. Don't act like everyone in the world can't deal with this though when they clearly can and the fans in the stadium haven't changed how they celebrate one iota.
VAR - Not the hero we want, the one we need
- Thread starter Pavl3n
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) was joined by comedian Ali Woods to look back at the best and worst moments of a rollercoaster season with the annual United Hour Awards.
Has Ten Hag been sacked yet? We're not sure and we hope not, but it's looking more likely as the days pass.
Who should replace him and why is it taking so long to make a decision?
The angle he had was perfectly clear enough. You could hardly see the ball brush his arm unless it was in super slow motion. The brush of the arm doesn't push the ball towards goal, that was hitting his hip that did it.
It wasn't a deliberate hand ball and his arm was tucked into his waste as much as possible, literally nothing else he could have done. IMO it's a goal.
If Llorente moved his arm/hand out towards the ball and hit it into the net, then correctly disallow it.
It shows why this was the correct decision.
You'll come around, mate!
Last weekend in the Belgian league, a team loses the ball in the opposition box. Other team counters, foul in the box, referee gives a penalty. VAR calls him to the sideline, he has a look, and gives a penalty to the other team because a foul was committed in the box right before the counter started
I’m sure I will. To be honest I’m a lot less emotionally invested in football these days anyway, age probably.I also agree that VAR could be used well and had its advantages, I just can’t seem to like this version of it. I hated them checking that Lorente goal so thoroughly when I thought it was clear and obvious errors (Maradona, Henry). I hate this micro analysing of everything.
Jeez mate, I’m not even English. I was just pointing out that it hasn’t been used consistently in competitions English people (I assumed this board may be majority English league watching) have watched and therefore, had not had chance to adjust their reactions yet. Bloody hell
You’re so condescending..well done.
More time will lead to more reluctantance to celebrate. As I’ve already mentioned it’s changed how I celebrate goals
And I'm pointing out that it is a completely irrelevant point and means nothing.
All the moaning and groaning from City fans about VAR, wouldn't it have just been a good idea for City to score a goal away from home like Spurs did?
Spurs/ Man City fans have never been in a competition with VAR. this is the first year. People in this thread saying it didn’t spoil Man City celebration for final goal. Let’s see what it’s like after five years of this with similar calls and then see how the fans react.
That was my point. Anyway I digress.
Still undecided on VAR after last night. On the one hand I wouldn't wish what happened last night to City on a rival team, honestly, but then why should Spurs be denied a place in the semi-final because of an offside goal? It's really not good for football that moments like last night, where you think you've scored a last minute winner in a phenomenal game, can then be completely reversed in the blink of an eye. Yet justice prevailed. Spurs deserved to progress, they scored three at the Etihad and shut us out at their stadium. It's incredibly hard for me to decide if I'm in favour of it.
At any rate, there needs to be greater oversight over the use of it and more transparency. I don't understand why the ref was only shown one angle of the Llorente handball. One angle showed clearly that it hit his hand first yet it was not shown to the ref. Now, I'm not aggrieved by this, as personally I'd have allowed it to stand anyway. However, the referee's reaction made it seem clear that he only didn't disallow because he couldn't see if it hit his hand or not, which is enough to suggest had he been shown an alternative angle he would have disallowed it. This leads us to question who is choosing which angle he sees and why? Surely the ref should be shown multiple angles so as to best inform his decision. I'd like to see UEFA's explanation for this.
At any rate, there needs to be greater oversight over the use of it and more transparency. I don't understand why the ref was only shown one angle of the Llorente handball. One angle showed clearly that it hit his hand first yet it was not shown to the ref. Now, I'm not aggrieved by this, as personally I'd have allowed it to stand anyway. However, the referee's reaction made it seem clear that he only didn't disallow because he couldn't see if it hit his hand or not, which is enough to suggest had he been shown an alternative angle he would have disallowed it. This leads us to question who is choosing which angle he sees and why? Surely the ref should be shown multiple angles so as to best inform his decision. I'd like to see UEFA's explanation for this.
I think both angles are probably highlighted now, only thing I wanna mention is I thought Pep's reaction after VAR intervened didnt look like agony but more like numbness to me.
Dont agree neither that Materazzi wouldn't provoke Zidane for instance. This part of playing dirty is a way of being, that has evolved over years to become this personality. If there's no room to begin with, I dont think these characters of football would evolve into people like Materazzi, Suarez or Ramos for instance.
That's pretty awesome.You'll come around, mate!
Last weekend in the Belgian league, a team loses the ball in the opposition box. Other team counters, foul in the box, referee gives a penalty. VAR calls him to the sideline, he has a look, and gives a penalty to the other team because a foul was committed in the box right before the counter started
Can you imagine if Sterlings goal was allowed because they didn’t have VAR?
Spurs would be (rightly) furious.
Glad it’s here despite the negative effects it may have.
Spurs would be (rightly) furious.
Glad it’s here despite the negative effects it may have.
It wasn’t though. There was better angles so why not use them? An endless loop of the same replay was useless. I think if he’d seen the other replay and disallowed. Whether people like the way the rules or applied or not generally speaking if the balls hits your arm and it ends up with a goal it would get disallowed. I’m not unhappy it didn’t but if it had been a more contentious decision would they still just give the ref one angle of it?
That was my thought on it. He seemed bemused that he was even asked to look at it. It was the worst angle they had.
I thought VAR would take away excitement from the sport but boy was I wrong.
It was genius from Eriksen to use it for timing wasting purposes
Last night was the most brutal varring I've seen so far.
Yep, the idea of the long delays on paper sounded horrible but in reality just adds to the drama and lets be honest if it stops wrong decisions from being made it cant be a bad thing
The "handball" was the most obvious unintentional handball you'll ever see. Even if there is a rule change that means a goal like like that shouldn't be allowed you can't convince me it would be right. Justice was done by it being given.
We're just heading to a world of e-sports anyway, so why not just build that bridge quicker by leaning on technology more in our classic sports?
That’s why I’m saying that we need to take it out of the hands of the referees, because they are allowing time to be stolen by teams with their time wasting which is against the rules. Just like teams were getting away with cheating despite cheating being against the rules, and offside goals being scored despite being against the rules, so they decided to introduce VAR.
In what way do you say ''Justice was done'' though?
Because it would have been allowed without the VAR check?
Because ''a bit of handball'' is alright now when a goal is getting scored?
A bit of handball that VAR failed to see that still makes VAR fantastic.
(I'm not saying you're saying all these things, I just wanted to query the justice idea)
I totally agree with this, but it's a precedent that allows people to score with their hands so long as it's accidental if you say this one was OK.
You've never been allowed to score with your hands, it's always been treated differently from defenders doing it. And everyone was happy with that until it needed querying in order to defend the catastrophic failure of VAR in this instance.
The PL will be ridiculous with it next season, and I can't wait. Bring on the drama.
Except no precendent was set: the current rule set allows for goals to be scored that involve accidentally handling the ball.
So no catastrophic failure in this instance, no conspiracy, no cover up.
I think it's the VAR who decides what angles and replays are relevant for the ref, but I'm not 100% sure on that.
That being said I think it's important to understand that the way VAR is used between refs isn't as straight forward as one might think.
When something goes to on the pitch review the scene is often boiled down to a very specific question, which in this case could of course be whether or not his hand made contact with the ball, but it could for example also be how significant the contact was, or how unintentional it was.
Last edited:
The beauty and drama of sport comes from the human side that balances out the cold, results obsessed side of it.
Replay is going to quickly throw that perfect balance out of whack as everything tilts toward results.
Replay is going to quickly throw that perfect balance out of whack as everything tilts toward results.
1) He didn't actually score with his hand.
2) The current rules as written already allow accidental handball in this scenario, so it would be disingenuous to say some new precedent was set here. Especially as we already know there are new rules coming in place that will specifically stop this scenario from happening again, which is pretty much the opposite of allowing a precedent to be set.
Why does the referee go to see it at all.
VAR would be ten times better without the referee going to look at the video. Just get people elsewhere lookong
VAR would be ten times better without the referee going to look at the video. Just get people elsewhere lookong
Because people kept complaining about remote controlled refs.
he as good as scored with his arm then? - I could also say he jumped into the path of the ball.
yes I suppose the rule says the bold but you'd see it actually allowed about once in a blue moon, shall we say.
''blue moon'' <----
VAR lashed that decision right up, what else can you say**
**that handball involved in goals is fine as a technicality when it hasn't ever been for games played in the real world AND it was great drama, so it doesn't matter
I just think these are silly arguments. The celebration of VAR in the context of the other night doesn't look right to me if you want to be fair in the For/Against debate.
For the record, I don't mind it getting a trial, but I don't think it's as black/white a great thing that most people here seem to think.
Thought there was no handball but the camera behind the goal convinced me otherwise. The referee might have changed his mind had he seen the situation from that angle. Most fans would be unhappy if their team conceded a goal like that.
What is even your point? Iirc the initial ruling was that the goal was correct, Cakir looked at it with VAR again, found that there were no rule broken, so the goal survived review. So what was the big mistake? Should he have overruled a goal which was scored according to rules?he as good as scored with his arm then? - I could also say he jumped into the path of the ball.
yes I suppose the rule says the bold but you'd see it actually allowed about once in a blue moon, shall we say.
''blue moon'' <----
VAR lashed that decision right up, what else can you say**
**that handball involved in goals is fine as a technicality when it hasn't ever been for games played in the real world AND it was great drama, so it doesn't matter
I just think these are silly arguments. The celebration of VAR in the context of the other night doesn't look right to me if you want to be fair in the For/Against debate.
For the record, I don't mind it getting a trial, but I don't think it's as black/white a great thing that most people here seem to think.
It's true that there is a discrepancy between what the hand rule states and what people want to see or may even regard as convention, but that's not VARs fault, if anything VAR forces these issues to be clarified.
I think so, yes. Like every other time & therefore requiring a change in the wording of the rules.
But that he didn't & the application of VAR there, was basically a pile of shite, is being lauded as a great thing in itself.
As I say, people are not having a fair debate, people are just saying stuff.
Horrible cock-up = great drama. So VAR is good, is not a valid argument.
What do you think would be the reaction if VAR broke the rules? Don't you think that would pose a tiny problem down the line with its credibility?
The only pile of shite is you making up rules and expecting the refs to follow it for some reason. It wasn't a handball, get over it.
Right... what?
Of course, it was a handball. You need to get to specsavers - and urgently - if you don't think that was a handball.
well...
1 - there is the rules
2 - there is the accepted application of the rules
where (2) is like 'since the dawn of time'
so yes, I think the goal ought to have been disallowed
or I'll say again, he actively jumped at the cross & contacted the ball with his arm, so apply the rules & get it disallowed that way too,
.Thankfully I can read the rules just fine, and guess what? Nope, wasn't a handball.
Of course the refs shouldn't follow your made up rules. You need to get to the doctors - and urgently - if you think refs should break the rules to follow whatever your delusion thinks of next.
So there are
1) the rules
2) not the rules
You don’t like VAR because it enforces #1 and not #2.