I’m still not convinced it was even a pen let alone this VAR bollocks even works. The Italian player was already going down, he moved his foot into the path of Tarkowski who couldn’t change his stride pattern and stood on his foot. What if he stood on his hand? What if a player jumps for a header, and lands on someone’s foot?
That wasn’t clear and obvious, it once again come down to opinion.
I can’t wait for a Bolivian first division referee to get hold of this technology on the worlds biggest stage. What could possibly go wrong!!!!
This system should be tried and tested for a few years before it’s allowed at the World Cup, it’s gotta nightmare written all over it.
Completely agree. Can't see how anyone can argue with it. VAR is most definitely inconsistent enough not to be used for a major tournament at this stage.
But their player was fouled, its irrelevant if its accidental or not, he was fouled, you can see it on the VAR replay.
VAR worked, it was a pen because he fouled their player by standing on his foot, so its a pen, we may not like it, and if it was an English player who was fouled we would all be agreeing it was a pen, VAR worked.
Again this is all about opinions, its not a clear cut Penalty by any means. Player was already going down, regardless whether it was an English player or not i do not feel its clear enough to give the penalty.
VAR worked, it was a pen because he fouled their player by standing on his foot, so its a pen, we may not like it, and if it was an English player who was fouled we would all be agreeing it was a pen, VAR worked.
He only stood on his foot because Chiesa was already going down and slide his leg out. Therefore unintentional contact forced by the attacking player. It’s like players intentionally trailing a leg when they go round a keeper and go to ground.
VAR should never have been used in the first place as it wasn’t a clear and obvious error.
If anything, the Stones fuck up after 5 minutes was much more of a pen.
He was throwing himself to the ground long before the contact, not a pen in my eyes
It could have been a free kick from Tarkowski pulling on Chiesa's arm.
It could have been a very harsh penalty from Ashley Youngs barge that had no intent to win the ball that knocked Chiesa off balance.
It is instead assumed it was given harshley as a penalty for Tarkowski treading on Chiesa's standing foot meaning whilst already off balance, he had no chance to correct himself.
Lallana then cleared the ball when Chiesa could no longer reach it because of the barge and treading.
Until referees come out to explain unclear decisions, we are left to assume....
My assumption is that the referee combined Young's barge, with Tarkowski's foot treading and decided that it was the combination that ended Chiesa's run and it was therefore a penalty.
Intended or not if you get the man before the ball to win possession it is a foul.
Would also like to add that I thought Stones should maybe have been penalised for his second mistake early on in the first half - Was all over Immobile and pulled him back a good few times
He was throwing himself to the ground long before the contact, not a pen in my eyes
It could have been a free kick from Tarkowski pulling on Chiesa's arm.
It could have been a very harsh penalty from Ashley Youngs barge that had no intent to win the ball that knocked Chiesa off balance.
It is instead assumed it was given harshley as a penalty for Tarkowski treading on Chiesa's standing foot meaning whilst already off balance, he had no chance to correct himself.
Lallana then cleared the ball when Chiesa could no longer reach it because of the barge and treading.
Until referees come out to explain unclear decisions, we are left to assume....
My assumption is that the referee combined Young's barge, with Tarkowski's foot treading and decided that it was the combination that ended Chiesa's run and it was therefore a penalty.
Intended or not if you get the man before the ball to win possession it is a foul.
The last sentence isn’t black and white. If I place myself inbetween you and the ball and I’m I’m touching distance of it, then I don’t even have to touch the ball for it to be deemed in my possession.
I’m still not convinced it was even a pen let alone this VAR bollocks even works. The Italian player was already going down, he moved his foot into the path of Tarkowski who couldn’t change his stride pattern and stood on his foot. What if he stood on his hand? What if a player jumps for a header, and lands on someone’s foot?
That wasn’t clear and obvious, it once again come down to opinion.
I can’t wait for a Bolivian first division referee to get hold of this technology on the worlds biggest stage. What could possibly go wrong!!!!
This system should be tried and tested for a few years before it’s allowed at the World Cup, it’s gotta nightmare written all over it.
Completely agree. Can't see how anyone can argue with it. VAR is most definitely inconsistent enough not to be used for a major tournament at this stage.
But their player was fouled, its irrelevant if its accidental or not, he was fouled, you can see it on the VAR replay.
@ValleyGary is doing an admirable job of explaining exactly why it wasn't a penalty and, more importantly, why VAR should not have been used.
He was throwing himself to the ground long before the contact, not a pen in my eyes
It could have been a free kick from Tarkowski pulling on Chiesa's arm.
It could have been a very harsh penalty from Ashley Youngs barge that had no intent to win the ball that knocked Chiesa off balance.
It is instead assumed it was given harshley as a penalty for Tarkowski treading on Chiesa's standing foot meaning whilst already off balance, he had no chance to correct himself.
Lallana then cleared the ball when Chiesa could no longer reach it because of the barge and treading.
Until referees come out to explain unclear decisions, we are left to assume....
My assumption is that the referee combined Young's barge, with Tarkowski's foot treading and decided that it was the combination that ended Chiesa's run and it was therefore a penalty.
Intended or not if you get the man before the ball to win possession it is a foul.
The last sentence isn’t black and white. If I place myself inbetween you and the ball and I’m I’m touching distance of it, then I don’t even have to touch the ball for it to be deemed in my possession.
This is why we need Referees to be accountable for their decisions.
Having had a night to sleep on it I only have one issue with the decision - why wasn't the other penalty shout in the first half with Vardy at least checked by the ref? Even if we accept as a given that it was a right call to give the pen, it doesn't explain how the ref could be so certain as to not require at least another look at the Vardy one.
Purely as a matter of consistency if the Chiesa one is going to be checked then surely every penalty shout should be checked?
Having had a night to sleep on it I only have one issue with the decision - why wasn't the other penalty shout in the first half with Vardy at least checked by the ref? Even if we accept as a given that it was a right call to give the pen, it doesn't explain how the ref could be so certain as to not require at least another look at the Vardy one.
Purely as a matter of consistency if the Chiesa one is going to be checked then surely every penalty shout should be checked?
I think obvious penalties should continue to be given and VAR should only be for the unclear decisions.
I think this is the issue, we seem to be using it backwards...
It's someone with access to replays that radios into the ref to advise that he may have made a mistake, the ref then watches the replay and decides if he has or not.
Instead it should be down to the ref to check the replay if he is at all unsure.
Remember the time we played and the decision as to whose free kick it was, was reversed several times by the Referee... That is where VAR is required. It was clearly a decision that required assistance.
The current rule of 'to correct and clear and obvious mistakes' is surely down to the linesmen and 4th official to assist the referee as they always have...
Football died a little bit when diving was introduced to the English game in the '90s
Colin Powell used to dive, and Rodney Marsh.
So did Charlie George apparently, but its easier to name players who DON'T dive these days and when you get the likes of Viera claiming "it's now just part of the game", I think there is a problem
But wasn't the Vardy one equally as marginal as the Chiesa one? How long did the video ref have to double check the replay after the refs call was made?
Nobody appealed for the foul in the Chiesa one, so what convinced the video ref that he needed to look at multiple replays in depth for that call, but not for the Vardy one that was at least appealed for (albeit minimally) suggesting some contact was made?
VARs and other match officials are able to recommend reviews, but the only person who can initiate one is the referee, who will then have the final say on whether their original decision should stand or be changed.
So does that mean the VAR told the ref to initiate a review through ear piece?
That was not a penalty last night, the Italian player had already overrun the ball, Tarkowski didn't make a challenge l, he didn't even feint to make a challenge. Football isn't yet a totally contact free sport and stuff like feet getting trodden on accidentally happens it doesn't make it a foul.
Besides that, it seems people are split on whether it was a penalty or not, which means it wasn't clear and obvious and personally I think the referee was gagging to play with the screen. Rugby, tennis and cricket have got the VR right because the live crowd and television viewers know what's going on. I know it's early doors for football but it's a complete clusterfuck
Apologies if this has already been said, because I haven't read the entire thread but isn't this just like the umpire referral system in cricket, in that it was brought in with the intention of eradicating the absolutely disastrous mistakes that umpires and referees occasionally make - the real injustices - but in its practical application it's started to be used in relation to all sorts of much more questionable decisions. I can live with that so long as it does eliminate the real shockers.
VARs and other match officials are able to recommend reviews, but the only person who can initiate one is the referee, who will then have the final say on whether their original decision should stand or be changed.
So does that mean the VAR told the ref to initiate a review through ear piece?
I believe that is what the commentators said last night another German official advised the ref to review the corner decision.
VAR may one day eliminate games being decided by the officials mistakes instead of player skill but based on the reaction to last night it will never eliminate fan bias.
VAR may one day eliminate games being decided by the officials mistakes instead of player skill but based on the reaction to last night it will never eliminate fan bias.
This is getting boring, its not necessarily fan bias here its an opinion which alot of us have. Agree to disagree really no need to keep saying its because its England as that wasn't a factor, when you watch it live sometimes it might be when you appeal for stuff but once you have watched back you watch the incident and then confirm.
I would argue that VAR could actually create more opportunity for officials to make mistakes in the sense that the very act of calling for VAR or not can be a mistake in and of itself - if there is no consistency (like last night where Chiesa's incident was checked but Vardy's wasn't, England's goal was checked but the penalty was not checked for encroachment)
The easiest answer is to only use VAR for mistaken identity and offside decisions (black and white decisions) and leave the other decisions (the judgement calls) to refs as it has always been.
Nobody is arguing that goal line technology was a bad idea though. It was trialled and introduced successfully and I have not heard of any controversy surrounding it.
Interesting information. How do we know the VAR looked at the Stones and Vardy incidents? And if he did, while he's watching them back, another incident could occur that he then misses, because he is watching a replay of the first incident...
VAR may one day eliminate games being decided by the officials mistakes instead of player skill but based on the reaction to last night it will never eliminate fan bias.
This is getting boring, its not necessarily fan bias here its an opinion which alot of us have. Agree to disagree really no need to keep saying its because its England as that wasn't a factor, when you watch it live sometimes it might be when you appeal for stuff but once you have watched back you watch the incident and then confirm.
The overreaction is fan bias and I have been as guilty of it over the years when it comes to Charlton & England as much as anyone else.
The reality is if that had been Bonucci on Rashford up the other end of the pitch & it had not been given most of the same people would be complaining about us being robbed by a terrible official.
VAR is not perfect yet but the system like any changes in the sport will never improve until it is used as much as possible at the highest level, so hopefully fans can deal with living through the beta phase and stop throwing hissy fits.
Comments
VAR should never have been used in the first place as it wasn’t a clear and obvious error.
If anything, the Stones fuck up after 5 minutes was much more of a pen.
It could have been a very harsh penalty from Ashley Youngs barge that had no intent to win the ball that knocked Chiesa off balance.
It is instead assumed it was given harshley as a penalty for Tarkowski treading on Chiesa's standing foot meaning whilst already off balance, he had no chance to correct himself.
Lallana then cleared the ball when Chiesa could no longer reach it because of the barge and treading.
Until referees come out to explain unclear decisions, we are left to assume....
My assumption is that the referee combined Young's barge, with Tarkowski's foot treading and decided that it was the combination that ended Chiesa's run and it was therefore a penalty.
Intended or not if you get the man before the ball to win possession it is a foul.
Purely as a matter of consistency if the Chiesa one is going to be checked then surely every penalty shout should be checked?
I think this is the issue, we seem to be using it backwards...
It's someone with access to replays that radios into the ref to advise that he may have made a mistake, the ref then watches the replay and decides if he has or not.
Instead it should be down to the ref to check the replay if he is at all unsure.
Remember the time we played and the decision as to whose free kick it was, was reversed several times by the Referee... That is where VAR is required. It was clearly a decision that required assistance.
The current rule of 'to correct and clear and obvious mistakes' is surely down to the linesmen and 4th official to assist the referee as they always have...
Nobody appealed for the foul in the Chiesa one, so what convinced the video ref that he needed to look at multiple replays in depth for that call, but not for the Vardy one that was at least appealed for (albeit minimally) suggesting some contact was made?
So does that mean the VAR told the ref to initiate a review through ear piece?
Besides that, it seems people are split on whether it was a penalty or not, which means it wasn't clear and obvious and personally I think the referee was gagging to play with the screen. Rugby, tennis and cricket have got the VR right because the live crowd and television viewers know what's going on. I know it's early doors for football but it's a complete clusterfuck
Germanofficial advised the ref to review the corner decision.The easiest answer is to only use VAR for mistaken identity and offside decisions (black and white decisions) and leave the other decisions (the judgement calls) to refs as it has always been.
Have VAR and we are 2-2 with Germany after Lampards goal is given by VAR.
Don't have VAR and Henry's jungling act is missed and a grave injustice is committed.
Tough choice !
Or Leeds under Revie.
The reality is if that had been Bonucci on Rashford up the other end of the pitch & it had not been given most of the same people would be complaining about us being robbed by a terrible official.
VAR is not perfect yet but the system like any changes in the sport will never improve until it is used as much as possible at the highest level, so hopefully fans can deal with living through the beta phase and stop throwing hissy fits.