Football is now a farce
Comments
-
Yeah but you and your mates have something to talk about down the pub at least...1StevieG said:Now we have a perfectly good goal scored by Man City and no VAR to correct the linesman. The linesman has assumed that the player in front of the keeper is interfering in an offside position with play yet the keeper has reacted to the direction of the ball. Football is a farce without the technology to resolve these issues.
4 -
All you guys shouting for VAR, still want a ref, why, do away with them and every decision would be right, wouldn't it.0
-
And how the fuck is that not a red card? Could have broken Sanes leg.5
-
Correct if they had a VAR ref and not one on the field he would have gone.0
-
People and their mates will be forced to talk of other things, such as socioeconomic iniquity. VAR will bring about the Revolution5
-
Could we introduce a system which throws pundits off the screen when it is demonstrated that they are speaking garbage.Chris_from_Sidcup said:5 -
Football was ruined once the money started piling in. VAR is just another addition to the razzamajazz soap opera game that’s also called soccer. It’s here to stay with your 4HD in 3D tv.0
-
Why not have a system where only the official with access to the video can call for the review through a deafening blast in the refs ear or similar. Asking the players to get involved is a recipe for disaster - and in my view should lead to an immediate booking. Yes officials make howlers - but I suspect most will be corrected if just a second official is involved. I suspect most of us can live with the mistakes that get past two officials.1
- Sponsored links:
-
I missed this post from earlier. Spot on.cafctom said:Don't see an issue with it at all. If you're anti VAR or any kind of process that leads to fair decisions being made then you don't really have much right to criticise or complain about refereeing on a Saturday as far as I'm concerned.
1 -
Then they should introduce it for EVERY wrong decision, and who decides wether its right or wrong as its opinion. Whether its a goal kick or a corner (which is fact) can be just as important as whether someone's been tugged or handball in the box.cafctom said:
But it shouldn't be about people have a debate after the game. It should be about sportsmen getting the fair result for the efforts they are putting in - why should players' careers be affected by wrong decisions simply so us fans can have something to chat about in the pub afterwards?Pelling1993 said:I hate VAR, football is an extremely subjective game and that’s part of the enjoyment, having a debate after the game as to whether it was a penalty/free kick/red card or not.
As fans we spend the majority of the season complaining about refereeing decisions. If something comes along to stop us having to complain about those issues, then I don't understand why people would be against that. Maybe it's just the mindset of fans who feel like they need to complain about something, however illogical it is.0 -
I was tugged in the box once.Chippycafc said:
Then they should introduce it for EVERY wrong decision, and who decides wether its right or wrong as its opinion. Whether its a goal kick or a corner (which is fact) can be just as important as whether someone's been tugged or handball in the box.cafctom said:
But it shouldn't be about people have a debate after the game. It should be about sportsmen getting the fair result for the efforts they are putting in - why should players' careers be affected by wrong decisions simply so us fans can have something to chat about in the pub afterwards?Pelling1993 said:I hate VAR, football is an extremely subjective game and that’s part of the enjoyment, having a debate after the game as to whether it was a penalty/free kick/red card or not.
As fans we spend the majority of the season complaining about refereeing decisions. If something comes along to stop us having to complain about those issues, then I don't understand why people would be against that. Maybe it's just the mindset of fans who feel like they need to complain about something, however illogical it is.
Not sure I'd like it to be reviewed by a stranger, though.6 -
It is true that there will always be opinion. An example is a ref has to decide whether he thinks a handball is intentional for instance. If a ref sees a handball but feels it isn't intentional and gives a goal and a team appeal due to there being a handball, then it poses a problem. If it goes to VAR they are getting a second opinion from somebody who might see it differently - but teh ref din't miss it. Does anybody know what happens there? I would say the fairest thing is if the ref saw the handball he shouldn't allow it to go to VAR - or if it does go - a bit like cricket - it becomes umpires call!
All of this has probably been gone through, but there is a lot of detail behind it that requires proper thinking through. But when all situations are covered, I can't see how it will be controversial at all.0 -
Pretty sure the video assistant just says "it's worth having another look at x incident mate" to the on field ref.MuttleyCAFC said:It is true that there will always be opinion. An example is a ref has to decide whether he thinks a handball is intentional for instance. If a ref sees a handball but feels it isn't intentional and gives a goal and a team appeal due to there being a handball, then it poses a problem. If it goes to VAR they are getting a second opinion from somebody who might see it differently - but teh ref din't miss it. Does anybody know what happens there? I would say the fairest thing is if the ref saw the handball he shouldn't allow it to go to VAR - or if it does go - a bit like cricket - it becomes umpires call!
All of this has probably been gone through, but there is a lot of detail behind it that requires proper thinking through. But when all situations are covered, I can't see how it will be controversial at all.
The on field ref then goes over to the dugout and reviews the footage himself to make a more informed decision based on multiple angles rather than the one split second they had to make a decision initially.
Don't think the video assistant ever inserts their own opinion into the decision making process.0 -
I thought West Brom’s goal was ruled out for offside because his arm or body were offside not his feet
Then on the picture they show for Man City’s ‘offside’ goal everyone’s claiming he was onside and the official made the wrong decision but to me it looked right because the attackers arms were in front and offside like the West Brom’s player.
What is the actual rule /law ?
1 -
Allowing for the fact that VAR is in its infancy and will need to evolve, the only issue I have with the system is the way Salah went down like a sack of shit under minimal contact, winning a penalty with no sanctions on his theatrics.
My worry is that, even more so than now, strikers will go down as soon as they are touched because if the contact is seen by VAR, the penalty will be given. I think it needs something to discourage this - whether that's a booking for overdoing the fall or maybe there being an adjustment to the rule - eg, it's only considered to be a foul if the referee believes the striker did everything he could to stay on his feet. Salah certainly didn't, I think that's clear.
It would return the problem to being about interpretation, but I think that would be better than every striker falling over in the box and defenders being afraid to tackle.1 -
I think it’s any part of the body that you can score with, so he shouldn’t have been given offside.oohaahmortimer said:I thought West Brom’s goal was ruled out for offside because his arm or body were offside not his feet
Then on the picture they show for Man City’s ‘offside’ goal everyone’s claiming he was onside and the official made the wrong decision but to me it looked right because the attackers arms were in front and offside like the West Brom’s player.
What is the actual rule /law ?0 -
But the West Brom player had one foot in an offside position anyway...
0 -
What always confuses me is the fact the whole ball has to be over the line for a goal / corner / throw in etc... yet only part of a player has to be beyond the last man for it to be offside, surely should be the whole player for it to come into play...oohaahmortimer said:I thought West Brom’s goal was ruled out for offside because his arm or body were offside not his feet
Then on the picture they show for Man City’s ‘offside’ goal everyone’s claiming he was onside and the official made the wrong decision but to me it looked right because the attackers arms were in front and offside like the West Brom’s player.
What is the actual rule /law ?
Would certainly favour the attacker1 - Sponsored links:
-
Instead of stopping the game for every incident, they could review the whole game at the end and be able to adjust the result after a few hours when they are really sure!5
-
I guess the issue of that is if a team go 5-0 up with four goals potentially being chalked off... the other team will have long shut up shop and instead of trying to score themselves (which they should do @ 1-0) they'll be trying to stop it going 6-0stevexreeve said:Instead of stopping the game for every incident, they could review the whole game at the end and be able to adjust the result after a few hours when they are really sure!
0 -
Forget about the messy bit, lets just have an ABBA penalties hey..? Oh, wait...ForeverAddickted said:
I guess the issue of that is if a team go 5-0 up with four goals potentially being chalked off... the other team will have long shut up shop and instead of trying to score themselves (which they should do @ 1-0) they'll be trying to stop it going 6-0stevexreeve said:Instead of stopping the game for every incident, they could review the whole game at the end and be able to adjust the result after a few hours when they are really sure!
1 -
How will the logistics of VAR work if the trial is a success and it becomes part of the modern game?
There won't be enough spare refs to be the VAR official for each match for the Premier League matches, let alone the Championship and below.
Will there be one or two VAR refs for each match day, and they then have to answer all queries for say 22 matches? What if there is a query from two games at the same time? Does one get put on hold?
Or does the 4th Official become the VAR ref for each game and instead of being away at another location they just use the pitchside screen like Craig Pawson did on Saturday night?2 -
Heard from some fans at the game, they had no idea what was going on. think they need to re think the whole thing0
-
Being touched in the box doesn't mean that it should be a penalty, football is a contact sport after alllordromford said:Allowing for the fact that VAR is in its infancy and will need to evolve, the only issue I have with the system is the way Salah went down like a sack of shit under minimal contact, winning a penalty with no sanctions on his theatrics.
My worry is that, even more so than now, strikers will go down as soon as they are touched because if the contact is seen by VAR, the penalty will be given. I think it needs something to discourage this - whether that's a booking for overdoing the fall or maybe there being an adjustment to the rule - eg, it's only considered to be a foul if the referee believes the striker did everything he could to stay on his feet. Salah certainly didn't, I think that's clear.
It would return the problem to being about interpretation, but I think that would be better than every striker falling over in the box and defenders being afraid to tackle.3 -
Ooh arhh misses...!killerandflash said:
Being touched in the box doesn't mean that it should be a penalty, football is a contact sport after alllordromford said:Allowing for the fact that VAR is in its infancy and will need to evolve, the only issue I have with the system is the way Salah went down like a sack of shit under minimal contact, winning a penalty with no sanctions on his theatrics.
My worry is that, even more so than now, strikers will go down as soon as they are touched because if the contact is seen by VAR, the penalty will be given. I think it needs something to discourage this - whether that's a booking for overdoing the fall or maybe there being an adjustment to the rule - eg, it's only considered to be a foul if the referee believes the striker did everything he could to stay on his feet. Salah certainly didn't, I think that's clear.
It would return the problem to being about interpretation, but I think that would be better than every striker falling over in the box and defenders being afraid to tackle.0 -
They're just typical Liverpool fans arent they?benjest1989 said:Heard from some fans at the game, they had no idea what was going on.
1 -
But Livermore pulled him back, and stopped him getting to the crosskillerandflash said:
Being touched in the box doesn't mean that it should be a penalty, football is a contact sport after alllordromford said:Allowing for the fact that VAR is in its infancy and will need to evolve, the only issue I have with the system is the way Salah went down like a sack of shit under minimal contact, winning a penalty with no sanctions on his theatrics.
My worry is that, even more so than now, strikers will go down as soon as they are touched because if the contact is seen by VAR, the penalty will be given. I think it needs something to discourage this - whether that's a booking for overdoing the fall or maybe there being an adjustment to the rule - eg, it's only considered to be a foul if the referee believes the striker did everything he could to stay on his feet. Salah certainly didn't, I think that's clear.
It would return the problem to being about interpretation, but I think that would be better than every striker falling over in the box and defenders being afraid to tackle.0 -
I felt he Salah penalty was definitely different to the Morata one against Norwich;Rothko said:
But Livermore pulled him back, and stopped him getting to the crosskillerandflash said:
Being touched in the box doesn't mean that it should be a penalty, football is a contact sport after alllordromford said:Allowing for the fact that VAR is in its infancy and will need to evolve, the only issue I have with the system is the way Salah went down like a sack of shit under minimal contact, winning a penalty with no sanctions on his theatrics.
My worry is that, even more so than now, strikers will go down as soon as they are touched because if the contact is seen by VAR, the penalty will be given. I think it needs something to discourage this - whether that's a booking for overdoing the fall or maybe there being an adjustment to the rule - eg, it's only considered to be a foul if the referee believes the striker did everything he could to stay on his feet. Salah certainly didn't, I think that's clear.
It would return the problem to being about interpretation, but I think that would be better than every striker falling over in the box and defenders being afraid to tackle.
i.e. When I saw the latter I instantly thought dive as all the Norwich player does is put his hand on Morata's shoulder - As you say with Livermore he does the same, but you can clearly see him pull on Salah's shoulder... that for me is the difference between a pen and dive0
