Match of the Day/ VAR

gorams_glayva

Well-Known Member
Yes, it gets the correct decisions and that’s what matters.

The title last year went to city because of a despicable decision by a Mancunian cheat, a decision that would never have been given under VAR. Forgive me for not having sympathy for a bunch of cheats that have broken every rule in the book. Notwithstanding that, VAR arrived at the right decision.
It would also have ruled out Wolves` goal against City which was blatant handball, thus giving 2 extra points to the blues.

VAR is sucking the life and spontaneity out of the game. Fans cant really celebrate without waiting to see if the goal is being reviewed. It`ll be the death of the game.

Crazy example from last years CL game between Schalke and City. VAR awards a penalty to Schalke for a foul that the ref had missed. Fair enough, it was a foul by Fernandinho on the German...but the replay showed that the SChalke player was a good half yard offside when the ball was played to him. But VAR ignored that. Its just nuts...get rid of it.
 

laudofan

Active Member
The new handball rules are a different issue from VAR.

Fans have moaned for years about refs getting things wrong and now they're still moaning when VAR is getting them right. You just can't please everyone.

Obviously I can see the point about the hiatus in the game but overall I think it's better that the correct decision is made.
 

WestEndGer18

Active Member
The new rule is a farce. It can't be a disallowed goal for City but no penalty for the same offence if it was committed by the Spurs player. How can that be fair? It's a farce.

But technically VAR got it right given this is the new rules.

My issue is the consistency with it. How can they spot the handball but not even review the penalty claim on Rodri from the first half? It's a stonewall penalty in my view but to not even review it by VAR? How can that be?

Also, the Spurs defender grabs a hold of Laportes arm in the build up to City's chalked off goal yesterday. Technically that's a penalty in the rules of the game so how is that being overlooked? It has barely even been mentioned anywhere!
They did review the Rodri incident. They didn’t think it was a penalty.
 

laudofan

Active Member
Don't blame VAR for the City - Spurs decision. VAR done it's job. Blame the new rules for hand ball.
I tend to favour that rule. It'll even itself out.

At the end of the day, no fan wants to see their team lose a goal because an opposition player has handled the ball (intentionally or not).
 

dt17

Well-Known Member
What does that even mean? It was 100% a handball under the new rules, how much more clear and obvious does it have to be?

Really don't get the chat about ruining the game. What's worse - an illegal, last minute goal or waiting a few minutes and reaching the correct decision through VAR?
It's not that clear and obvious because not one Spurs player thought it was a hand ball.

I tend to favour that rule. It'll even itself out.

At the end of the day, no fan wants to see their team lose a goal because an opposition player has handled the ball (intentionally or not).
It's not fair though because had the ball hit the defenders hand, it might not have been a penalty.
 

Superrangers

Well-Known Member
Goal keeper having both feet of the line when penalty was taken.
I assume you are talking the supercup? I was absolutely bladdered watching at my mate’s house, so would need to watch it back. To what extent is that down to the referee though? It’s supposed to be their call (based on the new rules). That isn’t supposed to be a VAR issue though IIRC. VAR is for goals (including fouls and offsides), red card offences, the award of penalties and mistaken identity offences.
 

laudofan

Active Member
It's not fair though because had the ball hit the defenders hand, it might not have been a penalty.
Sure, but no-one wants to see a penalty given for an inadvertent handball.

I can see why you cite the apparent anomaly mate but I think the "no goal if a hand has helped it" rule is in keeping with the spirit of football.
 

laudofan

Active Member
Not knowing if that last minute winner counts until 2 or 3 mins later is not the football I grew up watching
I think it's an average of something like 85 seconds for a review but obviously that's the big downside.

It's a tradeoff. Do we want the correct decision? If so we need to wait.
 

Renfrew@UKGB&NI

Well-Known Member
Tim Cahill on match of the day last night said it was like big brother during the game,couldn't agree more
Punters who pay good money to watch the game live are the losers here,but hey let's keep the armchair fans happy. I'm fed up hearing about refs speaking to the crowd,reruns on big screens to get the fans involved, 2 challenges to each team.
I can only hope this shambles continues and the fans who go to games get together and start a momentum to get rid of it.
Don't want our game turned into some American rubbish,with stop start and adverts at every turn.
 

dt17

Well-Known Member
Sure, but no-one wants to see a penalty given for an inadvertent handball.

I can see why you cite the apparent anomaly mate but I think the "no goal if a hand has helped it" rule is in keeping with the spirit of football.
Did that hand ball in the Man City game really benefit City though? It's not as if it put the ball on a plate a yard out for a tap in.

Can't have one rule for one team (attacking) and a different one of the other (defending), it should either be a foul for both or none at all.
 

Leif Erikson

Well-Known Member
It's not that clear and obvious because not one Spurs player thought it was a hand ball.



It's not fair though because had the ball hit the defenders hand, it might not have been a penalty.
I could be wrong but I don't think the 'clear and obvious' is even part of the rule any more, it was initially but was quickly changed. If it was clear and obvious the ref would've seen it as well, completely nullifying the point of VAR.

I'd argue that it would be given as a penalty, we saw a few given in the latter stages of the CL for handball that clearly weren't deliberate either.
 

Renfrew@UKGB&NI

Well-Known Member
I could be wrong but I don't think the 'clear and obvious' is even part of the rule any more, it was initially but was quickly changed. If it was clear and obvious the ref would've seen it as well, completely nullifying the point of VAR.

I'd argue that it would be given as a penalty, we saw a few given in the latter stages of the CL for handball that clearly weren't deliberate either.
Yes they told us many times that it would be used only for clear and obvious,which was a downright lie and when this is asked about,the reply is,but it was the correct decision so you can't complain.
This has been led by the tv companies for years.remember when they were showing the replay to the manager after the decision went against them,then sticking a mic in their face at the end. Stirring it up weekly and now we have this shambles.
Can just see it soon,when we have the commentator saying,and now to var ,sponsored by santander or whoever.
 

laudofan

Active Member
Did that hand ball in the Man City game really benefit City though? It's not as if it put the ball on a plate a yard out for a tap in.

Can't have one rule for one team (attacking) and a different one of the other (defending), it should either be a foul for both or none at all.
I presume the VAR officials were just applying the new law as it stands - if a hand is involved then it's no goal. At least that's clear and doesn't really involve any evaluation of how much benefit was involved.

I hear what you say about the differences between attack and defence. IMO it's justified although obviously not everyone agrees.
 

bpfurian

Well-Known Member
I assume you are talking the supercup? I was absolutely bladdered watching at my mate’s house, so would need to watch it back. To what extent is that down to the referee though? It’s supposed to be their call (based on the new rules). That isn’t supposed to be a VAR issue though IIRC. VAR is for goals (including fouls and offsides), red card offences, the award of penalties and mistaken identity offences.
It was used in both the men's and women's world cups on quite a few occasions for the same offences,keepers must remain on the line.
Of course you didn't see it,why am I not surprised.
You would of been squealing like a pig and claiming you where cheated if it had of been the other way round.
 

Sebo1872

Well-Known Member
It could be used in a good way but they are being overly arsey with it.

I don't trust their wee lines for offside calls as well.

If it's marginal the attacker should get the advantage.

Same applies with the handball rule, if that was a defender VAR would not have awarded a penalty yet deem it OK to rule out a goal.

I worry it is going to suck the fun out the game bit by bit.
 

Superrangers

Well-Known Member
It was used in both the men's and women's world cups on quite a few occasions for the same offences,keepers must remain on the line.
Of course you didn't see it,why am I not surprised.
You would of been squealing like a pig and claiming you where cheated if it had of been the other way round.
The danger with VAR is that it’s currently being used outside the realms it was designed for. Nowhere was it mentioned that it would be specifically to check goalkeepers feet at a penalty. The rules were changed to say that the keeper’s feet had to be on or over the line but that’s still the ref’s domain.

Come on, I have admitted I was drinking during the match. Do you think anyone half cut watching a penalty shootout is watching the keepers’ feet, irrespective of whether they support one of the clubs involved? I was honest and said I would have to watch it again. Did I deny the keeper had moved into a position he shouldn’t have been? No. It’s the ref’s job though and not specifically VAR-related, hence my post.

If you really don’t like VAR or think it makes the wrong call, you could easily have highlighted the Chelsea penalty that shouldn’t have been awarded. Our very own Andy Gray has had plenty to say about it.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/var-slammed-another-flaw-after-18936760.amp
 

bpfurian

Well-Known Member
The danger with VAR is that it’s currently being used outside the realms it was designed for. Nowhere was it mentioned that it would be specifically to check goalkeepers feet at a penalty. The rules were changed to say that the keeper’s feet had to be on or over the line but that’s still the ref’s domain.

Come on, I have admitted I was drinking during the match. Do you think anyone half cut watching a penalty shootout is watching the keepers’ feet, irrespective of whether they support one of the clubs involved? I was honest and said I would have to watch it again. Did I deny the keeper had moved into a position he shouldn’t have been? No. It’s the ref’s job though and not specifically VAR-related, hence my post.

If you really don’t like VAR or think it makes the wrong call, you could easily have highlighted the Chelsea penalty that shouldn’t have been awarded. Our very own Andy Gray has had plenty to say about it.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/var-slammed-another-flaw-after-18936760.amp
As you know mate, I have generally been of the opinion mistakes are made by refs and now with Var the same will happen ie the penalty you mention( never a penalty).
But you have been banging on about cheating and being robbed of titles etc.
I'm pointing out exactly the same thing that Var or the ref on that occasion got it wrong and are you going to apply the same logic that a team was cheated or robbed of a trophy.
Congratulations on winning by the way,it was a cracking game,which could of went either way on the night.
A good advertisement for the EPL imo and the best super cup final in quite a few years.
 

instructor

Well-Known Member
I would only use VAR for clear offsides being called wrongly, the rule could be 'clear daylight between the attacker and defender'. I would also revert to the old handball rule, that is 'hand to ball then a foul'. Give the power back to the referee and his assistants.
 

the bridge

Well-Known Member
Official Ticketer
It wasn't under FIFAS new handball rules.
Exactly and all VAR did was illustrate that. Also how anyone can say that a handball from an attacking team that redirects completely the pathway of the ball from a defender to the attacker is a goal is very interesting. I thought the only thing VAR got wrong was the wrestling of Rodrigo by the Spurs defender. I thought that was a penalty and suspect that there will be penalties given for that this season.
 

Superrangers

Well-Known Member
As you know mate, I have generally been of the opinion mistakes are made by refs and now with Var the same will happen ie the penalty you mention( never a penalty).
But you have been banging on about cheating and being robbed of titles etc.
I'm pointing out exactly the same thing that Var or the ref on that occasion got it wrong and are you going to apply the same logic that a team was cheated or robbed of a trophy.
Congratulations on winning by the way,it was a cracking game,which could of went either way on the night.
A good advertisement for the EPL imo and the best super cup final in quite a few years.
It’s not perfect but it will get far more right than wrong. The main reason it’s unpopular is that it delays the game but also British people love nothing better than having something to criticise and moan about.

Liverpool have been shit so far this season, second half of the community shield aside. Hopefully they improve soon.
 

bpfurian

Well-Known Member
It’s not perfect but it will get far more right than wrong. The main reason it’s unpopular is that it delays the game but also British people love nothing better than having something to criticise and moan about.

Liverpool have been shit so far this season, second half of the community shield aside. Hopefully they improve soon.
Agreed, probably why we love the game is the controversy and the fact it's imperfect, giving us lots to moan and complain about.
Early days yet, and a long way to go but can't unfortunately see past city again.
Plus it's going to be a tough season for us,judging by yesterday's game.
But Frank deserves to be given a few seasons to get it right and we should be prepared to take a hit, trophy wise to bring some stability to the club.
 

Superrangers

Well-Known Member
Agreed, probably why we love the game is the controversy and the fact it's imperfect, giving us lots to moan and complain about.
Early days yet, and a long way to go but can't unfortunately see past city again.
Plus it's going to be a tough season for us,judging by yesterday's game.
But Frank deserves to be given a few seasons to get it right and we should be prepared to take a hit, trophy wise to bring some stability to the club.
Didn’t see it. What did it finish 1-1?
 

georgedoors

Well-Known Member
Var was a joke in the city spurs game due to the stonewall penalty ignored by it, then a goal chaulked of for something nobody seen. If being manhandled to the ground by two defenders can't be seen by Var what's the point..
 

Bluenose1979

Well-Known Member
Sounds to me more like the new handball rule is the problem and that VAR simply applied the law (correctly).

I was always cycnical about video technology being brought in to make decisions, primarily because I thought it'd take away a huge part of the fun of the sport - the controversy.

Instead, it seem to have ramped it up.

Still not sure whether I like or dislike it, but it's certainly not reduced the Monday morning office debates...
 

dt17

Well-Known Member
Sounds to me more like the new handball rule is the problem and that VAR simply applied the law (correctly).

I was always cycnical about video technology being brought in to make decisions, primarily because I thought it'd take away a huge part of the fun of the sport - the controversy.

Instead, it seem to have ramped it up.

Still not sure whether I like or dislike it, but it's certainly not reduced the Monday morning office debates...
I think the main issue is the length of time it's taking and that some of the decisions are not 'clear and obvious' which was the whole point of it in the first place.

Also, fans are worried that they won't be able to celebrate goals anymore in case VAR sees something and disallows it.
 

Bluenose1979

Well-Known Member
I think the main issue is the length of time it's taking and that some of the decisions are not 'clear and obvious' which was the whole point of it in the first place.

Also, fans are worried that they won't be able to celebrate goals anymore in case VAR sees something and disallows it.
Yeah, all valid remarks. But not sure if they're any worse in reality than the controversy we've always had or just a different kind of controversial.

I'm not ready to demonise or celebrate it yet. I think it'll show it's value in a lot of cases by getting things right that would otherwise have been missed, but it doesn't eliminate the issues that give rise to a good pub or Monday morning office debate.

I think it's the kind of thing that in a few years will just be part and parcel of the game and won't irk folk in the way it now because it's new.
 

Walterego

Well-Known Member
Official Ticketer
Absolute sickener for City...
If you were offered VAR to be introduced to the SPFL from next weekend would you want it?
Most definitely not.
Sitting at a stadium waiting to see if you can cheer a goal will kill football as we know it.
A lot of the English lads I work with are already saying they’d be as well watching at home.
 

dt17

Well-Known Member
Yeah, all valid remarks. But not sure if they're any worse in reality than the controversy we've always had or just a different kind of controversial.

I'm not ready to demonise or celebrate it yet. I think it'll show it's value in a lot of cases by getting things right that would otherwise have been missed, but it doesn't eliminate the issues that give rise to a good pub or Monday morning office debate.

I think it's the kind of thing that in a few years will just be part and parcel of the game and won't irk folk in the way it now because it's new.
I think the technology itself is great and it's a welcome addition but I just don't think the rules are currently reflecting what it should be used for.

Even last year in the World Cup, a couple of hand balls were given because when the replay was slowed down to a fraction of the speed it hit a player's hand - but in real time there's nothing the defender could've done about it. Portugal vs Iran was one game (I think), then there was another dubious decision in the final I'm sure.
 
Top