Everton and VAR

Status
Not open for further replies.
Just when I’d calmed down after Sunday, I’ve just watched Arsenal’s first goal on Monday night. Great strike by Sokratis yes, but was there an Arsenal player right in the Portsmouth goalie’s eye line? It looked like it to me, and he looked offside as well, but as the goalie clearly wasn’t going to save it, it stood. Consistency? Of course not.
 
Just when I’d calmed down after Sunday, I’ve just watched Arsenal’s first goal on Monday night. Great strike by Sokratis yes, but was there an Arsenal player right in the Portsmouth goalie’s eye line? It looked like it to me, and he looked offside as well, but as the goalie clearly wasn’t going to save it, it stood. Consistency? Of course not.

Stood absolutely in his “line of vision”
 
Just when I’d calmed down after Sunday, I’ve just watched Arsenal’s first goal on Monday night. Great strike by Sokratis yes, but was there an Arsenal player right in the Portsmouth goalie’s eye line? It looked like it to me, and he looked offside as well, but as the goalie clearly wasn’t going to save it, it stood. Consistency? Of course not.
It's amazing that in 1 weekend we had two call's for the same thing and both were wrong. And both in favor of a sky 6 side.
 
Is anyone else's head still mashed over this? It's honestly been frustrating me so much since it happened.

The utter incompetence of the referees, the shambolic deployment of VAR, the idiocy of extremely highly paid pundits (with some notable exceptions) has just been almost too much to bear.

On the topic of VAR, what I have seen argued against it by some this season is that it distracts from the spirit of the game, and Sunday was by the far the most clear example of that this season.

Only one team was trying to win that game in the second half, that team gets a deserved last minute goal that every single stipulation of the offside 'interference' clause can be used to say that no offence was committed - but a bloke 200 miles away decides that there is sufficient grey area to overrule the decision made by his colleagues who are actually officiating the match.

When they are disallowing goals that the rules state can, and probably should, be given - then you know the technology is being used in a way to distract from the way the game is meant to be played. They should always be using VAR from a positive perspective, never from a negative one.
 

Is anyone else's head still mashed over this? It's honestly been frustrating me so much since it happened.

The utter incompetence of the referees, the shambolic deployment of VAR, the idiocy of extremely highly paid pundits (with some notable exceptions) has just been almost too much to bear.

On the topic of VAR, what I have seen argued against it by some this season is that it distracts from the spirit of the game, and Sunday was by the far the most clear example of that this season.

Only one team was trying to win that game in the second half, that team gets a deserved last minute goal that every single stipulation of the offside 'interference' clause can be used to say that no offence was committed - but a bloke 200 miles away decides that there is sufficient grey area to overrule the decision made by his colleagues who are actually officiating the match.

When they are disallowing goals that the rules state can, and probably should, be given - then you know the technology is being used in a way to distract from the way the game is meant to be played. They should always be using VAR from a positive perspective, never from a negative one.
I'm still fuming over this, this is the longest I've ever fumed over an Everton decision. There was 2 things the foul and the offside the foul was 100% and the offside should probably have gone out way although I can see that there is at least an argument for calling it offside. 2 decisions in the build up and they got both wrong. In my opinion they need to find a bunch of impartial people who have little or no interest in football hire them and rote learn the rules of the game and give them the VAR jobs. It's obviously not working the current way, it's not possible for someone to say that it wasn't a penalty unless they have an interest in the outcome of the game.
 
Not long after appealing umpires decisions in cricket started, and considering how many are upheld, I wondered how many test match and even series results would have been different had the technology been available before then. I'm now wondering about VAR and football. Offside rules have changed, for the better, imo, and were easier to judge before the change, but looking at it together with decisions applied by VAR in other areas of the game I think match
results and trophies won would have been even more remarkably different.
 
The laws are written and worded in such a way that the is no definitive meaning. This way they can either swing whichever way they want and also have an argument for any mistakes their refs make. Laws need to be black and white wherever they can. Hand ball in the area ??? Pen.... blatant handball red card. If the ref makes a decision VAR should be able to review and tell the ref that there may be a error and to check his pitch side monitor and see if he wants to change his decision. VAR should not be over ruling refs. Refs need to be held accountable and if they view an incident and change their mind or indeed don’t change it, yet still make the error then they have to wear it and not hide behind someone 300 likes away in an office
 
Refs need to be held accountable and if they view an incident and change their mind or indeed don’t change it, yet still make the error then they have to wear it and not hide behind someone 300 likes away in an office
This. One of my major concerns about VAR is that it allows Refs to abdicate all responsibilities for decisions made. (Wasn't me Miss it was him).
 
True this, and it's ruining the game! Should be used as it is in Rugby, there the referee uses it when unsure of a decision and requests its use to get the decision correct (most of the time)! It's never if ever being used for "clear and obvious" decisions - how can it be when two virtually identical handballs in the same game are treated differently (Leicester v Man City)? How is it clear and obvious when someone can be offside by an armpit or a big toe?

The responsibility for running the game should be with the referee on the pitch, and not lie with the VAR to go looking for reasons to disallow a goal!

Finally, and I've said it before on here, what do we really expect when the bloke responsible for the implementation of VAR is Mike Riley - one of the most incompetent of a very long line of incompetent referees to ever (dis)grace a football pitch!

Absolutely spot on this regarding Mike Riley. You can't be run by an absolute balloon head like him and expect the referees under him to be competent.

Does anyone remember the last game of the season years ago (when Rooney still played for us) and we needed a win to get into Europe. It was against Utd.

That tit gave them a pen for literally nothing. Weir was standing there against Van Nistleroy shielding the ball. He just fell into a heap for no reason and the ref had given the pen before he'd even hit the deck.

Disgrace of a referee overseeing the incompetence of all the others on his watch currently
 

Things I don't like about VAR : (in no particular order)
- Delays, stops the flow of the game
- Crowds cheering disallowed goals after they've been celebrated.
- No communication in the stadium.
- A bloke not even in the ground making decisions.
- Nobody can define clear and obvious.
- They keep changing the rules mid season.( must be a legal shout about this)
- Off side, nobody knows what offside is anymore and the benefit of the doubt has swung back to the defender.
- Players hassling refs to check VAR after a goal is scored they don't agree with.(Maguire)
- It's killing the game
( I'm sure I've missed stuff)

Things I like about VAR :
 
The laws are written and worded in such a way that the is no definitive meaning. This way they can either swing whichever way they want and also have an argument for any mistakes their refs make. Laws need to be black and white wherever they can. Hand ball in the area ??? Pen.... blatant handball red card. If the ref makes a decision VAR should be able to review and tell the ref that there may be a error and to check his pitch side monitor and see if he wants to change his decision. VAR should not be over ruling refs. Refs need to be held accountable and if they view an incident and change their mind or indeed don’t change it, yet still make the error then they have to wear it and not hide behind someone 300 likes away in an office
You're by and large right about this. But the one area that it isn't true is offside. This is what it says in the laws of the game:

player in an offside position at the moment the ball is played or touched* by a team-mate is only penalised on becoming involved in active play by:

  • interfering with play by playing or touching a ball passed or touched by a team-mate or
  • interfering with an opponent by:
    • preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent’s line of vision or
    • challenging an opponent for the ball or
    • clearly attempting to play a ball which is close when this action impacts on an opponent or
    • making an obvious action which clearly impacts on the ability of an opponent to play the ball


There's no grey area there at all. And I challenge anyone to tell me that Gylfi clearly did any of the things that make someone offside without touching the ball. Clearly obstructing the line of vision? Nope. De Gea saw it the entire way. Challenging an opponent? Nope. Attempting to play the ball? He's literally done the opposite. He tried to not play it. Making an obvious action? I fail to see how moving his feet toward his body is an obvious enough hindrance to anyone.

It's just such a ridiculous decision. Unfortunately my memory isn't strong enough to remember another one where a player was similarly positioned and it was let stand, but I've definitely seen it. They've chosen in a huge moment to make a call that is never made and is not in the spirit of the rules, if even within them at all, and of course it goes against us.

I'm still fuming if you can't tell.
 
You're by and large right about this. But the one area that it isn't true is offside. This is what it says in the laws of the game:

player in an offside position at the moment the ball is played or touched* by a team-mate is only penalised on becoming involved in active play by:

  • interfering with play by playing or touching a ball passed or touched by a team-mate or
  • interfering with an opponent by:
    • preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent’s line of vision or
    • challenging an opponent for the ball or
    • clearly attempting to play a ball which is close when this action impacts on an opponent or
    • making an obvious action which clearly impacts on the ability of an opponent to play the ball


There's no grey area there at all. And I challenge anyone to tell me that Gylfi clearly did any of the things that make someone offside without touching the ball. Clearly obstructing the line of vision? Nope. De Gea saw it the entire way. Challenging an opponent? Nope. Attempting to play the ball? He's literally done the opposite. He tried to not play it. Making an obvious action? I fail to see how moving his feet toward his body is an obvious enough hindrance to anyone.

It's just such a ridiculous decision. Unfortunately my memory isn't strong enough to remember another one where a player was similarly positioned and it was let stand, but I've definitely seen it. They've chosen in a huge moment to make a call that is never made and is not in the spirit of the rules, if even within them at all, and of course it goes against us.

I'm still fuming if you can't tell.

At this point I just put it down to the opposition being Manchester United. They've always had decisions strangely go their way without question since the beginning of the PL, so in that respect its not a unique occurance at all.
The only word to explain it is: corrupt.
 
Cost Vs benefits. When 99% of offside decisions were made correctly before VAR, what's the benefit of VAR for offside decisions? The cost is obviously to the fan experience.
 
The crowd need to be chanting about how bad VAR is, bring attention to it, the fact the we’re aggrieved by it, and call it out.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top