VAR

[Furey1878]

Worth a bump this for me. That disallowed Man City goal last night sums up the state of VAR.

It is actively looking to rule out goals where it can rather than just ensure that the game is officiated fairly and howlers aren't made.

The application of VAR in the prem is very indicative of a bureaucratic, jobs-worth miserable process worm culture that exists in this miserable country.

 

[greener]

My darling wife (who has little or no interest in footy) and I watched the game down the pub last night. She made two points.

1) Is VAR supposed to piss everybody on both sides off.

2) That blue No 9 is a very ugly man.

 

[NathDogg]

Worth a bump this for me. That disallowed Man City goal last night sums up the state of VAR.

It is actively looking to rule out goals where it can rather than just ensure that the game is officiated fairly and howlers aren't made.

The application of VAR in the prem is very indicative of a bureaucratic, jobs-worth miserable process worm culture that exists in this miserable country.

Spot on mate, and it’s making on field refs so much worse.

“We won’t re-ref the game, that’s not what it’s for.”

Proceed to re-ref every singly decision within an inch of its life.

I didn’t even celebrate our second goal on sat, as I was certain they were going to over rule the ref, even though it was a good goal and leno made a mess of it.

I’m also Certain Pigmol are in league with the bookmakers - it’s just legalised match fixing now.

 

[Lob]

Worth a bump this for me. That disallowed Man City goal last night sums up the state of VAR.

It is actively looking to rule out goals where it can rather than just ensure that the game is officiated fairly and howlers aren't made.

The application of VAR in the prem is very indicative of a bureaucratic, jobs-worth miserable process worm culture that exists in this miserable country.

Spot on. They are seeking to have too much of an influence on games. The common sense approach last night which nobody would have had a problem with would be to have just allowed the goal as an advantage played as it was deep into injury time and the game was over anyway. They simply had to interfere and show who's boss which in this instance had a negative effect on both teams. Their number one priority should predominantly be to have as little involvement and impact as possible unless absolutely necessary.

 

[Lanolin]

Worth a bump this for me. That disallowed Man City goal last night sums up the state of VAR.

It is actively looking to rule out goals where it can rather than just ensure that the game is officiated fairly and howlers aren't made.

The application of VAR in the prem is very indicative of a bureaucratic, jobs-worth miserable process worm culture that exists in this miserable country.

In terms of the laws, allowing the goal would have been a massive howler and VAR intervening is absolutely right. There's a separate argument that referees should just freestyle it and ignore the rules to a large extent in order to improve the viewer experience, but if we want consistency (which is what everyone always says) then just allowing goals because it's the last minute and neither of the two teams playing really minds doesn't tally with that. We can't have it both ways.

 

[Pootsy]

The irony being that Schlobaizai being sent off for denying a clear goal scoring opportunity means a legitimate goal was chalked off.

Man City are the losers here for their goal being overruled. Liverpool still gain the advantage of Goal Difference keeping them in 6th. Sunderland gain an advantage from Schlobazai being banned for their game.

How does that make sense?

 

[RD2910]

Worth a bump this for me. That disallowed Man City goal last night sums up the state of VAR.

It is actively looking to rule out goals where it can rather than just ensure that the game is officiated fairly and howlers aren't made.

The application of VAR in the prem is very indicative of a bureaucratic, jobs-worth miserable process worm culture that exists in this miserable country.

It's a problem with the existence of VAR itself. Back in the day the goal would've counted and everyone would've gone home, nobody would care about the fouls. Obviously VAR has completely changed that, but giving them the power to ignore things because it's 'what football expects' is introducing even more potential for bias, unconscious or otherwise. The game expects Liverpool/Utd to be awarded this last minute winner so we're going to ignore this foul that we'd give for anyone else. That happens already, but still.

Yesterday was farcical, but both fouls were obvious. I think the refs had to do what they did.

 

[Marius57]

The irony being that Schlobaizai being sent off for denying a clear goal scoring opportunity means a legitimate goal was chalked off.

Man City are the losers here for their goal being overruled. Liverpool still gain the advantage of Goal Difference keeping them in 6th. Sunderland gain an advantage from Schlobazai being banned for their game.

How does that make sense?

But it wasn’t a legitimate goal because haaland fouled Slob to stop him clearing it. Slob fouling haaland and being waved play on doesn’t then mean haaland can just foul him back. It doesn’t matter what’s gone on in the 30 seconds before or 5 seconds before, the ball is in play and he has fouled him.

And Liverpool are also disadvantaged by him now not being available which potentially impacts them more than 1 gd as he is one of their better performers this season.

 

[Bryan+]

Happy with it. Has minor issues but people’s passion for entertainment has undermined the rules. I would much prefer the rules are enforced at the cost of a goal here and there if it means cheats don’t prosper.

 

[Pootsy]

It doesn’t matter what’s gone on in the 30 seconds before or 5 seconds before, the ball is in play and he has fouled him.

Of course it does. Advantage was being played to see if the initial pullback on Haaland stopped a clear goal scoring opportunity.

Schlobz (not writing all that name again) catapults himself forward using Haaland. He would never have got near the ball otherwise. He was well behind and 10 yards to the right.

So the middle foul that this is being all judged on should not be credited because of the advantage played. The decision is either red card or Goal.

So back to the original foul. Did the foul stop a goal scoring opportunity? Yes it did but there was a goal anyway.

Just give the goal and a yellow for unsportsmanlike behaviour and blow the final whistle ref.

 

[Marius57]

Of course it does. Advantage was being played to see if the initial pullback on Haaland stopped a clear goal scoring opportunity.

Schlobz (not writing all that name again) catapults himself forward using Haaland. He would never have got near the ball otherwise. He was well behind and 10 yards to the right.

So the middle foul that this is being all judged on should not be credited because of the advantage played. The decision is either red card or Goal.

So back to the original foul. Did the foul stop a goal scoring opportunity? Yes it did but there was a goal anyway.

Just give the goal and a yellow for unsportsmanlike behaviour and blow the final whistle ref.

just because advantage is played doesn’t mean haaland can then foul him back.

It’s a separate foul in its own right that prevents Slob from stopping the goal (because until play stops, they don’t know any decisions given on the previous foul).

It was the correct decision.

I don’t necessarily agree with the rules as the ball still went in the net so would have been easy and understandable to give it, but it’s the correct decision making.

 

[Lanolin]

Of course it does. Advantage was being played to see if the initial pullback on Haaland stopped a clear goal scoring opportunity.

Schlobz (not writing all that name again) catapults himself forward using Haaland. He would never have got near the ball otherwise. He was well behind and 10 yards to the right.

So the middle foul that this is being all judged on should not be credited because of the advantage played. The decision is either red card or Goal.

So back to the original foul. Did the foul stop a goal scoring opportunity? Yes it did but there was a goal anyway.

Just give the goal and a yellow for unsportsmanlike behaviour and blow the final whistle ref.

But what that means, by definition, is that every time the referee plays an advantage, the fouled player is allowed a freebie where they can break the rules themselves in order to even it up - so you get fouled on the halfway line, pick the ball up and launch it forward to put your striker through on goal because it's only fair, right? That is quite literally what you're advocating here, unless we're saying it only applies when it would make for a cool finish to the game.

 

[Pootsy]

just because advantage is played doesn’t mean haaland can then foul him back.

It’s a separate foul in its own right that prevents Slob from stopping the goal (because until play stops, they don’t know any decisions given on the previous foul).

It was the correct decision.

I don’t necessarily agree with the rules as the ball still went in the net so would have been easy and understandable to give it, but it’s the correct decision making.

I believe the Haaland foul is doing too much heavy lifting here as it simply cannot take place if the first foul doesn’t happen. Haaland had motored past him.

Goal and a yellow for me was the correct decision by law.

 

[Marius57]

I believe the Haaland foul is doing too much heavy lifting here as it simply cannot take place if the first foul doesn’t happen. Haaland had motored past him.

Goal and a yellow for me was the correct decision by law.

It doesn’t matter if it could take place or not, he still did it. He fouled an opposition player to stop him from clearing the ball. That is against the rules. Just because a previous foul meant that foul was possible doesn’t negate him fouling someone.

1 foul doesn’t negate another.

 

[Pootsy]

But what that means, by definition, is that every time the referee plays an advantage, the fouled player is allowed a freebie where they can break the rules themselves in order to even it up - so you get fouled on the halfway line, pick the ball up and launch it forward to put your striker through on goal because it's only fair, right? That is quite literally what you're advocating here, unless we're saying it only applies when it would make for a cool finish to the game.

I understand how you may have misconstrued what I’ve said. Obviously you can’t just make a foul. Doing so while an advantage being played would always mean going back to the original foul.

What I’m saying is the Haaland foul can’t happen without the propulsion gained by pulling on Haaland originally. The correct way in my opinion to apply the letter of the law here is a to award a goal to Cherki and yellow card the Liverpool No 8 for unsportsmanlike behaviour.

Instead they chalked off a legitimate goal because of two blokes scrapping on the pitch near the ball.