VAR

[Tipp blue]

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.

I think the ref was spot on, He played advantage from the Schlob initial foul, Haaland's foul then ends the advantage and the ref has to call it back to the first foul as the ball hadnt crossed the line.

 

[Pootsy]

I think the ref was spot on, He played advantage from the Schlob initial foul, Haaland's foul then ends the advantage and the ref has to call it back to the first foul as the ball hadnt crossed the line.

So why stop Cherki scoring? Book both players and award the goal.

 

[Lanolin]

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.

But it's not a legitimate goal, that's the whole point. It's a legitimate goal if you ignore literally everything else that happens from when Cherki kicks the ball, but that has quite literally never been a thing in football so I don't understand why we would do that. We all know Szoboszlai commits the first foul - although it's a bit weird that you seem to think he used Haaland as a slingshot, he caught him up because his foul slowed Haaland down, not because it sped him up - but Haaland then commits a separate foul of his own which is what ultimately results in the ball ending up in the net. You can't just say they even eachother out, or you open the door to the exact situations I've just mentioned. You can either use advantage as an excuse to break the rules or you can't, it's that simple. I've said elsewhere, I totally get that it's not 'fair' and there's an argument that there should be some sort of penalty try equivalent to make sure the punishment fits the crime, but it's ridiculous to make out like it's an issue with VAR or an objectively bad decision because it just isn't, it's 100% the right call under the laws as they are.

 

[Tipp blue]

So why stop Cherki scoring? Book both players an award the goal.

The first foul is stopping a goal scoring oppertunity, always a foul and a red, the 2nd foul ended the advantage and it got pulled back for a free kick for the the first. In my opnion the only thing the REF got wrong was not sending Haaland off too. Both fouls individually are red card offences the contraversy is that they were within seconds of each other.

 

[davids]

Just to change the subject from the RS. After watching the Newcastle game how was that not handball and a penalty compared to the penalty given against Tarkowski at Leeds.

 

[Furey1878]

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.

That's the bureaucracy I'm on about mate. The referee was happy with it in real-time, and in the spirit of the game the goal was the right outcome.

I don't really even have a problem with it being looked at and VAR just telling the ref what they can see in the replays. But the problem is referees 99% of the time just going with whatever VAR says.

I agree with your point on consistency but it's also laughable given that VAR will disallow something one week and clear an identical scenario the next.

 

[Furey1878]

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.

I do get this, but I think process has been taken to silly levels. The ref played advantage, and as a result the certain goal still happened.

Now you can slow that down and say "well actually the advantage ends once Halaand fouls him back therefore we have to disallow" but you've introduced more chaos into something that in real time happened in like 5-10 seconds.

 

[Furey1878]

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.

I don't disagree with anything said here. I just think it's inconsistent with the reality of how it plays out.

Players are encouraged to go down and exaggerate contact to force a VAR review. Anything slowed down looks a million times worse. Subjectivity runs rife and VAR will contradict itself week to week. Innocuous contact anywhere outside the box is glossed over, but in the box it can result in a team getting a free shot at goal.

Think it really needs to be dialled back, myself. Keep it to reasonably objective things, like if it goes in off a player's arm then disallow etc...

 

[b-rad]

The first foul is stopping a goal scoring oppertunity, always a foul and a red, the 2nd foul ended the advantage and it got pulled back for a free kick for the the first. In my opnion the only thing the REF got wrong was not sending Haaland off too. Both fouls individually are red card offences the contraversy is that they were within seconds of each other.

How was Haaland's a red card offence? A pull is a clear yellow. If it's dogso, then it's a red.

 

[Bedfordblue]

That's the bureaucracy I'm on about mate. The referee was happy with it in real-time, and in the spirit of the game the goal was the right outcome.

I don't really even have a problem with it being looked at and VAR just telling the ref what they can see in the replays. But the problem is referees 99% of the time just going with whatever VAR says.

I agree with your point on consistency but it's also laughable given that VAR will disallow something one week and clear an identical scenario the next.

What ever happened to VAR not ‘re-refereeing’ the games…..
The on field ref can’t have missed anything that went on and let it all go in real time.
The advantage was to let the ball end up in the net, which it did.
Said yesterday they’re going the right way about getting VAR abolished with these sort of calls.

The only possible argument for me, is to not card slobadob puts whoever they play next at a disadvantage as he would be available to play. But I can’t see any right minded football fan not preferring that goal to stand even if it means he doesn’t get carded.

 

[Furey1878]

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.

Exactly this. A relatively simple, albeit mad phase of play, has been overcomplicated by process.

 

[Furey1878]

But it's not a legitimate goal, that's the whole point. It's a legitimate goal if you ignore literally everything else that happens from when Cherki kicks the ball, but that has quite literally never been a thing in football so I don't understand why we would do that. We all know Szoboszlai commits the first foul - although it's a bit weird that you seem to think he used Haaland as a slingshot, he caught him up because his foul slowed Haaland down, not because it sped him up - but Haaland then commits a separate foul of his own which is what ultimately results in the ball ending up in the net. You can't just say they even eachother out, or you open the door to the exact situations I've just mentioned. You can either use advantage as an excuse to break the rules or you can't, it's that simple. I've said elsewhere, I totally get that it's not 'fair' and there's an argument that there should be some sort of penalty try equivalent to make sure the punishment fits the crime, but it's ridiculous to make out like it's an issue with VAR or an objectively bad decision because it just isn't, it's 100% the right call under the laws as they are.

I take your can of worms point here. But there just has to be something in-between re-refereeing and scrapping the technology imo.

 

[MACCA75]

The first foul is stopping a goal scoring oppertunity, always a foul and a red, the 2nd foul ended the advantage and it got pulled back for a free kick for the the first. In my opnion the only thing the REF got wrong was not sending Haaland off too. Both fouls individually are red card offences the contraversy is that they were within seconds of each other.

How on earth is Haalands a red card offence

 

[Sharpies volley]

The first foul is stopping a goal scoring oppertunity, always a foul and a red, the 2nd foul ended the advantage and it got pulled back for a free kick for the the first. In my opnion the only thing the REF got wrong was not sending Haaland off too. Both fouls individually are red card offences the contraversy is that they were within seconds of each other.

How is Haarlands a red?

 

[Toffeepot]

The first foul is stopping a goal scoring oppertunity, always a foul and a red, the 2nd foul ended the advantage and it got pulled back for a free kick for the the first. In my opnion the only thing the REF got wrong was not sending Haaland off too. Both fouls individually are red card offences the contraversy is that they were within seconds of each other.

How was Haaland's a red? 'Stopping an own goal scoring opportunity'?