Spurs and VAR

[Sir Henry]

Out of interest, why?

Frankly, I don't like it as an idea either, but I find it preferable to the current open ended scenario where any goal is automatically reviewed.

Because you cant have a subjective goal.

 

[mightyspur]

Out of interest, why?

Frankly, I don't like it as an idea either, but I find it preferable to the current open ended scenario where any goal is automatically reviewed.

Well for starters, as has been pointed out there is still a great deal of subjectivity on what is or isn't a foul. Take the Lamela incident. Lots of people are saying it should have been a pen. Quite a few people saying, nah not a pen. If a manager challenges and the ref says he's not over turning his initial decision, imagine all the cries of fix and agenda then.

It also leaves the game open to bigger controversy. What happens if a side loses it's review for a subjective call and then can't call another when something like the hand ball incident we had this weekend in the final minutes.

You'll get managers calling reviews for things they know are not valid to break up some play. Oh we're down in their penalty box, our player gets tackled, other team streaming forward looking very dangerous on the break, "I want a review of that tackle, should have been a penalty I reckon"...

Leave reffing to the ref. Have VAR assist and call out any possibly infringements that may be missed and check all goals are without incident and I think it is pretty spot on

 

[TheHodFather]

For anyone who's interested the following gives a reasonable explanation of how VAR is supposed to work in the PL

https://www.premierleague.com/news/1214130

 

[Khilari]

Out of interest, why?

Frankly, I don't like it as an idea either, but I find it preferable to the current open ended scenario where any goal is automatically reviewed.

I think it defeats the point of VAR introduction. VAR is there to attempt to reconcile incorrect decisions in a sport where the financial stakes become greater and higher as time goes by and referees are being vilified for human error.

Having VAR invoked only when teams feel an injustice has occurred means that other incorrect decisions are ignored despite the technology being available and will again lead to referees being (unfairly) criticised when everyone else has the benefit of hindsight and replays.

 

[fletch82]

The Prem have a different interpretation of handball to UEFA and FIFA so in Europe that will count as handball, doesn't help when there's different laws for Seperate bodies, bit ridiculous if you ask me.

Didn't know that how jolly silly

Really? That's so nice of him. Please say hi back and tell him he's one of my favorite players.

He said piss off
He couldn't even find you on Google.

 

[14/04/91]

Neville and spitty were going on about this last night...apparently its down to the high threshold thats been set to overrule referees.
Doesn't really make a lot of sense, they showed that during the incident Oliver wasn't even looking at it as he was watching the bigger pack of players, but surely thats exactly when it should be used.
Its not overruling him if he completely missed it, id be pissed if we were on the other end of that one.

In practice this would mean a VAR check every time someone hit the deck at a corner. So pretty much every corner. Unworkable.

And it could get tactical. The ball gets hoofed clear, a break is on but someone’s decided to fall down to prevent it. City would do this every time. Ok you could argue it only gets checked at the next break in play but what if something key happens in the meantime?

 

[14/04/91]

And they need to clamp down immediately on players dissent towards the ref following VAR.

Michael Oliver did not refer the incident but Jesus was giving him both barrels at full time.

The PL need to issue an edict/warning that this will result in some form of punishment, as it’s totally unfair on the ref; taking the spotlight off the ref is one of the benefits of the system.

 

[Gb160]

In practice this would mean a VAR check every time someone hit the deck at a corner. So pretty much every corner. Unworkable.

Worked pretty well at the World Cup...

 

[Shadydan]

This thread is pretty much old men shouts at clouds, it's gonna take some getting used to but it'll be for the overall benefit of the game.

 

[mil1lion]

VAR or no VAR it will not prevent people complaining when things go against them.
I just hope if VAR doesn't work for us we don't turn on him and use him as our new scapegoat in future. "Fuck sake Tripp...I mean VAR"

 

[sly1]

Out of interest, why?

Frankly, I don't like it as an idea either, but I find it preferable to the current open ended scenario where any goal is automatically reviewed.

I think the problem with a limited appeals system is that it works really badly with the subjective nature of football rules.

In an appeal system you should get to keep an appeal if it’s correct (otherwise you are still being penalised for an incorrect decision against you).

But it’s then really hard to know what to do with 50/50 incidents. Because if you don't give it to the team, they lose the decision and their appeal over something that could have gone either way. So teams get doubly punished for dubious decisions against them.

 

[Lighty64]

I hate it. Yes it went for us on Saturday but I hate it.

Very happy to see 30,000+ Wolves fans chanting f*ck VAR even after their goal was given last night. Hope to hear that sung up and down the country this season. By a huge margin, match going fans are against it, and understandably so. The moment of absolute unbridled joy when you score a goal is being replaced by apprehension that it will be disallowed. It's not football.

but that can happen naturally, I've celebrated many a goal to be disappointed that it's been disallowed afterwards

with VAR a correct decision will be made at the end of the day, and had it been available last season a very good chance Cardiff would still be in the PL. due to errors they are now multi millions out of pocket.

with every sport technology corrects errors and football the richest sport of the lot will finally see the same results. how they ever filter it down to the other leagues eventually is a problem, but hopefully 1 that will happen one day

 

[Lighty64]

anyways we won't need to moan about VAR this weekend, apparently Mike Dean is ref, so plenty of controversy

 

[ralphs bald spot]

I dont understand peoples problems with the rule change it makes perfect sense to me and its exactly how it should be.
Any advantage leading to a goal by use of the hand deliberately or accidentally should be disallowed.

Ashley Cole cross for Chelsea's winner against us back in the day comes to mind he didn't mean to handle but it hit his hand which moves the ball in front of him enabling him to hit a cross straight in resulting in a goal
Today that goal would rightly be disallowed.
I remember everyone being so incensed by it me included.
Henry's goal for France and many many more.

If you gain advantage for use of the hand it should be penalized and free kick given none of this subjective he didn't really mean it shit

The rule is a nonsense there has to be intent for it to be a foul - the City goal was a good goal the rule is wrong and the offside in the there game against West ham when his arm was offiside is total bull

VAR should be a thirty second look and that's it - and maybe allow managers to have two VAR claims a game otherwise its VAR is a total crock

 

[dagraham]

The issue for me is, despite fans wanting a fair contest, out of all the mainstream sports football is by far the least suited to VAR.

 

[degoose]

VAR or no VAR it will not prevent people complaining when things go against them.
I just hope if VAR doesn't work for us we don't turn on him and use him as our new scapegoat in future. "Fuck sake Tripp...I mean VAR"

This is my thoughts with var. Much like without, it will balance itself out.I know we will have decisions made this season because of var and the new rules like we already did in the champs league last year. City fans have already forgotten how they got something from new rules except they didn't score .

People will always find something to complain about and blame and because football rules and actions are subjective at times nobody will ever 100 percent agree. Let's all remember sarri and his laptop because he felt var didn't work the way he wanted it to.

 

[degoose]

The rule is a nonsense there has to be intent for it to be a foul - the City goal was a good goal the rule is wrong and the offside in the there game against West ham when his arm was offiside is total bull

VAR should be a thirty second look and that's it - and maybe allow managers to have two VAR claims a game otherwise its VAR is a total crock

That's your opinion though on the rules , these have recently been put in much like last season in champs league . You can disagree as much as you want but now unless they are changed your opinion of what is wrong won't matter.

 

[buckley]

The VAR people have confirmed that they looked at the Lamela incident and said " Lamelas arm was pulling the city player and so if with enough force he would have fell backwards but he fell forwards and thus it was a dive " I am paraphrasing but you get the drift .
Also Simon Jordan said and I paraphrase again " Pep last year said that Lorentes goal should not have stood but the deflected goal on Saturday should have stood " the smell of hypocrisy is stinking the football world out .
The new rule reference VAR where no goal should be scored whether accidental or on purpose when the ball hits an arm is a brilliant law and long live VAR . For myself if the Lorente goal was ruled out I would have been pissed but I would understand and except it .
Just as the Jesus goal was ruled out correctly in my opinion the rules don't allow for opinion the ball hits or brushes the hand = no goal
such a clear and simple law . The Var laws regarding offsides is also brilliant because whether a centi metre or a yard offside is offside .
As in real life you can't be a little bit dead you are either dead or alive as in offside not offside.

 

[nicdic]

The VAR people have confirmed that they looked at the Lamela incident and said " Lamelas arm was pulling the city player and so if with enough force he would have fell backwards but he fell forwards and thus it was a dive " I am paraphrasing but you get the drift .
Also Simon Jordan said and I paraphrase again " Pep last year said that Lorentes goal should not have stood but the deflected goal on Saturday should have stood " the smell of hypocrisy is stinking the football world out .
The new rule reference VAR where no goal should be scored whether accidental or on purpose when the ball hits an arm is a brilliant law and long live VAR . For myself if the Lorente goal was ruled out I would have been pissed but I would understand and except it .
Just as the Jesus goal was ruled out correctly in my opinion the rules don't allow for opinion the ball hits or brushes the hand = no goal
such a clear and simple law . The Var laws regarding offsides is also brilliant because whether a centi metre or a yard offside is offside .
As in real life you can't be a little bit dead you are either dead or alive as in offside not offside.

Would the Llorente one have been disallowed though under the new laws?

The ball hitting Laporte's hand unintentional affords City an advantage and leads to a goal.

The ball hitting Llorente's arm didn't make a big enough effect to change that the ball would have hit his hip and gone in?

 

[buckley]

For me the law is clear the ball strikes the arm its no goal and there is no mention of how much force so last year Lorentes goal would have been ruled out under the current VAR law . Its just my opinion and others may disagree but I repeat myself the rules are clear there is no room for argument and counter argument . Long live VAR.