Spurs and VAR

[Trotter]

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.

I am afraid that is the public consumption statement they have put out (they did this a couple of times last season as well, including after the Kane offside VAR goal against Chelsea, when Chelsea had much better angle of same incident showing well offside, and they blamed everyone but themselves for the error). Basically they said Michael Oliver felt the above and the VAR agreed, but the pictures clearly show Michael Oliver was not even looking at the incident, so should be clear to anybody that they should smell something fishy.

Privately in the PGMOL post-weekend debrief meeting with all the referees on Monday, the referees (including Michael Oliver himself) all agreed it was an obvious error and have asked that the protocol be changed, so the VAR can rule on more subjective cases. Basically the referee wanted help in this incident, but the VAR protocol PL use didn't allow it. The PGMOL head will advise them of changes post this event, but nothing will be announced publicly, it will just be tweaking the high level of interference they have set.
I am still in contact with a couple of officials that were at that meeting.

 

[buckley]

All I can say is that there will be a penalty every time the ball is put in the box from a corner or a free kick because football is a contact sport and the only way to stop such events as Lamelas is to say from now on the game will be a no contact game . Cant it just be accepted that the VAR people said "no goal " whatever there motives in giving out statements there main objective is to get the right call
albeit some of their " right calls " are wrong and all these controversies give something to talk about .
Just imagine football with no contact you might just as well follow netball.long live VAR there will be a lot more correct calls than wrong calls at the very least it gives you and I something to disagree on.

 

[mightyspur]

All I can say is that there will be a penalty every time the ball is put in the box from a corner or a free kick because football is a contact sport and the only way to stop such events as Lamelas is to say from now on the game will be a no contact game . Cant it just be accepted that the VAR people said "no goal " whatever there motives in giving out statements there main objective is to get the right call
albeit some of their " right calls " are wrong and all these controversies give something to talk about .
Just imagine football with no contact you might just as well follow netball.long live VAR there will be a lot more correct calls than wrong calls at the very least it gives you and I something to disagree on.

I'm not sure that is true. You can still have contact, you just don't wrap your arms around someone

 

[Gilzeanking]

I'm not sure that is true. You can still have contact, you just don't wrap your arms around someone

The rules are quite clear . Players may not use their arms to gain any advantage .

This is a major change between 60s-70s football and now . Check out old matches like Utds European cup win '68 . No-one can block Best's dribbles with their arms . In those days there were still skinny superstars . Nowadays you need powerful upper body strength
to grapple opponents with your arms .

I don't know where the line is drawn these days...but as you say , wrapping arms around an opponent should remain an offence .

 

[Shadydan]

I am afraid that is the public consumption statement they have put out (they did this a couple of times last season as well, including after the Kane offside VAR goal against Chelsea, when Chelsea had much better angle of same incident showing well offside, and they blamed everyone but themselves for the error). Basically they said Michael Oliver felt the above and the VAR agreed, but the pictures clearly show Michael Oliver was not even looking at the incident, so should be clear to anybody that they should smell something fishy.

Privately in the PGMOL post-weekend debrief meeting with all the referees on Monday, the referees (including Michael Oliver himself) all agreed it was an obvious error and have asked that the protocol be changed, so the VAR can rule on more subjective cases. Basically the referee wanted help in this incident, but the VAR protocol PL use didn't allow it. The PGMOL head will advise them of changes post this event, but nothing will be announced publicly, it will just be tweaking the high level of interference they have set.
I am still in contact with a couple of officials that were at that meeting.

Source?

 

[buckley]

I wonder if they have VAR in Italian football as from what I have seen most of the penalty area defending involves holding and grabbing in the penalty area witness a few years ago a Celtic match against an Italian side when M .O'niel was manager they would have had four or five sent off in one incident I witnessed. If VAR cuts out the holding on to players works then I am all for it but I would not like to sanatize it to the extent that physical contact was banned completely . I would still argue that the Lamela incident was as clear a penalty as some seem to think but its only my lonely opinion.

 

[Phomesy]

I am afraid that is the public consumption statement they have put out (they did this a couple of times last season as well, including after the Kane offside VAR goal against Chelsea, when Chelsea had much better angle of same incident showing well offside, and they blamed everyone but themselves for the error). Basically they said Michael Oliver felt the above and the VAR agreed, but the pictures clearly show Michael Oliver was not even looking at the incident, so should be clear to anybody that they should smell something fishy.

Privately in the PGMOL post-weekend debrief meeting with all the referees on Monday, the referees (including Michael Oliver himself) all agreed it was an obvious error and have asked that the protocol be changed, so the VAR can rule on more subjective cases. Basically the referee wanted help in this incident, but the VAR protocol PL use didn't allow it. The PGMOL head will advise them of changes post this event, but nothing will be announced publicly, it will just be tweaking the high level of interference they have set.
I am still in contact with a couple of officials that were at that meeting.

Interesting. I was at a drinks function with someone who claimed to be in the VAR building at the time and he was saying what you have just described as the “for public consumption” line. I don’t know if he was fed it but he seemed to believe it. And it backed up my impression from the video.

But if there’s a private acknowledgment that the decision was incorrect why are they not being open about it? To protect Oliver or the process itself?

Shenanigans?

 

[SirHarryHotspur]

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.

In that Champions League game we had VAR which the ref checked but in his opinion he ruled that the ball hit Llorente's thigh so if we had the same ref even under the new handball law would he still allow the goal to stand. I know there was supposed to be further footage which he didn't see but at the time he ruled thigh and not arm, even with VAR still room for controversy.

 

[Trotter]

Interesting. I was at a drinks function with someone who claimed to be in the VAR building at the time and he was saying what you have just described as the “for public consumption” line. I don’t know if he was fed it but he seemed to believe it. And it backed up my impression from the video.

But if there’s a private acknowledgment that the decision was incorrect why are they not being open about it? To protect Oliver or the process itself?

Shenanigans?

I am sure it is more the process they have introduced they are protecting, and will just adjust it behind the scenes a bit, to try to reduce the chance of this happening again.
They technically have no need to protect Oliver, as VAR itself should protect him from making the error.
Nobody is really blaming Michael Oliver for not giving the penalty (he was looking at another area in box where he thought offences were more likely to happen), they are blaming VAR for not interfering

 

[FibreOpticJesus]

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

That’s the point I do not want to wait to the end of the day. You knew within 2 seconds of a goal was ruled out for offside or a foul etc. It is too slow and we cannot see what is going on. We pay for our tickets so we should be able to see and digest the decision. Just like you do in rugby and cricket. Then all they have to concentrate on is getting the decision done in 39 seconds. If it takes longer it is down to refs original decision.

 

[buckley]

I would sooner wait a minute or two to get the correct decision rather than spend the next week bemoaning a bad error.
As for delaying celebration of a goal well that's poppycock the Villa game at the ground myself and my son celebrated the goals and it did not impair our celebration even tho VAR operates on all goals scored the only time it affects is if a goal is disallowed .
But that has always been the case that celebrations are cut short as we and all clubs have been caught out in celebration for a goal only to have the ref disallow it. All goals are checked by VAR and only the problem ones take a minute or two as in the Villa game I did not notice VAR . IN the past you have had teams managed by the likes of Pulis and Warnock among others where there players taking an eternity out of taking a goal kick. a throw on. a free kick. a corner kick and I would say most games will not have more than two minutes taken out of it thru VAR whereas the Pulis / Warnock style of play I swear takes about 15 minutes or so out of a game if they are level or in the lead obviously when they are losing the cannot get the ball into play quick enough ; long live VAR.

 

[Trotter]

I would sooner wait a minute or two to get the correct decision rather than spend the next week bemoaning a bad error.
As for delaying celebration of a goal well that's poppycock the Villa game at the ground myself and my son celebrated the goals and it did not impair our celebration even tho VAR operates on all goals scored the only time it affects is if a goal is disallowed .
But that has always been the case that celebrations are cut short as we and all clubs have been caught out in celebration for a goal only to have the ref disallow it. All goals are checked by VAR and only the problem ones take a minute or two as in the Villa game I did not notice VAR . IN the past you have had teams managed by the likes of Pulis and Warnock among others where there players taking an eternity out of taking a goal kick. a throw on. a free kick. a corner kick and I would say most games will not have more than two minutes taken out of it thru VAR whereas the Pulis / Warnock style of play I swear takes about 15 minutes or so out of a game if they are level or in the lead obviously when they are losing the cannot get the ball into play quick enough ; long live VAR.

I am in agreement with most of this.
The only thing I am against is to wait 2 or 3 minutes, and then have a goal ruled out for being a millimetre offside when the technology is not truly accurate (calculations have shown that 20cm is roughly the maximum inaccuracy level)
VAR as it stands will not correct everything, in fact IFAB have said they believe it will be another 10 years before we have a real fit for purpose solution.
It is the debate, do we want better (by no means perfect) accuracy in decisions or are we willing to accept a degree of inaccuracy like we always have for a more free-flowing game.

 

[buckley]

If you had seen some of the games I have seen the really free flowing games are not all that regular because there is so much time taken up by the teams that part of there play is to waste time at every opportunity.
The only real free going game I can remember was years ago against Norwich when Gunn the elder was in goal think it was and still is the only game that has had no fouls and both teams went hammer and tongs against each other now that game was free flowing.
Also these time wasting teams really do take time out of the game and their time wasting is never added as xtra time but from what I have seen VAR stoppages have been added to xtra time not one game last week 7 minutes xtra time with no undue stoppages thru the game IE injuries or Subs or match time wasting . Therefore VAR stoppages do not take time out of the game.

 

[Trotter]

Yes the time is added back on, but there is a 3 minute delay to game.
Takes momentum out of it totally

 

[dagraham]

I would sooner wait a minute or two to get the correct decision rather than spend the next week bemoaning a bad error.
As for delaying celebration of a goal well that's poppycock the Villa game at the ground myself and my son celebrated the goals and it did not impair our celebration even tho VAR operates on all goals scored the only time it affects is if a goal is disallowed .
But that has always been the case that celebrations are cut short as we and all clubs have been caught out in celebration for a goal only to have the ref disallow it. All goals are checked by VAR and only the problem ones take a minute or two as in the Villa game I did not notice VAR . IN the past you have had teams managed by the likes of Pulis and Warnock among others where there players taking an eternity out of taking a goal kick. a throw on. a free kick. a corner kick and I would say most games will not have more than two minutes taken out of it thru VAR whereas the Pulis / Warnock style of play I swear takes about 15 minutes or so out of a game if they are level or in the lead obviously when they are losing the cannot get the ball into play quick enough ; long live VAR.

But if you take that Neves goal as an example, there was no danger of there being a bad error. It was as marginal as you can get, at worst level ( which is supposed to be given as a benefit of the doubt to the attacking team). Yet we had several minutes of scrutiny before awarding the goal.

Personally, I’ve never seen a replay of a goal scored against where it was maybe an inch offside where you need to scrutinise it and got pissed off about it. It’s the huge errors that need eradicating imo.

 

[Shadydan]

But if you take that Neves goal as an example, there was no danger of there being a bad error. It was as marginal as you can get, at worst level ( which is supposed to be given as a benefit of the doubt to the attacking team). Yet we had several minutes of scrutiny before awarding the goal.

Personally, I’ve never seen a replay of a goal scored against where it was maybe an inch offside where you need to scrutinise it and got pissed off about it. It’s the huge errors that need eradicating imo.

That's down to them not having the clear and obvious rule on offsides, if they have that then this wouldn't be a problem.

 

[dagraham]

That's down to them not having the clear and obvious rule on offsides, if they have that then this wouldn't be a problem.

Whatever happened to that part of the rule that said there had to be “daylight” ( or words to that effect) between the attacker and last defender for it to be offside?

 

[Lilbaz]

Whatever happened to that part of the rule that said there had to be “daylight” ( or words to that effect) between the attacker and last defender for it to be offside?

Was it ever a rule?

 

[Trotter]

Was it ever a rule?

No, was never a law of the game.
There was a perception when level changed from being offside to being onside, that "clear daylight" would be used, but in effect going from level being offside to onside was in effect only a millimetre.
Neither was there ever a law saying benefit of the doubt goes to the attackers as is sometimes said.

 

[Lilbaz]

No, was never a law of the game.
There was a perception when level changed from being offside to being onside, that "clear daylight" would be used, but in effect going from level being offside to onside was in effect only a millimetre.
Neither was there ever a law saying benefit of the doubt goes to the attackers as is sometimes said.

Cheers.