Spurs and VAR

wrd

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2014
Messages
5,261
The sad thing is that VAR is working precisely as it is designed to, which is not how we would want it to.

It is a validation tool. We all want it to be an invalidation tool. We want it to overturn bad decisions, but that's not how it's being implemented. That's how it should be implemented, but it isn't currently.

VAR is not there to make sure a call is correct. It is there to correct 'clear and obvious errors' by the ref. It is there to ensure that a referee has interpreted the laws of the game correctly. The problem with that is that what constitutes a 'clear and obvious' error is itself an interpretation and subject to interpretation.

Let's take a recent example. Under the rules of the game as they are currently laid down, Dele's handball in the box on Sunday should have been a penalty. The law states that any contact with the ball by a hand, even accidental, is a penalty - see the penalty given against us in the CL Final last season.

The VAR replay wasn't done in order to check whether Dele's hand had made contact with the ball. It was to check whether the referee made a 'clear and obvious error' in not awarding the penalty. When VAR review, the referee is asked to explain his decision to them. They then consider that before making their own call. So, say, for instance, Atkinson told VAR that he didn't see Dele's hand make contact with the ball, then even if VAR shows that it did, his decision to not award the penalty would not be deemed as a 'clear and obvious error' and so his decision would be validated.

So, the reason it wasn't given was that Atkinson interpreted the law in his head and decided it wasn't a penalty. VAR then checked his interpretation against the video replay. They did not check the video replay and make a decision in isolation. They were looking to see if Atkinson had made a 'clear and obvious error'. VAR decided that Atkinson had not made a clear and obvious error in denying the penalty and therefore didn't overturn his decision.

That's the prism that VAR has to be viewed through - not that it is there to ensure every call is correct. It should be used like that, but it isn't being used like that. VAR is not there to help the game, the players and most especially not the fans - it is there to be used by referees and only for their benefit. Until that changes, we will continue to see the same controversies, the same ridiculous calls, etc, etc.

One of the problems with officiating is that it is entirely opaque - there is no accountability, there is no transparency. Why else do they hide what is said from the fans during VAR checks? This is just another example of the mendacity at the heart of football officiating - referees are held up as final arbiters, treated as untouchables who can do as they please and are indemnified from being criticised. Fine, if they could demonstrate that they made decisions well enough consistently enough to be considered experts. But they're not - they're terrible, they make horrendous mistakes and then they are protected from any official criticism. Anyone who speaks out is punished.

And that makes VAR in its current implementation inherently suspect and therefore expecting it to be a balance to the paucity of quality in refereeing is pointless - it's not there to make things better; it is there to help insulate referees from being scrutinised.

VAR should be a system by which a correct decision should be given, but that's not how it's being used currently. Expecting anything else is pointless.
It kills me that it was so successful during the 2018 world cup and they have decided against following that way of using it.
 

rez9000

Worried about Tromboning
Joined
Feb 8, 2007
Messages
8,038
It kills me that it was so successful during the 2018 world cup and they have decided against following that way of using it.
Absolutely. And that was a conscious decision. They (whoever they happens to be, be it the PGMOL, the Premier League, the FA or some combination of the three) have hobbled the potential power that VAR has for making the game better. And it all boils down to control.

Everything that happens in English football is designed to maintain the position of power and or influence that the controlling organisations have. And we know this. It starts right at the top with FIFA, filters down through UEFA and the other confederations and into each nation's FA and League organisation. It's part of the system. How long did it take for goal-line technology to come into being even though the technology had been there for years before? The ability for video assistance for clear correct decisions has been around for years and has been successfully implemented in other sports like tennis, rugby and cricket, so why is it such a shitshow in football? Because the powers-that-be have no interest in actually improving anything. They have been forced to act over VAR, but they've done their best to make sure it doesn't make any significant change to the problems it's supposed to address. Anyone who complains now about poor refereeing will simply be told, 'you've got VAR. What are you complaining about?'
 

wrd

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2014
Messages
5,261
Absolutely. And that was a conscious decision. They (whoever they happens to be, be it the PGMOL, the Premier League, the FA or some combination of the three) have hobbled the potential power that VAR has for making the game better. And it all boils down to control.

Everything that happens in English football is designed to maintain the position of power and or influence that the controlling organisations have. And we know this. It starts right at the top with FIFA, filters down through UEFA and the other confederations and into each nation's FA and League organisation. It's part of the system. How long did it take for goal-line technology to come into being even though the technology had been there for years before? The ability for video assistance for clear correct decisions has been around for years and has been successfully implemented in other sports like tennis, rugby and cricket, so why is it such a shitshow in football? Because the powers-that-be have no interest in actually improving anything. They have been forced to act over VAR, but they've done their best to make sure it doesn't make any significant change to the problems it's supposed to address. Anyone who complains now about poor refereeing will simply be told, 'you've got VAR. What are you complaining about?'
What like this: https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11661/11853949/heung-min-son-red-card-understandable-says-dermot-gallagher-in-ref-watch

DERMOT'S VERDICT: Correct call. Clubs can have no argument about the technology used.

Followed by:

Everybody signed up to the technology, everybody knows there is no latitude in offside decision. It's either offside or onside. There's no debate.
 

dudu

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2011
Messages
3,035
One, the Delefeou one, is a trip/kick (a swinging leg), which stopped opponent playing ball, the other is a small coming together (nothing much more than shoulder to shoulder contact) which did not affect the opponent.
I personally think it did affect and impede Son, not to the level where he made it out mind but the kick on Delefeou isn't really stopping him playing the ball, getting to it maybe but its a tap that he chooses to fall over about to make a point.

I do get what you are saying but it seems very subjective to me.
 

rez9000

Worried about Tromboning
Joined
Feb 8, 2007
Messages
8,038
What like this: https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11661/11853949/heung-min-son-red-card-understandable-says-dermot-gallagher-in-ref-watch

DERMOT'S VERDICT: Correct call. Clubs can have no argument about the technology used.

Followed by:

Everybody signed up to the technology, everybody knows there is no latitude in offside decision. It's either offside or onside. There's no debate.
Seemingly.

Here's the main take-away from that article for me:

...the PGMOL are keen to point out the absolute trust among their elite panel of officials.
That, to me, speaks of an organisation that will not brook any questioning of whether they are competent to officiate matches. They are slamming the door on any possibility of questioning their actions. There is no space to wedge anything into any kind of crack between on-field and off-field officials. PGMOL is king essentially, so live with it, is how it seems to me.
 

'O Zio

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2014
Messages
5,746
Agreed if we want absolute perfection, but whatever is used is still numerous times better than a “best guess” from 80 yards away like we have had previously.
I think that comes back to what we were talking about earlier in either this thread or the main VAR thread: Do we really want perfection or do we want the "spirit" of the law to be applied i.e. the "spirit" of the offside law is to prevent people from just goalhanging, or at least having too much of an advantage over the defenders. Therefore I think what people (fans, players, managers etc.) want is for offsides to be called when the attacker is gaining too much of an advantage. Nobody is really bothered about whether the striker is 1mm offside because they're not gaining any advantage by doing that. So VAR should concentrate on offsides that are obvious because that's what the intention of the law is, and give the benefit of the doubt to the attacker if it's marginal. These 1mm instances where they're having to look at it 100 times and it take 5 minutes are not the original purpose of having the offside rule in the first place.
 

LeParisien

Wrong about everything
Joined
Mar 5, 2018
Messages
1,390
Textbook case of stupid var usage. At 50 frames per second they can have no confidence in that decision that is max 1cm offside. Shocking
 

spids

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2015
Messages
1,876
The lines they use on Var are too thick and too inaccurately placed.
 

Lighty64

PC huh what a joke, avatar changed
Joined
Aug 24, 2010
Messages
9,120
saved us today, though no 1 knows what the score would have been after, that was a worse decision than Son's v Leicester
 

Shadydan

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2012
Messages
27,577
Give advantage to the attacker has always been the rule

I like to see you defend those PGMOL nonces @MK Yid on this one.
 

spids

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2015
Messages
1,876
Today’s call against Sheff Utd was similar to the one we had against Leicester when Son was ruled offside. VAR should only be used to rule out a goal for offside if they can tell without any doubt after no more than 5 seconds (and then we wouldn’t even need to know it was a VAR review - they could just radio down to the ref whilst the players are still in initial celebrations) . If they need to slow it down frame by frame and going over and over it then it should be considered onside given the frame rate issue.
 

Trees

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2012
Messages
782
Today’s call against Sheff Utd was similar to the one we had against Leicester when Son was ruled offside. VAR should only be used to rule out a goal for offside if they can tell without any doubt after no more than 5 seconds (and then we wouldn’t even need to know it was a VAR review - they could just radio down to the ref whilst the players are still in initial celebrations) . If they need to slow it down frame by frame and going over and over it then it should be considered onside given the frame rate issue.
Totally agreed. Son’s ‘offside’ looking more and more of a turning point this season.
 

Spurrific

Chat > Transfer Rumours > Mumsnet > Spurs Chat
Joined
Jun 2, 2011
Messages
11,750
Some posters will only slate VAR when it goes our way - as that way it shows us how level-headed and unbiased they are. The true heroes of the internet.
 

dontcallme

SC Supporter
Joined
Mar 18, 2005
Messages
16,476
Technically the call was right today for their offside goal but the amount of time it took to make the decision was ridiculous.

I don't think judging offsides on such fine margins is good for the game.

I am in favour of VAR but it needs some serious work.
 

spud

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 2, 2003
Messages
4,520
Yesterday Sanchez had a goal correctly disallowed against Bournemouth when the ball hit his hand before he whacked it in, but we were denied a penalty when the Bournemouth defender went to ground. Why? He slid to block a cross and the ball clearly hit his hand which, as far as I could see, was away from his body. How was that any different from at least two penalties that have been given against us when the ball hit Danny Rose's arm?

I haven't read any comment on it in the media (and I haven't been in the match thread) so I suppose because we won it's considered irrelevant. But it isn't is it? In principle I'm in favour of VAR but the longer it continues with what appear to be terrible decisions like this one (and numerous ridiculous delays to review gnat's-pube offside decisions) I'm beginning to wish that it was abandoned.
 

philip

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 4, 2009
Messages
1,116
Yesterday Sanchez had a goal correctly disallowed against Bournemouth when the ball hit his hand before he whacked it in, but we were denied a penalty when the Bournemouth defender went to ground. Why? He slid to block a cross and the ball clearly hit his hand which, as far as I could see, was away from his body. How was that any different from at least two penalties that have been given against us when the ball hit Danny Rose's arm?

I haven't read any comment on it in the media (and I haven't been in the match thread) so I suppose because we won it's considered irrelevant. But it isn't is it? In principle I'm in favour of VAR but the longer it continues with what appear to be terrible decisions like this one (and numerous ridiculous delays to review gnat's-pube offside decisions) I'm beginning to wish that it was abandoned.
A goal scored is disallowed if it touches an attacking players arm, even if completely unintentional.
A penalty is only given if the defending player used his arm, or his arm was positioned in a way, to gain an advantage.
 

spud

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 2, 2003
Messages
4,520
A goal scored is disallowed if it touches an attacking players arm, even if completely unintentional.
A penalty is only given if the defending player used his arm, or his arm was positioned in a way, to gain an advantage.
Which, it seemed to me, it was. There can be no argument that it hit his hand. He was preventing a cross by hanging out an arm to block the ball when sliding. Preventing a potential scoring chance must be interpreted as 'gaining an advantage'.
 

Spurslove

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2012
Messages
1,608
It kills me that it was so successful during the 2018 world cup and they have decided against following that way of using it.
A few things kill me about VAR.

First, the refs have been advised NOT to go to the side of the pitch and refer to the monitors because of the amount of extra time it takes, which begs the question, WTF are they there for then?

Second, the fans have no idea WTF is happening after a goal is scored apart from the ref standing like a plum with his finger in his ear. Why is the incident/goal in question not being displayed on the giant screens so all the fans can see WTF is going on...?

Third, the raving inconsistency of the VAR decisions. On the weekend, Mings scored a goal for Villa at Old Trafford which was allowed, despite the Villa forward Trezeguet and one other being marginally off-side when the ball was launched into the area. Both were deemed to have had nothing to do with the goal being scored. Now, when we all cast our minds back to our game at Leicester, to when Aurier scored what looked like a perfectly good goal to put us 0-2 in front, but was ruled off-side because Son was deemed to be 1mm off-side in front of a line of on rushing defenders, representing a so-called 'Clear and Obvious Error' on the part of the referee, but by the exact same token, he had NOTHING to do with the goal being scored, and how is 1mm supposed to be a 'clear and obvious error' by the ref?

Fourth, VAR now over-rules the ref on the pitch which is a nonsense.

VAR in it's current format is actually KILLING the game. Players don't know whether to celebrate their goals or wait till the idiot in the VAR box hundreds of miles away tells them it's OK, or wipe it out because a minor foul was committed in the early part of the build up.

Fuck VAR. It's supposed to rule out clear and obvious errors which sounds fine as far as it goes, but it's created all sorts of different problems of its own.

.
 

MK Yid

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 30, 2009
Messages
428
A few things kill me about VAR.

First, the refs have been advised NOT to go to the side of the pitch and refer to the monitors because of the amount of extra time it takes, which begs the question, WTF are they there for then?

Second, the fans have no idea WTF is happening after a goal is scored apart from the ref standing like a plum with his finger in his ear. Why is the incident/goal in question not being displayed on the giant screens so all the fans can see WTF is going on...?

Third, the raving inconsistency of the VAR decisions. On the weekend, Mings scored a goal for Villa at Old Trafford which was allowed, despite the Villa forward Trezeguet and one other being marginally off-side when the ball was launched into the area. Both were deemed to have had nothing to do with the goal being scored. Now, when we all cast our minds back to our game at Leicester, to when Aurier scored what looked like a perfectly good goal to put us 0-2 in front, but was ruled off-side because Son was deemed to be 1mm off-side in front of a line of on rushing defenders, representing a so-called 'Clear and Obvious Error' on the part of the referee, but by the exact same token, he had NOTHING to do with the goal being scored, and how is 1mm supposed to be a 'clear and obvious error' by the ref?

Fourth, VAR now over-rules the ref on the pitch which is a nonsense.

VAR in it's current format is actually KILLING the game. Players don't know whether to celebrate their goals or wait till the idiot in the VAR box hundreds of miles away tells them it's OK, or wipe it out because a minor foul was committed in the early part of the build up.

Fuck VAR. It's supposed to rule out clear and obvious errors which sounds fine as far as it goes, but it's created all sorts of different problems of its own.

.
Congratulations on your third point for showing either a complete lack of memory about what happened with our disallowed goal, or a complete lack of understanding of the offside law.

Your other points I sort of agree with though.
 
Last edited:
Top