Lighty64
I believe
- Aug 24, 2010
- 10,400
- 12,476
the one from the angle you are talking about doesn't show Sess knee taking Aarons just above the back of his knee
Spurs and VAR
- Thread starter Archibald&Crooks
- Start date
the one from the angle you are talking about doesn't show Sess knee taking Aarons just above the back of his knee
spud
Well-Known Member
- Sep 2, 2003
- 5,850
- 8,794
That was because Aarons was collapsing into the challenge to get the pen. If he had been upright that wouldn't have happened.
spud
Well-Known Member
- Sep 2, 2003
- 5,850
- 8,794
Not if it shows clearly that the alleged foul for which the penalty was given didn't in fact happen.
I think all three are 'Orange' - by law of averages it is surprising that all three weren't originally spotted or that VAR didn't upgrade to a red at a point in the season when there have been more decisions overruled (than at the start of the season when nothing was overruled!)
Croftwoodspurs
Well-Known Member
- Aug 15, 2012
- 359
- 651
What interesting that none of these were reviewed in sky's Ref Watch...
I believe that the Robinson one should have been a red... Won the ball, but in hard and reckless with the follow through, he could have quite easily pulled out but left is foot there on purpose...
Then he did the same with Alderwiereld, but not as much power but still left his foot in...
I believe that the Robinson one should have been a red... Won the ball, but in hard and reckless with the follow through, he could have quite easily pulled out but left is foot there on purpose...
Then he did the same with Alderwiereld, but not as much power but still left his foot in...
mano-obe
Well-Known Member
- Mar 2, 2005
- 4,282
- 7,556
fishhhandaricecake
Well-Known Member
- Nov 15, 2018
- 19,148
- 47,886
Leg breaker from sterling, it made me wince, how on earth it’s not a red I’ll. ever know! Disgusting decision.
absolute bobbins
Am Yisrael Chai
- Feb 12, 2013
- 11,655
- 25,969
That’s a straight fucking red every day of the week and twice on Sunday. Unless it's Sterling because... reasons?
yido_number1
He'll always be magic
- Jun 8, 2004
- 8,667
- 16,851
How they didn't rectify that with a yellow for diving? If they don't give a penalty the way he went down and appealed suggests yellow for diving. Can understand if he didn't appeal for the penalty.
the thing i don't understand is if Dean give Sterling the penalty would VAR have overturned it or just have given it after the review.
because IMHO it could have been given, but i am not saying it was a clear penalty.
We’ve got our Mike Dean (of old) back. Soon we’ll see him celebrating our goals again.
stevenurse
Palacios' neck fat
- May 14, 2007
- 6,089
- 10,022
That **** Dermot Gallagher suggesting it wasnt a red because he wasn't horizontal. Its an absolute joke.
yido_number1
He'll always be magic
- Jun 8, 2004
- 8,667
- 16,851
Wreckless and endangered Alli's leg. They sent Son off for a trip at Everton.
yido_number1
He'll always be magic
- Jun 8, 2004
- 8,667
- 16,851
How that Son one wasn't a red on VAR is just ridiculous.
whitesocks
The past means nothing. This is a message for life
- Jan 16, 2014
- 4,652
- 5,738
Var is creating alternative timelines now - it is like back to the future.
JayB
Well-Known Member
- Aug 24, 2011
- 6,659
- 26,067
What's really frustrating is the juxtaposition of all these dangerous challenges against us which have gone unpunished on the one hand and Son's moment of petulance against Rudiger on the other.
It's fair enough that Son was sent off given that he'd lashed out but if the cited rationale was that he'd endangered the safety of an opponent by gently brushing him with his boot then it's absolutely taking the piss to suggest that the likes of Sterling and Capoue -- who were a thousand times more likely to cause injury -- should have stayed on the pitch. It seems like we've been on the receiving end of an absolutely shocking challenge in nearly every match recently and not a single one of them has been punished.
That Son sending off had a massive impact on our season, it meant that Kane couldn't be rested at all during the ridiculous fixture congestion of the festive period and now we're without him for the rest of the season. To see the "endangering the safety" standard applied so strictly in that instance and then seemingly completely ignored in a number of significantly more egregious instances is just really difficult to accept.
It's fair enough that Son was sent off given that he'd lashed out but if the cited rationale was that he'd endangered the safety of an opponent by gently brushing him with his boot then it's absolutely taking the piss to suggest that the likes of Sterling and Capoue -- who were a thousand times more likely to cause injury -- should have stayed on the pitch. It seems like we've been on the receiving end of an absolutely shocking challenge in nearly every match recently and not a single one of them has been punished.
That Son sending off had a massive impact on our season, it meant that Kane couldn't be rested at all during the ridiculous fixture congestion of the festive period and now we're without him for the rest of the season. To see the "endangering the safety" standard applied so strictly in that instance and then seemingly completely ignored in a number of significantly more egregious instances is just really difficult to accept.
Lighty64
I believe
- Aug 24, 2010
- 10,400
- 12,476
was very similar to the red card Bertrand got v Leicester.
yet Gallagher refused to suggest Robinsons lunge on Tanganga wasn't red, and he wasn't upright
anyway at the end of the season we will see a new winner of the PL for the very 1st time, and that winner is
VAR it doesn't seem to affect Liverpool decisions they seem exempt
C0YS
Just another member
- Jul 9, 2007
- 12,780
- 13,817
The thing is, that the PL seem to be the only league which I've seen apply VAR in that way. It goes against IFAB's recommendations who have always insisted clear and obvious applies to offsides too.
The whole point of VAR is to help the officials not make silly mistakes. Now VAR has many issues and I'm not a fan, however, by taking the decision out of the hands of the referee you are completely confusing who is running the game. Who is the authority. While completely undermining what should be consistent decisions within the context of a game at least.
Different referees may have different ideas of what constitutes, say a red card. Let the ref himself decide if he made a clear and obvious error. Because the issue is there is no consensus what clear and obvious actually means, and different VAR teams seem to have wildly different interpretations of what that means.
I didn't know that VAR could be worse than in the CL but in the PL we have managed it. I now actually look forward to European games because I know the VAR will be much more logical.
The PL in caring way too much about interruptions to the game have kind of missed the point here. Interruptions are annoying, very annoying. But it doesn't actually really matter how long the interruption is. In either case it breaks the flow of the game and changes the experience of football. Currently in the PL VAR has still interrupted the game quite frequently, and unlike in the CL where you can at least watch the ref move to the screen to re-look and can at least gage how serious the check will be, the PL gives the fans nothing.
If VAR as a project is to continue there are two options. Either, show the fans at the ground the footage. Or get the ref to mike up and explain his decision when reviewing the tape. Simple as that. These options will help an incredible amount to improve the experience and cut down on the chaos.
The number one thing that needs to happen though, is give power back to the ref. If you really cant do that then take away more power from the ref, and basically just ref the game on the screen and the man on the pitch becomes just someone to follow those instructions. The latter option would make a mockery of the sport but they are doing so anyway.
C0YS
Just another member
- Jul 9, 2007
- 12,780
- 13,817
Also one more point. Isn't it ironic and predictable that instead of solving debates and controversy VAR has only made it worse. Partly because now we have VAR it should be making better decisions but it just doesn't seem to be doing that.
Partly, because the media is obsessed with ref decisions and would always make controversy out of anything. But, also now VAR serves as a good like judgement, we have no one to blame for bad decisions apart from some abstract men making decisions out of the sky, and this is incredibly frustrating.
Challenging VAR is like challenging God, it is supposedly 'the truth'. We need refs because we need someone tangible to blame. We take out our frustration on the ref costing us the game and move on. That is so much harder now, because the blame is now pinned on something abstract. Similarly, opinions now against decisions coming from VAR are now essentially 'wrong'. Steam is harder to get out, people just end up being angrier than before and it sucks a lot of the fun out of the game.
Football's obsession with getting the 'right' decision infuriates me. Mistakes are simply part of the game, and always will be. What matters is that in every match the reff tries to officiate it as fairly and consistently as possible, beyond that it's just part of the game really. The obsession with decisions is what led to VAR, which lead to the pointless change in the handball law.
Yes the hand ball law was ambiguous before, but everyone kind of knew what a handball was and each individual ref was consistent with applying those laws even if not every ref applied those laws in the same way. Now we have replaced common sense approaches by refs with frankly laws which essentially make handballs even more random then before and even more down to chance. VAR led to the need to change the handball law because it needed the 'truth' VAR struggles with ambiguous decisions, because it just ends up stoking more controversy.
But yet so much of football is down to interpretation. The game, in a large part, has developed organically with the times and the needs of those times with minimal rule changes. The officiating similarly has changed, simply by developing different understandings on the application of the same laws. What is considered a yellow is different than in the past, what is considered a foul has changed. These changes have happened as the game as got quicker. The flexibility of the laws of football are its great strength. That the laws allow for a ref to apply a common sense approach to different games and situation is part of what allows individual games to become great games and similarly in allowing the game as a whole to grow and develop.
A ref is not simply someone who makes decisions on a fouls etc, but rather someone who orchestrates the game. Different styles of referring create vastly different kind of games. There are some refs (one of which we saw on Sunday) who you can actually pretty accurately predict what kind of game it will be simply by the official. For me the best refs are those that allow the players and the game to take centre stage. But this is a skill, knowing when to let play continue, when to go hard on players, and when to go soft. VAR doesn't completely change this about refs, but its reductionist. Turning decisions to be more important than how the game runs. For me that's a shame.
Partly, because the media is obsessed with ref decisions and would always make controversy out of anything. But, also now VAR serves as a good like judgement, we have no one to blame for bad decisions apart from some abstract men making decisions out of the sky, and this is incredibly frustrating.
Challenging VAR is like challenging God, it is supposedly 'the truth'. We need refs because we need someone tangible to blame. We take out our frustration on the ref costing us the game and move on. That is so much harder now, because the blame is now pinned on something abstract. Similarly, opinions now against decisions coming from VAR are now essentially 'wrong'. Steam is harder to get out, people just end up being angrier than before and it sucks a lot of the fun out of the game.
Football's obsession with getting the 'right' decision infuriates me. Mistakes are simply part of the game, and always will be. What matters is that in every match the reff tries to officiate it as fairly and consistently as possible, beyond that it's just part of the game really. The obsession with decisions is what led to VAR, which lead to the pointless change in the handball law.
Yes the hand ball law was ambiguous before, but everyone kind of knew what a handball was and each individual ref was consistent with applying those laws even if not every ref applied those laws in the same way. Now we have replaced common sense approaches by refs with frankly laws which essentially make handballs even more random then before and even more down to chance. VAR led to the need to change the handball law because it needed the 'truth' VAR struggles with ambiguous decisions, because it just ends up stoking more controversy.
But yet so much of football is down to interpretation. The game, in a large part, has developed organically with the times and the needs of those times with minimal rule changes. The officiating similarly has changed, simply by developing different understandings on the application of the same laws. What is considered a yellow is different than in the past, what is considered a foul has changed. These changes have happened as the game as got quicker. The flexibility of the laws of football are its great strength. That the laws allow for a ref to apply a common sense approach to different games and situation is part of what allows individual games to become great games and similarly in allowing the game as a whole to grow and develop.
A ref is not simply someone who makes decisions on a fouls etc, but rather someone who orchestrates the game. Different styles of referring create vastly different kind of games. There are some refs (one of which we saw on Sunday) who you can actually pretty accurately predict what kind of game it will be simply by the official. For me the best refs are those that allow the players and the game to take centre stage. But this is a skill, knowing when to let play continue, when to go hard on players, and when to go soft. VAR doesn't completely change this about refs, but its reductionist. Turning decisions to be more important than how the game runs. For me that's a shame.
