Spurs and VAR

[Archibald&Crooks]

Whether you agree with him or not (and I don't), @MK Yid is at least articulating and arguing his corner respectfully. He's not doing it in the way a lot of people who troll do, he's not doing it to annoy and his not doing it in that stupid way that we all see far too often, he's just giving an honest opinion that most of us disagree with.

Come on guys, that's allowed and even encouraged isn't it? Or do you want a forum full of lemmings who all just agree all the time.

He doesn't deserve some of the comments aimed at him and i'd like to think it's going to stop now.

 

[BringBack_leGin]

Whether you agree with him or not (and I don't), @MK Yid is at least articulating and arguing his corner respectfully. He's not doing it in the way a lot of people who troll do, he's not doing it to annoy and his not doing it in that stupid way that we all see far too often, he's just giving an honest opinion that most of us disagree with.

Come on guys, that's allowed and even encouraged isn't it? Or do you want a forum full of lemmings who all just agree all the time.

He doesn't deserve some of the comments aimed at him and i'd like to think it's going to stop now.

I said earlier, and I’ve had big disagreements with him previously, that I don’t think he’s trolling. I actually think he writes very well and even though I’m not convinced by the argument he’s put forward, he’s at least supporting it with a bit of research and information that quite frankly if we all did we’d end up with far better discussions on here than we often get.

Unlike you, you big fat Greek WUM ?? ?

 

[Dov67]

so this rule will change in a couple of weeks according to Gary Neville. I happen to agree given the heat its now getting.

Awesome - can we have our 2 points back or at least have the game replayed. 2 days gone and still raging

 

[Trotter]

Is mk yid a ref?

Was Referee and Linesman, got up to PL as linesman, FL for couple of seasons as referee, but most of time in Isthmian League and Conference. Gave it up roughly 15 years ago when it basically became full-time commitment as I couldn't continue due to work career, and instead spent the 15 as season ticket holder and travelling up and down country watching us and to all but 3 of our European away matches in the period (often funded by work expenses, as we had operation in every country in world, so tied football in with work). Never officiated in a Spurs first team game (for obvious reasons), but refereed the reserves in the old Football Combination on a few occasions, in those days we were playing at St. Albans. Those were the days though that if a player didn't start on a Saturday, he played for the reserves in the midweek, so refereed many of our first team players.
Still have many former colleagues that are performing at the top level (and some that have also retired but still involved), a few of whom I am still regularly in touch with, and speak with every time something controversial happens that clarification is needed on..
However after refereeing for 20 seasons, I still can only see things objectively (sometimes wish I didn't) rather than the totally blinkered view that is the standard DNA of a fan

 

[SpartanSpur]

Personally I appreciate the input @MK Yid brings to these pages, even if I certainly don't agree with everything he says it's good to have that insight into the referees view.

I do agree with others that VAR is not necessarily a bad thing, it is in the implementation that the refereeing system - from IFAB down - has failed miserably.

For me I didn't mind it coming in because I expected it to be used as a safety net for obvious decisions where a ref/lino may have been unsighted or caught out by the speed of play. Yes it's disappointing having a goal ruled out that might not have, but in the ones where it's a foot or two off then no one really complains.

Yes VAR does make you worry a little more when you score a goal, but TBH I sometimes did that in the stadium before hand if I thought someone looked offside, especially if we had had one disallowed recently. It's not like celebrating goals only for them to get chalked off didn't exist before VAR.

I guess the issue with lawmakers is how do you allow leeway with something like offside when video technology gives you less scope for error. With these MM offsides surely we have the technology argument. Surely if it gets to the point where they have to draw the stupid lines we can just call it onside? That supports attacking play without being egregious, like these new handball laws.

We also had the issue last season of VAR refs, especially at the start, seemingly being unwilling to go against their on field colleagues. Hopefully the increased use of monitors will avoid this going forward.

Do lawmakers even get ex-players involved in the rule making process? Surely that would be the best way forward. I doubt any defender would have allowed either new handball law to be brought in as they are a nonsense. This is my issue with IFAB and the PGMOL, they act like they know what's best but have made an absolute mockery of themselves with some of these rules. When everyone in the game is saying you fucked up, it's time to accept you probably have. The refs are then the fall guys are they aren't giving them enough leeway or agency to referee the game how they see it.

My suggestions would be as follows:

Offsides - if not perceptible to the VAR official on the freeze frame given then the call is onside. Yes offside is supposed to be objective but we don't have the right technology for it and no one in the game wants it coming down to MMs anyway.

Penalties - VAR ref waves off spurious claims, such as , Ref uses monitor on contentious ones to ensure they are making the final decision.

Handballs - Flip the conditionality - accidental handball/ball to hand is not a penalty or reason to disallow a goal. The officials then have agency to decide if the handball was material in the creation of a clear goalscoring opportunity which then supercedes it being accidental, which IMO is pretty much where it was beforehand. They then have the benefit of the monitor on anything contentious. That way you only punish an unfair advantage. The sillouette rule isn't bad if it's applying to a direct shot on goal that might have gone in had it not hit the hand, especially if left to the refs discretion. I don't think the Dier handball would have been so controversial if it was in the six yard box and Dier's arm stopped the ball going in for example. This issue was a penalty was given for something totally innocuous and nowhere near the goal. T-shirt line I think is a decent addition however.

Red cards - With the addition of monitors this is actually currently pretty spot on. Well done IFAB/PGMOL.

I think Jose nailed it when he said the VAR has become the true referee, which should never have happened, it's called video assistant referee after all! All most people want is VAR to be a supplementary resource like GLT is. I genuinely don't know how they have got it so wrong.

 

[WalkerboyUK]

so this rule will change in a couple of weeks according to Gary Neville. I happen to agree given the heat its now getting.

Awesome - can we have our 2 points back or at least have the game replayed. 2 days gone and still raging

There will be no change until the end of the season.
Can't just change rules part way through a season unfortunately

 

[Trotter]

There will be no change until the end of the season.
Can't just change rules part way through a season unfortunately

They can't change the laws according to IFAB/FIFA rules (although technically they did last season when COVID broke out), unless an exceptional meeting is held for that exact purpose with backing from all countries, but the League/FIFA can adjust guidelines/interpretations (just as there was adjustments made to how high the bar was set for VAR intervention changed during the season). Problem with the laws as they are written though is there really is not much wiggle room in them for interpretation, so it is not as if PL can just tell their referees to do something, if it is not backed up even slightly within the laws.
But the pressure is mounting for something to be done, they cannot just behave like ostriches

 

[BringBack_leGin]

They can't change the laws according to IFAB/FIFA rules (although technically they did last season when COVID broke out), unless an exceptional meeting is held for that exact purpose with backing from all countries, but the League/FIFA can adjust guidelines/interpretations (just as there was adjustments made to how high the bar was set for VAR intervention changed during the season). Problem with the laws as they are written though is there really is not much wiggle room in them for interpretation, so it is not as if PL can just tell their referees to do something, if it is not backed up even slightly within the laws.
But the pressure is mounting for something to be done, they cannot just behave like ostriches

It’s that pesky ‘except’ part that’s the issue. If those words were replaced with something looser like ‘the referee may exercise discretion regarding the above’ then yes, we’d open the door to inconsistency but we’d also allow for referees to avoid making ridiculously literal applications of a poorly worded law. Sadly, that wording isn’t changing any time soon.

https://resources.fifa.com/image/upload/ifab-laws-of-the-game-2020-21.pdf?cloudid=d6g1medsi8jrrd3e4imp

Handling the ball
For the purposes of determining handball offences, the upper boundary of the arm is in line with the bottom of the armpit.
It is an offence if a player:
• deliberately touches the ball with their hand/arm, including moving the hand/arm towards the ball
• scores in the opponents’ goal directly from their hand/arm, even if accidental, including by the goalkeeper
• after the ball has touched their or a team-mate’s hand/arm, even if accidental, immediately:
• scores in the opponents’ goal • creates a goal-scoring opportunity
• touches the ball with their hand/arm when:
• the hand/arm has made their body unnaturally bigger
• the hand/arm is above/beyond their shoulder level (unless the player
deliberately plays the ball which then touches their hand/arm)
The above offences apply even if the ball touches a player’s hand/arm directly from the head or body (including the foot) of another player who is close.
Except for the above offences, it is not an offence if the ball touches a player’s hand/arm:


• directly from the player’s own head or body (including the foot)
• directly from the head or body (including the foot) of another player who is close • if the hand/arm is close to the body and does not make the body unnaturally
bigger
• when a player falls and the hand/arm is between the body and the ground to
support the body, but not extended laterally or vertically away from the body

My personal take is that the **** at stockley park should’ve said ‘not sure that's a free kick mate, in fact you should look at that as potential violent conduct from the Newcastle player and consider sending him off’. Sadly it was a demonstrably non impartial adjudicator in the hot seat in my opinion.

 

[Trotter]

It’s that pesky ‘except’ part that’s the issue. If those words were replaced with something looser like ‘the referee may exercise discretion regarding the above’ then yes, we’d open the door to inconsistency but we’d also allow for referees to avoid making ridiculously literal applications of a poorly worded law. Sadly, that wording isn’t changing any time soon.

Indeed the line except for the above offences is a pain, but actually it is more the removal of the word "USUALLY" which was in the laws until beginning of this season that is the real issue.

The top section previously said it is Usually an Offence (which allowed the PL to referee as they wanted) with that gone so has the ability of referees to use common sense in the area.

 

[SecretLemonadeDrinker]

But that is outside the remit VAR has been given. It would only be properly checked at if it were a potential red card offence.

Indeed it is. But the point, surely, is why is it outside the remit? It is integral to what followed - all the more so since Newcastle had proved that they had no other way of getting the ball into our area.

It’s just yet another way in which the application of VAR hasn’t been properly thought through.

 

[Dougal]

How fucking good is football without VAR?

 

[Kirito]

How fucking good is football without VAR?

Was certainly refreshing to watch the game without it last night.

 

[Reado]

How fucking good is football without VAR?

It was great. No stop/start. No heart-in-mouth on the Lamela goal as you knew it wouldn't be checked. Would've been allowed anyway with VAR as he was well on, but just takes the fun out of celebrating it there and then. I don't think there were any contentious decisions that would've been checked, but even so it was just nice to enjoy a game of football without the constant stoppages.

 

[Dillspur]

Initially I was all for VAR, but I think it's proving it isn't suited to football, there's just not enough factual rules, nearly every law/rule is open to interpretation and now we are making the original rules more complicated to accommodate VAR. Saying that, I do think there is a place for it, but it should be at the discretion of the on field refs.

 

[Scissors&Tape]

Indeed the line except for the above offences is a pain, but actually it is more the removal of the word "USUALLY" which was in the laws until beginning of this season that is the real issue.

The top section previously said it is Usually an Offence (which allowed the PL to referee as they wanted) with that gone so has the ability of referees to use common sense in the area.

I know the PL cannot do this on its own, but one way to fix the rule, and get back some of the discretion lost by striking the word "usually," would be to just get rid of the automatic handball provision for when the "the hand/arm is above/beyond their shoulder level." This seems to be the most problematic provision, as it leads to handballs being called when it is clear that their was no intentional handling of the ball, like with the recent handball against Dier. The problem this language is attempting to address -- when a player puts their arm in a position just to make it more likely that the ball accidentally strikes the arm -- is covered by other language in the rule, i.e. it is a handball when the player's "hand/arm has made their body unnaturally bigger." The ref can determine on a case-by-case basis whether the arm above the shoulder was made to make the "body unnaturally bigger." So, the discretion lost by getting rid of the word "usually" would come back uin the form of the ref's determination of whether a player has made their "body unnaturally bigger."

That, and impose a strict time limit on VAR review, so that only truly "clear and obvious errors" are addressed.

 

[VegasII]

They should have just brought in goal line technology and left it at that.

 

[Kirito]

They should have just brought in goal line technology and left it at that.

I don't agree with this.

Goal line tech, offsides, dangerous fouls and obvious cheating should all be included.

The only thing that is broken is the handball rule and its enough to make VAR hated. Change the rule so VAR is only for deliberate and obvious handballs then the system would be great.

 

[Monkey boy]

I don't agree with this.

Goal line tech, offsides, dangerous fouls and obvious cheating should all be included.

The only thing that is broken is the handball rule and its enough to make VAR hated. Change the rule so VAR is only for deliberate and obvious handballs then the system would be great.

yeah everyone loves the offside rules, nobody ever complains about that.

 

[SirNiNyHotspur]

yeah everyone loves the offside rules, nobody ever complains about that.

I hate offside as it stands, possibly more than handball, it completely kills the joy of the goal as we know they have to get their magnifying glass out before we can celebrate, also I’m not convinced by the technology, is the frame they froze always correct and exact? what part of the body/ shirt are they deciding is off when the picture is so blurry magnified, leaves room from favoritism imo giving benefit to one side or other. I think it should be used for obvious offside only, when you don’t need the magnifying glass, clear and obvious errors only which is what most thought it was being brought in for...

 

[Kirito]

Yeah the magnifying and checking to see if an arm hair was offside is stupid, definitely agree with that x