Spurs and VAR

[teedee]

Prior to VAR there were some decisions that were incorrect, offsides missed, etc, but in general, after a bit of a moan, players and fans accepted the mistakes and got on with it. Since VAR has been implemented the number of ridiculous decisions and the uproar they cause has been absolutely immense. In virtually every game there are inquests about VAR decisions. It is worth noting that the reason VAR was brought in was to avoid poor decisions being made, but the opposite has occurred. Scrap VAR and scrap Mike Riley and Jon Moss at the same time.

 

[Beni]

I like VAR, and think it is needed due to the amount of mistakes referees made pre-VAR. However the way VAR is being used is not correct and decisions are still at the fate of unconscious bias as to what they interpret the offence to be.
Decisions need to be clear and obvious errors, not ones that if you asked 10 people, it would be a 50/50 split either way.

For VAR to work, decisions need to be black or white, as you are moving the referees interpretation of an offence just to somewhere else i.e. another ref far away infront of a screen. This is why offsides are the easier to review as black or white, given the right set criteria. This is not new, its basic decision analysis that multiple businesses use across all sectors. Aslong as you have the set criteria, you make the right decision in line with them.

For me, VAR should be used after a goal is scored for offside decisions, where the offside rule is aligned to the players feet when the ball is played as opposed to your a$$ or armpit or part of the body etc. Advantage is given to the attacker to overcome any interpretation of mm differences with a clear space between defender and attackers feet defined, i.e. Attacker has a 3cm leeway for arguments sake.

Offsides for other players in an offside position, should be again a black and white process elimination via a decision analysis process.

1. Was the offside player interfering with defending team?
- Goalkeepers eyesight (Yes/No)
- Obstructing defenders ability to challenge goalscorer (Non offside player) (Yes/No)

If Yes to these, then offside is given, if no, then review is over and goal stands.

For anything else, the on-field ref needs to specifically say what he wants checking, and only that can be checked. So question would go like Offence: "Can you check if Moura handled that when on the ground".
Decision Analysis: The VAR officials will need to ask themselves,
1. Is it clear that Moura handled the ball? - Yes/No
- Yes (Minimum of 3 or however many people need to state yes)
- No, Review is over

2. Is the handball deliberate? (Set criteria for this)
- If Yes, review is over and handball given

3. If No...
- Is players arm in an Unnatural position (Yes/No)
- Did this give the opposition a disadvantage and attacking an advantage? i.e. If the ball was not handled, ball would have gone to defending team

If yes to both above then its a handball, No and goal stands. The above may sound lengthy, but it really isn't if you have the tools available which does the decisions for you, aslong as you have the set criteria that is a yes/no response set in the first place and all you would need is someone to input these at the time.

 

[dirtyh]

Oliver and moss basically just need to go to the glue factory. Shocking excuse for supposedly functional lifeforms and a waste of skin and oxygen. Couldn’t interpret their way out of a paper bag. Var itself isn’t the issue as long as it’s used to correct errors, the issue is some clueless biased corrupt fuckwit who never played the game in front of the monitor making decisions that they have no comprehension of.

 

[Dillspur]

It was obvious that Lucas had not touch the ball. I had no idea why the officials must always err on the side of the goal-scoring team and give such benefits of doubts to the goal-concede team.

If it is non-conclusive, like when you couldn't even stupidly draw all those lines to help you, the decision should fall back to pre-VAR days, and the goal should stand.

Lucas's forearm undoubtedly touches the ball as he's falling to the ground, I have seen the shot that absolutely proves this. However, the UTD player then smashed the ball into his upper shoulder and it deflects to Kane, the handball doesn't directly lead to a goal and doesn't directly assist a goal, which is what I thought was the criteria when judging handballs.

 

[mr ashley]

In my opinion the only thing that needs changing is the hand ball rule leading to a goal and instead of " intentional or unintentional " it needs to be " intentional hand ball " leaving out the unintentional bit .

That’s the only bit that needs changing??

Not the microscopic search for daylight between the attackers armpit hair on offside decisions?

Not the fact that the on- field ref doesn’t get a chance to see the footage to review his own decision?

Not the fact that the crowd/ tv audience doesn’t gets a chance to gear the conversation/ decision making process?
I could go on....

Even the one success story ( goal line technology) has been shown that it’s faulty/ open to manipulation.

VAR needs a complete overhaul, ideally after an independent review of the IFAB laws and those who have re-written them.
How we ended up with these ridiculous laws and their nonsensical interpretations baffles me.

The PGMOL are supposed to be the most highly -qualified officials we possess, yet they have been hopelessly out of tune in insisting offside and handball can be decided in this way.
As Jose rightly said, calling it forensic is an insult to forensic scientists. Their scrutiny has a positive impact.
VAR in its current application is, at best, run by nit-picking incompetents. At worst, it’s a facilitator of corruption.

 

[mr ashley]

VAR needs to remember why it was brought in, it's was to help referees by correct obvious mistakes. Not armpits offside, not handball where the ball strokes a hair on their arm by accident.

The way this should work is simple, the rules should be in place to support the ref and contribute to the flow of the game. Offside rule should be changed to feet only and the tech improved to make it clearer where an offence has been caused. If the tech isn't good enough then make the rule broader (daylight/clear foot infront etc)

Handball should be deliberate offences or ones that directly influence a goal or goalscoring chances (deflections). If the technology can't tell if an arm has been hit then it didn't impact the goal.

Finally VAR should refer all decisions that aren't black and white to the referee for video review where they think they need to.

For example, Ref sees a foul and gives a yellow, VAR checks (all checks must be concluded in 1 minute) and if it feels there is cause for a red it goes "you might want to take a closer look at that one buddy", ref stops the game and reviews the pitch side cameras. Tannoys and screen inform fans that a referee review is underway. Final decision lies with the ref with a view that if a decision can't be made in 1 minute then the orignal call remains.

Why is that so bloody difficult?

Absolutely 100% this

 

[BringBack_leGin]

Obviously when the VAR regards a Man Utd goal, letter of the law was not applied and the goal stood...

 

[fridgemagnet]

I may be alone with this but I'm sure I'm seeing a lot of retrospective levelling up going on with VAR, you know how refs would cock up and give a dubious penalty or decision that leads to a goal and they immediately knew they'd cocked up so they spent the rest of the match looking for an excuse to cancel it out.
Well to me I'm seeing instance after instance of that with VAR, e.g Spurs get the benefit of it in one match, pundits/managers kick up stink then the next match the aggrieved side seem to get given a leveller and the beneficiaries will see something chalked off in their match.

It could be confirmation bias that I'm witnessing but I don't believe I am.

It's killing football for me though.

 

[nailsy]

Prior to VAR there were some decisions that were incorrect, offsides missed, etc, but in general, after a bit of a moan, players and fans accepted the mistakes and got on with it. Since VAR has been implemented the number of ridiculous decisions and the uproar they cause has been absolutely immense. In virtually every game there are inquests about VAR decisions. It is worth noting that the reason VAR was brought in was to avoid poor decisions being made, but the opposite has occurred. Scrap VAR and scrap Mike Riley and Jon Moss at the same time.

Managers moaned about referee decisions after almost every game. Post match analysis was mainly about whether the ref had made a mistake or not. VAR isn't working, but there's no way that mistakes were just accepted before it was introduced.

 

[Trotter]

Managers moaned about referee decisions after almost every game. Post match analysis was mainly about whether the ref had made a mistake or not. VAR isn't working, but there's no way that mistakes were just accepted before it was introduced.

Totally agree, VAR was brought in because of the consistent complaining about decisions, we still go on about the Mendes one now.
All VAR has done this season is shown the laws of the game are not written as the public would want, and in some cases probably not as the lawmakers intended.
They tried to correct the handball law so goals would not be scored or assisted by the use of the hand, without thinking of the consequences of making that a black and white, no room for the officials to manoeuvere law.
It is not VAR that is the issue here, in respect of offsides, the clubs were told before voting the system in there would be millimetres decisions, and offsides are a matter of fact, they either are or are not offside, clear and obvious does not come in to play, the clubs understood and wanted that, we have to accept that, or choose a different sport to follow.
It is the re-written handball law for this season, which was done basically because the referees in the Premier League were not applying the previous law correctly unlike the rest of the world (think the Sissoko penalty in CL final, that would not have been given in PL, but has been a penalty everywhere else in world for years). In effect it is our league that led to the situation we are in now. IFAB are rewriting the handball law, but the draft rewrite for next season will still rule out the goal we had chalked off in the week, but would not have ruled out the similar one Man City had chalked off due to the distance the ball was from the goal.

 

[ralvy]

It was obvious that Lucas had not touch the ball. I had no idea why the officials must always err on the side of the goal-scoring team and give such benefits of doubts to the goal-concede team.

If it is non-conclusive, like when you couldn't even stupidly draw all those lines to help you, the decision should fall back to pre-VAR days, and the goal should stand.

Exactly! If it's not clear and obvious, then var shouldn't be used to overrule a decision.

 

[spud]

Exactly! If it's not clear and obvious, then var shouldn't be used to overrule a decision.

My understanding is that that isn't the case. Offside and handball are treated as 'matters of fact': they either happened or they didn't. The 'clear and obvious' criterion is if the ref has clearly fucked up when giving/not giving a foul etc. In other words, matters of opinion.

The problems with offside and handball is that they clearly aren't 'matters of fact'. Whether a player is offside is decided by where somebody has chosen to draw the lines, which depends upon the exact millisecond that they think the ball has been kicked - a matter of opinion. Handball is given when somebody decides that the ball has hit a hand; again a matter of opinion, even though it's usually obvious.

I have seen numerous angles of our disallowed goal on thursday, as I'm sure we all have, and I can't see the ball hitting Lucas's arm or hand. So it's a 'matter of fact' that Lucas handled it, but only the bloke in the office with the monitors saw it.

 

[ralvy]

My understanding is that that isn't the case. Offside and handball are treated as 'matters of fact': they either happened or they didn't. The 'clear and obvious' criterion is if the ref has clearly fucked up when giving/not giving a foul etc. In other words, matters of opinion.

The problems with offside and handball is that they clearly aren't 'matters of fact'. Whether a player is offside is decided by where somebody has chosen to draw the lines, which depends upon the exact millisecond that they think the ball has been kicked - a matter of opinion. Handball is given when somebody decides that the ball has hit a hand; again a matter of opinion, even though it's usually obvious.

I have seen numerous angles of our disallowed goal on thursday, as I'm sure we all have, and I can't see the ball hitting Lucas's arm or hand. So it's a 'matter of fact' that Lucas handled it, but only the bloke in the office with the monitors saw it.

Yeah, I entirely agree with you. It's so incredibly stupid for them to want to treat it as a matter of fact. Physics acknowledges there are limitations to any measuring system (at least when it comes to physical dimensions and such), so why does the FA and FIFA pretend to be above physics by not allowing themselves any room for uncertainty?

 

[Croftwoodspurs]

Been thinking about lane goal, I believe moura atm did not touch the ball if t did so slight that it did not move the ball.. When the ball was deflected to lay it came of his back... The hand ball needs to look in the context in his it occured... It occurred by a foul on Moira and the ref played on to give us the advantage which we scored...

To rule the goal offside and give a free-kick to the opposition is beyond laughable. If you d disallow the goal we should had a freekick..

Also can't believe they did not review the arm in son s face, as it was a second yellow would have then been a red card decision.

 

[HedgieSpur]

Ive said this before, but I believe VAR decisions should be made within 30 seconds. If that is not possible, then the original decision should stand.

 

[Spurrific]

Been thinking about lane goal, I believe moura atm did not touch the ball if t did so slight that it did not move the ball.. When the ball was deflected to lay it came of his back... The hand ball needs to look in the context in his it occured... It occurred by a foul on Moira and the ref played on to give us the advantage which we scored...

To rule the goal offside and give a free-kick to the opposition is beyond laughable. If you d disallow the goal we should had a freekick..

Also can't believe they did not review the arm in son s face, as it was a second yellow would have then been a red card decision.

Don’t think they can review second yellows, or yellows, can they?

 

[Trotter]

Don’t think they can review second yellows, or yellows, can they?

Correct, they can't

 

[Croftwoodspurs]

Correct, they can't

I had heard that, but they should have reviewed it for being a straight red which it was close to being... Then state while not violence play would be a yellow...

They reviewed possible penalties and then booked a player for simulation, so should be no differences...

 

[mr ashley]

Don’t think they can review second yellows, or yellows, can they?

That’s another huge issue. Why can’t these significant decisions be reviewed? If I’ve received 4 bookings this season, and get booked in error, then I receive a 1 match ban.
If it’s my 10th, I miss two games.
If it’s my second booking, but the first was an error, I get sent off.
It’s a(nother) huge flaw in the system, and again allows officials to carry on unscrutinised.
Ive said it before, PGMOL is in need of a total overhaul

 

[Trotter]

I had heard that, but they should have reviewed it for being a straight red which it was close to being... Then state while not violence play would be a yellow...

They reviewed possible penalties and then booked a player for simulation, so should be no differences...

They would have reviewed it for being straight red, it was nowhere near worthy of a red card though. Look at the Ayew one in the week, that was similar, forearm to side of face, looking at player, but with a lot more force, that was not deemed a red card under review.
VAR is not telling a referee to caution a player for simulation for overturned penalty, referee decides based on the information that VAR has given him that he has been conned by a dive, and acts accordingly.