The VAR Thread

[Lighty64]

another thing that was a ridiculous decision today and VAR took no action with Nobles tackle, he was out of control, and caught the United player with his studs. as I said earlier this Var is meant to help correct obvious errors, that report from Riley (one of the worst refs I've ever seen) is total ballshit. 4 errors so far is crap and that's not taking into account this weekend.

there is no point in having a monitor if they don't intend on ever using it. I wonder if Kane would have got the penalty if he hadn't scored. why didn't Rose get a penalty (I know this is in general, but not doing 2 separate posts)?

Old Salah will be loving all this, with the VAR ref not having the balls to do anything, he will still chance his diving at the slenderest of touches, if the ref calls a pen he knows it won't be overruled, if the ref doesn't because he is unsure he will escape the yellow for diving.

the member I now have on ignore who was involved and has friends in the association perhaps he can ask how Wijnaldum can run straight into a player that's off the ground attempting to get his head on it, and win a free-kick. That was more him making contact, surely he can't be obstructing if it's impossible to get out the way, and more Wijnaldum making sure he is contacted, a bit similar to why he believes Kane didn't get a penalty v Newcastle or Arsenal.

I was all for VAR, but now I hope we get better officials (some hope). I would rather 1 in each half, and 1 a bit like in Europe but the side there isn't a linesman, and ones that help a ref, instead of waiting before using their flag. I know the game of the 70' through to the 90's was slower, but god the rules and laws have changed so many times they don't know how to keep up with them

 

[nailsy]

They have to look at the way VAR is dealing with the tight offside decisions like the one for us against Leicester. I said during the women's world cup that those decisions just feel wrong. The technology just isn't accurate enough to gauge whether the player was in that exact position at the moment the ball was played. Surely they could work out the possible level of inaccuracy by calculating frame rates, top player speeds, etc? Then when you go to the video screen you have one line representing the defenders position, one line representing the attacker, and a third line for margin of error. If the third line overlaps both of the first two lines then you have to allow advantage to the attacker.

I agree with what Barry Glendenning said the other day. VAR should have been introduced to make sure the right decisions are made, but it's being applied to protect the refs instead.

Have there been many VAR decisions that have resulted in a goal being scored that wouldn't otherwise have happened? I'd guess that there have been a few extra penalties given, but have any of the tight offside decisions where the linesman keeps his flag down resulted in a goal? At the moment it seems that VARs chief role is to rule out goals, which would be OK if they were always the right decisions.

 

[Grey Fox]

The Premier league and the referees need to get together during the next international break and sort this out. It is supposed to be used for clear and obvious incidents, what we are seeing is not this at all.
I would like to see an independent panel doing the VAR not other referees, its human nature not to drop your colleague in the do do by changing his decision.

 

[Danny1]

VAR has been an utter shambles this season. Just taking Spurs games alone I have seen the following errors / close calls:

1 - Kane penalty not given against Newcastle.
2 - Rose penalty not given against Leicester.
3 - Aurier goal disallowed due to Son offside which could be deemed previous phase (how far back do you go?)
4 - Lamela foul on Rodri not given.
5 - City goal being disallowed due to dubious hand ball.

For me, the above are clear & obvious errors that had an effect on the outcome of those games. They need to go with the cricket philosophy which is if there is no definite answer then the decision stands with the on field umpire.

Also, nobody knows who the person is in the VAR Room, have they had training, are they previous referees or players? Are their allegiances known before the game to ensure that there is no bias in these decisions that are affecting games.

Looking at the above, if those decisions went they way that they should then City would have beaten us, we would have beaten Leicester & possibly Newcastle.

 

[Danny1]

Another thing, as a player, if you were put through on goal and the linesman flagged & whistle blows then do you stop? Personally I wouldn't, I would run through, put the ball in the back of the net & then ask the question as to whether I was actually offside. It's just causing so much confusion.

 

[nailsy]

VAR has been an utter shambles this season. Just taking Spurs games alone I have seen the following errors / close calls:

1 - Kane penalty not given against Newcastle.
2 - Rose penalty not given against Leicester.
3 - Aurier goal disallowed due to Son offside which could be deemed previous phase (how far back do you go?)
4 - Lamela foul on Rodri not given.
5 - City goal being disallowed due to dubious hand ball.

For me, the above are clear & obvious errors that had an effect on the outcome of those games. They need to go with the cricket philosophy which is if there is no definite answer then the decision stands with the on field umpire.

Also, nobody knows who the person is in the VAR Room, have they had training, are they previous referees or players? Are their allegiances known before the game to ensure that there is no bias in these decisions that are affecting games.

Looking at the above, if those decisions went they way that they should then City would have beaten us, we would have beaten Leicester & possibly Newcastle.

Everyone in the VAR room is fully trained. I assume they have to declare who they support just like the refs/linesmen do.

Another thing, as a player, if you were put through on goal and the linesman flagged & whistle blows then do you stop? Personally I wouldn't, I would run through, put the ball in the back of the net & then ask the question as to whether I was actually offside. It's just causing so much confusion.

Why would you do that? Everyone else stops when the ref blows the whistle, it's never going to count.

Besides which the linesman shouldn't be flagging with tight calls now so it shouldn't happen. I don't think linesmen flagging is causing any confusion is it? When they don't flag for offsides is where we tend to see VAR issues.

 

[Marty]

Also, nobody knows who the person is in the VAR Room, have they had training, are they previous referees or players? Are their allegiances known before the game to ensure that there is no bias in these decisions that are affecting games.

Just to take this out, we do know who's in the VAR room. It's a qualified top flight referee appointed by PGMOL, alongside specialists in the technology VAR uses.

The problem is that the VAR is reluctant to throw his colleague under the bus by pointing out a wrong decision, and referees on the pitch are holding back decisions (like, how does the linesman not flag for Leicester's disallowed goal on Saturday immediately, Perez was far off) assuming that the VAR will intervene. So we end up in a ridiculous situation where refs don't make decisions and aren't corrected except when they decide to draw offside lines down to the millimetre.

 

[nailsy]

One of the football podcasts mentioned that one of the Premier refs is going to retire because he has on-going back problems and can't run around the pitch anymore. Apparently he can't become a VAR official now because he can't pass the fitness test which is the same one they use for on-field referees.

 

[Marty]

One of the football podcasts mentioned that one of the Premier refs is going to retire because he has on-going back problems and can't run around the pitch anymore. Apparently he can't become a VAR official now because he can't pass the fitness test which is the same one they use for on-field referees.

That's a bit odd. It's not like referees are easy to come by these days, the average age of PL refs is way too high as it is. That the likes of Dean and Atkinson are still A-list refs who get top games is a damning indictment of referee recruitment in this country over the last two decades.

 

[Danny1]

Everyone in the VAR room is fully trained. I assume they have to declare who they support just like the refs/linesmen do.



Why would you do that? Everyone else stops when the ref blows the whistle, it's never going to count.

Besides which the linesman shouldn't be flagging with tight calls now so it shouldn't happen. I don't think linesmen flagging is causing any confusion is it? When they don't flag for offsides is where we tend to see VAR issues.

Fair enough, however on your second point, there was an incident in the Chelsea game yesterday where a ball was played through to Abraham and the linesman flagged & ref blew his whistle and the game stopped. However, at the time I thought it was extremely close call so what happens if they realise its actually onside? That was also be a clear & obvious error and the game should have continued so what do they do from there?

If it's close then the linesman should not flag at all & leave it up to VAR.

 

[nailsy]

Fair enough, however on your second point, there was an incident in the Chelsea game yesterday where a ball was played through to Abraham and the linesman flagged & ref blew his whistle and the game stopped. However, at the time I thought it was extremely close call so what happens if they realise its actually onside? That was also be a clear & obvious error and the game should have continued so what do they do from there?

If it's close then the linesman should not flag at all & leave it up to VAR.

If the linesman is confident that it's offside they should flag. We don't want needless VAR reviews all the time. They might make the odd mistake, but we have to live with it. I haven't seen the incident you're talking about, but it could be that they switched off for a second and raised their flag as that's their first instinct after years of running the line. Don't forget that some of the officials will be doing games that don't have VAR as well.

 

[Danny1]

If the linesman is confident that it's offside they should flag. We don't want needless VAR reviews all the time. They might make the odd mistake, but we have to live with it. I haven't seen the incident you're talking about, but it could be that they switched off for a second and raised their flag as that's their first instinct after years of running the line. Don't forget that some of the officials will be doing games that don't have VAR as well.

Ah I agree and for me there is zero blame to the linesman in doing his job to the best of his ability. I've always thought that once you open up a scenario to potential "mis-justice" for want of a better word, then there will always be a seed of doubt in every decision being made.

 

[cozzo]

VAR puts the players at risk from injuries over nothing.

 

[Lighty64]

The Premier league and the referees need to get together during the next international break and sort this out. It is supposed to be used for clear and obvious incidents, what we are seeing is not this at all.
I would like to see an independent panel doing the VAR not other referees, its human nature not to drop your colleague in the do do by changing his decision.

but it's only this country or the PL that give a shit about protecting the man in the middle. what's the point in having monitors if they don't intend on using them, and even if Mike Dean looked v Newcastle too much bad blood with Poch to give us anything, and the PGMOL can't see there's a problem with him, and if Riley is making the appointments I'm shocked we don't have Dean every other bloody week.

 

[TheBlueRooster]

VAR isn't the problem it's the new laws and the interpretation by both parties. I think if the guy in the control room had said that Son was offside but by only 2-3mm and get the referee on the field to make the call as it is too close to be 100% accurate then I'd be happy to accept the decision. For me the offside law has to be changed not bits of a player is onside and bits aren't.

 

[BehindEnemyLines]

If the call is within the tolerance of the VAR system (which appears to be about 15cm), then the call should be in the attacking players favour. They shouldn't be overriding the referee by making calls over a 1.3cm offside when they know the system isn't accurate enough to definitively state that as fact!

 

[13VanDerBale13]

Aside from offside the biggest joke with ‘VAR’ is how ‘they’ are afraid to overturn refs decisions & award penalties, countless occasions this season where blatant pens haven’t been overturned

 

[yankspurs]

One of the football podcasts mentioned that one of the Premier refs is going to retire because he has on-going back problems and can't run around the pitch anymore. Apparently he can't become a VAR official now because he can't pass the fitness test which is the same one they use for on-field referees.

Can confirm. Sitting around on a chair all day doing nothing but staring at a screen is very fitness oriented. You have to keep focused for 8-9 hours a day 5 days a week. Very tough on the body

 

['O Zio]

Do the referees have the option to come and take another look? Don't recall it happening if they are. Surely that clears up any issues with this?

I believe that the PL VAR protocol is that the referee doesn't view the decision himself. One of the major gripes during trials was the time it was taking to make a decision and a lot of that time was due to the referee going over to the screen.

They do actually have that option available to them at the side of the pitch. However, because that slows the game down so much, the PL was very adamant at the start of the season that refs only use it as an absolute last resort/in exceptional circumstances, so I assume no ref has had the balls to ask for it yet because they'd presumably get a telling off from the PL if their gut feeling was wrong. I assume the only time it would get used is if a ref is absolutely certain that the VAR is wrong, but obviously it takes some serious stubbornness to be convinced that you got a better look at it in real time than the VAR did in a replay.

 

[nailsy]

Have there been many VAR decisions that have resulted in a goal being scored that wouldn't otherwise have happened? I'd guess that there have been a few extra penalties given, but have any of the tight offside decisions where the linesman keeps his flag down resulted in a goal? At the moment it seems that VARs chief role is to rule out goals, which would be OK if they were always the right decisions.

I've just heard the answer to this. Apparently it's ruled out nine goals, and added one that was going to be ruled out.