VAR

[UniFox21]

I'm sure many of you watched the PSG vs Utd game, and over on the champions league thread lot of people can't see why it was given and some can. 

 

If VAR starts making these types of decisions start being given, literally everything will begin to be a foul.

[Sampson]

It was never a penalty, but it was a fault of the referee not VAR. VAR didn't make the decision.

[Trav Le Bleu]

Wrong thread, but it's my main bugbear with VAR. It's doesn't change the interpretation of an individual that will depend on who the ref is.

[MrSpaM]

Just a question for the people who think it wasn't, if the player was facing forward would it be a penalty?

 

Unfortunately there is no stipulation in hand ball that the player must be facing the ball for it to be given as a foul

 

I think it was a penalty based on that

[Sampson]

Just now, MrSpaM said:

Just a question for the people who think it wasn't, if the player was facing forward would it be a penalty?

 

Unfortunately there is no stipulation in hand ball that the player must be facing the ball for it to be given as a foul

 

I think it was a penalty based on that

There is a stipulation it has to be deliberate though.

 

How could that be considered deliberate when he has his back to it and realistically, doesn't even know where the ball is? It's not like he moves his arm towards the ball or anything.

[MrSpaM]

3 minutes ago, Sampson said:

There is a stipulation it has to be deliberate though.

 

How could that be considered deliberate when he has his back to it and realistically, doesn't even know where the ball is? It's not like he moves his arm towards the ball or anything.

If the players back was to the ball when it was struck you could argue it was accidental, he was watching the ball when when it was struck, waited, and then turned, so you could also argue he knew what trajectory the ball was taking, therefore it's deliberate

Edited 6 March 2019 by MrSpaM

[funkyrobot]

He jumped high to block it and it hit his arm so the jump combined with him putting his arm out means it can easily be given as handball. In Europe with VAR they’ve been doing that all season. 

[That_Dude]

14 minutes ago, MrSpaM said:

If the players back was to the ball when it was struck you could argue it was accidental, he was watching the ball when when it was struck, waited, and then turned, so you could also argue he knew what trajectory the ball was taking, therefore it's deliberate

No, just no. Off course he waited before, he had to see if the opponent was going to strike or go further with the ball. He jumped and turned his back because he freaked out, not wanting to get it on his face at full speed.

 

When you jump and your arms move to maintain your balance and his right one was as much aligned as possible in this case. He didn't try to make himself bigger. The ball did hit his arm but there's just no way it was deliberate. It's one of the softest penalties ever given.

[womp]

I saw one just recently where the player after a attempt at a header as he came down the player behind (approx 1 mtr away)kicked it (attempted cross)into his arm.

VAR says penalty and he gets a yellow card.

absolutely ridiculous!!!

[davelcfc100]

Nobody knows the correct answer. That’s the problem.

[st albans fox]

Next season it will definitely be a pen .... the players arm has to be by his side if he blocks a shot with his arm ....... as soon as the ref was asked to look at it I was sure he would give it .....he is way off the ground and his arm was a little way away from his body..... a tough one ...... no VAR = no pen .... that’s for sure ! 

 

still dont like  it but we have to make the best of it cos it isn’t going to be dropped now ......

Edited 6 March 2019 by st albans fox

[ScouseFox]

said it last season, said it in the world cup threads, will continue to say it. if VAR replays are continually shown in slow motion, the game is fu cked. the game isn’t played in slow motion. handball’s, big tackles and everything else all look like they’re penalties, straight reds, excessive force blah blah blah if you slow it down enough. 

[womp]

25 minutes ago, Sampson said:

There is a stipulation it has to be deliberate though.

 

How could that be considered deliberate when he has his back to it and realistically, doesn't even know where the ball is? It's not like he moves his arm towards the ball or anything.

they seem to not care if its deliberate or their arm is where it should be for balance,well anything except if it hits his hand/arm.

[womp]

2 minutes ago, ScouseFox said:

said it last season, said it in the world cup threads, will continue to say it. if VAR replays are continually shown in slow motion, the game is fu cked. the game isn’t played in slow motion. handball’s, big tackles and everything else all look like they’re penalties, straight reds, excessive force blah blah blah if you slow it down enough. 

maybe they should try VAR not seeing slow motion only real time.

[H.a.r.r.y]

i could imagine one of our players taking that penalty, the classic stutter and a pee roller straight into the keeper's hands to send you home

[womp]

55 minutes ago, Sampson said:

It was never a penalty, but it was a fault of the referee not VAR. VAR didn't make the decision.

so far when a ref has been called to look, not one of them has gone against VAR.

well that ive seen.

[Super_horns]

With handball different refs will have varied opinions so you will

still get debate ..

[Kitchandro]

1 hour ago, Sampson said:

It was never a penalty, but it was a fault of the referee not VAR. VAR didn't make the decision.

But VAR influences the referees just as normal assistant referees do. Without it's input certain decisions wouldn't be made. Handballs are the most common - in real time most clearly aren't handballs but officials are now obliged to look at all these instances in slow motion out of context.

I mean the footage the referee is looking at in the above example is so stupid, rewinding and playing a 1 second piece of film over and over again gives you no understanding of intention, speed or anything relevant apart from the fact the ball clearly struck his arm. How is the referee supposed to make a conclusive decision based on that?

 

When VAR has actually stepped in and made the referee look at an incident 25 times he normally would have had the natural common sense to see once and judge it on it's merits in normal time, you'd have to say it's causing trouble. It doesn't solve a single thing it only creates more controversy and makes corruption easier as referees can now pick and choose which decisions to review and change and even if they are honest the thinking time will affect their judgement. They are under even more pressure with VAR and they need less because they generally crumble under it.

 

Terrible addition to the game.

[ealingfox]

Absolutely ludicrous decision.

[Kitchandro]

Sorry but anyone who watched the World Cup final and still thought VAR was a good idea needs to lay off the sauce. The biggest game in football was swung in the favour of the worse team due to VAR and VAR alone. That penalty would never have been given without VAR and you could argue was only given because the referee was given time to decide whether he could get away with giving it.

 

The powers that be cannot be trusted with this sort of technology.

[WigstonWanderer]

10 minutes ago, Kitchandro said:

But VAR influences the referees just as normal assistant referees do. Without it's input certain decisions wouldn't be made. Handballs are the most common - in real time most clearly aren't handballs but officials are now obliged to look at all these instances in slow motion out of context.

I mean the footage the referee is looking at in the above example is so stupid, rewinding and playing a 1 second piece of film over and over again gives you no understanding of intention, speed or anything relevant apart from the fact the ball clearly struck his arm. How is the referee supposed to make a conclusive decision based on that?

 

When VAR has actually stepped in and made the referee look at an incident 25 times he normally would have had the natural common sense to see once and judge it on it's merits in normal time, you'd have to say it's causing trouble. It doesn't solve a single thing it only creates more controversy and makes corruption easier as referees can now pick and choose which decisions to review and change and even if they are honest the thinking time will affect their judgement. They are under even more pressure with VAR and they need less because they generally crumble under it.

 

Terrible addition to the game.

I don’t think it’s true that they can pick and choose which decisions to review. I believe VAR will automatically review incidents as they see fit and bring them to the ref’s attention. No doubt the ref can also ask them to check some instances when he wasn’t sure what happened.

[Gamble92]

The problem with asking the ref to look at it is that they then know that other officials must think it is, and then give it.

 

How many times do they NOT give it when they get told to have a look? I can only remember once at the world cup when i seen a ref look and not give it. Every other time, no matter how tame, he's given it.

 

Im still for it though. At least he can make his mind up there and not when the game is over wishing he had done things differently.

[Fox In The Box 90]

Just now, Gamble92 said:

The problem with asking the ref to look at it is that they then know that other officials must think it is, and then give it.

 

How many times do they NOT give it when they get told to have a look? I can only remember once at the world cup when i seen a ref look and not give it. Every other time, no matter how tame, he's given it.

 

Im still for it though. At least he can make his mind up there and not when the game is over wishing he had done things differently.

I think this seems to be the thing for me.

 

Referees are too quick to overturn their original decision now. When a decision is reviewed its pretty much always overturned.

 

On the decision itself, it was soft but the defender blocked a goal bound shot with his arm.

 

Whether he intended to do that is doubtful but so are 90% + of handball decisions. Cant really complain too much i dont think

[ThaiFox]

6 hours ago, UniFox21 said:

I'm sure many of you watched the PSG vs Utd game, and over on the champions league thread lot of people can't see why it was given and some can. 

 

If VAR starts making these types of decisions start being given, literally everything will begin to be a foul.

 

5 hours ago, ScouseFox said:

said it last season, said it in the world cup threads, will continue to say it. if VAR replays are continually shown in slow motion, the game is fu cked. the game isn’t played in slow motion. handball’s, big tackles and everything else all look like they’re penalties, straight reds, excessive force blah blah blah if you slow it down enough. 

 

4 hours ago, Kitchandro said:

Sorry but anyone who watched the World Cup final and still thought VAR was a good idea needs to lay off the sauce. The biggest game in football was swung in the favour of the worse team due to VAR and VAR alone. That penalty would never have been given without VAR and you could argue was only given because the referee was given time to decide whether he could get away with giving it.

 

The powers that be cannot be trusted with this sort of technology.

These three posts show exactly why VAR is bad for football. There will be far more controversial decisions with VAR than before.

 

Even in tennis, or cricket, or where the games is stop and start, I don't like it. Players use it for various reasons and not always to correct a decision, and umpires back out of making decisions because they know a player can appeal.

 

As ScouseFox correctly says, everything looks much worse in slow motion and often don't take into account how the situation develops.

 

(However, it would have shown Deeney was offside when he scored for Watford last Sunday!)

 

 

[Nicolo Barella]

VAR is needed. It's not perfect, nor will it ever be, but it will improve. What it's not going to magically improve is our referees. They need to be trained better, vetted more, given a clearer career path, and helped with rule changes.

 

People using the world cup as an example of VAR's failure to add anything to the game amuses me. Have they forgotten the overwhelming number of decisions VAR ruled correctly, and the fact that it was the first time being implemented in the World Cup? I can agree with some that replays shouldn't be slow-mo, but I believe it will come with time.