"Bon dia a tots!": The Other Teams thread [R]

Reports that Anthony Modeste is likely off to China. Not finalized yet but a club official says it's very close to done.
Tianjin Quanjian to pay 35m euro fee. Alexandre Pato and Axel Witsel also at Tianjin.
There's a new Chinese law that includes a 100% tax on all transfer fees but I'm guessing Cologne will see none of that (?)
Still, a decent payday for Cologne but... damn, he'll be missed.

 

Players are just going to have to learn to play until they hear the whistle. You just know its gonna happen any day where the linesman's flag goes up, defenders stop, ref decides its close enough to play-on and the attacker slots the ball in the net unchallenged. Then they check the replay and the goal counts.

That'll cause an uproar, but hey... gotta play until you hear the whistle.

As for slowing the game down, well the sport most similar to soccer in terms of flow-of-play which also uses VAR is rugby. And VAR does slow that game down noticeably. There's just no debating that.

 

Playing to the whistle has always been preached.
The referee cannot and should not allow VAR to enter his mind. He must trust his linesmen who are in a better position to judge. Otherwise, VAR is affecting the game more than it should and not in a positive sense.

Afaik, VAR is used in rugby specifically for tries and whether or not the ball was touched down.
Soccer's equivalent is goal-line technology.

As for the issues of playing flow interrupted by throw-ins, corners, fouls, etc, we as fans accepted those as part of the game when we became fans of The Beautiful Game.
VAR has its place if used as intended: “Minimum interference, maximum benefit”. Yet it seems every goal is being looked at.
After Portugal's second goal I threw up my hands and thought, "What the hell could they possibly be looking at?!" There was nothing obvious that could have warrented a review. In the end the goal stood. Complete waste of time.
Australia's second goal included a handball that benefited the Aussies. Yet the goal stood! Where's the outcry from those favoring VAR?
And again, VAR is supposed to decide "was the decision clearly wrong?”, not “was the decision correct?”. If they're going to constantly ask the latter soccer will nearly have as many stop/starts as gridiron football.
I maintain the Vargas goal should have stood.
https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/confederation-cup-2017-referees.2046235/page-2#post-35574522

 

If they can incorporate true technology into offside calls I'd would definitely be in favor. But how do you put sensors in knees?
But I've never had a problem with shades of gray in offsides. One of a number of petty infringes that I've accepted when I began following the sport.

We've seen times when a corner kick is taken that the ball is a bit beyond the corner arc. The technical definition says the ball must be inside the arc.
So if a goal is scored should VAR take the goal away? How about if a corner is cleared by the defence, kept in the attacking team's half and eventually scores?

Very early on in the Portugal-Mexico game a Mexican defender threw his elbow into the back of Nani's head. Nani stayed down for quite a while. A foul was given but it arguably should have been a red card. Not even a yellow was produced.
No shouting from the VAR backers.

 

Well, they have one year to work it all out if they plan on using it in the World Cup. And the way things stand now I feel VAR will cause more controversy than settle issues.

I think the Bundesliga plans on using VAR this coming season.

 

Calendario update...

Sat 29 July: pre-season Clasico, FCB v LPB
Mon 31 July: CR7 summoned to appear in Spanish court for tax evasion.

 

fyi ... In rugby they'll review any questionable call that connects directly a possible scoring play (not just if the ball touched down). They'll also use it to judge bad tackles in the middle of the match (i.e. if it should be a red card, yellow, just a foul or no foul at all).

So its basically identical to how its being applied at the Confederations Cup. But of course rugby has more scoring plays than soccer so one would expect fewer delays in soccer.

 

The problem here though is that if we require it to always be black & white we have to begin with changing the offside law (or the way its interpreted). As long as a player can be considered not offside despite being "passive offside" there will always be some non-black&white calls.

Then there are the penalty decisions. Haven't seen VAR used for one recently but those are never/rarely black & white.

 

I'm just pointing out that offside is not a black & white thing like the discussion in this thread seems to assuming. Passive offside is quite subjective.

The biggest hurdle VAR has to overcome is convincing fans that not every call will be made right just because VAR is implemented. I'm giving one type of call that will cause controversy. Then there are penalty decisions, which (correct me if I'm wrong) we haven't had so far in this Confederations' Cup. I don't think fans are prepared for it. They're already whining over the black & white decision to negate Chile's first half "goal" against Russia in a glorified friendly.

 

Problem is they seem to be reviewing every scoring play, not just ones that are "clearly and obviously wrong".
I also wonder... it probably takes roughly a minute for each VAR review. Is the time it takes for these reviews being added to injury time? I would think it should yet it's felt like it hasn't.

 

Yeah, its time they stop the bloody clock for certain things.

 

This is exactly what the confed cup should be about. Testing things and looking for improvements. Stopping the clock would be a good idea.

How is VAR initiated - does the ref have to ask for it himself if he is unsure, can the teams ask for it, or is it the var operator who decides?

 

But if your team went up a goal because this 'offside' wasn't called how anxious would you be for VAR to confirm the call?



It's close enough for me that a) the play isn't "clear and obvious", especially during live action that VAR should be required (I've always been of the opinion that if you need slow-motion/freeze frame to determine a call, give the benefit of the doubt to the attacking team referee's decision) and b) I wouldn't be bothered if my team went a goal down because this 'offside' wasn't called. aka Sh*t happens.

 

No comments so far on the use of VAR on Portugal's second goal v Mexico. What were they looking for?
Nor on the Aussie handball goal v Germany. Should the goal have been allowed?

 

Assuming the lines are correct, the one line is drawn to mark the defender's foot.
For me, the defender's right elbow is beyond that line.
Agree?

EDIT:
I'll also reiterate this post from a respected member of the refereeing forum.
https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/confederation-cup-2017-referees.2046235/page-2#post-35574522