Don't tell me that the VAR Thread is still going?

Because the tags could only "catch" a limited number of issues whereas VAR can at least run an eye over any issue.?

 

I'd change my boots at half time.

Come on you guys. This is stupid enough already.

 

Half of the other rules are subjective, so why not??

Wouldn't the Chelsea offside have qualified for that particular decision?

 

The point is that 95% of times we all know it would get called. Which therefore brings into statistical question why a 2nd ref on the same day would refuse to call it. That's statistically highly unlikely as a normal measurement.

So VAR (the refs working that day), it seems, for reasons not to do with the rules, was unwilling to do what it was put there to do. Which is to overrule a clear and obvious error.
If this can't be called a clear and obvious error, then such a thing DOES NOT EXIST.....

 

It fascinates me how people can be so concerned with millimeter-nanosecond accuracy (where it actually doesn't matter - Sterling and Mason Mount incidents) and be blase about secondary refs using their eyes where it does actually matter....
as in the Matip and Serbia World Cup situations.
For me these are not only nowhere near 50-50 incidents, but are not even arguably 75-25 incidents. Which points to a human structural failing of VAR to uphold its own standards.

 

Just because something else is poor is never an argument to be satisfied with a different poor outcome.

No. It was clearly offside. The Tottenham(?) decision was a much closer call.

 

Sure, any number of scenarios are possible. And I don;t know what happened (other than that Matip was fouled - that I DO know.) But which one is most likely?

These two - I'd reckon -

One - they saw, and did not want to intervene.
Two - they weren't looking at that bit and couldn't get into any kind of overlay mode to check it because they weren;t aware of it quickly enough (there's a lot to look at in the box on corners.)
Both of those seem likely. The ref telling them to piss off for his original decision, as you put it, is rather like my Yellow Goalposts, not so much so!

(Incidentally, a ref wouldn't be within his (still sane) right to insist on sticking to a call so bad that he wouldn't take his colleagues better placed advice if it came.
You yourself said you had no problem with it as a foul and that (more crucially) refs don't always enforce the rules with strictness in the box on corners. Grant all that: Then any ref, knowing and being aware of all this, and knowing that he is already bending the rules like a long bow to accommodate extra roughness in corner situations, and then refusing to take a correction of his call about such a thing from those better placed to see it, would be unfit to be a ref.
If he's incapable of realizing how bad a foul that actually was one is left wondering how he ever became a ref.

very zany...... VAR should have called it.

 

I don't either. But I do think that it's an unlikely probability that two refs looking at that would both come to the conclusion that it wasn't a foul. I think the VAR refs either didn't see it or they fluffed their lines.......

 

I think this whole discussion began with my saying that IF they give VAR any kind of role in policing that, the can of worms will eat them.......

and now, after a gazillion posts to the contrary you are suggesting they try to get involved. They must have opened up a Canabis store next to your house!

 

6 Leicester players were in possible offsides on the first VAR call...... mental.... good call though ... a linesman might actually get that call wrong because there were so many players clustered in the area

 

Btw/ technically this is incorrect. That may be correct, or it may not. What is correct is that you don't know that I don't know anything that happened. I could be the ref, or his brother.
Hell, I could be the VAR ref ....
(well now that one is stretching the imagination a bit .... ..... )

 

Var give the Chavs a PK. The defender did get the ball but it was well sold off the follow through.

Nowhere near a clear PK though as the tackle on Mane' where the defender never touched the ball but clearly took Mane' out.

Still subjective.

 

It’s poor officiating, full stop.

 

Two different uses of VAR. both calling it to hard for var to call offsides.


The Premier League’s use of the technology has been accused of sucking the joy out of football after it judged Son Heung-min to be 2cm offside in the build-up to a disallowed goal in their defeat by Leicester last Saturday, as VAR took an age to draw lines down from the players’ armpits and decipher the offside line.

However, The Mail on Sunday revealed that the technology used by broadcasters and VAR to judge offsides is not accurate enough to be certain on the most marginal calls with players able to move more than 19cm between frames.

Rosetti’s views suggest that extremely tight calls are likely to be ruled onside in the Champions League with UEFA understood to be conscious of how difficult it can be to judge the exact moment the ball was struck.


https://distinctathlete.com/2019/09...ar-offside-decisions-uefa-referee-chief-says/

 

yep - I posted that about 5,000 posts back. expect the pro-VAR gang to completely ignore it again.

"Roberto Rosetti wants his video officials to refrain from overturning on-field decisions if it is too difficult to tell for certain whether a player was in an offside position when the ball was played."
- that sounds a lot like what I've been saying on here. oh hang on, it IS what I've been saying.

"fans at Villa Park chanting ‘VAR is f****** s***’ after officials took almost two minutes to rule out John McGinn’s goal for a fractional offside"
"even the players have started to mock the technology. McGinn celebrated his late goal by drawing the box-shaped VAR signal, while Tanguy Ndombele also marked his goal for Tottenham with a box shape before putting his finger to his ear in mock VAR discussion with Serge Aurier."
- they need to be careful, VAR will review this and tell the ref to red card them. on a serious note, how can a professional league continue when the crowds and even players openly mock the rules?

"Rosetti’s views suggest that extremely tight calls are likely to be ruled onside in the Champions League"
- meanwhile the Prem will continue to use microscopes.

take the big view - if the top officials in the game, and the leagues in Europe, can't agree on how VAR should be used, surely to god that = it's been introduced too soon?

 

Did you say that? have I agreed?

My fear is of turning the game into NFL, basketball type "sport"

 

yes I have, and yes of course you have - you're a very wise man.

 

I know.