VAR

[hallamblue]

No part of the defender can be in line with any part of the attacker, same line across pitch.. pretty simple I'd have thought?

You'd think that lol

 

[blulouie]

That is the problem with VAR in football - we're looking for an objectively right answer to be reached when there isn't one it's subjective.

Under the rules which is all we need to know , that is a stonewall penalty , anywhere else on the pitch a free kick is given.

It's not about wether it is objective or subjective.

Plain & simple ( remember when football used to be that ) that is a foul preventing a goalscoring opportunity.
In the area its a penalty.

The ONLY debate here is WE way more often that not don't get the right decisions , yet others do.

 

[Victus]

 

[neil999]

All this stuff about slowing it down making it worse... i thought slowing it down showed he only clipped him and there was no force behind the challenge?!

 

[NathDogg]

All 3 involved in this debacle needs sacking, along with Webb, pgmol and VAR. they are as defunct as the premier league and all unfit for purpose.

Kavanagh didn’t even give a foul, never mind a caution, in real time and he was spot on.

Pawson and Salisbury then proceed to intervene when there isn’t a clear and obvious error on the pitch - why are they even reviewing it?

We need to hear the audio of what they have told Kavanagh during the 8,000,000 replays in super slow mo that made him change his mind.

Why didn’t Kavanagh have the courage of his convictions and stick with his original correct call - what was said or instructed to him to go from no foul to straight red for serious foul play?

Why weren’t the two tackles by Hughes reviewed by VAR like the DCL one? A clear and obvious error from the ref of the DCL challenge is a red.

Why wasn’t the holding on Beto reviewed as other incidents have been - wasn’t that a clear and obvious error from Kavanagh and the linesman to miss the rugby tackle?

I will give you a clue - the answer to all those questions isn’t incompetence or inconsistency.

It’s corruption.

 

[RD2910]

That's the simplest way going forward, and it was the rule for a brief period, think Wengers idea is along those lines? Have no idea why it was changed

'Daylight' was never in the actual law. I remember Jonathan Pearce got a bit obsessed on commentary telling everyone it was but it definitely wasn't.

 

[Evertonthat]

What VAR dosent do is help show the real time event as it was. Its slowed down and freezeframed to show a still image of a foot position that could be deemed dangerous, and thats what the morons at PGMOL have based their opinions on.

In reality Dom was virtually stationary at the time of the tackle, so it's wasn't at all dangerous. it was a great sliding ball trap and timed perfectly.

In addition, it's not helped by the pathetic play acting by Clyne.

 

[JimmyK]

Under the rules which is all we need to know , that is a stonewall penalty , anywhere else on the pitch a free kick is given.

It's not about wether it is objective or subjective.

Plain & simple ( remember when football used to be that ) that is a foul preventing a goalscoring opportunity.
In the area its a penalty.

The ONLY debate here is WE way more often that not don't get the right decisions , yet others do.

It didn't get given as a penalty VAR didn't think it was either and a lot of our own fans don't think it was a penalty so I think you might be exaggerating a bit. Like I said sometimes they get given sometimes they don't and that is why VAR doesn't help because two referees can look at the same incident and see it differently thats just how it is so VAR adds more confusion not less.

 

[Blue_Berry]

100% Beto wasn't a pen but the point Dyche made (the only decent point I thought from hs press conference but we'll agree to disagree on what we both think he should and shouldn't have said) was spot on. Put te Beto one in slow motion and it's pen. Put the Hughes tackle in slow motion and it's a red and so on and so on.

I've no qualms with the Beto one not being given but let's say that's Salah or Foden, 100% that gets checked a lot differently. I think it took the commentsor less than 5 seconds to say it had been checked. How did they check that slow motion in 5 seconds? I don't think they did and just instantly dismissed it as a dive. About 40 seconds later they do the slow motion replay and you'd say "yeah in super slow motion that could be classed as a pen".

I don't want soft penalties, I don't want dodgy decisions, I'm not asking for a helping hand. What I do want though is fairness in these decisions and consistency.

Stick VAR in the bin and stick about 10 of the referees in it whilst we're at it.

I get what you're saying mate - 100% Beto wasn't a pen, in the eyes of anyone who has ever played football. HOWEVER...

How many times have you heard ex-footballer pundits commentating on a game say 'there was contact, so he was entitled to go down'? So I guess that's what the rules say, and they are therefore just citing the rules, but they must know in their heart of hearts that's just wrong, and they still tow the line.

If I'm honest, I reckon the Beto 'pen' wasn't given mainly because he's not skilled enough in making a convincing dive. He was manhandled, but he was pretty much stationary, so just slumped to the floor, whereas a Salah or a Grealish would have lunged forward dramatically and almost certainly got the pen.

And THAT is what the game's all about now, unfortunately.

 

[joebocop]

All this stuff about slowing it down making it worse... i thought slowing it down showed he only clipped him and there was no force behind the challenge?!

The only time it looks dangerous is when it's paused at a specific angle. Which makes it look somewhat similar to image you'd see of a dangerous tackle. In every other speed and angle it shouldn't even be a consideration. Baffling decision.

 

[dublinbluenose]

The only way to have any faith in the way VAR is being run is to ooen the audio up in real-time. Let the teams and tv audience hear, as rugby does.

It also should only be up to the ref to call for a review, i.e. if he isnt sure about a penalty he can have a look. That and off side. Leave the rest until after, if there is serious foul play then a player can be cited.

 

[ForestBlue]

Will he get a bigger ban if the appeal fails?

 

[blulouie]

It didn't get given as a penalty VAR didn't think it was either and a lot of our own fans don't think it was a penalty so I think you might be exaggerating a bit. Like I said sometimes they get given sometimes they don't and that is why VAR doesn't help because two referees can look at the same incident and see it differently thats just how it is so VAR adds more confusion not less.

Just answer this.

If that's Salah in front of the Kop does that get given ?

The point is made it is a foul in the box , by any metric its a penalty.

It is wrong , VAR used slow mo from many different angles to change the referees mind on DCL , So why didn't they do it for this , as I recall it was checked by VAR in seconds.

The ONLY debate here is what is Right or Wrong.

 

[Kevsleftpeg]

There needs to be some amount of contact allowed, the game existed for years with contact just fine so why try to remove it completely.
I get a shirt pull that stops a player advancing but two players grappling in the box can't be a foul.
Watch every corner we get or defend against, unless the refs pull up every one for grappling and give a foul it isn't consistent, and consistency or lack of it is the big issue here.

Firstly it wasn't at a corner. Secondly, it's not contact it's one player literally holding another in a bear hug for a sustained period of time. I don't get how anyone can think that shouldn't be penalised. That has never been allowed in the rules and actually didn't use to go on anywhere near as much at corners etc pre-2000s because you would simply get elbowed/butted in the face by the opponent and no one would have any sympathy for you.

 

[RD2910]

Will he get a bigger ban if the appeal fails?

No.