VAR

[blulouie]

The Beto one is a good example of why I don't think VAR works in football because I don't really think that is a penalty but some people do and they definitely get given at other times which just shows why interfering with those decisions doesn't work because its just someone elses opinion being thrown into the mix.

What does this even mean ?

some people do and they definitely get given at other times...Well they don't for us.

Did you not see Liverpool’s pens the other night , if they had Blue shirts on they get booked for diving.

 

[Gilbert..]

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.

Fully putting your arms around an opponent preventing him moving forward is not grappling as Beto was not doing the same. Its a foul. Its always been a foul and if that had happened near the centre circle Everton would have got a free kick.

 

[blulouie]

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.

That wasn't a corner mate where the majority of the shirt pulling & holding is done before the corner is taken.

That was a foul on a player in the penalty box in open play. It stops a goalscoring opportunity and its not a little tug , he has Beto in a bear hug for quite a while.

If that's a Red shirt in front of the Kop that's a pen....All day.

 

[Rita_Poon]

Belter that. Add it to the Niasse evidence.

 

[Pittsburgh Footy]

Exactly, lots of supporters don't actually understand the purpose of the offside rule. It is purely a fairly blunt instrument to prevent goal hanging. Giving offsides which are not clearly visible to the naked eye is ludicrous. When I played upfront you look across the line and keep your eye line level with the last defender. If you run too early and are a yard ahead when the ball is played you are offside. If you are broadly in line you shouldn't be.

This is why I've long been frustrated by how VAR is required to apply the offside rule. The intent of the rule is stop what you describe. It was never intended to be judged within the millimeter like we can do with current technology. The wording of the rule needs to change now, to say something that allows more wiggle room in its application - it was never intended to be applied as we currently do today.

 

[matty1878]

it won’t let me post that video with all the challenges and at stats

makes me sick

if i was a manager i’d be skint of fines

coz i would kick off

 

[JelavicBrate2]

For all those saying cancel VAR, this is what officiating for the big clubs looks like without it. You’ll never see an offside given against Salah or Fernandes ever again without VAR. The technology is no problem, it’s the corrupt refs using it to fix games which is the issue.

John Terry diving to save a goal with his hands going ignored

Steven Gerrard getting parties for ‘intent to foul’ even when no contact

United having goals disallowed against them when the ball is 3 yards over the line

City scoring against us from a ball about 5 yards out of play

This is the world without VAR and Pigmol would be desperate to go back to it, desperate.

But they were honest mistakes, the referee before goaline technology was never going to predict that Caroll would drop the ball from a random shot from the half way line. When City scored when the ball went out of play, to be fair they had a blatant penalty not given that I could see from the lower Gwaldys and Stones got away with one at their place in the last minute should of been a pen. It's got worse with VAR as people are saying it completely distracts from the players performance.

 

[JimmyK]

What does this even mean ?

some people do and they definitely get given at other times...Well they don't for us.

Did you not see Liverpool’s pens the other night , if they had Blue shirts on they get booked for diving.

What is it you don't understand because it means exactly what it says? I don't think that is a penalty and neither do 3 people who have replied to me saying it but you do and so do some other people. 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.

 

[JimmyK]

But they were honest mistakes, the referee before goaline technology was never going to predict that Caroll would drop the ball from a random shot from the half way line. When City scored when the ball went out of play, to be fair they had a blatant penalty not given that I could see from the lower Gwaldys and Stones got away with one at their place in the last minute should of been a pen. It's got worse with VAR as people are saying it completely distracts from the players performance.

It must have been very blatant for you to see it from the lower gwladys when it happened at the etihad.

 

[JelavicBrate2]

It must have been very blatant for you to see it from the lower gwladys when it happened at the etihad.

Mirallas did the one I saw from lower Gwaldys volleyed one of their players, didn't get anywhere near the ball, could see stones one cos if the angle. You could see Mirallas fouled the fella from mars it was that blatant.

 

[JimmyK]

Mirallas did the one I saw from lower Gwaldys volleyed one of their players, didn't get anywhere near the ball, could see stones one cos if the angle. You could see Mirallas fouled the fella from mars it was that blatant.

The ball went out in the second leg that was the first leg is all i meant.

 

[Marius57]

It shouldn't be a penalty, ever, BUT.. the way the game has gone there are penalties being given for minimal contact every weekend. And that being the case how is full blatant contact not deemed a foul?
It's non-football people making up rules, same as has been mentioned above about offside, go back to why each rule was brought in in the 1st place and adapt the guidelines to meet the modern game. You should never ever be inches offside, Jesus I would say you shouldn't even be able to be a foot offside.
It's all a real contrived pile of bollocks turned out and if nothings done about it will only get worse

Offside should be if there is daylight between the attacker and defender. Give the benefit of the doubt to the attacker.

 

[Chrismac]

Offside should be if there is daylight between the attacker and defender. Give the benefit of the doubt to the attacker.

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

 

[hallamblue]

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

It won't help, you'll get interpretation of what daylight is, which bit of the player counts etc. Just leave it with the linesman and unless it's horrendously wrong let the on field decision stand.

 

[Chrismac]

It won't help, you'll get interpretation of what daylight is, which bit of the player counts etc. Just leave it with the linesman and unless it's horrendously wrong let the on field decision stand.

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?