VAR

[RD2910]

Will he get a bigger ban if the appeal fails?

No.

 

[twoblue]

Im sceptical of offsides too. Surely the ball is touching the foot for several frames in really close offsides the player could be offside when he touches the ball but onside when leaves his foot. Any fine margin decision should go the way of an attacker in my opinion

 

[Kevsleftpeg]

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.

100% it's a major problem with the way lots of people understand the rules of all sports and rules/laws in general. They never think about the purpose or intent of the rule or how it originated. They just blindly apply/follow it. Handball is the same. The purpose of the rule is to prevent players picking up the ball or deliberately deflecting it with a hand. It was never intended to penalties ball to hand situations yet lots of modern day fans think it is a fundamental rule of the game that anytime the ball hits ab an arm it is handball

 

[RD2910]

Im sceptical of offsides too. Surely the ball is touching the foot for several frames in really close offsides the player could be offside when he touches the ball but onside when leaves his foot. Any fine margin decision should go the way of an attacker in my opinion

It's the 'first point of contact' which counts in relation to offside.

 

[JimmyK]

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.

Well that might be the ONLY debate here for you but that isn't the point of what I was saying! I think Salah would get a penalty for it yes because thats how it seems to work but I would also think it was the wrong decision when that happened so it doesn't make any difference. I don't think that would usually get given as a penalty and lots of people agree with me and THAT is the whole debate from my point of view. I'm not saying you're wrong to think its a penalty I'm saying the exact opposite which is that there is no right and wrong with these things the interpretation of the laws is subjective it always has been and always will be. You don't get a foul every time theres contact between players the referee always has to make a subjective call on whether the contact justifies a foul thats why we talk about penalties being soft and say we've seen them given it basically means I suppose technically its not the wrong decision but its not really what you see as the right decision either. VAR doesn't work for subjective calls is the point i'm making the penalty appeal last night was just the example not the point.

 

[Kevsleftpeg]

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.

You're not understanding the problem we are discussing. The problem is that the current rule no longer reflects how the game is played in practice or in amateur football. There always needs to be an offside line. If the rule is daylight and a striker is a millimetre offside then I would have zero sympathy because he has really misjudged the offside by a foot or more using eyeline as a guide. The current rule says a striker is offside when for 99% of football history everyone would say he is onside

 

[Kevsleftpeg]

It's the 'first point of contact' which counts in relation to offside.

But that is still impossible to determine with sufficient accuracy to say someone is a mm offside. Players can move quite a bit in a frame.

 

[JimmyK]

You're not understanding the problem we are discussing. The problem is that the current rule no longer reflects how the game is played in practice or in amateur football. There always needs to be an offside line. If the rule is daylight and a striker is a millimetre offside then I would have zero sympathy because he has really misjudged the offside by a foot or more using eyeline as a guide. The current rule says a striker is offside when for 99% of football history everyone would say he is onside

I don't think they even need to do that though they just need to get rid of the lines and use common sense. Go back to the lineman deciding if you're on or off and then let the VAR watch a replay to see whether they've made a ricket - if you have to watch 15 replays and get a protractor out then the decision doesn't need changing if you watch a replay and can say actually he's clearly off then it does.

 

[roydo]

But that is still impossible to determine with sufficient accuracy to say someone is a mm offside. Players can move quite a bit in a frame.

Thats why in cricket they have the umpires call option, cos the tech, whilst good, is not 100%. I would love that in the PL. Lino doesnt flag, unless blindingly obvious, refs call.

 

[blulouie]

Well that might be the ONLY debate here for you but that isn't the point of what I was saying! I think Salah would get a penalty for it yes because thats how it seems to work but I would also think it was the wrong decision when that happened so it doesn't make any difference.

You're all over the place here mate.

 

[arch stanton]

Im sceptical of offsides too. Surely the ball is touching the foot for several frames in really close offsides the player could be offside when he touches the ball but onside when leaves his foot. Any fine margin decision should go the way of an attacker in my opinion

play it at half speed only, no freeze frames, two watches of it, if you cant decide it is obvious, advantage to the attacking team

 

[JimmyK]

You're all over the place here mate.

I'm making one point lad I don't get how you're missing it! VAR doesn't work unless it's for straightforward black and white situations. It can tell you if someones offside or the ball is out of play but it doesn't help when the call is subjective. Forget the Beto one that was just an example but if you don't like it we'll just use another one. The laws say that the Onana handball was a penalty but do you think it is really? I don't and neither did the referee I have no doubt he saw it but he didn't think it was a pen because he used common sense but then someone else told him actually it was and it ended up getting given BECAUSE ITS SUBJECTIVE!

 

[Kevsleftpeg]

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.

Your basic argument is that because certain decisions are subjective and won't achieve a 100% consensus there is no point in having a review process. I don't agree with that attitude at all. The on field ref is the one who ultimately makes the call anyway so it just gives him the opportunity to correct mistakes with better information. The issue is the way certain rules are written, the way the referees interpret them (which is massively and unnecessarily inconsistent), and big club bias/corruption. For full transparency, each team should have a referee liaison officer employed by their club. The referees should meet every Tuesday and review every decision flagged by the liaison officer and agree as a refereeing group (including each liaison officer) whether the decisions where correct. That is then the standard that needs to be applied going forward and referees that fail to meet that standard, as decided by the liaison officers should be sacked. One club, one vote.

 

[Kevsleftpeg]

I'm making one point lad I don't get how you're missing it! VAR doesn't work unless it's for straightforward black and white situations. It can tell you if someones offside or the ball is out of play but it doesn't help when the call is subjective. Forget the Beto one that was just an example but if you don't like it we'll just use another one. The laws say that the Onana handball was a penalty but do you think it is really? I don't and neither did the referee I have no doubt he saw it but he didn't think it was a pen because he used common sense but then someone else told him actually it was and it ended up getting given BECAUSE ITS SUBJECTIVE!

Mate, if you think offside calls are black and white guy clearly don't watch much football. In your weird world every decision that the referee makes apart from whether the ball is out or who kicked it last is correct and can't be improved on because it is SUBJECTIVE. That's a bizarre take.

 

[JimmyK]

Your basic argument is that because certain decisions are subjective and won't achieve a 100% consensus there is no point in having a review process. I don't agree with that attitude at all. The on field ref is the one who ultimately makes the call anyway so it just gives him the opportunity to correct mistakes with better information. The issue is the way certain rules are written, the way the referees interpret them (which is massively and unnecessarily inconsistent), and big club bias/corruption. For full transparency, each team should have a referee liaison officer employed by their club. The referees should meet every Tuesday and review every decision flagged by the liaison officer and agree as a refereeing group (including each liaison officer) whether the decisions where correct. That is then the standard that needs to be applied going forward and referees that fail to meet that standard, as decided by the liaison officers should be sacked. One club, one vote.

No its not about a 100% consensus at all its even more basic than that i'm saying there isn't always a right answer in football the laws have to be interpreted and the way they are interpreted will be different by different people and in different situations just like in the actual law like what one copper arrests you for another one won't and what one ref sees as enough contact to go down another one doesn't. The problem that creates with VAR is that one ref sees something and thinks no pen but then the other ref on VAR thinks pen and so it just causes more problem than it solves because who is right and who makes the ultimate decision.