Jump to content
speeeeeeedie

Premier League Stuff

Recommended Posts

59 minutes ago, 47er said:

I thought he was fouled before it hit his arm?

Anyway I still believe intent should be part of the equation.

VAR ruining the game, so much dead time killing the game.

I agree. Intent should be the overriding factor. But that isn’t always the requirement in today’s game. Plus the interpretation is applied so inconsistently. The lack of intent of the City winner earlier in the season which chalked off a cracking end to a game backs up your point.

By the rules, if the ball hits a striker on the arm - even from the back - then a subsequent goal would be disallowed. No penalty if a defender did the same.

VAR should have awarded that incident as a penalty by today’s standards as his arms were up above his head. But then the referee should have decided the same.

Refs defer to VAR and VAR defers you the ref. It’s a nonsense and it is ruining the game.

And that’s not even taking into account the loss of excitement and spectacle if a last minute goal is ruled out on a dubious technicality inconsistently applied.

VAR must necessarily be 100% accurate and applied 100% consistently. Not sure either is possible or even practical.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, RevidgeBlue said:

The current law whereby a defender is rightly not penalised for accidental handball but an attacker (wrongly imo) is, is absolutely ludicrous.

I cant understand this. We have seen multiple goals ruled out because the ball has brushed an arm by a tiny amount and had no bearing on the outcome, yet the same rule doesnt apply to the defenders. Watching the rugby, they have a similar system which seemed to work OK, partly because the on pitch ref and virtual ref are miked up and the footage/conversation is played on the stadium screens. At least it was clear what is going on.

Said from the start VAR is a shambles. Football is a spectator sport. VAR is ruining the spectacle and is therefore in no way good for the game. 

It doesnt help VAR however, footballs rule makers seem intent on complicating the game beyond reason and penalising the tiniest infringement. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, benhben said:

I cant understand this. We have seen multiple goals ruled out because the ball has brushed an arm by a tiny amount and had no bearing on the outcome, yet the same rule doesnt apply to the defenders. Watching the rugby, they have a similar system which seemed to work OK, partly because the on pitch ref and virtual ref are miked up and the footage/conversation is played on the stadium screens. At least it was clear what is going on.

Said from the start VAR is a shambles. Football is a spectator sport. VAR is ruining the spectacle and is therefore in no way good for the game. 

It doesnt help VAR however, footballs rule makers seem intent on complicating the game beyond reason and penalising the tiniest infringement. 

Claret, in peace as ever,

The VAR system needs resetting, as it's got off to a bad start ... as was seen in the Rugby, who've had it for years, the control should remain with the on-field official ..

It should be as follows .... goal is scored, if Referee has any doubt, he calls for VAR ( ie: handball, offside or foul in the build-up ). His mike goes on. He says " On-field decision is a goal, is there a clear and obvious reason why it shouldn't be awarded ? " VAR official plays back the best replays he has on a big screen or pitch-side monitor, with his opinion. Final decision left to the Referee, which he then explains " on mike ", ideally to both Captains. In addition, should the VAR official suspect anything " clear & obvious " to rule out a goal, he should bring it immediately to the Ref's attention.

Offside should be chest in front, rather than one foot .... think in terms of a 100 metres finish, in which the upper torso counts when deciding a winner ...    

 

 

Edited by sympatheticclaret

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, sympatheticclaret said:

Claret, in peace as ever,

The VAR system needs resetting, as it's got off to a bad start ... as was seen in the Rugby, who've had it for years, the control should remain with the on-field official ..

It should be as follows .... goal is scored, if Referee has any doubt, he calls for VAR ( ie: handball, offside or foul in the build-up ). His mike goes on. He says " On-field decision is a goal, is there a clear and obvious reason why it shouldn't be awarded ? " VAR official plays back the best replays he has on a big screen or pitch-side monitor, with his opinion. Final decision left to the Referee, which he then explains " on mike ", ideally to both Captains. In addition, should the VAR official suspect anything " clear & obvious " to rule out a goal, he should bring it immediately to the Ref's attention.

Offside should be chest in front, rather than one foot .... think in terms of a 100 metres finish, in which the upper torso counts when deciding a winner ...    

Some good suggestions. I agree that it should be the referees decision fist hand, not a ‘higher power’.

A couple of other things. There should be a limit to how long play can continue before a review. There was a penalty review at the weekend that took place 10 passes later and after a further free kick had been awarded. To rewind at that point would have been ridiculous.

Ultimately, VAR should enhance the game not take away from it. The ref still needs to get more right in the build up than after the event. A last minute goal, wild celebrations and then a long delayed review while waiting for the restart that takes away that moment and makes everyone feel foolish will kill the passion in the crowd. Maybe that’s exactly what the TV companies want...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, sympatheticclaret said:

Offside should be chest in front, rather than one foot .... think in terms of a 100 metres finish, in which the upper torso counts when deciding a winner ...    

I agree, but as I've mentioned before with VAR you are talking about changing the current rules of the game in this instance, not how VAR works. 

The way the PL has implemented VAR really sucks. They've got it wrong and need to adjust it ASAP. As our claret friend stated above it should be far closer to how it works in rugby. Not sure why they've gone this route for the PL as FIFA did it better at the World Cup a year and a half ago.

The other thing that needs looking at is the rules of the game. They've become far too strict, to the point of being nonsensical (imo), particularly when it comes to handballs in the area and offside decisions. This desperately needs addressing as abiding by the laws of the game is what maintains its integrity, but if those rules are nonsensical then it brings into question the validity of the sport as a whole.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, sympatheticclaret said:

Claret, in peace as ever,

The VAR system needs resetting, as it's got off to a bad start ... as was seen in the Rugby, who've had it for years, the control should remain with the on-field official ..

It should be as follows .... goal is scored, if Referee has any doubt, he calls for VAR ( ie: handball, offside or foul in the build-up ). His mike goes on. He says " On-field decision is a goal, is there a clear and obvious reason why it shouldn't be awarded ? " VAR official plays back the best replays he has on a big screen or pitch-side monitor, with his opinion. Final decision left to the Referee, which he then explains " on mike ", ideally to both Captains. In addition, should the VAR official suspect anything " clear & obvious " to rule out a goal, he should bring it immediately to the Ref's attention.

Offside should be chest in front, rather than one foot .... think in terms of a 100 metres finish, in which the upper torso counts when deciding a winner ...    

 

 

Still far too complicated.  Forget how they do it in Rugby. A fifth ref sitting at a monitor should draw to the attention of the ref on the field any obvious, serious mistake that he's made. Conversation between the two completely private.

No stopping play and calling for a VAR decision. On the field ref has final decision anyway.  Simple!

Besides, the laws of the game have been tampered with to the point of being ridiculous. They should revert to being more simplistic.

Edited by bazza

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We, or should I say they, have made a very simple game complicated. For over one hundred and thirty years, a referee and two linesmen have sufficed. Back when Match of The Day showed extended highlights of a couple of games, a brief few minutes of the rest and on Sundays you got a main game on ITV, things were a lot simpler. A tv camera on the side and sometimes one behind one of the goals and that was it. Later on, maybe a bit of slow motion to show a foul or penalty.

As the Premier League progressed following the advent of Sky, suddenly there were a million cameras and a million different camera angles, slow motion, super slow mo to the Nth degree and no hiding place for match officials, should they get a decision wrong. As the revenues increased with better tv deals, so did the paranoia of the club chairmen, determined to stay in the top flight at all costs. All this put extra pressure on the match officials and something finally had to give, hence the introduction of VAR.

sympathetic claret is spot on. I can only speak for Rugby League as I very rarely watch Union. This has been tried and tested now for several years and football should have learnt from it. In RL, the referee has full control and he only resorts to the Video Referee if he is in any doubt at all as to the scoring of a try. For example, was there a knock on in the build up, was the ball grounded correctly, was there a foot in touch or an offside and so on. The on-the-field referee signals his opinion as to either a try or no try and then it’s over to the VR who has the final say. Other than this happening three or four times each game (sometimes not this frequently), the referee is in full control and his decisions cannot be overturned. The fans don’t whinge about it and it’s never an out and out talking point after the game. Quite simple really.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just took 3 minutes 47 to decide a players toe was offside 

Whether VAR could work in theory in practice they couldn’t have implemented it in a worse way 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't forget the people who have implemented the system say it is only accurate up to approximately 30cm. 

Joke.

 

Edited by Hasta

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

VAR is a resounding failure (unless you’re a Liverpool fan).

It will almost certainly be reconfirmed for next season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whilst I think none of us would disagree with the view that disallowing the goal that sheffield United scored is absurd the fact is that as the offside rule is presently expressed it was the correct decision - you can't blame VAR because the law is silly - the solution is to amend the law

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Mashed Potatoes said:

Whilst I think none of us would disagree with the view that disallowing the goal that sheffield United scored is absurd the fact is that as the offside rule is presently expressed it was the correct decision - you can't blame VAR because the law is silly - the solution is to amend the law

VAR is being used to provide a second opinion, it isn’t accurate enough to decide facts.

The lines being drawn aren’t credible.

But the worst part is that it is taking three or four minutes to decide whether the match officials have made a clear and obvious error. The pundits are making decisions fast. If it a decision can’t be overruled in less than 30 seconds the original decision should stand.

VAR isn’t practical, even if it were accurate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Stuart said:

VAR is being used to provide a second opinion, it isn’t accurate enough to decide facts.

The lines being drawn aren’t credible.

But the worst part is that it is taking three or four minutes to decide whether the match officials have made a clear and obvious error. The pundits are making decisions fast. If it a decision can’t be overruled in less than 30 seconds the original decision should stand.

VAR isn’t practical, even if it were accurate.

Crikey. Ned Ludd lives !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thought that was a pen for Leicester, made a meal of it but it looked like he had his arm pulled back. VAR thought it was ok.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Mashed Potatoes said:

Crikey. Ned Ludd lives !

:rolleyes:

You really aren’t cut out for this are you.

But if you think the current VAR set up is going well then you are in a small minority.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Stuart said:

:rolleyes:

You really aren’t cut out for this are you.

But if you think the current VAR set up is going well then you are in a small minority.

You obviously have a problem with people having a different opinion to yourself.

I think VAR is here to stay but I have already said that some changes to its use need to be made. We are only 12 weeks in to its use.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Mashed Potatoes said:

You obviously have a problem with people having a different opinion to yourself.

I think VAR is here to stay but I have already said that some changes to its use need to be made. We are only 12 weeks in to its use.

Having an opinion about VAR is fine. Calling me chief Luddite because of complaints about the time taken to undermine refs doesn't really qualify.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Stuart said:

Having an opinion about VAR is fine. Calling me chief Luddite because of complaints about the time taken to undermine refs doesn't really qualify.

Why am I not "cut out for this" as you posted before I mentioned Ned Ludd ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Leicester are everything we could, and should have been in 2019. It's hard to swallow, but congrats to them. It all started with one bad decision after Venkys, and now the difference is heaven and hell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Leicester are absolutely incredible.

Some or their players could play for any team in the league.

Not a fan of Rodgers, but he’s done a sterling job there, no grumbles!

Their scouting is out of this world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Mashed Potatoes said:

Why am I not "cut out for this" as you posted before I mentioned Ned Ludd ?

QED.

I think you need to check again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, K-Hod said:

Leicester are absolutely incredible.

Some or their players could play for any team in the league.

Not a fan of Rodgers, but he’s done a sterling job there, no grumbles!

Their scouting is out of this world.

Just watching and honestly wondering if they could be Liverpool’s main threat this year. Their games against them and City will be interesting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know Arsenal are a team of soft lads when the going gets tough, but Leicester are a really good side. Nothing but admiration for them from me tbh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.