VAR: Sponsored by Chelsea

[Gutter Boy]

If a goal had been scored and you had to wait to see if it was given then yes. But VAR was used to award the penalty, so Kane still had to take the penalty and score so you would have celebrated as normal once Kane scored the penalty surely....

I flicked over and watched some of the Chris Packham documentary on the Northern Lights while all the faffing about was going on. So the moment had passed.

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

Without VAR we wouldnt have won last night.

We would be on here complaining how a correct decision wasnt given because referees are brick.

Instead, we get the decision, get the goal, and take an advantage into the second leg.

At the cost of 90 seconds worth of analysis.

And still people want to bitch and moan.

I think thats it, basically people want to bitch and moan, so theyll find something regardless...

 

[Gutter Boy]

Why wouldn't we have won? The referee would have just used his own eyes and made a pretty obvious decision.

Or if he hadn't, maybe we would have attacked more and won the game 2-0 or 3-0 with a second half blitz, rather than going defensive and protecting our lead.

The point is, it ruins the football, while making the centrepiece something that no one is interested in - refereeing

 

[Grays_1890]

And still people want to bitch and moan.

I think thats it, basically people want to bitch and moan, so theyll find something regardless...

I think Chelsea providing their own video to undermine the system does not help, I think the FA will rule against this in very much the same way they don't allow people to slag of Refs in post match interviews.

Otherwise whats the point in having a system which is suppose to get decisions correct if a video shown after shows it might be wrong, might as well just stick to Refs.

 

[Spur of the moment]

they really need to get a better routine worked out.
the early son penalty claim, did the ref even ask for it to be checked?
was sanchez booked for hazard falling over the ball? surely thats a clear and obviously error?
the lamela one late on, surely that should have been allowed to play on and if he scores then VAR check it? it was at best a 50/50 tussle, whats the point otherwise, you can't restart the game with any advantage to the attacker if the ref has fudged it up.

Also why wasn't their keeper sent off for the foul on Kane that led to the pen? It looked like he deliberately wrapped his hands around Kane's ankle after the ball had been played to ensure he could not go on and score.

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

Why wouldn't we have won? The referee would have just used his own eyes and made a pretty obvious decision.

Or if he hadn't, maybe we would have attacked more and won the game 2-0 or 3-0 with a second half blitz, rather than going defensive and protecting our lead.

The point is, it ruins the football, while making the centrepiece something that no one is interested in - refereeing

There was a single goal in the game, the result of a VAR decision. Wasnt shaping up to be a thriller and Id suggest it unlikely we decided to sit on a 1-0 lead and deliberately not come out of the gate looking for more goals.

We arent a team that protects a 1-0.

It didnt ruin anything. The game had stopped. Instead of making an unqualified decision and wasting time dealing with the backlash from the players, he took 93 seconds to get the right decision. 93 seconds where the game was stopped anyway and wasnt going to immediately restart.

The referee didnt use VAR in situations he was sure about, did he. That he did with the penalty already invalidates your point.

The offside was that marginal, I genuinely doubt we could rely on the right decision being made. As we know, officials tend to err on the side of caution with these things.

I think Chelsea providing their own video to undermine the system does not help, I think the FA will rule against this in very much the same way they don't allow people to slag of Refs in post match interviews.

Otherwise whats the point in having a system which is suppose to get decisions correct if a video shown after shows it might be wrong, might as well just stick to Refs.

Did they really? I didnt see that. Though, having seen the VAR shown on TV I find it hard to argue against the decision.

Ultimately, its the refs decision still. They are just being given the chance to judge it more thoroughly.

The point? 99% of decisions being correct. Thats the point. As I said, no VAR and theres every chance theres no penalty yesterday.

 

[Grays_1890]

The point? 99% of decisions being correct. Thats the point. As I said, no VAR and theres every chance theres no penalty yesterday.

I think you miss my point, I was ref'ing to whats the point if its undermined.

99% correct is that the rate they are benchmarking? Refs were 98% I think, lots of pain for that 1% aint it?

 

[Spur of the moment]

I'm not sure I've ever celebrated an important goal so little. It is a complete passion killer.

It certainly took some of the fizz out of it but on reflection I think I can live with that on this occasion.

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

I think you miss my point, I was ref'ing to whats the point if its undermined.

99% correct is that the rate they are benchmarking? Refs were 98% I think, lots of pain for that 1% aint it?

Ah gotcha, yes - I agree theres no reason for clubs to try and counter it. They dont do it now with the ropey decisions, they shouldnt with ones that are more certain.

If that 1% is major decisions being made correctly, then its well worth it IMHO.

Take last night, thats a pen - and its changed the face of the tie - and I honestly dont think it will have happened without VAR.

 

[Baleforce]

there is wording in the VAR rules (I think) about the official VAR cameras being the only ones of record

I think for this incident VAR worked well, having seen it a few times though I think Harry was offside, as his head and parts of his body were nearer the goal than any part of the defender, VAR won't stop referees misinterpreting the rules

 

[Grays_1890]

there is wording in the VAR rules (I think) about the official VAR cameras being the only ones of record

I think for this incident VAR worked well, having seen it a few times though I think Harry was offside, as his head and parts of his body were nearer the goal than any part of the defender, VAR won't stop referees misinterpreting the rules

I never really understood that part of the rule or agreed I suppose. If your feet are planted in the same line as the oppo does it matter if your arm or shirt is offside? Maybe it makes the whole decision more black and white, just seems strange.

 

[harr1984]

they really need to get a better routine worked out.
the early son penalty claim, did the ref even ask for it to be checked?
was sanchez booked for hazard falling over the ball? surely thats a clear and obviously error?
the lamela one late on, surely that should have been allowed to play on and if he scores then VAR check it? it was at best a 50/50 tussle, whats the point otherwise, you can't restart the game with any advantage to the attacker if the ref has fudged it up.

Judging by what was being said on the commentary I believe that VAR still analyse incidents whilst the game is ongoing - for example there was a handball incident yesterday that VAR deemed not worthy of going back on to award a penalty. The difference with the Kane one is because it had the offside aswell which is why the game stopped.......

 

[SpurMeUp]

there is wording in the VAR rules (I think) about the official VAR cameras being the only ones of record

I think for this incident VAR worked well, having seen it a few times though I think Harry was offside, as his head and parts of his body were nearer the goal than any part of the defender, VAR won't stop referees misinterpreting the rules

By definition I'm not sure it 'worked well' therefore!

1. we would have got the pen anyway. So why do we need var stopping the game? It would have had the same outcome with no intervention. The linesman is told to put up his flag, but wouldn't have otherwise.

2. interpretation is a part of making decisions. Things are shades of grey often.

There is a use for var but I don't think it has been designed with enough care. It needs more testing and refinment. Where a live ref would likely make the same decision, why interupt the game?

 

[Gutter Boy]

I never really understood that part of the rule or agreed I suppose. If your feet are planted in the same line as the oppo does it matter if your arm or shirt is offside? Maybe it makes the whole decision more black and white, just seems strange.

The rule is any part of the body you can score with, so basically everything but you arm

You can't actually tell properly with tv cameras. You'd need proper military grade laser technology setup the full length of the pitch to be able to give conclusive answers.

 

[Baleforce]

I never really understood that part of the rule or agreed I suppose. If your feet are planted in the same line as the oppo does it matter if your arm or shirt is offside? Maybe it makes the whole decision more black and white, just seems strange.

It would make sense to base it all on feet position, I'm going solely on the current wording.

 

[Baleforce]

By definition I'm not sure it 'worked well' therefore!

1. we would have got the pen anyway. So why do we need var stopping the game? It would have had the same outcome with no intervention. The linesman is told to put up his flag, but wouldn't have otherwise.

2. interpretation is a part of making decisions. Things are shades of grey often.

There is a use for var but I don't think it has been designed with enough care. It needs more testing and refinment. Where a live ref would likely make the same decision, why interupt the game?

this is the period of testing and refinement

 

[Lemonade Money]

I'm not sure I've ever celebrated an important goal so little. It is a complete passion killer.

Lol, you decided not to celebrate before the penalty was taken?

 

[elyid]

The F.A. should make a 1 min long video explaining exactly how VAR will be used and that should then be played on TV before every match involving VAR.

I personally think it works well, but needs to be drummed into everyone exactly how it's used.

the early son penalty claim, did the ref even ask for it to be checked?

Pretty sure VAR should be telling the ref and not the other way around. Presume they checked it and saw it wasn't a clear and obvious error. Tbf it probably wasn't a foul.

was sanchez booked for hazard falling over the ball? surely thats a clear and obviously error?

Think that was a foul tbh (even though Hazard backed into him)

the lamela one late on, surely that should have been allowed to play on and if he scores then VAR check it? it was at best a 50/50 tussle, whats the point otherwise, you can't restart the game with any advantage to the attacker if the ref has fudged it up.

Yeah that was weird. The ref seemed to think it was a definite foul though.

-----

Think it's all working fine, but needs to be communicated exactly what the process is so that everyone watching knows wtf is going on.

 

[elyid]

I'm not sure I've ever celebrated an important goal so little. It is a complete passion killer.

Dunno. I still celebrated like it was 2008 and we'd just signed Arshavin

 

[parklane1]

Another mess, not offside yet the Chelski camera had it offside. Meanwhile all of us in the crowd had to stand around twiddling our thumbs not knowing what the brick is happening.

Poch has got it right its not a good way of playing, he also said they do not like it in La Liga and they have had more time to adjust with it.