*Official OMT* - The day before a cup semi vs Chelsea and no OMT?

[Spur of the moment]

Heres an explanation from Clattenberg as to why it was offside - he thought Kane was onside originally:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/f...ays-improve-VAR-Harry-Kane-penalty-farce.html

What a joke the whole thing has become when an ex-top level referee effectively calls out erstwhile professional colleagues over a matter of inches and camera angles.

For crying out loud if it's really that tight just accept the verdict of the VAR at the time and move on.

 

[elltrev]

What a joke the whole thing has become when an ex-top level referee effectively calls out erstwhile professional colleagues over a matter of inches and camera angles.

For crying out loud if it's really that tight just accept the verdict of the VAR at the time and move on.

Yup. This is literally getting farcical.

 

[MKSpur]

And we had Liverpool fans moaning about goal like technology working the other day. It’s almost liek teams want incompetence and incorrect decisions made, as long as it benefits them.

In terms of time taken, as long as it’s added to the end of the half, like say all the longer blatant time wasting that goes then I don’t see the problem.

The other thing with offside, if it’s marginal benefit goes to the attacker.

I’d also like to see video refs used more for diving, even after the games to deter it.

 

[K.D.D.D.D.Soc]

It is a bit hypocritical of all these ex refs to become "rent a quote" as their actions show no respect to their ex colleagues doing a difficult job.

 

[K.D.D.D.D.Soc]

And we had Liverpool fans moaning about goal like technology working the other day. It’s almost liek teams want incompetence and incorrect decisions made, as long as it benefits them.

In terms of time taken, as long as it’s added to the end of the half, like say all the longer blatant time wasting that goes then I don’t see the problem.

The other thing with offside, if it’s marginal benefit goes to the attacker.

I’d also like to see video refs used more for diving, even after the games to deter it.

If I was a Liverpool or United fan I wouldn't want any changes, they did very well under the previous system where refs favoured them.

 

[mudshark]

If I was a Liverpool or United fan I wouldn't want any changes, they did very well under the previous system where refs favoured them.

And Chelsea as well. No way if the boot had been on the other foot there'd have been all this handwringing about it still in the media days later.

 

[Legohamster]

And Chelsea as well. No way if the boot had been on the other foot there'd have been all this handwringing about it still in the media days later.

Of course it would, it’s bigger than spurs/arsenal

VAR was brought in to stop this rubbish and it’s made it worse.

 

[mudshark]

Of course it would, it’s bigger than spurs/arsenal

VAR was bought in to stop this rubbish and it’s made it worse.

Arguably, but we probably only know about it because Chelsea chose to go public with their bring-your-own VAR footage. Would Spurs have played the victim like that, or handled it more discreetly? I'm inclined to think the latter. In any event, looks like we'd better get used to it.

 

[StephenH]

Next, it will be Herr Klopp whipping out is his X10 saying "Our camera clearly shows all my 'perfect' players were well-totally on-side!"

 

[mudshark]

...and if there are suspicions of an attempt to even the score somehow in the second leg, will we kick up a fuss? Can of worms.

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

Of course it would, it’s bigger than spurs/arsenal

VAR was bought in to stop this rubbish and it’s made it worse.

It hasnt made it worse. It proved itself in making the correct decision.

Chelsea made it worse by throwing a tantrum and muddying the waters.

Two very different things.

 

[parklane1]

Of course it would, it’s bigger than spurs/arsenal

VAR was bought in to stop this rubbish and it’s made it worse.

Indeed.

 

[Legohamster]

It hasnt made it worse. It proved itself in making the correct decision.

Chelsea made it worse by throwing a tantrum and muddying the waters.

Two very different things.

I dunno why I put Arsenal.... I meant Chelsea... all one big scum pool.

We would be making a stink about it if we had the same footage, the manager had a pop at it and we benefited from it.

Some of the scenes this week due to VAR have been farcical.

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

I dunno why I put Arsenal.... I meant Chelsea... all one big scum pool.

We would be making a stink about it if we had the same footage, the manager had a pop at it and we benefited from it.

Some of the scenes this week due to VAR have been farcical.

Would we?

As a club, I have to say, I think we absolutely wouldnt. We simply have more class than that.

And, anyway - look at the footage. Remove the fact you might be a spoiled brat (aka Chelsea fan/staff) and look. The difference between their evidence (clearly a few frames late) and the VAR is literally millimetres and even on the "evidence" presented still debatable.

If we were on the other end of it do you really think it would be a big drama? I have to say I dont.

What I really think this is, is Chelsea trying to get some early stink in to try and set a precedent to allow them their usual favourable way with decisions. Same as Utd and co have always enjoyed. Seriously - this is political (embarrasingly so), a power play, and not a genuine grievance, IMO of course.



EDIT: However, Cheslea game excepted (honestly see no issue), I do agree with your last line. The Burnley penalty that wasnt was a particular embarrassment. Clearly VAR has a way to go still.

 

[Legohamster]

Would we?

As a club, I have to say, I think we absolutely wouldnt. We simply have more class than that.

And, anyway - look at the footage. Remove the fact you might be a spoiled brat (aka Chelsea fan/staff) and look. The difference between their evidence (clearly a few frames late) and the VAR is literally millimetres and even on the "evidence" presented still debatable.

If we were on the other end of it do you really think it would be a big drama? I have to say I dont.

What I really think this is, is Chelsea trying to get some early stink in to try and set a precedent to allow them their usual favourable way with decisions. Same as Utd and co have always enjoyed. Seriously - this is political (embarrasingly so), a power play, and not a genuine grievance, IMO of course.



EDIT: However, Cheslea game excepted (honestly see no issue), I do agree with your last line. The Burnley penalty that wasnt was a particular embarrassment. Clearly VAR has a way to go still.

100 percent, I would want us too as well.

We always seem to be on the end of terrible decisions in big games, is it because we are too nice?

Maybe I am bias as I absolutely hate VAR and the rabbit hole it is leading us down.

 

[Kandi1977]

Indeed.

No it hasn't. It was used to check a situation that was impossible to see for the referees in real time, and the correct decision was made.
Honestly, there is nothing to debate about it. The correct decision was made, with the help of technology. What's wrong with that? And it didn't take any longer than it would have without it, because of all the players who'd have surrounded the ref and lino.

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

100 percent, I would want us too as well.

We always seem to be on the end of terrible decisions in big games, is it because we are too nice?

Maybe I am bias as I absolutely hate VAR and the rabbit hole it is leading us down.

You might want us to, but the club has a clear history of not being drama queens about this stuff. So I would be amazed if we started now.

I dont fault you for not liking VAR, each to their own.

I dont think weak arguments against it are constructive though, and this Chelsea example is firstly simply wrong, and secondly a storm in a tea cup.

You dont like VAR, fine, but this argument doesnt support your stance. Its just feeding the hype and nothing more.

The decision made was correct! People argue like it wasnt.
The decision made, even if incorrect by the Chelsea example, was still so marginal it is entirely acceptable it wasnt given. People argue like it was Mendes at OT all over again.

Its a bit much!

You dont want the game changed, I understand that. I dont agree, but I understand.
You fear how far technology will encroach once the door is opened? I understand that, and share that fear.
You think Chelsea throwing a brick fit (as they are want to do anyway) is evidence of anything?! I absolutely cant get on board there.

 

[parklane1]

No it hasn't. It was used to check a situation that was impossible to see for the referees in real time, and the correct decision was made.
Honestly, there is nothing to debate about it. The correct decision was made, with the help of technology. What's wrong with that? And it didn't take any longer than it would have without it, because of all the players who'd have surrounded the ref and lino.

Really??? well if that is the case maybe we should all act like lambs and just except something which has been perfection since it came in.

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

Really??? well if that is the case maybe we should all act like lambs and just except something which has been perfection since it came in.

What was wrong, specifically, with VAR in the Chelsea game.

What was incorrect, debatable, or farcical?

If youre going to throw it out there, back it up - lets have something to talk about.

 

[parklane1]

What was wrong, specifically, with VAR in the Chelsea game.

What was incorrect, debatable, or farcical?

If youre going to throw it out there, back it up - lets have something to talk about.

If as you state that VAR was perfect in the game and left no room for debate about the decision why the hell are we and every pub i have been in since having this discussion now about it.

And before you come back with those against it are wrong remember that there are those who feel just as strongly as you seem to be in your point as they are in theirs.