VAR: Sponsored by Chelsea

[Dicko]

 

[Robbo]

In my opinion, it's a case of a subjective view in a definitive ruling...

Was VDV in offside positon when Porro struck the ball - Yes, therefore he was offside.

However, where is became subjective is whether Tomiyasu deliberately played the ball or whether it was a deflection. If a deliberate action then it's a new 'phase' and where VDV is standing when Porro kick it becomes irrelevant. The second touch y Gabriel is a deflection. Therefore, to be given offside the VAR officials have deemed the first touch was accidental.

It's a stupid rule, which adds to the confusion. What's a "deliberate action"?

I think it's fair to say Tomiyasu deliberately tried to position himself to prevent Porro's shot from hitting the target. I'm sure he also deliberately moved his leg to block the shot. That's two deliberate actions. He probably didn't mean for the ball to fall to VDV, but it did as a result of at least two deliberate actions - or so you could argue.

It was much simpler back when you were onside if the ball came from an opponent.

 

[jrh]

View attachment 17079

If this is true it needs a full investigation

 

[Jordinho]

This is why leaving everything to one man doesn't work. VAR must be allowed to overule the ref.

 

[glasgowspur]

View attachment 17079

Is there audio for this?

 

[Glenda's Legs]

If this is true it needs a full investigation

Would certainly seem bizarre if true. Then add in the obvious penalty we did get, that he initially declined to give, and is it any wonder there are then conspiracy theories.

 

[Baleforce]

Would certainly seem bizarre if true. Then add in the obvious penalty we did get, that he initially declined to give, and is it any wonder there are then conspiracy theories.

He gave it as soon as he saw the reply to be fair.

It’s not conspiracy, it’s not even incompetence, the game is impossible to officiate without video replay, it’s too quick and there is too much going on.

 

[parklane1]

And still they can't get it right.

We need a VAR for VAR.

What we need for VAR is a bin for it and all the crap it does.

 

[90291Spur]

I would suggest scrapping the ‘clear and obvious error’ part. That’s another layer of human interpretation. If it’s an error by the ref, like the trip on Deki v Arse, it’s an error. VAR should intervene and at the least make the ref go to the monitor.

 

[stratnumberone]

He gave it as soon as he saw the reply to be fair.

It’s not conspiracy, it’s not even incompetence, the game is impossible to officiate without video replay, it’s too quick and there is too much going on.

It is very quick and there is an awful lot going on. However, in this case, Rice launched a full blooded kick that missed the ball and smashed Davies between the legs. It happened approx 4 yards from Oliver, who was looking directly at it. If that’s neither conspiracy nor incompetence, then what is it?

 

[glasgowspur]

It is very quick and there is an awful lot going on. However, in this case, Rice launched a full blooded kick that missed the ball and smashed Davies between the legs. It happened approx 4 yards from Oliver, who was looking directly at it. If that’s neither conspiracy nor incompetence, then what is it?

And oliver obviously seen it as he emphatically waved it away, there was absolutely no doubt in his mind that was not a pen.
Take that with the refusal to look at kulus trip and that's a bad day at anyone's office.

 

[stratnumberone]

And oliver obviously seen it as he emphatically waved it away, there was absolutely no doubt in his mind that was not a pen.
Take that with the refusal to look at kulus trip and that's a bad day at anyone's office.

If the above posts about ‘refusing’ to take VARs advice to look at the monitor are true, it’s far beyond ‘a bad day at the office’. Unless you’re a pilot and you fly your office into a mountain. I’m genuinely worried about the integrity of the officiating and therefore of the game.

 

[glasgowspur]

If the above posts about ‘refusing’ to take VARs advice to look at the monitor are true, it’s far beyond ‘a bad day at the office’. Unless you’re a pilot and you fly your office into a mountain. I’m genuinely worried about the integrity of the officiating and therefore of the game.

I find it difficult to believe that the game is corrupt to that level, but I can totally see why it looks like it.

 

[Baleforce]

human sight is complicated, the brain does a lot of gap filling

there is a lot of interesting studies into the accuracy of eye witness accounts

refs make first call on what they thought they saw

 

[Bedfordspurs]

I would suggest scrapping the ‘clear and obvious error’ part. That’s another layer of human interpretation. If it’s an error by the ref, like the trip on Deki v Arse, it’s an error. VAR should intervene and at the least make the ref go to the monitor.

I’d suggest scrapping on the field refs

 

[Lemonade Money]

It is very quick and there is an awful lot going on. However, in this case, Rice launched a full blooded kick that missed the ball and smashed Davies between the legs. It happened approx 4 yards from Oliver, who was looking directly at it. If that’s neither conspiracy nor incompetence, then what is it?

Highlight of the coverage was VAR repeatedly showing Davies getting kicked in the nuts. So stupid, like you needed to see that five times.

 

[Gazza Dazzla]

Highlight of the coverage was VAR repeatedly showing Davies getting kicked in the nuts. So stupid, like you needed to see that five times.

Judging by his performance on the day Oliver was probably saying I don’t see the issue he got the balls..

 

[SteveAWOL]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1785613558836760763

 

[Gutter Boy]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1785613558836760763

Maybe BBC should buy the rights to the coverage and broadcast it as 'real football'. Kind of make it the new Football Italia.

 

[NaijaSpurs]

Without VAR, the ref would have most likely given it. VAR takes the onus off him to do so.

Nah, he waved the players away, he had no intention of giving that penalty.