Baleforce
Arthur Rowe
Why does it?
-
Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara
VAR: Sponsored by Chelsea
- Thread starter Gutter Boy
- Start date
Why does it?
Baleforce
Arthur Rowe
Baleforce
Arthur Rowe
Bedfordspurs
Mark Falco
The definition of control has a conscious intent to it which I don’t believe he had on that situation. A second touch would have brought it under control though
But it still comes back to the ref not giving it and then changing his mind under VAR which means there was a clear error which their wasn’t
milo
Jack L. Jones
I don't think that we will ever get to a position where we get 100% of decisions right. VAR is in its infancy and it will take a while to settle on the best way of using it. It seems to work better in some countries than others, the Bundesliga for example seems to use it very well. I thought that the main issue in England last season was the length of time taken to review the incident, that seems to be less of a problem at the WC.
I agree with @scaramanga and @galeforce, we have long since passed the point where refs are being undermined. Every match is re-officiated by the media afterwards.
Baleforce
Arthur Rowe
I don’t see that as relevant.
I see that argument, but I think it was a clear error.
Bedfordspurs
Mark Falco
Today the actually operation of it was spot even if I don’t agree with him changing his mind
You reference Germany, did you not hear about the game when the ref called the players back out during half time to take a penalty... that’s awful IMO
@milo has already solved that one
milo
Jack L. Jones
Agreed, that's really bad officiating.
Bullet
Andy Thompson
Victor Moses dived ten times last night, CHEATSKI
Bullet
Andy Thompson
No, no, no. That is probably why you are upset with VAR.
It exists to clear up obvious errors, and to help refs make decisions. Of course there will still be debate.
Yesterday was brilliant for VAR, lots of ref decisions corrected or validated; it has already changed the WC for the better.
Personally I agree that the Griezmann trip was 50:50 so the ref did the right thing to check it on TV, at which point it is his choice. I would not have given it, but the refs did, that is football
Lemonade Money
Les Medley
The VAR has been pretty good so far from what I've seen.
ricky2tricky4city
Steffen Freund
I agree but in your last example how can it be a clear and obvious error when it's 50/50. I think the ref should have just gone with his original 'no foul' decision.
Also, are the refs under instruction to come over to the screen everytime? Can't they just have a word in their lughole?
Glenda's Legs
Paul Walsh
I was wondering that. So I just had a look on the FIFA website, and the answer is, it depends on the incident :
For the 2018 FIFA World Cup™, the referees have received clear instructions on when to accept information from the video assistant referee and when to review the video footage on the side of the field of play before taking the appropriate action/decision.
On-Field Review (for interpretation)
Goals
- foul committed by attacking player
- offside interference
- foul leading up to penalty
- foul by attacking player
VAR Advice Only (for factual incidents)
Goals
- offside position leading up to goal
- ball out of play leading up to goal
- foul committed inside or outside the penalty area
- ball out of play leading up to penalty
- offside position leading up to penalty
https://football-technology.fifa.com/en/innovations/VAR-at-the-World-Cup
Baleforce
Arthur Rowe
How many situations really are 50/50 though, the issues from yesterday which some see as contentious come down to whether or not there was contact, if there was, in those specific situations, it’s 100% a foul, if not, 100% a dive, either way the ref needs to take further action.
Glenda's Legs
Paul Walsh
I was surprised at how emphatic the panel were afterwards about it being a foul (apart from Bilic who didn’t care).
There was a push but I didn’t think it was strong enough to unsettle Miranda (?) and if the ball had gone out for a corner instead of hitting the back of the net I don’t think there would have been any protest about a foul. One of those that is picked up sometimes and let go on others.
As there was a goal I assume it would have been reviewed by the VAR team (as the game continued)? Presumably it didn’t pass the clear and obvious test to be referred back to the referee?
There was a push but I didn’t think it was strong enough to unsettle Miranda (?) and if the ball had gone out for a corner instead of hitting the back of the net I don’t think there would have been any protest about a foul. One of those that is picked up sometimes and let go on others.
As there was a goal I assume it would have been reviewed by the VAR team (as the game continued)? Presumably it didn’t pass the clear and obvious test to be referred back to the referee?
parklane1
Tony Galvin
Well according Clattenburg, all goals and decisions are reviewed and are then supposed to go back to the ref. And according to Clattenburg it was a foul and should have been disallowed. So who knows its a joke the whole VAR issue.