• 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

Re the Kane incident it reminds m of the way that thug Huth used to get away with murder for Leicester the season they won the PL.

His cunning trick off the ball was to quite blatantly haul opponents down in the box but make sure he too went down with them. Unfortunately when you are being wrestled to the ground you naturally try to fend the opponent off but that only succeeds in confusing the ref giving him the perfect excuse to duck out of a decision.

That I suspect is what was going on last night.
 
And yet, with VAR the call should have been made to the ref to look at it.

As I understand it, the ref on the screens has the ability to make that shout - "Hey, think I saw something, take a look!"
 
There should have been 3 pens and at least a 2 more yellows for Tunisia.
The scores should have been 4-1. Not allowing for our woeful finishing it could have been 7/8-1
Did Pickford have a shot to save from open play?
 
nayimfromthehalfwayline said:
And yet, with VAR the call should have been made to the ref to look at it.

As I understand it, the ref on the screens has the ability to make that shout - "Hey, think I saw something, take a look!"
Click to expand...
Maybe the VAR officials felt as both players were locked in a wrestling match it was not a sufficiently clear and obvious foul in the box. But the giveaway last night should have been that the Tunisian defender was facing away from the ball the whole time he was wrestling Kane to the ground.
 
Spur of the moment said:
Maybe the VAR officials felt as both players were locked in a wrestling match it was not a sufficiently clear and obvious foul in the box. But the giveaway last night should have been that the Tunisian defender was facing away from the ball the whole time he was wrestling Kane to the ground.
Click to expand...

Well exactly, the first one in particular was so blatant, so one sided, it is frankly comical they didnt think anything of it.
 
500.jpg
 
galeforce said:
From the press, currently based in Russia, using local internet gateways.
Click to expand...
No, from tv and radio coverage. Don't doubt there's also a lot a media massaging going on but all you here from both players and fans is how hospitable the ordinary Russians have been.

No doubt if the fans started causing trouble it'd be a very different story but some of the paranoia on here is just laughable.
 
This is a good summary
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/44508993

tl;dr
More penalties are being given. This is good, because referees were missing them, now they can spot them. This makes the game much fairer, because a penalty is a massive moment in a game.

Note: That article states that the video assistant referee DID initiate a review of "Kane being wrestled" to the ref but the ref didn't want to look at it pitch-side. Remember, the VAR officials can say "it was in the box" and other factual calls, but for something subjective like wrestling they can only tell the ref he should review it pitch-side.

So it was the ref that was wrong on this, not VAR.

"The video assistant referee, Sandro Ricci of Brazil, did initiate a review but no penalty was awarded"
 
Bullet said:
This is a good summary
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/44508993

tl;dr
More penalties are being given. This is good, because referees were missing them, now they can spot them. This makes the game much fairer, because a penalty is a massive moment in a game.

Note: That article states that the video assistant referee DID initiate a review of "Kane being wrestled" to the ref but the ref didn't want to look at it pitch-side. Remember, the VAR officials can say "it was in the box" and other factual calls, but for something subjective like wrestling they can only tell the ref he should review it pitch-side.

So it was the ref that was wrong on this, not VAR.

"The video assistant referee, Sandro Ricci of Brazil, did initiate a review but no penalty was awarded"
Click to expand...

If that's the case, then the ref needs to be bombed out of the tournament and demoted. Then the other refs will think "hmm, when VAR is telling me there's a penalty incident to review, maybe I should go and look at it."
 
Bullet said:
This is a good summary
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/44508993

tl;dr
More penalties are being given. This is good, because referees were missing them, now they can spot them. This makes the game much fairer, because a penalty is a massive moment in a game.

Note: That article states that the video assistant referee DID initiate a review of "Kane being wrestled" to the ref but the ref didn't want to look at it pitch-side. Remember, the VAR officials can say "it was in the box" and other factual calls, but for something subjective like wrestling they can only tell the ref he should review it pitch-side.

So it was the ref that was wrong on this, not VAR.

"The video assistant referee, Sandro Ricci of Brazil, did initiate a review but no penalty was awarded"
Click to expand...
Implementation is still a bit off. The VAR ref should be able to say it was a penalty and call it back, not just suggest the ref takes a look
 
scaramanga said:
Implementation is still a bit off. The VAR ref should be able to say it was a penalty and call it back, not just suggest the ref takes a look
Click to expand...
Presumably the VAR ref would have said something along the lines of 'it looks like a pen to me, I think you should take a look'? A VAR ref isn't going to suggest the ref takes a look if he doesn't think it's warranted. If so, the ref should be struck off.
 
LemonadeMoney said:
Presumably the VAR ref would have said something along the lines of 'it looks like a pen to me, I think you should take a look'? A VAR ref isn't going to suggest the ref takes a look if he doesn't think it's warranted. If so, the ref should be struck off.
Click to expand...
This is the issue - nobody wants to admit to the fallibility of referees. They clearly make mistakes, we all know they make mistakes, they should be open when they do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back