• 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

StephenH said:
I get that some are anti VAR, but last night was bizarre.
Still want VAR but it needs better management.
Italy and Germany are much much better than the fiasco of last night.
Click to expand...
Are they? I watch a fair bit of the Italian football and the fudger's always got his finger in his ear, before the unseen hand makes some decision you don't agree with, after taking ages. Juve v Fiorentina the other day, gives a penalty, bloke's stood there for ages waiting to take it, and then he gives a dodgy offside about 5 minutes earlier.

I'd say last night's effort was pretty standard, problem was he kept having to go to it so it exacerbated the problem.

Goal line tech has been great, and it'd be useful for one clam to be able to tell another clam that he's sent off the wrong bloke, or that was the other team's hand in the area, but micro managing offsides etc isn't doing much for me.
 
Glenda's Legs said:
What's with the "ungentlemanly conduct"? It's football, not cricket.
If stopping in the run up to a penalty is not permitted (and I'm not suggesting it should be) then just state it clearly in the rules.
What about when goalkeepers jump around trying to distract the penalty taker - isn't that "ungentlemanly"? Again, not saying it's right or wrong, just that the concept of "ungentlemanly" being in the rules seems bizarre to me. And potentially subjective to assess.
Maybe the stadium screens should be reminding fans of the opposing team to respect the penalty taker (something that I find truly weird with rugby).
Click to expand...

Ungentlemanly conduct was introduced to the rules in 1863. It was officially changed to 'unsporting behaviour' in 1997 to make it gender neutral.
 
Seedy Ron said:
Are they? I watch a fair bit of the Italian football and the fudger's always got his finger in his ear, before the unseen hand makes some decision you don't agree with, after taking ages. Juve v Fiorentina the other day, gives a penalty, bloke's stood there for ages waiting to take it, and then he gives a dodgy offside about 5 minutes earlier.

I'd say last night's effort was pretty standard, problem was he kept having to go to it so it exacerbated the problem.

Goal line tech has been great, and it'd be useful for one clam to be able to tell another clam that he's sent off the wrong bloke, or that was the other team's hand in the area, but micro managing offsides etc isn't doing much for me.
Click to expand...

I'm going off it that's for sure :D
 
r-u-s-x said:
it was the catch all for running to the ball and dummying it, the rule was clarified in 2010 and its not really ungentlemanly anymore but illegal feinting which also gets the yellow. But from all descriptions i see this only comes into play at the end of the run not during it so Son didn't do it. ---I cant beleive how much time I spent last night trying to work out what the fudge was going on.
Click to expand...

Correct (or so it would seem). So, if it is this clear :

https://twitter.com/x/status/969157828400304128

https://twitter.com/x/status/969182057611046912

surely that should be a pretty basic rule that refs would understand - and remember? It's not as if penalties are rare occurances.

(I'm printing that rule out from the FA rule book, so I can brandish it during the inevitable pub conversations later).

However, there seems to be a debate about whether "feinting" and "stopping" are the same. This tweet is only anecdotal, but interesting in terms of guidance given to the poster :

https://twitter.com/x/status/969164860939472896
 
Glenda's Legs said:
Correct (or so it would seem). So, if it is this clear :

https://twitter.com/x/status/969157828400304128

https://twitter.com/x/status/969182057611046912

surely that should be a pretty basic rule that refs would understand - and remember? It's not as if penalties are rare occurances.

(I'm printing that rule out from the FA rule book, so I can brandish it during the inevitable pub conversations later).

However, there seems to be a debate about whether "feinting" and "stopping" are the same. This tweet is only anecdotal, but interesting in terms of guidance given to the poster :

https://twitter.com/x/status/969164860939472896
Click to expand...


http://www.askasoccerreferee.com/feinting-at-a-penalty-kick/

Feinting at a penalty kick is allowed, including a brief stop along the way to the ball.

The issue of “feinting” underwent a significant change in 2000. Prior to that time, the kicker was expected to make one continuous, uninterrupted move to the ball; in and after 2000 (based on the FIFA Q&A), certain forms of deception were allowed.

Marcotti is just being a nob because he heard Foy say it was illegal and had a row on US tv and is now doubling down.
 
Poch was pretty dignified and diplomatic in his post-match discussion of VAR and handling the inevitable questions about the confusion.
He did very well to not come across as condemning the ref and wanting to do what he could to help resolve this.
 
K.D.D.D.D.Soc said:
The penalty situation was a total farce, it appears that the ref made a wrong call and Son did not commit any offence, but as half the players on the pitch were in the box before he did his faint shouldn't the penalty have been retaken as that "offence" occurred first? Will the booking be rescinded? Chris Foy took the opportunity to demonstate what a tinkle poor ref he was.
Click to expand...

Foy fudged that up on his own and didn't need the help of the video referee.
 
VR my mind this is part of the creeping "Americansiation" of UK Football , and in fact of many aspects of UK life. I've lived here for 15 years now, believe me you do not want the UK turning into a satellite state of the US.(Although I fear it is already on the way)
American sports events are tedious, soulless and passionless. Characterized by white teeth and comments like "Hey buddy your team sucks" . Just No.

I first attended WHL at 8 years old, I am now 54. VAR is on a par with a female Dr Who, totally unacceptable to me. If it is introduced I am done. I have already taken a decision not to watch the World Cup in Russia if VAR is used, tbh I'd rather watch a pub team on a Sunday morning. VAR totally destroyed my enjoyment of the game against Rochdale. Very sad day for me.
 
milo said:
Foy fudged that up on his own and didn't need the help of the video referee.
Click to expand...
does VAR not automatically review game changing events? I may be mis-remembering but he had his finger in his ear after he blew the whistle so the VAR ref is also guilty.
 
Yermiyahu said:
VR my mind this is part of the creeping "Americansiation" of UK Football , and in fact of many aspects of UK life. I've lived here for 15 years now, believe me you do not want the UK turning into a satellite state of the US.(Although I fear it is already on the way)
American sports events are tedious, soulless and passionless. Characterized by white teeth and comments like "Hey buddy your team sucks" . Just No.

I first attended WHL at 8 years old, I am now 54. VAR is on a par with a female Dr Who, totally unacceptable to me. If it is introduced I am done. I have already taken a decision not to watch the World Cup in Russia if VAR is used, tbh I'd rather watch a pub team on a Sunday morning. VAR totally destroyed my enjoyment of the game against Rochdale. Very sad day for me.
Click to expand...
I think you are being overly dramatic. It's a huge leap equating VAR with the "Americanisation" of football. Football has change; in the modern era the players are fitter and the ball moves faster - there is cheating on the pitch and the refs need extra eyes with making the most important decisions and that is the main purpose of VAR.

I'll just leave this here for the Luddites:
Paul: I'd sooner VAR (or the use of it) resulted in a few incorrect decisions rather than suffer an injustice of the magnitude of Lampard's non-goal against Germany at the 2010 World Cup. Defy any England fan to disagree.
Click to expand...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/live/football/43115766?ns_mchannel=social&ns_source=twitter&ns_campaign=bbc_live&ns_linkname=5a971755680cc406742ac4d4&Get involved&&ns_fee=0#post_5a971755680cc406742ac4d4
 
The incident Paul's referring to has already been solved by a system that runs automatically, instantly and doesn't involve any human input.
 
The Portugeezer said:
I think you are being overly dramatic. It's a huge leap equating VAR with the "Americanisation" of football. Football has change; in the modern era the players are fitter and the ball moves faster - there is cheating on the pitch and the refs need extra eyes with making the most important decisions and that is the main purpose of VAR.

I'll just leave this here for the Luddites:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/live/football/43115766?ns_mchannel=social&ns_source=twitter&ns_campaign=bbc_live&ns_linkname=5a971755680cc406742ac4d4&Get involved&&ns_fee=0#post_5a971755680cc406742ac4d4
Click to expand...
i disagree, what you lose outweighs what you gain.
 
The Portugeezer said:
All VAR decisions were correct: http://www.skysports.com/football/n...-on-decisions-in-tottenhams-win-over-rochdale

As for the penalty; Son had to get "clever" and do a silly feint. Just take it properly! The odds are already in favour of the taker!
Click to expand...
The first was never a foul by llorente, it was 6 of one and half a dozen of the other and it was instigated by the Rochdale defender! Even if it was a foul (highly debateable) are we doing VAR for every dubious call like that now, Imagine goals from corners, every single one would be VAR’d and probably disallowed on this basis. Verdict; INCORRECT VAR DECISION (but debateable, so definitely not an obvious mistake that needed overturning!)

The Trippier penalty, the incident started outside the box and as soon as they entered the box Tripp’s fell over, surely it’s where the initial foul takes place? Verdict; INCORRECT (IMO)

The Son penalty, as has been mentioned many times here if you’d read the thread that it was legal, the only thing illegal was the encroaching Rochdale players! Verdict; INCORRECT (as a matter of fact!)

So actually you’re wrong I’m afraid! Unless you were being sarcastic of course and I just missed it, I’d prefer to think that of you tbh.
 
Gazza Dazzla said:
The first was never a foul by llorente, it was 6 of one and half a dozen of the other and it was instigated by the Rochdale defender! Even if it was a foul (highly debateable) are we doing VAR for every dubious call like that now, Imagine goals from corners, every single one would be VAR’d and probably disallowed on this basis. Verdict; INCORRECT VAR DECISION (but debateable, so definitely not an obvious mistake that needed overturning!)

The Trippier penalty, the incident started outside the box and as soon as they entered the box Tripp’s fell over, surely it’s where the initial foul takes place? Verdict; INCORRECT (IMO)

The Son penalty, as has been mentioned many times here if you’d read the thread that it was legal, the only thing illegal was the encroaching Rochdale players! Verdict; INCORRECT (as a matter of fact!)

So actually you’re wrong I’m afraid! Unless you were being sarcastic of course and I just missed it, I’d prefer to think that of you tbh.
Click to expand...

You are referring to the outdated Law for both instances. It's been updated.

The foul continued into the box - according to the Laws of the Game, it's a penalty.

Son stopped in his run up which is unsportsmanlike conduct therefore it is illegal. As for the encroachment that was the second offense.
 
I want VT to be used to cut out errors is the game. But not what I saw last night that was a nightmare.
So if the "authorities" are incapable of implementing it correctly, then bin it!
Last nights abortion of a VAR trial was too higher price to pay for increased refereeing decision accuracy.
 
r-u-s-x said:
does VAR not automatically review game changing events? I may be mis-remembering but he had his finger in his ear after he blew the whistle so the VAR ref is also guilty.
Click to expand...

Not every decision is VARable and I thought that Son's penalty was something that he got wrong on his own. It is becoming a bit of a blur now, so I could be wrong.
 
Seedy Ron said:
The incident Paul's referring to has already been solved by a system that runs automatically, instantly and doesn't involve any human input.
Click to expand...
I think the point Paul was making is goal-line technology is there to assist the referees making the correct decision very much like VAR. VAR has massive room for improvement. To completely trash it because of the poor implementation is foolish.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back