Page 18 of 26

Re: VAR

PostPosted: Fri Sep 06, 2019 11:10 am
by walshawblue
Article on the BBC website The premier league trends states

9 spot kicks given by VAR 3 to the scum

30 incidents looked at but only 6 overturned including 2 goals ruled out for Gabriel Jesus

is this an indication of how bent it is ?

Re: VAR

PostPosted: Sat Sep 07, 2019 8:26 am
by salford city
Am in Spain at the in-laws at present. Last night Racing played Cadiz. There were two contentious penalty decisions - both of which went to VAR. The first was for the ball striking a defender's hand which it did albeit accidentally. The second given in around the 96th minute, after having 7 mins added on for the first review, was also for the ball striking a defenders hand. This one was a little bit harsh IMHO as the defender had gone to ground with his hand up & the ball struck his hand

After lengthy delays & reviews, on both occasions the referee consulted the video monitor & gave both penalties

What I would say here is that this was consistent, both hand-balls, both not given initially by the referee but given by the on-field referee after he had seen the replays. At least in this case, you can see who having the final say which is where we should be in the Premier.

Game went on to over 100 minutes

Re: VAR

PostPosted: Sat Sep 07, 2019 4:35 pm
by Beefymcfc
salford city wrote:Am in Spain at the in-laws at present. Last night Racing played Cadiz. There were two contentious penalty decisions - both of which went to VAR. The first was for the ball striking a defender's hand which it did albeit accidentally. The second given in around the 96th minute, after having 7 mins added on for the first review, was also for the ball striking a defenders hand. This one was a little bit harsh IMHO as the defender had gone to ground with his hand up & the ball struck his hand

After lengthy delays & reviews, on both occasions the referee consulted the video monitor & gave both penalties

What I would say here is that this was consistent, both hand-balls, both not given initially by the referee but given by the on-field referee after he had seen the replays. At least in this case, you can see who having the final say which is where we should be in the Premier.

Game went on to over 100 minutes

I don't think people would mind the game going on a little longer if the correct decision is made. Two things with your post that spring out:

The use of the monitor which we aren't using so the ref cannot be over ruled.

They decide to give a penalty for handball yet we don't but penalise the attackers only.

You know something is up when only one league plays to its own rules.

Re: VAR

PostPosted: Sat Sep 07, 2019 5:53 pm
by salford city
Beefymcfc wrote:
salford city wrote:Am in Spain at the in-laws at present. Last night Racing played Cadiz. There were two contentious penalty decisions - both of which went to VAR. The first was for the ball striking a defender's hand which it did albeit accidentally. The second given in around the 96th minute, after having 7 mins added on for the first review, was also for the ball striking a defenders hand. This one was a little bit harsh IMHO as the defender had gone to ground with his hand up & the ball struck his hand

After lengthy delays & reviews, on both occasions the referee consulted the video monitor & gave both penalties

What I would say here is that this was consistent, both hand-balls, both not given initially by the referee but given by the on-field referee after he had seen the replays. At least in this case, you can see who having the final say which is where we should be in the Premier.

Game went on to over 100 minutes

I don't think people would mind the game going on a little longer if the correct decision is made. Two things with your post that spring out:

The use of the monitor which we aren't using so the ref cannot be over ruled.

I think that's the point here Beefy, we have chosen to go away from the monitors & in effect, we have some unknown face sat fuck knows where, deciding the outcome of games? Corrupt as you like whichever way you look at it

They decide to give a penalty for handball yet we don't but penalise the attackers only.

You know something is up when only one league plays to its own rules.

Re: VAR

PostPosted: Fri Sep 13, 2019 11:24 am
by PrezIke
Luck Index 2019-20: Man City continue to be unlucky -- but so far VAR has little impact

https://www.espn.com/soccer/english-pre ... tle-impact

Re: VAR

PostPosted: Sun Sep 15, 2019 1:43 pm
by dazby
Why didn't Var give Norwich a pen for the handball by Stones? Made no sense.

Re: VAR

PostPosted: Sun Sep 15, 2019 2:39 pm
by ayrshireblue
Because the handball wasn't deliberate. If it had been the attacker that handled then scored it would supposedly be disallowed.
What I want to know is why was Norwich's 3rd goal not disallowed when Pukki was in the 18 yard box when Ederson took the goal kick. Again VAR is allowing goals to stand when they shouldn't be allowed depending on who the decisions favour.

Re: VAR

PostPosted: Sun Sep 15, 2019 5:43 pm
by Beefymcfc
Just think, most of us wanted to see VAR instigated as we thought that the wrongs we'd seen would bow be righted, the one concern was how it would be used by the powers that be. And how that concern has come back to bite us.

We thought those typical dives where a Rag or Dipper throws themselves into an oppo player and gets a touch of skin on the way down would be overturned by the VAR? We now know that it's never going to happen and we are just where we were without it, the referee making his decision, never to be overturned.

Yet, obvious penalty decisions such as Rhodri and Silva being discarded.

We then have the instance of stopping a player handballing the ball into the back of the net, like Boly last season, but then find the referees actually have a different rule to what their laws mandate. Not only that, once implemented go directly against their own mandate when they see fit.

And what about offsides and red card offenses, what's changed? If they want to find a reason to punish a team, they will, and vice versa.

So, in short, it's fucking shit due to the policy set by the PL, which is to ensure it benefits them and their commercial partners.

Re: VAR

PostPosted: Mon Sep 16, 2019 6:52 pm
by ayrshireblue
Image

Seems VAR can't spot the Norwich player illegally in our box when the goal kick was taken before the 3rd goal. No mention on any of the media but not hard to see.

Re: VAR

PostPosted: Mon Sep 16, 2019 7:43 pm
by Beefymcfc
ayrshireblue wrote:Image

Seems VAR can't spot the Norwich player illegally in our box when the goal kick was taken before the 3rd goal. No mention on any of the media but not hard to see.

I cant see the pic but I thought they'd changed the rule to allow players in the box or is that just the defensive players?

Re: VAR

PostPosted: Mon Sep 16, 2019 7:52 pm
by ayrshireblue
Only the defending players are allowed in the box before the goal kick is taken. Once the ball is touched then its open play as normal.

Re: VAR

PostPosted: Mon Sep 16, 2019 7:53 pm
by Nigels Tackle
ayrshireblue wrote:Image

Seems VAR can't spot the Norwich player illegally in our box when the goal kick was taken before the 3rd goal. No mention on any of the media but not hard to see.


your picture posting skills aren’t up to scratch...

just rewatched the lowlights of the game on the os, couldn’t see any oppo player causing issues in the box for before their 3rd... otter gets robbed by a lad steaming in from near the halfway line and pukki was miles outside the box

Re: VAR

PostPosted: Mon Sep 16, 2019 8:01 pm
by ayrshireblue
How do I post a picture?
When Ederson takes the goal kick Pukki is to the edge of the box but we'll inside it.

Re: VAR

PostPosted: Mon Sep 16, 2019 8:19 pm
by Beefymcfc
ayrshireblue wrote:Only the defending players are allowed in the box before the goal kick is taken. Once the ball is touched then its open play as normal.

Cheers, everyday's a school day ;-)

Re: VAR

PostPosted: Mon Sep 16, 2019 8:20 pm
by Nigels Tackle
ayrshireblue wrote:How do I post a picture?
When Ederson takes the goal kick Pukki is to the edge of the box but we'll inside it.


suspect that that has more to do with ed wanting to get the ball back in play quickly rather than pukki trying to gain an advantage. he wasn’t exactly pressing stones hard to get the ball

Re: VAR

PostPosted: Mon Sep 16, 2019 8:24 pm
by ayrshireblue
Image

Stones and Otamendi should have done better but Pukki was in an illegal position which is what VAR is meant to be looking at.
Do me a favour and let me know if this image is showing as I can see the other ones but obviously other people can't for some reason.

Re: VAR

PostPosted: Mon Sep 16, 2019 8:27 pm
by nottsblue
ayrshireblue wrote:Image

Stones and Otamendi should have done better but Pukki was in an illegal position which is what VAR is meant to be looking at.
Do me a favour and let me know if this image is showing as I can see the other ones but obviously other people can't for some reason.

Can see that. Shame the VAR people were having another coffee

Re: VAR

PostPosted: Mon Sep 16, 2019 9:16 pm
by Beefymcfc
nottsblue wrote:
ayrshireblue wrote:Image

Stones and Otamendi should have done better but Pukki was in an illegal position which is what VAR is meant to be looking at.
Do me a favour and let me know if this image is showing as I can see the other ones but obviously other people can't for some reason.

Can see that. Shame the VAR people were having another coffee

All these changes in the reg's mean that nobody knows what the fuck is right or wrong. Nobody noticed that at the time and when you look at the course of play you could probably say that it didn't affect the goal but when you look at it properly the fact that Pukki was so high up the pitch led to other players pushing higher and him getting an advantage by his position at the start of the phase.

Otamendi and Stones should've done and known better though, it's not as if Norwich hadn't given them notice. That's what comes y playing them both so early.

The letter of the law though, VAR should've reversed the decision.

Re: VAR

PostPosted: Tue Sep 17, 2019 7:42 am
by mr_nool
ayrshireblue wrote:Image

Stones and Otamendi should have done better but Pukki was in an illegal position which is what VAR is meant to be looking at.
Do me a favour and let me know if this image is showing as I can see the other ones but obviously other people can't for some reason.


He's not in an illegal position if Ederson doesn't give him the time to get out of the box.
This is a non-issue and a grasping at straws.

Re: VAR

PostPosted: Tue Sep 17, 2019 9:50 am
by gmercer1
mr_nool wrote:
ayrshireblue wrote:Image

Stones and Otamendi should have done better but Pukki was in an illegal position which is what VAR is meant to be looking at.
Do me a favour and let me know if this image is showing as I can see the other ones but obviously other people can't for some reason.


He's not in an illegal position if Ederson doesn't give him the time to get out of the box.
This is a non-issue and a grasping at straws.


I bet it would have been an issue if the goal was scored at the other end of the pitch.