Viking Supporters Co-operative
Viking Chat => Viking Chat => Topic started by: normal rules on January 16, 2018, 09:26:06 pm
-
So, for the first time VAR proves its worth. The 5 live commentators both initially called Leicesters second goal offside. Flag went up from lino, VAR proves otherwise.
-
There was an awkward pause during preceedings though. Be interesting to hear Leicester fans take on it. The outcome they would be pleased with - but what about the whole moment of scoring and then having to wait?
-
A bit like the Hurst one in 1966, that we all know clearly crossed the line.
-
There was an awkward pause during preceedings though. Be interesting to hear Leicester fans take on it. The outcome they would be pleased with - but what about the whole moment of scoring and then having to wait?
In an instance like this though, no time is lost. Without VAR the ball would still be dead because it'd be a dead ball to Fleetwood due to the offside. Instead the time is used to verify that the goal should stand and thus it's a positive use. I see no downside in instances such as this, it's when play hasn't stopped and a decision needs correcting that problems arise.
-
There was an awkward pause during preceedings though. Be interesting to hear Leicester fans take on it. The outcome they would be pleased with - but what about the whole moment of scoring and then having to wait?
In an instance like this though, no time is lost. Without VAR the ball would still be dead because it'd be a dead ball to Fleetwood due to the offside. Instead the time is used to verify that the goal should stand and thus it's a positive use. I see no downside in instances such as this, it's when play hasn't stopped and a decision needs correcting that problems arise.
I would agree with that.
Someone (BJW I think) suggested stopping the game anyway in the case of reviewing something like a goal or a pen appeal while the review takes place.
If it found not to be a goal or a pen, just restart the game with a goal kick.
Totally sensible suggestion.
-
I gave that some thought but the purists will say it's stopping the games natural flow, where, if there is no offence, then the other team could go up the other end and score legal goal.
It would be a major change, because when you think about it, there should be consequences. If a penalty is not awarded a considered a dive, the offending player will be booked. Players are then less likely do dive.
Resuming play by goal-kick or drop ball is a sensible solution.
Once again, bear in mind how many times is this likely to be needed during a game? It won't be stop/start as many may fear.
-
Hypothetical scenario.
The linesman sticks his flag up for offside.
The 'offside' player sees the flag as does the goalkeeper, but the attacker still knocks the ball into the net anyway and the goalkeeper makes no effort to save it due to the linesman's flag being up.
It then goes to VAR and, oh no, it's a perfectly good goal.
What happens then? Does the goal count?
Are players meant to play to the whistle now, or meant to play until any move is done and dusted - regardless of whether a whistle goes or a flag is up?
-
They're meant to play to the whistle anyway to be fair, but I see your point. If a referee blows for an offside and they stop, but it turns out it was inside, then we have a problem. But this is why I advocate the idea of a Challenge system ala the NFL or Tennis.
-
Every non-penno isn't a dive so there isn't always a natural break in play
-
Hypothetical scenario.
The linesman sticks his flag up for offside.
The 'offside' player sees the flag as does the goalkeeper, but the attacker still knocks the ball into the net anyway and the goalkeeper makes no effort to save it due to the linesman's flag being up.
It then goes to VAR and, oh no, it's a perfectly good goal.
What happens then? Does the goal count?
Are players meant to play to the whistle now, or meant to play until any move is done and dusted - regardless of whether a whistle goes or a flag is up?
It happened last night, but the referee didn't blow the whistle when the flag went up. Players will have to learn to play to the whistle, not the flag.
A more interesting one for me was the Coppinger penalty incident last Saturday. The ball stayed in play and was cleared down the other end. Baudry was adjudged to have fouled Carey and was booked. Then the VAR says to Haines "you need to have a look at this..."
-
The keeper shouldn't stop, but if he does that his own fault.
I suppose a common shout for a penalty is hands. That's a more difficult scenario to call and to decide whether to stop play.
-
Are players meant to play to the whistle now, or meant to play until any move is done and dusted - regardless of whether a whistle goes or a flag is up?
I was taught to play to the whistle in Primary school; if a pro doesn't play to the whistle that's their fault.
-
They're meant to play to the whistle anyway to be fair, but I see your point. If a referee blows for an offside and they stop, but it turns out it was inside, then we have a problem. But this is why I advocate the idea of a Challenge system ala the NFL or Tennis.
VAR is only used for clear and obvious errors in four areas, goals, straight red cards, pens and mistaken identity, therefore if some one was on side or off side and goal never happened it wouldn’t have been looked at by VAR.
COYR
-
They're meant to play to the whistle anyway to be fair, but I see your point. If a referee blows for an offside and they stop, but it turns out it was inside, then we have a problem. But this is why I advocate the idea of a Challenge system ala the NFL or Tennis.
VAR is only used for clear and obvious errors in four areas, goals, straight red cards, pens and mistaken identity, therefore if some one was on side or off side and goal never happened it wouldn’t have been looked at by VAR.
COYR
It was used last night for an offside.
-
They're meant to play to the whistle anyway to be fair, but I see your point. If a referee blows for an offside and they stop, but it turns out it was inside, then we have a problem. But this is why I advocate the idea of a Challenge system ala the NFL or Tennis.
VAR is only used for clear and obvious errors in four areas, goals, straight red cards, pens and mistaken identity, therefore if some one was on side or off side and goal never happened it wouldn’t have been looked at by VAR.
COYR
It was used last night for an offside.
only because there was a goal in question
-
They're meant to play to the whistle anyway to be fair, but I see your point. If a referee blows for an offside and they stop, but it turns out it was inside, then we have a problem. But this is why I advocate the idea of a Challenge system ala the NFL or Tennis.
VAR is only used for clear and obvious errors in four areas, goals, straight red cards, pens and mistaken identity, therefore if some one was on side or off side and goal never happened it wouldn’t have been looked at by VAR.
COYR
It was used last night for an offside.
only because there was a goal in question
It would be exactly the same with my scenario only the keeper has seen the flag and makes no attempt to save the ball.
I think there's too many flaws with VAR in its present format for it to be an outright success. There's far too many grey areas.
-
Yes, the ball being in the back of the net was a bit of a giveaway.
I remember our home game vs Rotherham in 1984/5 (?) where we thought there was an offside or a foul, and the players stopped. Rotherham scored and the goal stood - we lost 0-1. Plus there was a rare occurrence for the 80s, a 5 figure attendance at Belle Vue!
-
....Plus there was a rare occurrence for the 80s, a 5 figure attendance at Belle Vue!
:ohmy: Definitely a case for a video review!
-
I've just watched the video of what happened in the Leicester game on the BBC and I've got to be honest - I absolutely loved seeing a referee in an English game of football be able to use technology to help him make the right decision. All I thought was "hallelujah...it's about time". More of this please.
-
I don’t think either keeper or striker ever look at the linesman’s flag. You see defender’s look over when trying to play an offside trap but I can’t recall ever seeing a keeper not bother with a save unless the referee has blown his whistle.
If a striker is suddenly through on goal, why on earth would you as the keeper look to the touchline and take your focus off the ball? Ditto as a striker.
-
Yes, the ball being in the back of the net was a bit of a giveaway.
I remember our home game vs Rotherham in 1984/5 (?) where we thought there was an offside or a foul, and the players stopped. Rotherham scored and the goal stood - we lost 0-1. Plus there was a rare occurrence for the 80s, a 5 figure attendance at Belle Vue!
Something similar happened at Colchester the other year, McSheffrey was offside as far as the defence was concerned I seem to remember but he was clean through and got his only goal for the club.
-
VAR will work and this trial will raise some issues that may need things tweaking. I reckon it's here to stay.
Maybe they will roll it out with full time pro referees!
-
Chelsea v Norwich game just now.
Seconds into extra time and the Chelsea player goes down under a challenge from a Norwich player, inside the area. The referee blows his whistle, gives Norwich a f/k and books the Chelsea player for simulation.
Replays show it should have been a penalty.
Why can't the video referee have a word in his ear and tell him that it should have been a penalty? And will the yellow card be rescinded?
VAR is like opening up pandoras box. I remain to be convinced...
-
They can but for some reason they also thought it wasn't a pen even after watching the video
Crazy
-
And so within just 24hrs of VAR being useful and an accurate assessment of an incident being made, there is an absolute shambles of a decision made in the Chelsea game.
You will never see a more blatant penalty and how someone with the luxury of a number of replays in slo mo can make that decision is quite frankly remarkable.
And to book the player for diving just adds insult to injury.
The VAR debate will go on and on.
-
VAR agreed with the referee that it wasn't an obvious mistake.
On first watching I thought Will I Am bought it, although the replay shows it was the old chestnut of contact but he was already on his way down.
-
Another laughable one.
Morata goes down inside the area after a tug from a Norwich player (not clear cut but some referees out there would give it as a penalty).
The referee books Morata for diving, then red cards him for reacting angrily.
If only the FA would shoot this referee...
-
Conte having a right go at the officials, be intersting what he says in his broken English after the game
-
I thought he got all these decisions correct.
-
It was a definite pen the william one
-
I thought he got all these decisions correct.
And there lies the problem, right? Whether the ball crosses the line or not is either right or wrong.
Some of the stuff VAR is being used for is not always so clear cut.
-
It is not 100% foolproof, and we shouldn't expect it to be. In situations like that, the William one, I don't think I would have over ruled the ref. But, it will still reduce the amount of errors overall.
My concern is there may be an element of the referees union, in supporting fellow refs however at this stage it's too early to challenge the VARs integrity.
-
According to Sky the referee never referred to the VAR for either Chelsea penalty incident. So the VAR wasn't wrong.
The referee obviously needs more training and maybe more humility to refer to the VAR?
http://www.skysports.com/football/chelsea-vs-norwich/report/387609
-
Referees? Humility?
Hahaha hahaha hahaha!!!
I'm starting to lean towards the idea that the VAR should watch constantly and tell them when they're wrong.
-
I'm not sure they have to refer to it, if the video ref see he's made an error then they tell him.
That's what they said on the bbc after the game
-
I thought Willian was going down well before any contact. I can see why the ref didn’t give it.
-
I thought Willian was going down well before any contact. I can see why the ref didn’t give it.
Same here, I thought Willian was diving over the defender's legs before there was contact. I think the ref got the key decisions right.
Just shows how opinions can differ!
-
Exactly
Should only be used for factual events
The Norwich defender who made the tackle is on the radio this morning saying it was a penalty
-
I thought Willian was going down well before any contact. I can see why the ref didn’t give it.
Same here, I thought Willian was diving over the defender's legs before there was contact. I think the ref got the key decisions right.
Just shows how opinions can differ!
The fact opinions differ on the matter shows the decision shouldn’t have been overturned and VAR was used correctly. It’s there to eliminate clear and obvious errors.
-
Exactly
Should only be used for factual events
The Norwich defender who made the tackle is on the radio this morning saying it was a penalty
He thinks it was a penalty because there was contact, Willian instigated the contact for me.
-
Letter of the law states if any contact
Players have been leaving their leg there for decades
-
Contact initiated by the defender is a foul yes, but when the forward flicks his leg towards the defender, who hasn't "tripped or attempted to trip" the forward, and there is contact, that should not be a foul.
-
The Norwich defender who made the tackle is on the radio this morning saying it was a penalty
Fair enough, can't argue with that then.
But as you say, VAR should be limited in terms of which incidents it is used for.
-
If he's falling before contact happens it doesn't mean it's a dive.
He could just be anticipating the foul coming in
-
If he's falling before contact happens it doesn't mean it's a dive.
He could just be anticipating the foul coming in
Which is a pre meditated dive
-
If he's falling before contact happens it doesn't mean it's a dive.
He could just be anticipating the foul coming in
He’s not making a natural movement then is he when the contact comes. I’m pretty sure the laws state players have to be “impeded” by contact. The contact last night didn’t impede him as he was throwing himself to the floor and not going for the ball. If he was actively going for the ball would he have caught him, impossible to know, and you can’t presume when giving decisions. The referee had s great game for me.
-
I thought the ref had a good game too. He stuck to his guns and made some brave decisions in my opinion.
Only when refs continue to get really tough on 'simulation' will players start to think twice before cheating.
-
Let's look at the 3 incidents of "diving".
The first, Pedro's , a shocking and obvious dive. That is clear cheating and the ref got it right, can only give a yellow card but ideally ought to be a red.
The second, Willian, is he already going down or is he just jumping over the challenge, which ends in contact? Debatable if it is a penalty, some say it is because of contact. However my opinion only may be no penalty, but also no yellow card for diving.
The 3rd one, Morata (?) there's a slight touch on the shoulder, and he goes down. How is a tug on the shoulder an attempt to play the ball? Again, seen them given - could also have been no penalty but no booking.
The second yellows for the Chelsea players, they only have themselves to blame..
-
I would just like to see (over and above VAR)
A Report/Score/Rating by the Referees Assessor published publicly for every game Played. I have seen some (and will search again) and they could be quite useful
Who knows - DF is to be sanctioned by the FA for his unfortunate choice of words at the weekend - yet there in a dusty cupboard might be an Assessors Report giving Mr Haines the equivalent of 2 out of 10
It does not make what DF said "right" and it does not vindicate it but I am quite convinced the Assessor holds the key. If he scored Haines highly then there is something wrong with the system. Whereas if he scored him very lowly then there is something wrong with the system
Here is an example from a Lower League Match - so there must be other examples. Wonder if we can get Saturdays via Freedom of information means . Anyone ?
http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/referee-assessors-report-1058290
-
I thought that a foul had to be deemed intentional by the referee, therefore I can see why the Willian one was not given.
The other one was pulling/holding and nowhere in the laws does it say a little pull or a hard pull and we have seen them given, although I think the Referee went on the fact he went to ground with a dive after the event or after he had got goal side of the defender.
Two hard ones open to interpretation, as I said some time ago on here, the teams that will suffer are the top teams, they get in the box a lot more, and are used to being awarded the close calls.
-
and if a penalty decision is too close to call, the ref has to give it in the defenders favour i.e. no peno
-
Do you think that the presence of VAR affects how the players play the game?
From what I saw, they were appealing every decision to be reviewed. Hence more complaints to the referee from all and sundry and less playing to the whistle.
-
Personally yes - and that's why I agreed with someone who pointed out it should be like Tennis with x number of challenges
Get it right and keep the challenge
-
If he's falling before contact happens it doesn't mean it's a dive.
He could just be anticipating the foul coming in
Which is a pre meditated dive
Not really
More getting out of the way,
He's a better man than me if he can make a conscious decision to dive in half a second
-
Eh? People make the decision to dive in half a second all the time, we see it weekly all over football!
I have a great suggestion to Willian of how he can "get out of the way". You jump with your feet over the outstretched defender's leg and keep on running. That's how every honest footballer should approach the game. I don't recall leaving your legs dragging as low as you can to ensure contact being a very good way to get out of the way of anything.
-
If he's falling before contact happens it doesn't mean it's a dive.
He could just be anticipating the foul coming in
Which is a pre meditated dive
Not really
More getting out of the way,
He's a better man than me if he can make a conscious decision to dive in half a second
Therein there is doubt - not cheating like Pedro. Therefore my conclusion was Willian shouldn't have been booked, even if no penalty wasn't given.
There will always be physical contact - it isn't a foul or a dive, every time..
-
Personally yes - and that's why I agreed with someone who pointed out it should be like Tennis with x number of challenges
Get it right and keep the challenge
I'd hate this. The ref is the ref and should be respected for that. It's the ref's call to have a VAR. Persistent nagging of the ref to give a VAR should be a bookable offence.
Saying that, full time refs are needed throughout the league and stricter assessments given plus them being dropped as and when.
Maybe giving the VAR permission to review situations as seen fit and message the ref as to anything missed might be helpful too. Keeping the game flowing is the biggest factor here.
-
I'm afraid BRR, the VAR is shaping up to just highlight the calls that the referee has made wrong, thus questioning their judgement. Players are forever probing before this and even more so now. (Agree it should be a yellow card for any sort of dissent though)
This is in stark contrast to cricket where the presence of DRS has actually increased the accuracy of on-field decisions by the umpires to well over 95%.
-
I can see that, and a sad state of affairs that is :(
Teamwork between the VAR and ref is the key, and giving them the power, between them. If there's one thing I really dislike about footy it's the appealing for things. Players and managers seem to have the maturity of a pea when it comes to this. They really should grow the feck up or have a slap.
-
There is a tendency to see all incidents as an either/or choice, when it can sometimes be both.
Morata is a good example.
He was being held by the defender before he went to ground. Anywhere outside the box that is a free kick, so a penalty should be given for that foul.
Morata then throws himself to the ground without reason. Verdict...yellow for Morata for exaggeration.
So both decisions are not in conflict, because they deal with different offences, although they happened in quick order.
-
Albie, I have no doubt that if that had been Rowe going to ground, this forum would be awash with people accusing him of another dive.
-
Premeditated means planned in advance,
Looking at it again I don't think he left his leg there I think it was a stupid challenge especially in the box, and diving in like that will always run the risk of giving a penalty away
-
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/42727541
He doesn't leave his leg or fall before. He's actually trying to jump his leg and gets caught
-
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/42727541
He doesn't leave his leg or fall before. He's actually trying to jump his leg and gets caught
Agreed that no way is he diving.
Willian is clearly trying to jump over the tackle so he can get a shot away.
Shocking not to give the pen and disgraceful to book him.
-
:that:
Maybe in years to come we will 6 VAR systems all running at once and have "artificial intelligence" to adjudicate ...
... oh wait ... we tried it last Saturday v Plymouth - and it did not work. Thanks Mr HAINES
-
Not sure you could call last weeks officials intelligent in any way - artificial or otherwise!
:turd: :suicide:
-
If we have ' incompetent ' officials on the pitch , what's to stop us having an equally incompetent VAR official ?
-
Then there's no overall difference but it will over time reduce the risk of wrong decisions being made.
-
I think the thing to bear in mind is that, while there's no accounting for refs and lino's ignoring stupid things like Copps being dropped in the box, a LOT of decisions that are made are with a single view at full speed from 1 angle...and slow motion replays often show a very different picture. Fans, pundits and everybody involved in football have been talking about this for years. You would hope that given a VAR gets multiple angles and slow motion, it SHOULD massively cut down on incorrect decisions...conversely if the VAR agrees with the ref over something contentious, it SHOULD help reaffirm that the right decision was made too.
I may be living in dream world, but I'm sure a few years ago I heard that a study of offside decisions in the Prem showed that 95%+ were correct...but to sit in the stands on a Saturday, when emotion is involved, you'd think they get every one wrong.
-
And so the controversy continues:
The biggest hold-up surrounded the penalty awarded to Liverpool midway through the first half for the foul by Livermore on Salah, with Pawson referring to a monitor at the mouth of the players' tunnel after consulting with video assistant referee Andre Marriner.
Almost three minutes passed between the initial incident and Firmino stepping up to take the penalty - with which he hit the underside of the bar.
It was the second time in a few minutes that West Brom had been on the wrong end of a VAR decision, with Craig Dawson having seen a goal ruled out that would have put them 3-1 up.
Marriner alerted Pawson to the fact that Gareth Barry, standing in front of Liverpool goalkeeper Simon Mignolet and interfering with play, was offside as Dawson headed in a Chris Brunt corner.
Just before half-time came the third use of VAR, as Dawson's cross-shot flicked in off Matip for a third Albion goal. Rodriguez had been offside earlier in the move, but did not touch the ball at any stage, and was deemed not to be interfering with play. After a hold-up while the television footage was reviewed, the goal stood.
Pawson also seemed to check with Marriner after Salah slotted in Firmino's lay-off with 12 minutes left, although there was no delay in play and no clear reason as to why the goal might have been in doubt.
-
What f*** yawn VAR is becoming . The studio presenter do a better job .
-
Omg having just watched the Liverpool highlights, I cannot see why west broms third was disallowed, salah should have been booked for simulation, despite being held, he made a huge meal of it.
An open and entertaining cup tie stifled by delays caused using var.
right result in the end.
-
Var is shite at the minute, needs work
On the salah thing it's irrelevant if he made a meal of it, it's obvious he was pulled back.
West Brom goal was disallowed because Barry was offside and stood on the goalkeepers toes.
-
Var in me out . Beauty of football is human error
-
Var in me out . Beauty of football is human error
I think the beauty about Football is the scoring system, in most sports the best team wins or even the team that performs best on the day. Footballs not like that. It’s unpredictable.
-
As Jeff Stelling rightly says "anything DOES happen"