VAR thread

[Buzzo]

Wait what? Am I missing something here. Looks like a nicely worked goal with nothing else happening. Where is the part that led to it being disallowed?

And how many times have wolves been done this season by bad officiating.

I’ve genuinely no idea.

It’s a complete shocker.

[Exiled_red]

Why was it disallowed?

[vlahka]

I think I've spotted what MIGHT be the issue... About 2 seconds in at the bottom you see one of the players swing at the others head who stumbles dodging it and the ball gets passed him. Could be that.

[Buzzo]

I think I've spotted what MIGHT be the issue... About 2 seconds in at the bottom you see one of the players swing at the others head who stumbles dodging it and the ball gets passed him. Could be that.

Isn’t that the Wolves player that stumbles though?

[vlahka]

Isn’t that the Wolves player that stumbles though?

Looks like its the wolves player who takes a swing at him.

[Barnie7]

Cuhne throws an elbow in the face of the defender...it has no affect on the goal but Stuart Atwell after looking at the VAR screen gave a free kick to Bournemouth

[Buzzo]

So disallowed for this apparently.

Embarrassing.

[ame]https://twitter.com/_alwayswolves/status/1783254720833851682[/ame]

[spud_gun]

At this juncture the best thing would be for VAR to be sacked off for everything bar offsides and even then offsides would only remain because of the semi-automated offside technology being rolled out next season.

[DerKrampus]

You all missed the arm swing to the face by the Wolves player in front of the ball carrying one?

[Buzzo]

That’s in the clip just above. Never enough to disallow a goal.

[Scratch]

That’s in the clip just above. Never enough to disallow a goal.

I dunno, it's an intentional act by the player, he looks and takes a swing at him. It has no bearing on the goal, but it is a foul in the build-up and if the ref had seen it the he would probably have stopped play before the ball was crossed in.

[Cerbie]

I dunno, it's an intentional act by the player, he looks and takes a swing at him. It has no bearing on the goal, but it is a foul in the build-up and if the ref had seen it the he would probably have stopped play before the ball was crossed in.

Remember the Bobby hand ball near the half way line that bounce off the opposition player and hit his hand? Our goal was chalked off for that. This BS has been happening since the beginning of VAR. VAR are there primarily to support the Ref and actively look for reasons to disallow goals. No benefit of the doubt to the attackers and zero common sense applied.

A strategic review of the objectives of VAR is needed as the current implementation has resulted in a backwards step in officiating standards compared to pre-VAR.

[Exiled_red]

It's an odd one because if there is contact it is a foul, and play may have been stopped if the ref had seen it. But it has no impact on the goal, if the Bournemouth player goes down, you could make the argument that the goal was scored while Bournemouth were a players short due to the foul but the guy carries on an puts a challenge in 2 seconds later.

This is a consistency issue for me because no ref gives a penalty for a foul no matter how much contact there is if the attacking player stays on his feet, but here they are happy to rule out a goal.

[Buzzo]

If we want to discourage players from going down at the merest hint of contact then this is not the way to do it. At best. At the absolute most there is a minor flinch from the Bournemouth player.

[Exiled_red]

I realise what I am saying would encourage people to go down, but the inconsistency in what is given as a penalty or a foul is crazy. You only have to look at our game last night, Everton players going down under the slightest contact and getting freekicks, we get our players with studs in their chests and held in 2 handed bear hugs that don't get freekicks