VAR thread

[Exiled_red]

Whatever the rights and wrongs of the decision/outcome the process is a mess, you can't change your mind on why the goal was disallowed 10 mins later VAR is a cluster****

[Buzzo]

From the BBC interview with the Scotland manager...

"McTominay's fine free-kick is so close to being a super goal," said Clarke.

"Initially, Jack is a centimetre offside. Then when he steps towards the keeper they've asked the referee to look at it. They've interpreted Jack as interfering with the keeper. I'm not sure the goalie is saving that shot anyway."

So, he's offside, and steps towards (ie obstructs) the keeper....whether the keeper would have saved it or not is an unknown (most likely not) but the Scotland player being there means he cannot make an attempt, so the Scottish lad is interfering with play from an offside position.

I don't think he was aware of all of the shenanigans when he gave this interview.

That said, he was magnanimous enough to know he has to move on from it. Its not getting changes now.

The fact that the slightest brush on the keeper is getting given as a FK when players getting cleaned out is getting waved on is not lost on anyone. They were searching for a reason not to give the goal.

[S-RED]

Whatever the rights and wrongs of the decision/outcome the process is a mess, you can't change your mind on why the goal was disallowed 10 mins later VAR is a cluster****

this is the issue for sure; the descision was correct, but how they got to that point was another ****show

[Buzzo]

this is the issue for sure; the decision was wrong, but how they got to that point was another ****show

[S-RED]

this is the issue for sure; the descision was correct, but how they got to that point was another ****show

Lol, yes fair point.

The decision was correct, but only because of the ****ed up laws & interpretation

The decision was wrong if you were watching the game & IFAB hadn't come along & complicated every single thing about the laws of the game.

[vlahka]

He absolutely pushes the keeper. Move the still frames and you can see it as he leans into him and pushes. In fast motion it flows better, so hes being sly. Total foul.

[Buzzo]

Theory rejected

Ball is past the keeper before he knows what is happening. You can see form behind there is almost zero contact. Certainly not enough for a foul (he doesnt appeal) nor a fall. He brushes past him. When you look at the contact the other way that went on and didnt get called as a foul (keepers contact on Robbo, foul on McGinn) then it is a double standard. That's not enough to disallow a goal for me, keeper is at fault should do better and be stronger.

Anyway I am prepared to move on knowing that nobody will agree with me.

[vlahka]

You can totally see his body movement as he pushes the keeper back. But either way hes in front of the keeper from the kick off. Thats not allowed. I mean he didnt even try to jump for it because he was back inside his goal because of the guy in front of him.

[Buzzo]

Theory rejected.

Looks more like a goal each time I watch it.

[Kenneth]

He’s effecting the goalkeeper so active, and was in an offside position. The only scope for objecting to the decision is frustration.

[Buzzo]

Theory rejected.

[Mark79]

The keeper is far too passive, but Hendry’s only interest in the free kick is to impede him. Stood in front of him, physically backs in to him. Never any interest in attacking the ball.

Soft as hell, but can also see why it was disallowed (initial confusion over the official reason aside).

That said, I will also freely admit I’d be furious if the exact same thing happened to Liverpool.

[Kenneth]

Theory rejected.

That’s just the frustration speaking.

[ChesterDave]

IFAB
FIFA
UEFA
The FA
Premier League
PGMOL

Far too many parasites with their fingers in far too many pies.

[baitman]

That’s just the frustration speaking.

Good process, well done everyone.