VAR thread

[Buzzo]

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

[Cerbie]

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

Or the two identical Walker challenges in the FA Cup semi, one inside the box, no penalty, outside it foul.

I suppose you could say they are consistently inconsistent...

[ChesterDave]

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.

Then VAR is still ****ing **** because if they have ruled he intentionally swung his arm at the other guys face he should be off for violent conduct.

[Exiled_red]

[ame="https://twitter.com/martynziegler/status/1783600433346335070"]https://twitter.com/martynziegler/status/1783600433346335070[/ame]

[vlahka]

City's favourite go to for bonus points!

[Buzzo]

They have lost their minds with it. Listen to this it’s absolutely nuts. Just bin it.

[ame]https://twitter.com/stancollymore/status/1783943827859919175[/ame]

[fidget]

That's bat**** crazy

[Scratch]

I was with them all the way, until they decided that the tackle was red card worthy. I can see it being a penalty at a stretch, given the nature of the contact, but a red card for the follow thru, when the defender is just kicking the ball away, is ridiculous.

Especially if studs to the chest from a high boot is not dangerous play.

[vlahka]

For us its just foot on foot, no problem carry on.

[DerKrampus]

If you can't tell if something is offside within 20 seconds then it's not offside. VAR should be used to tell if something clear has been missed, not if a toenail is onside or not.

Remember Sterling's 'offside' goal? Everyone could see he was onside, that could have been caught in 5 seconds, *then* VAR would have been useful. Same for **** fouls etc. Has to be obvious enough to be spotted and highlighted in 20 seconds.

[Mr Pink]

When they’re checking it for offside, it really shows how inaccurate their technology is. Look at when they’re choosing which frame to stop it on, how much the leg swings between frames. And look at the shape of the ball in the frame they use. It doesn’t even look like a ball- like literally if I was shown a cropped version of the image, I don’t think I would guess that that’s a ball. That just goes to show how slow the cameras they’re using are. They need a high speed camera to catch the exact point where the ball leaves his foot (or the point where contact is made with the ball, not sure what the rule is).

Then they’re drawing lines and trying to guess where the shoulder ends and arm starts, and again it’s just inaccurate.

And for once, this isn’t even a criticism of the operators, it’s the technology and protocol. Between the issues choosing when exactly to freeze the frame and the issues of where exactly to draw lines, I would say there about a 5cm margin of error for where each line should be drawn, so up to 10cm margin of error for the difference between the lines, in extreme cases. They should just eyeball it and if ya can’t tell if he’s offside or not from the image, give the benefit to the attacker. Look at the reason the offside rule was brought in, in the first place ffs.

[Kenneth]

https://www.reddit.com/r/soccer/s/m0TqeEQ6lA

This is the VAR audio from the Ashley young slide through the back of the forest player that wasn’t given. Really poor effort and conclusion from the VAR. The ref explains why he didn’t give it and the VAR ignores him. Confirmation bias in video form.

[Scratch]

To me that is an easy example of how VAR should work;

Taylor says "he got the ball"
VAR ref should then go "Tayl's, he didn't get the ball".

And that should be it, send the ref to the screen so he can have a look and decide. No more input from VAR, put it back on to the ref.

[Buzzo]

Yeah decent process wrong outcome.

Totally agree, that’s all about backing the on-field decision and nothing about adding clarity to what actually happened.

“Mutual engagement between them” do me a favour. Who even speaks like that? Talk normally and look at what is happening with your eyes. One of the players goes through the back of the other.

It’s like it’s run by people watching their first ever game of football.

[chadrtc]

These videos they keep releasing have done nothing but confirm that the VAR officials are almost always trying to prove the original decision as correct, regardless of what the video shows.

Its yet another bizzare example of the strange post truth era we find ourselves inhabiting.