Liverpool vs Chelsea - UEFA Super Cup

[Exiled_red]

is VAR never going to over rule a ref to put things right, so does fergies magic cheque book still hold some sway?

It will overrule the ref if they have been conned by a clear dive with no contact whatsoever.

But those cases are very rare. Most players are going to leave a leg trailing and ensure that there is contact, which essentially means that in those cases as you say VAR is just going to agree with whatever the referee decided, so is still at their mercy.

[Phil]

https://ibb.co/9gRQp7y

Bobby complaining about the lack of confetti

[McDermotX]

For me the problem is that without VAR (when the official has to make a decision) just because there is contact doesn't mean it's a pen. .....

This whole 'contact on replays' being used to justify pens is a byproduct of the Sky Sports interpretation of football.
Nowhere in the rules of the sport will you see contact being used as justification for awarding a penalty.
An infringement by an opposing player is what's key.

Every week we see idiot pundits maintaining "oh, there's contact" or "you see he's running at pace". Arsebollocks.

Anyone who even remotely suggests that's a pen needs their head examined, and trying to justify if Adrian even laid a finger on his sock as reason enough to award said penalty needs beating about that head. In offhand terms, the term contact means appreciable intent by the player to stop an opponent, not whether or not the finger brushed a knee FFS.

There is no appreciable infringement by Adrian, there is no 'contact', the player does what they all do - tries to con a penalty out of the ref.
The ref ****ed up, albeit in an somewhat far from uncommon manner as we see hundred of decisions over the years awarded in a similar vein. The difference here, is there is now a safety net in play for such decisions and one of its sole functions is to prevent game changing decisions.

That failed tonight. 'Game changing decision' trumps 'clear and obvious error' (the new shield for officials to be hidden behind). If I was that ref tonight, I think I'd be fuming that this happened, and more than thankful that the result went the way it did.

[Buzzo]

This whole 'contact on replays' being used to justify pens is a byproduct of the Sky Sports interpretation of football.
Nowhere in the rules of the sport will you see contact being used as justification for awarding a penalty.
An infringement by an opposing player is what's key.

Every week we see idiot pundits maintaining "oh, there's contact" or "you see he's running at pace". Arsebollocks.

Anyone who even remotely suggests that's a pen needs their head examined, and trying to justify if Adrian even laid a finger on his sock as reason enough to award said penalty needs beating about that head. In offhand terms, the term contact means appreciable intent by the player to stop an opponent, not whether or not the finger brushed a knee FFS.

There is no appreciable infringement by Adrian, there is no 'contact', the player does what they all do - tries to con a penalty out of the ref.
The ref ****ed up, albeit in an somewhat far from uncommon manner as we see hundred of decisions over the years awarded in a similar vein. The difference here, is there is now a safety net in play for such decisions and one of its sole functions is to prevent game changing decisions.

That failed tonight.

100% agree. There will be VAR decisions where it is difficult to gauge how much contact there was. Tonight was not one of those decisions and is exactly the sort of decision VAR is supposed to help with.

Taking time outs for VAR would be an idea as the whole thing feels rushed.

[Exiled_red]

I have some sympathy as I don't think it was a penalty either.

But anyone saying **** VAR etc clearly doesn't understand the confines of clear and obvious. We had to have several reviews and wait until the end of the match before there was an admission of contact, the replays were inconclusive.

So the decision was a grey one IMO. But VAR had no right to over rule that decision.

VAR is only for clear and obvious reffing errors, not the final arbitrator for all major decisions, unfortunate as it is.

For the record I agree that the decision was the correct one within the guidelines for VAR, and you can't criticise the VAR officials for the decision that was made.

My issue with VAR has always been that it doesn't seem to be well thought through, and it is unclear what exactly they are trying to achieve. We can look at the Sterling offside and overrule the assistant who "clearly and/or obviously" missed Sterling's shoulder being a cm offside, but we can't determine that brushing someone's sock with your finger isn't enough to send them tumbling to the ground. To me that just seems a fairly large inconsistency as it suggests we want to get offsides perfect but these other elements of the game which you could argue are more important, well we aren't overly bothered about them

[Buzzo]

The replays were conclusive.

It’s bull**** they dont have access to all the angles? Where else are they getting their video feeds from? And if they struggle with that then how are they going to call dives where the forward draws contact more effectively?

At best that was a tech malfunction this evening. If they look at all of this e clips VAR rules that as no pen every day of the week.

Common sense has to be used with VAR.

Offsides are totally different decisions so different criteria applies.

[ChesterDave]

This whole 'contact on replays' being used to justify pens is a byproduct of the Sky Sports interpretation of football.
Nowhere in the rules of the sport will you see contact being used as justification for awarding a penalty.

its the same pundit bollocks of "entitled to go down" making a choice to go down is a dive

[Buzzo]

Also every other sport manages to give the VAR instant access to multiple angles and relay them to the stadia. With seemless dialogue (available to broadcaster) between the ref and the VAR. Instant control on speed and everything.

As ever football uses some ****e tech from the dark ages and the richest game on the planet can’t have live video feeds inside every top level stadium.

[Fosterbloke]

Another trophy. Cool.

[Liverpool]

VAR is sound if done properly but it doesn't look like it will be implemented that way.

The upcoming World Cup changes, Euros, CL/World cup stuff in 2024. The game is going to go to **** in next 5-6 years. The governing bodies haven't got a clue, all about the money.

I'm going to enjoy Klopp and this team then sack it all off and collect traffic cones instead.

[McDermotX]

[McDermotX]

[ame]https://twitter.com/Linda_Pizzuti/status/1161763862082985987[/ame]

[McDermotX]

[labourRed]

The replays were conclusive.

It’s bull**** they dont have access to all the angles? Where else are they getting their video feeds from? And if they struggle with that then how are they going to call dives where the forward draws contact more effectively?

At best that was a tech malfunction this evening. If they look at all of this e clips VAR rules that as no pen every day of the week.

Common sense has to be used with VAR.

Offsides are totally different decisions so different criteria applies.

That's not what VAR determines. They are checking if the ref made an obvious error. Plain and simple.

[Buzzo]

That's not what VAR determines. They are checking if the ref made an obvious error. Plain and simple.

Which there was. Not enough contact to legislate for a penalty.