Jump to content
IGNORED

VAR


hollydog

Recommended Posts

As it stands, or as its being applied in the Premier League, VAR is not fit for purpose. And it won't be unless a way can be found to make it almost instantaneous, as with goal line technology. 

In most sports where technology is used it is after the event I. E. Once play has been stopped and where the ball is 'dead'. For example, in Rugby the touch lines, and indeed the player if it contact with the ball, are deemed out of play whereas in football a ball on the line is deemed in play which continues. While the lines are in during tennis most technology decisions are made when the ball has fizzed past an opponent and play has stopped. 

For me VAR has proved a failure and should cease at the end of the season until it improves. I don't for one minute of course think this will happen, especially when Championship refs have been told to attend VAR training. Not that VAR training will make any difference if they don't know the laws of the game in the first place, like the plonker who disallowed Firmino's 'goal' against Villa when the only part of his body 'offside' was one it is illegal to score with. This only proved that we have to revert to clear daylight before offside can be given. The idea that a player can be offside because he takes a size 11 boot as opposed to a size 9 is patently ridiculous. 

VAR is not to be used to referee the game but to clear up obvious errors. Accordingly, it should be made clear that the man in the middle of the pitch is in charge and should be able to tell the man in the booth miles from the ground to go forth and multiply, or something politer, if he is content with his decision. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, wayne allisons tongues said:

No penalty given due to Alexander Arnold atm is in a natural position according to PL

I think I agree with that - they are down by his side and I don’t think you have to put arms behind your back.

Its certainly not a deliberate handball which I guess would be a ‘clear and obvious’ error missed by the referee. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Alex_BCFC said:

I think I agree with that - they are down by his side and I don’t think you have to put arms behind your back.

Its certainly not a deliberate handball which I guess would be a ‘clear and obvious’ error missed by the referee. 

His arm is outstretched deffo not by his side.

As they’ve just said in the studio, next week that’s a pen somewhere else.

Personally think VAR ref bottled it due to the goal straight after.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, cidercity1987 said:

VAR is just showing up how truly clueless the refs are, they can’t say they didn’t see it anymore.

That is as blatant handball as you will ever see aside from a dive on the goalline and the justification of ‘it was a natural position’ is absolutely farcical.

Was it a "John Terry - making himself bigger" stance?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, AppyDAZE said:

I was under the impression that the new law states that a team cannot score if the balls hits an attackers arm (even accidentally) so what are MC moaning about?

VAR really is all over the place and it's gone beyond a joke tbh.

Your impression is correct. It is a offence.

If the ball strikes a defenders arm it has to be a deliberate action.

In this occurrence VAR is correct. It does highlight how complex the hand ball rule has become.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, AppyDAZE said:

I was under the impression that the new law states that a team cannot score if the balls hits an attackers arm (even accidentally) so what are MC moaning about?

VAR really is all over the place and it's gone beyond a joke tbh.

.....yes...........but......no............but according to the statement given to MOTD, Dasilva's handball would only be a handball offence had Man City scored from the incident.

As they did not, then Dasilva's handball wasn't a handball and was ignored when it came to considering TAA's handball, even though TAA's handball ( that wasn't handball according to VAR) was directly caused by Dasilva's handball, which, of course,  was not actually a  handball because Man City didn't go on to score from it. 

You'll thank me for taking to time to clear that up for you all!

:) 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, downendcity said:

.....yes...........but......no............but according to the statement given to MOTD, Dasilva's handball would only be a handball offence had Man City scored from the incident.

As they did not, then Dasilva's handball wasn't a handball and was ignored when it came to considering TAA's handball, even though TAA's handball ( that wasn't handball according to VAR) was directly caused by Dasilva's handball, which, of course,  was not actually a  handball because Man City didn't go on to score from it. 

You'll thank me for taking to time to clear that up for you all!

:) 

 

Dasilva?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Premier league meeting involving VAR today, David Gold on SSN just now saying he won't support the use of screens pitch side as to him its not right that a referee whose been running around for an hour has to then run over to check a screen pitch side......

No really that is actually what he said..... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...