• Current Donation Goals

exiledblue

VAR and Chelsea

Recommended Posts

What is the point of VAR and is it anti Chelsea?

At the end of the day VAR is just another referee in a room somewhere so if we believe refs are anti Chelsea on the pitch why should an anonymous ref be any different.

Yesterday, we could have had a pen when Dave was fouled by serial fouler Stiepermann and a number of other challenges should have been covered by VAR if its to work how I think it should.

Feel free to log pro and contro decisions relating to VAR 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
chara   

From what I have seen of the new "system" it really is an added burden to the game..still comes down to someones opinion..if it comes to VAR it means the ref thinks he missed something.

IMO the Chelsea disallowed goal was the keeper losing the ball after bringing it down on Giroud.. but VAR showed same as first look by ref and as such was a waste of time..bias?..hate to have an agenda but....

I beleive in Germany it was thrown out?...says it all...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’ll be honest and say I don’t really know the criteria behind VAR. I know I hate it and I have hated the idea of it for the last 5 years, I also find it really boring to discuss.

Having said that, there was some questionable decisions in our game yesterday. I can see how a ref may miss the Azpilucueta penalty as it happened very quickly, I can’t get how it gets missed from VAR perspective if reviewed. Same goes for the stamp on Mount, where it looks like Godfrey moves away from the direction of the ball.

Personally, I didn’t have a problem with the disallowed goal, it could go either way and not much in that either way for me. Same with the foul on Tammy for their first goal, technically it’s a foul but we can’t just use VAR as a excuse for not defending better to prevent the goal from happening. It’s one of those clashes that happen between players on numerous occasions during a match.

Generally speaking, the worry is that clubs who have a positive PR (Liverpool , Arsenal,Everton all the old Skool ‘proper football clubs’) will get the reviews in their favour, whilst the clubs generally viewed more negatively like Chelsea could end up receiving the ****** end of the stick.

Either way, I just fail to see any scenario where VAR is good for football short or long term.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have said it before but the only way VAR works is if it is implemented in a draconian manner. By this, I mean no 'clear and obvious' nonesense and instead if something happens it goes back/get over turned. For this, I mean 0.5mm offside, instances like the fouls against Tammy in both Norwich and Utd games, or Grealish's against Spuds etc. Tbh, I really do not think this is an anti Chelsea thing, I just think it is incompetence. For instance, today both City and Spuds should have had penalties but did not get them as they were not 'clear and obvious' and then Wolves get a soft one because it was given on the pitch by the ref. Utd yesterday should also have had a penalty before there first. At the moment, all that VAR is being used for is to justify crappy reffing. 

Edited by King Kante

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ham   
52 minutes ago, King Kante said:

I have said it before but the only way VAR works is if it is implemented in a draconian manner. By this, I mean no 'clear and obvious' nonesense and instead if something happens it goes back/get over turned. For this, I mean 0.5mm offside, instances like the fouls against Tammy in both Norwich and Utd games, or Grealish's against Spuds etc. Tbh, I really do not think this is an anti Chelsea thing, I just think it is incompetence. For instance, today both City and Spuds should have had penalties but did not get them as they were not 'clear and obvious' and then Wolves get a soft one because it was given on the pitch by the ref. Utd yesterday should also have had a penalty before there first. At the moment, all that VAR is being used for is to justify crappy reffing. 

Which is the point at which it loses all credibility.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ham said:

Which is the point at which it loses all credibility.

Indeed. However, I think this is more of a problem in this country. In others they are going more down the overturning/ref reviews the pen by the side of the pitch route. I think in the end this will win out. In this country, the only reason we are doing the current route is because we have always had the idea that 'things even themselves out of the course of the season'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yesterday I was sure it would be used against us, as it already has been whilst being tested. After seeing the decisions in the United, City and Spurs games I’m not so sure. 

When you have referees like Atkinson who won’t give yellow cards for blatant pullbacks, why should we expect them to get decisions correct even with video?

And when you have ex refs like Walton and the cretin Gallagher defending what should be the indefensible, why should we expect current refs to undermine their colleagues? 

In short it’s a cluster-**** that should be abandoned as soon as possible. Spend the money on completely overhauling the system of refereeing in this country. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, OfWolfAndBiggs said:

And when you have ex refs like Walton and the cretin Gallagher defending what should be the indefensible, why should we expect current refs to undermine their colleagues? 

VAR is there to protect refs while they get on with influencing games.
Walton and Gallagher are there to protect VAR  while it protects refs  who are fixing games.

We have had 20 odd years of Sky with "independent experts" sitting in tin boxes showing replays of incidents and proving themselves to be consistently as biased or more biased as refs.  Why would it ever turn out differently?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Holymoly   
15 hours ago, King Kante said:

At the moment, all that VAR is being used for is to justify crappy reffing. 

Personally I think a lot of the time the on field officials are just abrogating their responsibility and passing the buck. The mindset appears to be just let the play flow and VAR will bring it back if there's something to wave a card at. The trouble is that the instance where the foul on Abraham was deemed to be "too far away" from the eventual goal ignored the fact that if he hadn't been fouled then Norwich wouldn't have found themselves in front of goal. This is also apparently ignoring the fact that a foul was commited and went unpunished. I realise this is a result of the arbitrary guidelines set down for instances where VAR is consulted but for me it just goes to prove that VAR should either be dumped entirely or else used for every on field situation that may arise.

It took cricket a long time to arrive at the state it is currently in but now the conclusions are never questioned. I realise football is a different kind of sport but if it is going to use VAR then it has to be prepared to drag play back an indeterminate distance if an infraction of the laws has occurred. Currently the existing usage still allows for subjective decisions and ever increasing dissatisfaction with the process.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now