• Current Donation Goals

exiledblue

VAR and Chelsea

Recommended Posts

paulw66   
21 minutes ago, exiledblue said:

Ex-Prem ref Dermot Gallagher said: “The procedure is that the referee goes first and says what he has seen. “VAR looks at the pictures and if they replicate what the referee has seen, they have got to go with the ref.”

So basically the ref makes a bad call and they will find an angle to accept that bad call and will not over rule it, even if other angles may show it to be a bad call..

So how does that explain the Azpilicueta non penalty......the ref says, the defender came in and took the ball......... VAR says, yeah ok then. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, paulw66 said:

So how does that explain the Azpilicueta non penalty......the ref says, the defender came in and took the ball......... VAR says, yeah ok then. 

agreed and there lies the confusion. Nobody understands the criteria, it still relies on the potential bias of the VAR ref and the VAR ref may not want to do anything to undermine the match ref.

Ronaldo had a goal disallowed at the weekend almost 5 mins later. What if the oppo or Juve had scored again during that time? Would they have disallowed all the goals or just Ronaldos? What if the final whistle had gone and that was a winning goal would the fans have gone home thinking they had won only to hear on the radio otherwise

There is the potential for riots when we near the business end of the season and poor or no VAR decisions define what happens to your team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
chara   

VAR is such a good idea in theory but as we have seen so disruptive in practise. 

The rule changes this season seem to have been for cosmetic purposes and when they filter down to the grass roots of the game cannot improve any aspects of the game for players at these levels. Debatable if any were necessary...I seem to remember being told as a kid that the referee was the same as a corner flag or goal post and if the ball struck him(her!) it was just part of the randomness of the game..afterall if a misplaced pass hits an oppo as opposed to being intercepted there is no case for a hold up an a refereeingd change of direction in play..

VAR is just an extension of the officials'ability to manage a game or mis manage. Goal line technology works as it is in or not..no grey area...even line tech would be ok but second guessing a decision as we have seen is no better than any refs error.

"He's not that kind of player" influences a decision with or without VAR..I was at SB when John Hollins basically finished Gordon Milnes career..and he "Was not that sort of player"

Food for thought eh?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JaneB   
5 hours ago, chara said:

VAR is such a good idea in theory but as we have seen so disruptive in practise. 

The rule changes this season seem to have been for cosmetic purposes and when they filter down to the grass roots of the game cannot improve any aspects of the game for players at these levels. Debatable if any were necessary...I seem to remember being told as a kid that the referee was the same as a corner flag or goal post and if the ball struck him(her!) it was just part of the randomness of the game..afterall if a misplaced pass hits an oppo as opposed to being intercepted there is no case for a hold up an a refereeingd change of direction in play..

VAR is just an extension of the officials'ability to manage a game or mis manage. Goal line technology works as it is in or not..no grey area...even line tech would be ok but second guessing a decision as we have seen is no better than any refs error.

"He's not that kind of player" influences a decision with or without VAR..I was at SB when John Hollins basically finished Gordon Milnes career..and he "Was not that sort of player"

Food for thought eh?

Definitely.  

As you say, it can just as easily be used to mismanage a game as manage it better.  A lot of controversy so far and maybe it will settle down but I have my doubts.

I remember when Alan Shearer stamped on Neil Lennon's head but of course 'he was not that sort of player'.  I think anyone is capable of a dangerous 'tackle' but some are more capable than others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
chara   
1 minute ago, JaneB said:

Definitely.  

As you say, it can just as easily be used to mismanage a game as manage it better.  A lot of controversy so far and maybe it will settle down but I have my doubts.

I remember when Alan Shearer stamped on Neil Lennon's head but of course 'he was not that sort of player'.  I think anyone is capable of a dangerous 'tackle' but some are more capable than others.

Yep..going back a bit but when Chopper "Chopped" the response was always the same from media etc..if Gary Liniker for example followed through it was he's not etc. 

I was told by someone who played with Bobby Moore that he was "dirtier" than he was seen as. It's a hard hard game and nobody is a saint..well maybe Zola but....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JaneB   
37 minutes ago, chara said:

Yep..going back a bit but when Chopper "Chopped" the response was always the same from media etc..if Gary Liniker for example followed through it was he's not etc. 

I was told by someone who played with Bobby Moore that he was "dirtier" than he was seen as. It's a hard hard game and nobody is a saint..well maybe Zola but....

Zola will always be a saint 😇

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/27/2019 at 0:51 PM, East Lower said:

Now, Kent Walton was a fine commentator but I'm not sure Jacki Pallo, Giant Haystacks, Mick McManus, Cry Baby Jim Breaks or even Kendo Nagasaki needed VAR to tell us about 2 x falls, a knockout or a submission on Saturday afternoons - "Ask 'I'm ref, ask I'm" ;-)

As for VAR, the goal-line technology is great - the rest of it they'll make up as it go's along and to whatever agenda the paymasters want.

It's not fit for purpose as the rules/guidelines are not strict enough. For example - How many 'phases of play' is too far back for VAR not to be referred to?

Kent Walton's job was to tell viewers straight faced that the sport was not fixed.  Same as Peter Walton.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just have it thrown out now. 

Adds nothing of value and confuses the decision-making process and fans ability to understand it. Either you re-referee all dubious calls and overturn the ref, or you don't use it at all. 

Nice in theory, awful in practice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, The_Ghost said:

Just have it thrown out now. 

Adds nothing of value and confuses the decision-making process and fans ability to understand it. Either you re-referee all dubious calls and overturn the ref, or you don't use it at all. 

Nice in theory, awful in practice.

And if you are re-refereeing all the dubious calls, let's do the obvious thing and review all violent play, regardless of whether a referee looked at it or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Droy was my hero said:

And if you are re-refereeing all the dubious calls, let's do the obvious thing and review all violent play, regardless of whether a referee looked at it or not.

Yes of course. The whole “did the ref see it or not” rubbish is ludicrous. 

Barnes on Matic. Verthongen guilty of the same crime as Matic a day later (minus the violent provocation). The list literally goes on and on and on. 

 

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