Get VAR in the fucking bin (1 Viewer)

[The CableGuy]

Aren’t we getting it in the Champ too?

W-what??????? Seriously????

 

---

[shmmeee]

W-what??????? Seriously????

I thought someone said that but can find no evidence online. Stand down

 

[clint van damme]

I thought someone said that but can find no evidence online. Stand down

Isn't it some sort of VAR lite?

 

[Martin180]

They can’t afford decent refs in the Championship let alone VAR

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Having just seen the Forest highlights they’re quite right to have released that statement. The last foul on Hudson-Odoi beggars belief

 

[Terry Gibson's perm]

I have never been bothered by var as we don’t have it, but I do feel that the pictures they get in the booth should be pixelated in some way so they can’t tell who the team is as it does seem to favour the bigger sides.

 

[rylee]

Fair play to everyone today, but if the club don’t protest against that absolute shitshow of a decision, where you can clearly see the line has been drawn over the boot.. then there is something seriously wrong and questions need to be asked.

It’s clear to see from anyone that is so corrupt. Really makes me watching football again with VAR.

 

[OffenhamSkyBlue]

Yup Not a single man united player even appealed for off side.

Onana did (i think, but he was waving his arms around for anything)

What a total c*nt that guy is!

 

[clint van damme]

where you can clearly see the line has been drawn over the boot..

I definitely want to see an explanation for this

 

[AJB1983]

Onana did (i think, but he was waving his arms around for anything)

What a total c*nt that guy is!

I think that’s a really good point - the only player appealing was Onana and he is the least likely of all of the players to know/suspect an offside.
Not one of them appealed.

which is where the whole implementation of VAR is wrong.
If someone scores but the players clearly think there’s a foul/offside etc - check it.
If there’s a penalty and the players think it’s a dive - check it.

I get that the referees are essentially doing their job in refereeing the game but they are creating decisions/offences even when no-one else in the entire stadium, including the 22 professional footballers on the pitch think there’s a problem.

 

[Nick]

I definitely want to see an explanation for this

Did they show multiple angles and slow motion on the TV coverage to see if it was?

They hardly have a "not very good cameras" excuse in Wembley.

 

[clint van damme]

Did they show multiple angles and slow motion on the TV coverage to see if it was?

They hardly have a "not very good cameras" excuse in Wembley.

Not seen TV coverage so wouldn't know but from the stills and social media clips I've seen it looks very dodgy.
The thing is if they came out a explained maybe it would clear it up.
There's no accountability.

 

[Nick]

Not seen TV coverage so wouldn't know but from the stills and social media clips I've seen it looks very dodgy.
The thing is if they came out a explained maybe it would clear it up.
There's no accountability.

I have literally only seen that one still image with a line on.

Seen plenty of other angles and views where it looks clearly onside but were they even looked at?

 

[clint van damme]

I have literally only seen that one still image with a line on.

Seen plenty of other angles and views where it looks clearly onside but were they even looked at?

Even if they were, when it's that tight I cant see how you can call it offside.

 

[GaryMabbuttsLeftKnee]

Nope.

It's been utilised incorrectly.

Use it for obvious errors. We can now tell if a ball crossed the line or not. We can use it to see if a foul was made in the area, or whether it occurred outside. We can see if a bad tackle was actually worse than it first appeared, or whether a player actually made a good tackle. We can now see if a goalkeeper steps off his line for a penalty. It can work well for many things

If someone is clearly offside and it's missed, use it for that, but when you look at a still and players look like they are almost side by side, it should immediately go back to the on-field decision and not palmed all over for 2-3 mins.

VAR could be very useful.

This just doesn't work and at whatever level you think is 'clear and obvious' the ambiguity just moves there. If you say 'daylight' or 'its done on feet' the ambiguity over tiny millimeters will still be exactly the same, just at a different line. What is the definition of clear and obvious? The issue is, football has so many grey areas. There can be a tackle that 60% of fans would agree is a foul and 40% disagree. The 40% will just moan that VAR is still bad etc etc. It works for if the ball has crossed a goal line because that is factual and scientific. 90% of football decisions aren't factual and scientific. Offside, ironically is one of the few that could be if they used more advanced cameras and technology than they currently use.

 

[Liquid Gold]

The highlights on ITV it's on 8 minutes - https://www.itv.com/watch/fa-cup-highlights/10a5525/10a5525a0014

Dixon says it's off on a still image with no lines. Then the lines appear later on and it's the dodgy image we've all seen where O'Hare hasn't played the ball and it's over the top of Wan Bissaka's boot.

 

[Alkhen]

It's the fact O'Hare scoops the ball rather than kicks it that muddies the water for me. At what point do you draw the lines? The foot is in contact with the ball longer.

 

[PVA]

It's the fact O'Hare scoops the ball rather than kicks it that muddies the water for me. At what point do you draw the lines? The foot is in contact with the ball longer.

It's supposed to be when the foot first touches the ball I believe.

 

[stay_up_skyblues]

I was pretty zen yesterday. But now I’ve seen that offside call. Fuck off. The games gone. Glad the FA got the Manchester derby they wanted for the final. In the same week they scrapped replays no less.

 

[Liquid Gold]

It's supposed to be when the foot first touches the ball I believe.

So if O'Hare scooped the ball onto his foot, stood on one leg controlling the ball for 5 seconds, then flicked it on it would count from the start of the 5 seconds when he is static with the ball on his foot?

If that's the rule teams should just do that and have their strikers crowd the keeper.

 

[Nick]

It's supposed to be when the foot first touches the ball I believe.

How does that work? If a player puts their foot on it, drags it back and scoops it through (maintaining contact)?

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

It's the fact O'Hare scoops the ball rather than kicks it that muddies the water for me. At what point do you draw the lines? The foot is in contact with the ball longer.

It’s when the ball is released

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

It's supposed to be when the foot first touches the ball I believe.

Nah

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

Nah

Ifab laws of the game refers to playing the ball but not what this constitutes
Interesting - I’ve always played as the ball leaves the part of the body playing the ball

 

[Houchens Head]

Just found out who the VAR ref was.....

 

[Alkhen]

I'm allowing myself massive sour grapes today. Im totally at ease with the fact we lost but the manner it happened is annoying. Offside is offide and all that but it was so marginal. Haji's stationary big-toe gained zero advantage over the already in position AWB. I just don't understand why we need that level of scrutiny so far back in a move?

Its been a PR disaster this week for the powers that be. They come across as hell-bent on sucking the joy and life out of football. They seem to fixated on the massive clubs and are blind to the fact that its the smaller ones that make the game in England so special. The scrapping of FA cup replays to appease about 5 big clubs is a genuine scandal.

The press is constantly spinning the narrative that the magic of the FA cup is dead, whilst lawmakers set up a system to forensically search for an excuse to rule out goals. It cost us a winning goal in what would have been an all-time great comeback/underdog story. Seems like they are sabotaging their own product.

As for Man United they are a shell of a club. I hope they feel pretty humiliated. Everything about that club is broken. the fans were basically silent apart from their goals. Letting a 3 goal lead slip to a Championship club and having to be rescued by VAR is shocking from a squad that cost 1.2 bn to assemble, the classless reaction from that rat Antony sums them up. I will enjoy watching them get picked apart by Man City

 

[PVA]

It’s when the ball is released

The law says otherwise Pete:

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

The law says otherwise Pete:


View attachment 35263

I read that it can’t mean what it says. Which touch. What deems it’s been played and when?
Might need to be clarified
So the law is when it is played not when it’s first touched

 

[Ricketts]

Has anyone looked at /analysed the potential offside leading to the corner Mcguire scored from?

 

[fernandopartridge]

In fucking deed

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

Has anyone looked at /analysed the potential offside leading to the corner Mcguire scored from?

Or the foul on Ohare leading up to our disallowed goal

 

[glasgowfan]

The issue is not VAR. It's about human interpretation of the rules, and that will always be subject to dispute. As long as we believe that the officials and adjudicators are not corrupt (and I don't think they are), we need to accept the decisions.
People say that offside by the length of a toenail shouldn't matter, so do we go to the length of a toe, or a foot, or 50 centimeters or whatever? And then what happens if it's judged to be 51cm or 49cm?
There will always be arguments, VAR or not

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

The issue is not VAR. It's about human interpretation of the rules, and that will always be subject to dispute. As long as we believe that the officials and adjudicators are not corrupt (and I don't think they are), we need to accept the decisions.
People say that offside by the length of a toenail shouldn't matter, so do we go to the length of a toe, or a foot, or 50 centimeters or whatever? And then what happens if it's judged to be 51cm or 49cm?
There will always be arguments, VAR or not

True that’s when you come to the Otis manual umpires call.
Would like to hear the audio too and definitely clarify what constitutes the ball being played to see if the correct frame was used
And if they messed up an apology and a separate claim should be paid for lost revenue

 

[Gynnsthetonic]

True that’s when you come to the Otis manual umpires call.
Would like to hear the audio too and definitely clarify what constitutes the ball being played to see if the correct frame was used
And if they messed up an apology and a separate claim should be paid for lost revenue

I'd love them to admit to a mistake offer us a replay and we say get fucked

 

[clint van damme]

The issue is not VAR. It's about human interpretation of the rules, and that will always be subject to dispute. As long as we believe that the officials and adjudicators are not corrupt (and I don't think they are), we need to accept the decisions.
People say that offside by the length of a toenail shouldn't matter, so do we go to the length of a toe, or a foot, or 50 centimeters or whatever? And then what happens if it's judged to be 51cm or 49cm?
There will always be arguments, VAR or not

Not sure what thread it is but there's a couple of posts showing the build up and Wright looks miles onside.
Even going by when he gets level with Wan Bissaka and the dodgy line, I don't think the officials are corrupt, but subconsciously they know, getting it wrong in favour of one of the big clubs will bring alot less heat than getting it wrong to their detriment