VAR - yes or no ?

Does exactly what it says on the tin - the forum for football-related discussion.

Moderators: chalks, the pink palermo, -DL-, Gnome, Rio, bristolhammerfc

Post Reply
User avatar
LeonRivers
Posts: 7709
Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2008 4:57 pm
Location: Way out of your league

Re: VAR - yes or no ?

Post by LeonRivers » Tue Oct 08, 2019 4:58 pm

Cuenca 'ammer wrote:
Tue Oct 08, 2019 3:14 pm
I think it's relevant

you talk down to everyone like their opinion isn't worth a shyte.
I’m not dealing with opinions. I’m dealing with matters of fact. If someone makes a statement that is factually correct, my presentation of the correct information does not warrant abuse. Perhaps you have some insecurity issues regarding your own posting to take such offence at a mere presentation of facts.
Cuenca 'ammer wrote:
Tue Oct 08, 2019 3:14 pm
you came out with the old nugget that the t.v. commentators are happy to trot out.

"there was contact."

there's contact in loads of tackles. are they all fouls ?

I didn’t say it was a foul. I said [initially] that it was not a dive because there was contact. Please do try and quote me correctly.
Cuenca 'ammer wrote:
Tue Oct 08, 2019 3:14 pm
VAR awards a goal or disallows a goal.

"it was/was not a goal."
Again, we’re dealing in black or white matters of fact. That you do not like the fact is irrelevant to me. If you disagree with an offside decision that is given after review then you are in the wrong. This is your own personal issue. Take that up with the FA. Not me. I don’t make the rules.
Cuenca 'ammer wrote:
Tue Oct 08, 2019 3:14 pm
you're the Tommy Docherty of KUMB.

"if you don't believe it look in the paper tomorrow."
I’ve never said that. Please do not misrepresent me in your attacks.
Cuenca 'ammer wrote:
Tue Oct 08, 2019 3:14 pm
doesn't always make it right - as loads on here put it, it's a 2D image with people trying to implement a 3D decision from.

and the panel has already said that it has gotten decisions incorrect - like Haller against Norwich. so it obviously isn't infallible if their own people say the people in charge get things wrong.
Haller v Norwich was a matter of personal opinion and not a yes/no offside call. It is therefore not relevant to any posts I have made on yes/no calls.

brothernero
Posts: 3867
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2017 3:03 pm
Location: Essex

Re: VAR - yes or no ?

Post by brothernero » Tue Oct 08, 2019 5:16 pm

Leon Rivers being the same Patronising, Belittling, Talking Down, West Ham fan hating, Condescending. High Horse sitting, Know All Person he was on the other West Ham United forum where he continual Better than all attitude eventually got him run of the forum.

Shock Horror.

:asleep:

User avatar
LeonRivers
Posts: 7709
Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2008 4:57 pm
Location: Way out of your league

Re: VAR - yes or no ?

Post by LeonRivers » Tue Oct 08, 2019 5:27 pm

brothernero wrote:
Tue Oct 08, 2019 5:16 pm
Leon Rivers being the same Patronising, Belittling, Talking Down, West Ham fan hating, Condescending. High Horse sitting, Know All Person he was on the other West Ham United forum where he continual Better than all attitude eventually got him run of the forum.

Shock Horror.

:asleep:
What other forum? Genuine question. I REALLY look forward to this answer.

brothernero
Posts: 3867
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2017 3:03 pm
Location: Essex

Re: VAR - yes or no ?

Post by brothernero » Tue Oct 08, 2019 5:34 pm

Thought you might play that game. So predictable.

Had my say on you and your whole stinking attitude towards your "Fellow" West Ham fans. You just keep being the Know All, Better than everyone else Jerk you always have and always will be.

Sad Little boy.


Oh don't worry Mods, That's my last post on Mr Rivers.

User avatar
warp
Posts: 13897
Joined: Fri Jul 30, 2010 11:13 am
Location: I am everything about this site which is wrong... i don't give a toss about WHUFC.

Re: VAR - yes or no ?

Post by warp » Tue Oct 08, 2019 5:34 pm

Image

brothernero
Posts: 3867
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2017 3:03 pm
Location: Essex

Re: VAR - yes or no ?

Post by brothernero » Tue Oct 08, 2019 5:39 pm

Oh come on Warp, could have least been Something from AEW. WWE is now so yesterday. :wink:

Or at least an Alexa Bliss GIF. :P

User avatar
warp
Posts: 13897
Joined: Fri Jul 30, 2010 11:13 am
Location: I am everything about this site which is wrong... i don't give a toss about WHUFC.

Re: VAR - yes or no ?

Post by warp » Tue Oct 08, 2019 5:46 pm

Image

User avatar
S-H
Posts: 15337
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 7:05 am

Re: VAR - yes or no ?

Post by S-H » Tue Oct 08, 2019 5:48 pm

:lol:

User avatar
Cuenca 'ammer
ex 'ouston 'ammer
Posts: 33375
Joined: Thu Dec 05, 2002 4:19 pm
Location: Journey to the dead of night. High on a hill in Eldorado

Re: VAR - yes or no ?

Post by Cuenca 'ammer » Tue Oct 08, 2019 6:06 pm

Leon

try this:


https://www.football.london/west-ham-un ... e-16908801

Thankfully it didn't prove to be costly for West Ham but referee chief Mike Riley has admitted the Hammers should have been awarded a penalty during the win over Norwich which was missed by VAR.

Striker Sebastien Haller was clearly brought down in the box by Tom Trybull in the second half with the home side already 2-0 to the good but no penalty was the on-field decision from referee Paul Tierney.

VAR did not intervene after the incorrect decision though and play went on despite the protestations of Haller and his teammates.

The incident is one of four that were not overturned by VAR having decided not to intervene.

Referee chief Riley delivered the update at a Premier League "shareholders" meeting in London earlier on Thursday. He said after meeting to Sly Sports: "There were four incidents where VAR didn't intervene and had they done, we would have a better understanding of the role VAR plays in the game.

"[The mistakes] are all about the judgement of VAR and the process that we adopt.

"These are examples were VAR could have had a benefit and intervened to help the referee on the day."


FACT - VAR boss said the decision initially was wrong and VAR should have intervened. but it didn't. it was wrong. one of FOUR incorrect calls.

not my opinion. well at the time it was. but later confirmed by the head of officiating.

it was a fact in the Liverpool game that it gave the penalty - which you incorrectly said was a goal not overruled. perhaps VAR was wrong. again.

and again, all you say is: there was contact. and as has been pointed out on here, there is loads of contact in games. not all result in free kicks and/or penalties. saying "there was contact" is a get out used by t.v. pundits everywhere.

User avatar
LeonRivers
Posts: 7709
Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2008 4:57 pm
Location: Way out of your league

Re: VAR - yes or no ?

Post by LeonRivers » Tue Oct 08, 2019 6:10 pm

brothernero wrote:
Tue Oct 08, 2019 5:34 pm
Thought you might play that game.
....because this is the only West Ham forum you’ve ever seen me post on? :)

User avatar
LeonRivers
Posts: 7709
Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2008 4:57 pm
Location: Way out of your league

Re: VAR - yes or no ?

Post by LeonRivers » Tue Oct 08, 2019 6:15 pm

Cuenca 'ammer wrote:
Tue Oct 08, 2019 6:06 pm
Leon

try this:


https://www.football.london/west-ham-un ... e-16908801
I love a link/evidence, so thank you. As I’ve said though, that was a referees opinion. Not a cut and dry “was he offside” fact-based call. On that occasion the two referees that looked at it both had the wrong opinion. That will continue to happen.
Regardless, it wasn’t relevant to the discussion about VARs use in Crystal Palace’s offside being overturned, nor was it relevant in the discussion regarding wether Mané dived or not. If I’ve missed something somewhere that this relates to I’m happy to go back and take a look. I genuinely can’t remember what discussions I’m having on here now. As we have all recently learned, I’m a prolific **** on multiple West Ham platforms! :lol:

User avatar
Cuenca 'ammer
ex 'ouston 'ammer
Posts: 33375
Joined: Thu Dec 05, 2002 4:19 pm
Location: Journey to the dead of night. High on a hill in Eldorado

Re: VAR - yes or no ?

Post by Cuenca 'ammer » Tue Oct 08, 2019 6:29 pm

Leon

all the blokes on here posted about an opinion that they (and me and several pundits) reckon could have been not given. "soft" is another word the pundits use.

https://www.teamtalk.com/news/alan-shea ... ol-penalty

only an opinion of course as it was awarded. it doesn't mean it wasn't awarded incorrectly.

it's all fact after the event, one way or another. if it wasn't awarded that would have been a fact also. merely saying there was contact doesn't mean it was a foul. doesn't mean it wasn't either or course.

going back to the Norwich non penalty award had TWO referees look at it and both were wrong, as admitted by the head of officiating.

what does that tell you about the thing in the first place - the FACT that it wasn't used correctly FOUR times. not ONE. F-O-U-R.

it isn't being used correctly. initially it doesn't say ALL GOALS but it seems like it IS being used to review all goals. it is listed on the website, clear and obvious. the goal Saturday wasn't clear and obvious. again as correctly pointed out, we don't get to see the exact moment it is played, not leaves, the players foot. and using it in 2D for 3D reality.

https://www.premierleague.com/VAR

All 380 Premier League fixtures will have a VAR, who is constantly monitoring the match but will be used only for "clear and obvious errors" or "serious missed incidents" in four match-changing situations:

Goals
Penalty decisions
Direct red card incidents
Mistaken identity

The final decision will always be taken by the on-field referee.

VAR will not achieve 100 per cent accuracy, but will positively influence decision-making and lead to more correct, and fairer, judgments.

In the Premier League, there will be a high bar for VAR intervention on subjective decisions to maintain the pace and intensity of the matches.

Factual decisions, such as offside or if a foul was committed inside or outside the penalty area, will not be subject to the "clear and obvious error" test.



nothing about that Palace goal was clear and obvious and/or serious missed incidents. as have other games I have watched. so either they are re-writing instructions and haven't told anyone or are not applying their own instructions.

Boleyn Bound
Posts: 123
Joined: Fri Aug 13, 2010 2:19 pm

Re: VAR - yes or no ?

Post by Boleyn Bound » Tue Oct 08, 2019 7:53 pm

Factual decisions, such as offside or if a foul was committed inside or outside the penalty area, will not be subject to the "clear and obvious error" test.

If this is what they're saying then I would interpret that as ALL offsides will be checked irrelevant if it's "a clear and obvious error"

User avatar
Cuenca 'ammer
ex 'ouston 'ammer
Posts: 33375
Joined: Thu Dec 05, 2002 4:19 pm
Location: Journey to the dead of night. High on a hill in Eldorado

Re: VAR - yes or no ?

Post by Cuenca 'ammer » Tue Oct 08, 2019 7:58 pm

Boleyn Bound wrote:
Tue Oct 08, 2019 7:53 pm
Factual decisions, such as offside or if a foul was committed inside or outside the penalty area, will not be subject to the "clear and obvious error" test.

If this is what they're saying then I would interpret that as ALL offsides will be checked irrelevant if it's "a clear and obvious error"
I haven't a clue just what it means mate.. seems to contradict itself....or unless it means offside OUTSIDE the area will not be subject to review...but then again Aubamayang was outside the box wasn't he last week at ManU ?

Boleyn Bound
Posts: 123
Joined: Fri Aug 13, 2010 2:19 pm

Re: VAR - yes or no ?

Post by Boleyn Bound » Tue Oct 08, 2019 8:09 pm

Clear as mud.

Definitely doesn't appear to being applied consistently though.

User avatar
LeonRivers
Posts: 7709
Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2008 4:57 pm
Location: Way out of your league

Re: VAR - yes or no ?

Post by LeonRivers » Tue Oct 08, 2019 8:37 pm

Boleyn Bound wrote:
Tue Oct 08, 2019 7:53 pm
If this is what they're saying then I would interpret that as ALL offsides will be checked irrelevant if it's "a clear and obvious error"
All goals are checked for offside and clear and obvious errors.

User avatar
Boooogers!
Posts: 995
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2014 9:34 pm

Re: VAR - yes or no ?

Post by Boooogers! » Tue Oct 08, 2019 8:37 pm

I can't stand VAR. It's ruining the game. I preferred it when the odd decision a season when wrong rather than this constant checking the VAR screen *****. Just make the refs more accountable. Rather that than some nerd sitting behind a computer screen drawing lines in MS Paint. ****ing ridiculous.

User avatar
Cuenca 'ammer
ex 'ouston 'ammer
Posts: 33375
Joined: Thu Dec 05, 2002 4:19 pm
Location: Journey to the dead of night. High on a hill in Eldorado

Re: VAR - yes or no ?

Post by Cuenca 'ammer » Tue Oct 08, 2019 8:49 pm

All 380 Premier League fixtures will have a VAR, who is constantly monitoring the match but will be used only for "clear and obvious errors" or "serious missed incidents" in four match-changing situations:

so the A/R made a CLEAR AND OBVIOUS error or a SERIOUS MISSED INCIDENT in flagging for offside on Saturday ?

so clear and obvious it took almost 3 minutes to figure it out ?

:?

Crouchend_Hammer
Posts: 12340
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2004 9:31 am
Location: Forest Gate

Re: VAR - yes or no ?

Post by Crouchend_Hammer » Tue Oct 08, 2019 11:06 pm

Whether we agree with the accuracy of the technology or not, offside decisions have been determined by rule makers as 'fact' based decisions and are thus outside the remit of 'clear and obvious errors'. If the VAR tech they have in place deems it offside, even by a gnats cock, then in the eyes of VAR it is a 'fact'

However, it has become apparent that the technology currently in place cannot always get these fact based decisions correct to 100% certainty due to 2D angles, not knowing exactly when the ball has been released etc

The 'clear and obvious error' part of VAR only refers to those incidents that VAR does not consider as 'fact' I. E a foul

I personally thought the Mane one was a foul and so did the vast majoroty of 20 odd people on the stag do I was on, many who have played to a high level. That doesn't mean it definitely was a foul of course, as it is still only an opinion (and cannot possibly be a fact)

If I recall correcrly, VAR hasn't overturned any non 'fact' decision since about week 2. Is that right? That suggests to me the powers that be have decided to stop using it

User avatar
Colours never run
Posts: 14888
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 1:46 am
Location: "Be in no doubt, we are part of the most successful stadium migration in history"

Re: VAR - yes or no ?

Post by Colours never run » Wed Oct 09, 2019 2:15 am

It was mentioned a while back by a few people in favour of it saying how VAR will serve as a leveller now by making sure the Big teams don't get the decisions in their favour. Well that Mane dive in the Mickey's game that did get reviewed by VARce, just goes to prove what a load of b*llocks that is by not over turning a clear and obvious error made by the Ref at the time. Predictably it still leaves decisions to be made subjective and not corrected as they should be.

The beauty of goal line technology was always going to be perfect because it's undeniable, whereas this technology is still the same old unconscious bull**** as before but takes 3 times as long to get to the same conclusion.

The sooner this **** is ****ed off for good, the better. Hate everything about it.

Post Reply