Eddies (please be Eddies) bouncing back mags vs Ipswich who are pretty much already down.

[David Kelly 1394]

3 minutes ago, Gemmill said:

One of the worst things about VAR is a referee not making a decision on the pitch because he knows VAR will check it, and then VAR deciding there isn't enough to overturn the referee's "decision". 

 

But the referee has explicitly made no decision. 

 

So you end up with them both opting for the "no decision" route and now it's somehow no one's fault that a decision got missed. I

 

t's fucking idiotic. If the ref isn't sure, he should be able to say "lads I missed that one, could you please review and let me know."

There's a multitude of ways they could use VAR better but they seem to be completely against putting these completely simple things in place.

[Toonpack 12115]

For me, VAR should be (as was originally proposed) only for clear and obvious errors (and offside - although the current rule is bollocks) as such if VAR can't see something is wrong in 30 seconds, it's not clear and obvious snd we should stick with the onfield decision.

[Craig 7339]

35 minutes ago, Gemmill said:

One of the worst things about VAR is a referee not making a decision on the pitch because he knows VAR will check it, and then VAR deciding there isn't enough to overturn the referee's "decision". 

 

But the referee has explicitly made no decision. 

 

So you end up with them both opting for the "no decision" route and now it's somehow no one's fault that a decision got missed. I

 

t's fucking idiotic. If the ref isn't sure, he should be able to say "lads I missed that one, could you please review and let me know."

That's the crux of it. They've not got the stones to make the calls - and these are well-remunerated professional referees, not like those in the 80s & 90s who had a different professions Mon-Fri and reffed a league match on a Saturday for relative peanuts. 

Agree with your last sentence as well. One of the biggest issues with VAR's implementation is that bloke in the middle of the field (who PGMOL are at pains to state must always be in control of proceedings) has zero power to invoke VAR. It's fucking unbelievable. 

Should be like cricket where the umpires can signal they need the 3rd umpire to help them come to the correct decision. 

[Holden McGroin 7968]

They spent a good 5 mins checking that Murphy pull. One angle looked like there wasn’t much in it and the other suggested a bit of a pull.

 

The ref was looking right at the incident as well. It’s not like he has missed an off the ball incident.

[Craig 7339]

20 minutes ago, Toonpack said:

For me, VAR should be (as was originally proposed) only for clear and obvious errors (and offside - although the current rule is bollocks) as such if VAR can't see something is wrong in 30 seconds, it's not clear and obvious snd we should stick with the onfield decision.

It's more simple than that for me, it should be invoked at the request of the on field ref ONLY. He should be able to call on it so he can support his own decision making process.

And non of this line drawing bollocks either. For decades the typical football fan has been able to use an action replay to determine whether the referee's decision was right or wrong without anyway getting a fucking ruler and highlighter out. 

They're so obsessed with worrying technology is going to slow down the game so need to control its use that they've ended up doing just that ... and it's bullshit.

[Toonpack 12115]

Just now, Craig said:

It's more simple than that for me, it should be invoked at the request of the on field ref ONLY. He should be able to call on it so he can support his own decision making process.

And non of this line drawing bollocks either. For decades the typical football fan has been able to use an action replay to determine whether the referee's decision was right or wrong without anyway getting a fucking ruler and highlighter out. 

They're so obsessed with worrying technology is going to slow down the game so need to control its use that they've ended up doing just that ... and it's bullshit.

 

Agree, especially with the line drawing shite, if they have to draw lines it's onside for me.

 

[Holden McGroin 7968]

2 minutes ago, Toonpack said:

 

Agree, especially with the line drawing shite, if they have to draw lines it's onside for me.

 

Aye. The lines are an absolute farce. They don’t do that with the semi-automated anymore do they?

 

The Champions league had it last season (and maybe before that as well) and it works much better. 
 

I was just happy with the ball over the line technology but would be fine with offside decisions if it’s at a decent speed.

 

The lines start to get blurred if eg a player hand balled into the net or someone punched a player off the ball etc.

 

It’s certainly stopped a lot of diving in the box. That’s the one good thing.

[Craig 7339]

48 minutes ago, Holden McGroin said:

Aye. The lines are an absolute farce. They don’t do that with the semi-automated anymore do they?

 

The Champions league had it last season (and maybe before that as well) and it works much better. 
 

I was just happy with the ball over the line technology but would be fine with offside decisions if it’s at a decent speed.

 

The lines start to get blurred if eg a player hand balled into the net or someone punched a player off the ball etc.

 

It’s certainly stopped a lot of diving in the box. That’s the one good thing.

Yeah Goalline Technology is precisely that. Technology. 

VAR is some arsehole sat in a studio watching the game with multiple different camera angles and making what they consider and informed decision based on it. There's no technology involved aside from having the luxury of a replay button.  It's the Zapruder Film of football ... different people will see what they want to see depending on their pre-conceived opinion.

 

 

Edited 6 hours ago by Craig

[Dougle 3835]

16 minutes ago, Craig said:

Yeah Goalline Technology is precisely that. Technology. 

VAR is some arsehole sat in a studio watching the game with selective camera angles, depending on which team is involved, and making a decision based on it. There's no technology involved aside from having the luxury of a replay button.  It's the Zapruder Film of football ... different people will see what they want to see depending on their pre-conceived opinion.

 

 

 

FYP

[OTF 8659]

2 hours ago, Holden McGroin said:

I don’t normally like criticising refs but he was out of his depth on Sat.

 

The Bruno disallowed goal was a joke (the defender pushed him into the keeper as well), I’m not sure if Burn tripped Ben Johnson and although  Murphy was tugged back there has been numerous incidents recently like this that didn’t get overturned. 

 

 

With Murphy what makes that a stonewall penalty for me is the position of the ball. The ball from Bruno is perfectly into the path of Murphy with noone else anywhere near it. Enciso is wholly behind Murphy and makes a grab for his shoulder with only one possible intention - to slow Murphy down. It's a foul, as clear as they come ("holds an opponent", "impedes an opponent with contact") there's no arguement that any contact from Enciso could be legal. IMO the ref should have called it but as others have pointed out he didn't because of the VAR safety blanket. Thankfully here the safety blanket worked, but it shouldn't have been needed with a competent ref.

[Holden McGroin 7968]

1 hour ago, OTF said:

 

With Murphy what makes that a stonewall penalty for me is the position of the ball. The ball from Bruno is perfectly into the path of Murphy with noone else anywhere near it. Enciso is wholly behind Murphy and makes a grab for his shoulder with only one possible intention - to slow Murphy down. It's a foul, as clear as they come ("holds an opponent", "impedes an opponent with contact") there's no arguement that any contact from Enciso could be legal. IMO the ref should have called it but as others have pointed out he didn't because of the VAR safety blanket. Thankfully here the safety blanket worked, but it shouldn't have been needed with a competent ref.

I agree it's a penalty. There Is enough force. My problem is that he is looking directly at it and he felt there wasn't enough force. It's not like he missed it. VAR basically just made the decision for him. There have been similar cases recently (Morgan Rogers at Forest for example) which they let the ref just make the onfield call rightly, or wrongly.

[Alex 37764]

Said this a few times before but for when the VAR team decide they need to get involved then they need to completely own the decision. If they decide it’s a mistake they make that call. They’re the ones with the technology at their disposal (and not just a smaller screen where someone else dictates which replays are available, as is the case for the on field ref). If they don’t think it’s clear enough to call out as an error then the VAR team should stay out of it. Asking the referee to look at the screen in front of a crowd puts ridiculous pressure on them. Surely VAR should be about helping officials, not making their life more difficult 
 

[Craig 7339]

You’re absolutely right but again, PGMOL will hide behind their view that the on-field ref has to have the final word.

 

Along similar lines was the first season of VAR handled differently? I seem to recall more power was held by those at Stockley Park and left the on-field ref somewhat redundant .. and they changed it to give the ref more control. I can’t remember if that was the case or if I’ve imagined it

[Kevin Carr's Gloves 4369]

The problem is the people, referees are all cunts.