[metallilad]

JonB, on 09 November 2019 - 11:13 PM, said:

So if one team thinks they should have a penalty but can’t appeal it as the ball hasn’t gone dead and the ball doesn’t go dead for a good few mins in which time the opposition score...how far back can we go? If they allow it and give the pen do we wipe those few mins off the clock and play it all again with the pen to restart things?

No. There has to be a degree of common sense with it.
But there's no reason why the ref can't give the penalty in the first place and let the opposing team appeal the decision.
Maybe, if the appeal has been won they can keep it or maybe it could be one appeal each half?

This post has been edited by metallilad: 09 November 2019 - 11:27 PM

[sophocles]

It baffles me when folks keep saying VAR is ok for offsides because it draws a line so that you can see if a player is ahead of it. The problem is that someone has to decide at which precise point in the action the line is drawn; it's still down to a human to decide precisely WHEN the forward pass was played and therefore where to draw the line. The truth is that a high-speed, frantic game like football is simply not susceptible to such micro-analysis without making the whole thing a total farce. For heavens sake, get rid of the whole pile if absolute nonsense NOW.

[dim view]

sophocles, on 10 November 2019 - 12:45 AM, said:

It baffles me when folks keep saying VAR is ok for offsides because it draws a line so that you can see if a player is ahead of it. The problem is that someone has to decide at which precise point in the action the line is drawn; it's still down to a human to decide precisely WHEN the forward pass was played and therefore where to draw the line. The truth is that a high-speed, frantic game like football is simply not susceptible to such micro-analysis without making the whole thing a total farce. For heavens sake, get rid of the whole pile if absolute nonsense NOW.

Correct. Not fit for purpose and sooner or later there is going to be a legal battle over a decision. For it (for which the lino was dead in line) to be proved right, there would have to be micro analysis of simultaneous stills of the ball leaving the passer and the position of the receiver, perhaps from different cameras. We are into the realms of measuring relativity.

I'd also like to know if statistical evidence of bias is creeping in. Would the goal have been allowed yesterday if Tottingham had scored it instead of Sheff Utd?

And, off at a tangent, that's twice in a week that a serious injury has happened to a victim of a cynical 'he's taken one for the team' foul. Such attacks should be a straight red if they involve tripping the opponent.

[Johnnyspireite7]

It's starting to get to the stage where the on-field officials (and I include Lines-people in that) won't make a decision and automatically go 'upstairs' like they do in Rugby League for awarding tries and Cricket Umpires not spotting no-balls unless there is a wicket. Bin it now because it is removing the spontaneity of the game where players and fans don't know whether to celebrate or not. Keep the goal line tech though because that is immediate and unequivocal.

[whittman]

Can they bin it during the season though with goals and decisions made by VAR then being different if no video ref in operation?

Surely there must be consistency of decisions during the whole season

[clarevoyant.]

A cracking example of the efficiency of the system in last nights T20 (11 really). Banton reviewed an LBW decision only to have the decision upheld but they reviewed the wrong ball on ball tracking (it was hit for 6) . Unfortunately the decision moved from hitting wickets to Umpires call when they finally reviewed the correct ball.

Abolish Var were will it stop,review corners throw ins etc., can it be financially viable in the lower leagues?
It would be a lot easier to eradicate the cancer that is defensively called "game management" , when the ball isn't in play.

Make sure the game lasts for 90 minutes, add the correct amount of time at the end of each half (how come 90% of games only get one minute added at half time) Teams under the cosh don't like a large amount of added time, it introduces the adrenalin rush factor (Harrogate last season).
Get an independent time keeper,simple.

[Siberian Spireite]

clarevoyant., on 10 November 2019 - 12:04 PM, said:

A cracking example of the efficiency of the system in last nights T20 (11 really). Banton reviewed an LBW decision only to have the decision upheld but they reviewed the wrong ball on ball tracking (it was hit for 6) . Unfortunately the decision moved from hitting wickets to Umpires call when they finally reviewed the correct ball.

I have no idea what this means.

[clarevoyant.]

Siberian Spireite, on 10 November 2019 - 01:18 PM, said:

I have no idea what this means.

I'd imagine the idiosyncrasies of cricket are baffling in Russia and from my few experiences of participating in the game in Belper it would appear they are just as baffling there. 😁


An explanation (hopefully)
A decision of out for LBW was appealed by the batsman, when the ball tracking part of the process was reviewed the previous ball was originally reviewed, ironically it was hit for 6.
Clear as mud???

This post has been edited by clarevoyant.: 10 November 2019 - 01:43 PM

[Town_Fan]

Hawkeye is brilliant for cricket and with the natural pauses between balls it actually adds to the atmosphere rather than breaks up the flow of the game. I agree that we need a umpires call with var. In the nfl they are having a bit of a battle with replay over turning calls and this has largely been dealt with by erring on the side of the call made on the field.

[Benno Spire]

Give each manager two VAR reviews to use in a game and if they are correct they keep them if wrong lose them. Once there gone there gone. Also give a referees review.At the moment in its current form it’s killing the momentum in games.If the decisions were perfect every time it would reduce the complaints from Clarevoyant about referees.

[Siberian Spireite]

clarevoyant., on 10 November 2019 - 01:37 PM, said:

I'd imagine the idiosyncrasies of cricket are baffling in Russia and from my few experiences of participating in the game in Belper it would appear they are just as baffling there. 😁


An explanation (hopefully)
A decision of out for LBW was appealed by the batsman, when the ball tracking part of the process was reviewed the previous ball was originally reviewed, ironically it was hit for 6.
Clear as mud???

Yes, mud, but thanks for trying.

[HoneyTrippa]

I believe one of the key major concerns is the lack of understanding /communication during a VAR decision. No one in the ground, fans, players, coaching staff, TV pundits, armchair fans etc know what's happening or indeed what the VAR process is actually reviewing. The TMO process in Rugby works a lot smoother, efficient and more effective. The referee stops the game and asks TMO clearly to review a certain issue that he or his linesmen have noticed. During this process, the fans, coaching staff, TV etc are kept in the loop with clear and concise commentary on what and why the incident is being reviewed. 99/100 TMO decisions are usually decided and confirmed fairly with little or no protest. Why cant football(VAR)adopt a similar Rugby TMO process.

[NOFX]

could work if used correctly, right now it's a joke. Hate to say it but Sheffield United were robbed.

This post has been edited by NOFX: 10 November 2019 - 04:03 PM

[Siberian Spireite]

HoneyTrippa, on 10 November 2019 - 03:27 PM, said:

I believe one of the key major concerns is the lack of understanding /communication during a VAR decision. No one in the ground, fans, players, coaching staff, TV pundits, armchair fans etc know what's happening or indeed what the VAR process is actually reviewing. The TMO process in Rugby works a lot smoother, efficient and more effective. The referee stops the game and asks TMO clearly to review a certain issue that he or his linesmen have noticed. During this process, the fans, coaching staff, TV etc are kept in the loop with clear and concise commentary on what and why the incident is being reviewed. 99/100 TMO decisions are usually decided and confirmed fairly with little or no protest. Why cant football(VAR)adopt a similar Rugby TMO process.

There are many instances in which rugby fans are treated as civilised human beings but football fans are not.

[azul]

sophocles, on 10 November 2019 - 12:45 AM, said:

It baffles me when folks keep saying VAR is ok for offsides because it draws a line so that you can see if a player is ahead of it. The problem is that someone has to decide at which precise point in the action the line is drawn; it's still down to a human to decide precisely WHEN the forward pass was played and therefore where to draw the line. The truth is that a high-speed, frantic game like football is simply not susceptible to such micro-analysis without making the whole thing a total farce. For heavens sake, get rid of the whole pile if absolute nonsense NOW.

It’s a little less subjective than other decisions - now take that decision in the Liverpool game - what the **** constitutes handball these days

Bin VAR

This post has been edited by azul: 10 November 2019 - 05:13 PM

[Fit as a Nelson]

azul, on 10 November 2019 - 04:44 PM, said:

It’s a little less subjective than other decisions - now take that decision in the Liverpool game - what the **** constitutes handball these days

Bin VAR

Really struggling to understand why that wasn’t handball?

[Stockholm Spireite]

Fit as a Nelson, on 10 November 2019 - 05:17 PM, said:

Really struggling to understand why that wasn’t handball?

Sky said something about the arm not being in an unnatural position...

But why didn't Agüero get on the ball? It fell closer to him than it did TAA.

[spireiterob]

Fit as a Nelson, on 10 November 2019 - 05:17 PM, said:

Really struggling to understand why that wasn’t handball?

Looked to me as if it came off Silva’s arm before which whilst unintentional would still be a foul under the new rules?

[Fit as a Nelson]

Stockholm Spireite, on 10 November 2019 - 05:20 PM, said:

Sky said something about the arm not being in an unnatural position...

But why didn't Agüero get on the ball? It fell closer to him than it did TAA.

I thought that too, it’s poor from Agüero, nearly as poor as Gundogan’s pathetic clearance straight to Fabinho 20 odd second later that lead to the goal.

spireiterob, on 10 November 2019 - 05:21 PM, said:

Looked to me as if it came off Silva’s arm before which whilst unintentional would still be a foul under the new rules?

Liverpool free kick then? Who even knows anymore.

[Town_Fan]

spireiterob, on 10 November 2019 - 05:21 PM, said:

Looked to me as if it came off Silva’s arm before which whilst unintentional would still be a foul under the new rules?

That's my understanding to. I'm sure I saw a goal chalked off earlier in the season as handball by the attacker is called irrespective of intent or body position. Why it's that way for one but not the defender I have no idea.