[dim view]

Summat I thought I noticed yesterday on’t telly. There was evidence of Darwin’s Theory kicking in with respect to Var. Newcastle’s behaviour differed appreciably from Sunderland’s in their efforts to gain advantage. They’d forgotten that Var wasn’t being used. I might do a thesis on it.

[60s 70s Spireite]

Calvert Lewis’s red card rescinded on appeal. So no foul, after VAR a red card, now rescinded. What nonsense.

[dim view]

60s 70s Spireite, on 09 January 2024 - 06:22 PM, said:

Calvert Lewis’s red card rescinded on appeal. So no foul, after VAR a red card, now rescinded. What nonsense.

This is serious. What it means is that the Appeals Committee has no confidence in the VAR person.

[Surrey Spireite]

Said it before, I'll say it again.....

The purpose for which it was brought in, is no longer its purpose.

It is therefore ...... no longer fit for purpose.

[FORZA AZZURRI]

dim view, on 09 January 2024 - 06:25 PM, said:

This is serious. What it means is that the Appeals Committee has no confidence in the VAR person.

Blame the Ref was ultimately his decision to give a Red.

[spireitetoo]

FORZA AZZURRI, on 09 January 2024 - 07:24 PM, said:

Blame the Ref was ultimately his decision to give a Red.

No the ref, originally gave a yellow, blame the VAR official who persuaded the ref to change his mind with the benefit of slow mo replay, ...
The ref in realtime called it right.

[Waller is my hero]

FORZA AZZURRI, on 09 January 2024 - 07:24 PM, said:

Blame the Ref was ultimately his decision to give a Red.

Agreed absolutely weak & spineless from the ref

[JonB]

FORZA AZZURRI, on 09 January 2024 - 07:24 PM, said:

Blame the Ref was ultimately his decision to give a Red.

No, the ref didn’t send him off so VAR stuck its oar and sent him to the screen on the recommendation his original decision was wrong and it should be a red card. They don’t really get a chance to make a second decision, they are pretty much told the original decison is wrong and see on the screen why VAR think that.

[FORZA AZZURRI]

JonB, on 09 January 2024 - 08:08 PM, said:

No, the ref didn’t send him off so VAR stuck its oar and sent him to the screen on the recommendation his original decision was wrong and it should be a red card. They don’t really get a chance to make a second decision, they are pretty much told the original decison is wrong and see on the screen why VAR think that.

No
How I understand it they tell him there’s a possibility of that challenge being a red .. you should re look at it…., then up to the Ref to say yes or no … had no balls and bottled it .

[clarevoyant.]

The bloke on VAR duty will undoubtedly be out refing a game shortly and if he had concerns that the Calvert Lewin incident was a potential red card after watching it countless times what will his version of a foul be whilst he's making a decision on the pitch. It must boost the players confidence no end!!!

[JonB]

FORZA AZZURRI, on 09 January 2024 - 08:21 PM, said:

No
How I understand it they tell him there’s a possibility of that challenge being a red .. you should re look at it…., then up to the Ref to say yes or no … had no balls and bottled it .

Thats not how they described it on one of the Howard Webb/Michael Owen shows…..they went through a Burnley player getting sent off early in the season with the VAR audio and they were saying to the ref it’s red and if you go to the screen we’ll show you why.

[FORZA AZZURRI]

JonB, on 09 January 2024 - 09:14 PM, said:

Thats not how they described it on one of the Howard Webb/Michael Owen shows…..they went through a Burnley player getting sent off early in the season with the VAR audio and they were saying to the ref it’s red and if you go to the screen we’ll show you why.

Still after seeing it over and over it’s the Ref that decides so for me no matter what they said he decided to agree rather than telling them to go forth & multiply .

[JonB]

Another VAR cracker gifts Luton a late equaliser at Burnley.

[Osborne again]

JonB, on 12 January 2024 - 09:56 PM, said:

Another VAR cracker gifts Luton a late equaliser at Burnley.

I agree, awful decision.

[Westbars Spireite]

Osborne again, on 12 January 2024 - 10:02 PM, said:

I agree, awful decision.

Really? The keeper goes into the forward who was looking the other way. Definitely a goal for me.

[Osborne again]

Westbars Spireite, on 12 January 2024 - 10:04 PM, said:

Really? The keeper goes into the forward who was looking the other way. Definitely a goal for me.

Again, it's how each person perceives it. For me, the player knew the goalkeeper was coming, and he didn't need to look to know that, but there's two ways to look at it. Same thing could happen tomorrow with a different decision.

[ronpowellsbutler]

JonB, on 12 January 2024 - 09:56 PM, said:

Another VAR cracker gifts Luton a late equaliser at Burnley.

For someone who remembers Nat Lofthouse in the 1958 Cup Final there was nothing wrong with it…..

[JonB]

Westbars Spireite, on 12 January 2024 - 10:04 PM, said:

Really? The keeper goes into the forward who was looking the other way. Definitely a goal for me.

Nah for me the Luton player knows what he’s doing and runs into the keeper turning his back into the keeper as he gets there. Keeper is looking at the ball the whole time and Luton player takes him out. Should have been given live let alone after umpteen replays.

[The Rev.]

ronpowellsbutler, on 12 January 2024 - 11:52 PM, said:

For someone who remembers Nat Lofthouse in the 1958 Cup Final there was nothing wrong with it…..

I wonder what Harry Gregg thought about it?

[Westbars Spireite]

JonB, on 13 January 2024 - 12:25 AM, said:

Nah for me the Luton player knows what he’s doing and runs into the keeper turning his back into the keeper as he gets there. Keeper is looking at the ball the whole time and Luton player takes him out. Should have been given live let alone after umpteen replays.

After seeing it again there's a bit of what you describe. Goalkeeper's get far too much protection though and he's neither big enough nor strong enough to do what he sets out to do.