SuperGran
Off with her head!
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2020
- Messages
- 19,460
- Reaction score
- 45,311
Doesn't happen often, but important decision at the end of the game which was key especially with the referees initial decision.Rugby VAR taking longer than football.
I mean why would you even think this is a good idea to come out with?
The egos of these "top" refs.
You’ll never ever convince me that taking 3 minutes to look at a still image is the best way to judge offside. The linesman gave it. No one appealed for offside. And if it takes that long to decide how can Dawson be getting an advantage. It’s all nonsense. And as for the Brentford fans cheering for VAR, go **** yourselves.Not convinced by that decision today
When you actually look when the ball is played, that doesn’t look like the still image that shows Dawson offside
You’ll never ever convince me that taking 3 minutes to look at a still image is the best way to judge offside. The linesman gave it. No one appealed for offside. And if it takes that long to decide how can Dawson be getting an advantage. It’s all nonsense. And as for the Brentford fans cheering for VAR, go **** yourselves.
Rule needs changing to benefit the attacker.You’ll never ever convince me that taking 3 minutes to look at a still image is the best way to judge offside. The linesman gave it. No one appealed for offside. And if it takes that long to decide how can Dawson be getting an advantage. It’s all nonsense. And as for the Brentford fans cheering for VAR, go **** yourselves.
Like I say I was always a believer that offside was there to stop attackers from deliberately getting an advantage. When it’s as close as the one Saturday, do we really think Dawson’s big toe being offside gives him a deliberate advantage. I think when it’s that close you should really call it level and go with the original decision. If the linesman had stuck his flag up for offside then it’s offside, if he doesn’t, it’s a goal. Don’t they do it in cricket? If the decision is close they go back to the original on pitch decision.Rule needs changing to benefit the attacker.
Umpires call, if not a totally incorrect decision after hawkeye has replayed, not sure if fans of football would accept it, be more grey areas to throw at the linesmanDon’t they do it in cricket
Theres also a ‘clear and obvious’ precedent that doesn’t seem to apply to off sides.Like I say I was always a believer that offside was there to stop attackers from deliberately getting an advantage. When it’s as close as the one Saturday, do we really think Dawson’s big toe being offside gives him a deliberate advantage. I think when it’s that close you should really call it level and go with the original decision. If the linesman had stuck his flag up for offside then it’s offside, if he doesn’t, it’s a goal. Don’t they do it in cricket? If the decision is close they go back to the original on pitch decision.
No, well it never did. Matters of 'fact' don't have to pass that test. Whether offside is always a matter of fact is a different question of course.Theres also a ‘clear and obvious’ precedent that doesn’t seem to apply to off sides.
Your first point is key for me. The camera technology is such that there is no way the line is accurate with when the crosser of the ball touches the ball. And is it when he touches ball or when it leaves his foot? It’s ridiculous as that’s the key moment and they spend no time looking at that, especially if the cross is deep or long through all. They guess.A few points regarding Dawson’s disallowed goal against Brentford…
1. How on earth do they reliably and consistently select the right frame to draw those god forsaken lines across the pitch? There must be any number they could pick from as the ball leaves the boot of the crosser.
2. It was only his toe that was in front of their defenders. I’m not sure I want to see goals being disallowed for that (for or against us).
3. It’s come to something where the first thing I do now when the ball hits the back of the net is try to judge whether the ref and PGMOL are doing a VAR check. Sad days. I’m just glad that the lions share of my life was pre VAR where I could celebrate goals properly.
Probably to form the basis of their complaints...
I mean why would you even think this is a good idea to come out with?
The egos of these "top" refs.
Be interesting to see how long it is before HMG and the FA have problems with FIFA. I give it two years maximum.Just wait until we get the regulator everyone clamoured for. That will make VAR insignificant
They don’t have a clue.
And the scary thing is, they still stick by this shambles and say “we’re getting there”, “it will just take time to adapt”. No one likes it, no one wants it, if you asked the genuine supporters I reckon the majority would say scrap it.They don’t have a clue.
I seem to remember them saying something bonkers at the time, like it was a deflection onto Gomes' arm, so it could be a penalty, whereas if he deliberately played it then it couldn't. I mean that makes perfect sense right?
Goaline technology great
It’s in or it’s not
Once you get humans drawing imaginary lines on pitches for offside then there is room for error and interpretation and that’s a problem given the egos at pgmol
And then there is the handball another thing open to interpretation
I still think Jimmy Hill had a good idea in the 70s . He suggested an additional 18 yard spot that would be used for penalising professional fouls . Take that further and a non deliberate handball in the area you get an 18 metre pen not a 12 metre pen. You only get a 12 m for deliberate handball. Also a professional foul outside the box instead of a red card you get an 18m pen given against you. Massive dissent? 18m pen.
**** the blue card . The 18m penalty would solve a lot of the issues we have currently.
I know I am like a broken record regarding VAR, but it has ruined the game.
Living near to Leicester I know a few Leicester City fans, and talking to them about this season, they all say more or less the same thing, which is that one good thing about not being in the Premier League is that when they score a goal, they know they can celebrate it without having to wait for VAR to ruin the moment. One chap even said that can they refuse to accept promotion and stay where they are.
Remarkable when you read what he said after the Gomes one (here)
Also in Game 13....a clear headbutt on Kilkman with VAR not adjudging it to be a red card incidentI was hoping I wouldn't have had to add to this thread. However after Gary and Jeff both had their say about Saturdays VAR intervention, so I guess that's official and I'm going to add it to the list. This is the story so far this season....
Game 1. Man Utd keeper clattered into Sasa Kalajdzjic. VAR disallowed penalty which if scored, result would have been 1-1. (1 point lost due to VAR)
Game 6. Penalty given to Luton which should have been disallowed by VAR. Cost Wolves the win. Wolves could now be on 7 points instead of 4. (VAR cost us a total of 3 points so far this season)
Game 10. Penalty given to Newcastle (Schar left a leg dangling, making it look like Hwang tripped him and Anthony Taylor’s decision wasn’t overturned by VAR). Final score 2-2, but should have been 2-1, so 2 more points lost due to VAR. (VAR cost us a total of 5 points so far this season)
Game 11. Penalty given to Sheffield United in dying minute of the game for a tackle with minimal contact in our penalty area. Once again the poor decision by the referee wasn't corrected by VAR. Up to that moment we were level and on for a point. (VAR cost us a total of 6 points so far this season)
Game 13. First penalty conceded against Fulham. Fulham player dived and Semedo never touched him. VAR didn’t intervene. Game finished 3-2, instead of 2-2. So 1 point lost last night. (VAR cost us a total of 7 points so far this season
Game 31. Max Kilman's 99th minute equaliser would have made it 2-2 against West Ham, however VAR (Tim Robinson) had a look for how to disallow it and decided that Chirewa was obstructing Fabianski. Gary O'Neil and then everyone on Match of the Day disagreed with that and even Jeff Shi entered the debate. 1 point lost. (VAR now has cost us a total 8 points this season)