VAR gives us more hope.

[Woodwardfan]

So far there seems to be mounting evidence that the referees have got together and are fudging VAR.

The system is there to benefit the game but the rules of the game have to be practical ( handball, goalies at penalties) and referees have to be honest.

To date there seems to be an understanding that the decision/ reputation of the referee on the field is paramount and the fewer overturned decisions the better.

Consequently the system probably will not help us much as a minnow in this league but the system will inevitably evolve and get more and more effective year by year.

If it doesn't then the game is corrupt and prepared for justice and reinforcement of the rules be partial.

 

[Woodwardfan]

I'm afraid the 'fudging' continues.

VAR is becoming a tool for offsides only.

Referees' other decisions are not being overturned, this 'clear and obvious' criteria is a kop-out.

For goalkeeper's sticking to the line for penalties, the rule of the game is not being upheld by choice, common consent!!

It's not the system concept at fault, it's the authorities and the officials, spineless.

The cricket technology evolved and is really good these days, not perfect though.

 

[Scooter_mcgavin]

I'm afraid the 'fudging' continues.

VAR is becoming a tool for offsides only.

Referees' other decisions are not being overturned, this 'clear and obvious' criteria is a kop-out.

For goalkeeper's sticking to the line for penalties, the rule of the game is not being upheld by choice, common consent!!

It's not the system concept at fault, it's the authorities and the officials, spineless.

The cricket technology evolved and is really good these days, not perfect though.

You only have to look.at manes clear dive for the pen today.

Goes to far and they agree it's a pen. Shocking.

 

[Woodwardfan]

I actually believe that Moss got our decision right yesterday - within the current law and the chosen way of ruling offsides.

The chosen way is too rigid and pays too much respect to the technology by applying it to miniscule measures even on that 1st phase of our move yesterday. The technology can't be that accurate in measuring the point at which the ball is kicked and therefore frozen on screen. I trust the lines that the technology produces but not the precise point of the kick impact.

While I have been watching football the offside rules have changed. To be onside the attacker had to have three players between him and the goal and if he was level with the defender he was offside. Also the attacker simply had to be offside, not interfering with the ball, he could be on the opposite wing to be flagged offside.

Apparently when the game was invented any player in front of the ball could be offside!! Then it was changed to 3 men and eventually in 1925 to the current 2 men. ( I'm a bit disconcerted over that because I would have sworn It was like that when I was young, maybe a past life, sure to have been A Blade!!).

So, the current offside rule is way more generous to attackers in the modern game with great flexibilty in rules for not interfering with play, not in line of sight, level with the defender and being played on by an opposition touch.

Having accepted that those changes are generous to the attacking team, the introduction of VAR and the opportunity to take exact measures on a frozen frame of action can reinforce the rules and the big issue is where those lines are drawn.

Should the lines offer the VAR official some discretion depending what part and how much of the body is 'offside'. Personally I think Moss was right to disallow the goal and I reckon the offside rules are generous enough when related to the history of the offside laws,; allow 6 inches for trailing arms/ legs maybe, use the trunk of the body maybe.

Wilder took the decision rationally and with dignity. He is a big man in a man's game and his team dug deep to rescue the point despite the set-back. VAR dimmed our 'hope', as quoted in the thread title, for just a few minutes because the team has character.

Watching MOTD I have to say that Leicester were harder done by than us. How the VAR Official could pretend, yes 'pretend' that penalty call was not 'clear and obvious' beggars belief. It should be noted that such decisions are changed if the error is 'clear and obvious' whereas offside is an exact measure.

 

[Yellarbellyblade]

I actually believe that Moss got our decision right yesterday - within the current law and the chosen way of ruling offsides.

The chosen way is too rigid and pays too much respect to the technology by applying it to miniscule measures even on that 1st phase of our move yesterday. The technology can't be that accurate in measuring the point at which the ball is kicked and therefore frozen on screen. I trust the lines that the technology produces but not the precise point of the kick impact.

While I have been watching football the offside rules have changed. To be onside the attacker had to have three players between him and the goal and if he was level with the defender he was offside. Also the attacker simply had to be offside, not interfering with the ball, he could be on the opposite wing to be flagged offside.

Apparently when the game was invented any player in front of the ball could be offside!! Then it was changed to 3 men and eventually in 1925 to the current 2 men. ( I'm a bit disconcerted over that because I would have sworn It was like that when I was young, maybe a past life, sure to have been A Blade!!).

So, the current offside rule is way more generous to attackers in the modern game with great flexibilty in rules for not interfering with play, not in line of sight, level with the defender and being played on by an opposition touch.

Having accepted that those changes are generous to the attacking team, the introduction of VAR and the opportunity to take exact measures on the a frozen frame of action can reinforce the rules and the big issue is where those lines are drawn.

Should the lines offer the VAR official some discretion depending what part and how much of the body is 'offside'. Personally I think Moss was right to disallow the goal and I reckon the offside rules are generous enough when related to the history of the offside laws.

Wilder took the decision rationally and with dignity. He is a big man in a man's game and his team dug deep to rescue the point despite the set-back. VAR dimmed our 'hope', as quoted in the thread title, for just a few minutes because the team has character.

Watching MOTD I have to say that Leicester were harder done by than us. How the VAR Official could pretend, yes 'pretend' that penalty call was not 'clear and obvious' beggars belief. It should be noted that such decisions are changed if the error is 'clear and obvious' whereas offside is an exact measure.

If the technology was 100% accurate I could accept it more but it isn’t yet they are using it as though it is. If it is to regain any credibility it needs to accept the inherent level of error with it and stop making out that these really tight decisions can be judged by it

 

[Woodwardfan]

If the technology was 100% accurate I could accept it more but it isn’t yet they are using it as though it is. If it is to regain any credibility it needs to accept the inherent level of error with it and stop making out that these really tight decisions can be judged by it

I suppose the counter to that would be that it's the same for all teams. No right or wrong as regards the drawing of the lines though.

 

[Yellarbellyblade]

I suppose the counter to that would be that it's the same for all teams. No right or wrong as regards the drawing of the lines though.

Agreed and actually I was talking in general terms not specifically our one yesterday because It’s not the first one but rather the latest in a long line of similar ones.
When you bring in something new it should aspire to be slightly better than “shit for everyone “

Let’s not even talk about the penalty non-penalty decisions that are being made. That’s not a technology issue that’s just poor decision making

 

[Woodwardfan]

Well, it's not working in our favour as yet!! Hard to bear at Spurs and now v Toon.

Last night the linesman was wrong because his perceived offside was not 'clear and obvious' which is the latest rule of thumb for raising the flag apparently. Raising his flag caused the problem for the referee and our players.

The referee was culpable to a slight degree as he put the whistle to his lips and that could have misled our defence.

However we were wide open to the break and Henderson and Baldock were unprofessional.

VAR evolves and we seem to be suffering a sudden bad patch with it.

 

[Bladesman]

The only decision that has gone our way by my count is McBurnie's debatable handball against Man Utd.

 

[Harry's Game]

The one at Spurs is still the one that rankles most as that was not offside.

 

[BushBlade]

It’s about time UEFA stepped up to the plate and insist on consistency across Europe. I’m fucking sick of hearing about how English refs think they can apply their own interpretations of how it should work, and then totally fuck it up. The PGMOL or whatever the pricks call themselves aren’t fit for purpose.
They are either doing this deliberately in the vain hope that VAR will be scrapped or they are fucking incompetent.
The PL should be doing more but they can’t even find a replacement for Scudamore.
And, I already have to pay two subscriptions to watch PL football, I’m not paying another one, not to watch this fucking shitshow. I’m not a cow to be fucking milked by these corporate cunts. Amazon called it a successful ‘trading day’. That’s it, just a commodity, like a tin of beans.
Just fuck off, you’re killing the game.

 

[Selly]

One thing is clear after last night around the offside rule, they need to decide whether the linesman has any say in giving offside.

If they decide (s)he doesn`t, then they tell them to keep their flag down in all cases and allow play to continue - this would be a fundamental change to the game as we know it - you would be in a situation where ever attack is checked to decide whether or not the corner/throw in that resulted should have instead been a free kick.

If they decide that (s)he does, then play, if it hasn`t already stopped (by virtue of the ball being in the net/out of play), has to stop if the linesman raises their flag.

This halfway house of the linesman being able to raise his flag and play continues is a complete and utter shitshow.

 

[Worksop II]

I think we need start the tradition of the Lino having the Flag firmly inserted before kick

Then they wouldnt be able to interfere during the Game .......

 

[Brian Blessed]

The only decision that has gone our way by my count is McBurnie's debatable handball against Man Utd.

Also got away with a pen against Arsenal. Maybe Burnley as well. Should have had one v Saints and then the Spurs offside. And i consider last night to be a lino rather than VAR fuck up. So as they say decisons even themselves out over a season even though they dont really I'd say VAR wise we're fairly even so far

 

[ShockingBadBuy]

It’s about time UEFA stepped up to the plate and insist on consistency across Europe. I’m fucking sick of hearing about how English refs think they can apply their own interpretations of how it should work, and then totally fuck it up. The PGMOL or whatever the pricks call themselves aren’t fit for purpose.
They are either doing this deliberately in the vain hope that VAR will be scrapped or they are fucking incompetent.
The PL should be doing more but they can’t even find a replacement for Scudamore.
And, I already have to pay two subscriptions to watch PL football, I’m not paying another one, not to watch this fucking shitshow. I’m not a cow to be fucking milked by these corporate cunts. Amazon called it a successful ‘trading day’. That’s it, just a commodity, like a tin of beans.
Just fuck off, you’re killing the game.

Very well said. On all fronts.

 

[JayGreen17]

Sign this

Sign the Petition

VAR - SUSPEND VAR until robust consistent operational practices have been developed.

chng.it

 

[Woodwardfan]

Another weekend of VAR controversy for United .

Accept the non- penalty for the Norwich goal but the officials have to make their minds up about the intentional/ non intentional handballs for the scoring team.

Diabolical decision to check the goal and not the penalty and call offside which was an irrelevance. It demonstrates those two officials do not know the game and can't read the sequence of events in the move.

The Basham rescinded red card was a touch of good fortune, it could have been upheld for 'dangerous play'.

All in all another good day for the system but a very poor day for the officials and it went against us yet again.

 

[nicksufc]

One of the most annoying things about the shitshow that is VAR is the lack of explanation behind these decisions, at the time in the stadium or afterwards. We don't even know why Lundstram's goal was ruled out in the end. That is unacceptable.

 

[Sheffsteel]

Another weekend of VAR controversy for United .

Accept the non- penalty for the Norwich goal but the officials have to make their minds up about the intentional/ non intentional handballs for the scoring team.

Diabolical decision to check the goal and not the penalty and call offside which was an irrelevance. It demonstrates those two officials do not know the game and can't read the sequence of events in the move.

The Basham rescinded red card was a touch of good fortune, it could have been upheld for 'dangerous play'.

All in all another good day for the system but a very poor day for the officials and it went against us yet again.

Regards the Norwich goal it DOES look like the most minor cases of accidental handball.
Keith Edwards summed it up well on Radio Sheffield... he said that under the current rules their goal should be disallowed. However Edwards says he disagrees with those rules and he thinks when there’s minimal contact and no advantage gained by the attacking player then the goal should count.

Regards the Basham penalty...you’ve seen them given but it would have been soft.
There was a bit of contact, Basham felt it and decided to go down. It’s a bit 50/50.
if the ref had given a penalty then VAR wouldn’t have overturned it....as no obvious mistake.
My view is that it probably wasn’t a penalty.....but that’s because I like to see proper contact....but I can understand why it would be given.

Regards the Basham sending off....in real time it looked like a sending off.
Keith Edwards said it’s one of them 50/50 ones that are sometimes given....said he’s a bit unlucky to get sent off but would be a bit lucky to stay on.
The replay shows that there wasn’t almost no proper contact with the player...so a yellow card looks fair.

 

[MalvernBlade]

Not wanting to sound paranoid but if Basham was playing for a team that is playing in red, based in Liverpool and tops the division it would be given. Penalties are even given to a player running away from goal to the edge of the box when there is absolutely no possible way that a goal scoring opportunity was denied

 

[Selly]

Another weekend of VAR controversy for United .

Accept the non- penalty for the Norwich goal but the officials have to make their minds up about the intentional/ non intentional handballs for the scoring team.

Their mind is made up, any ball to hand for the attacking teams sees the goal chalked off. Even after several replays I honestly couldn't tell you if it hit anyone's hand - ergo, correct decision

Diabolical decision to check the goal and not the penalty and call offside which was an irrelevance. It demonstrates those two officials do not know the game and can't read the sequence of events in the move.

How do you know they didn`t check the penalty?

The Basham rescinded red card was a touch of good fortune, it could have been upheld for 'dangerous play'.

Good fortune that it got the call right (IMO)? That call is precisely the sort of issue that should be going to VAR - the ref had made an obvious (and understandable*) error

* I thought it was a red when I saw it in Real Time, and then after the first replay I still thought it was a red. Once I saw the behind the goal angle it was obvious that it wasn`t anything like a red.

All in all another good day for the system but a very poor day for the officials and it went against us yet again.

How so? We had a red overturned, vs a debatable penalty not given and a debateable handball not given. I'd say we were in credit (for one of the first times this season) with VAR actually benefiting us.

Without VAR we are playing the last 20 with 10 men - and a good chance we don't win. Even assuming a best case of us holding on and Bash getting the card rescinded, we would also have another 20 mins of playing with 10 men in our legs.

VAR helped us yesterday. It actively penalised us against Southampton and Spurs. I still think the implementation is horrid, as is the level of information available to those in the ground.

 

[Large Mendonca]

I agree with our Chris re: the penalty - 100% nailed on. He's usually honest is our Chris. If it's in the centre circle we 100% get a free kick.

 

[wizadry]

Regards the Norwich goal it DOES look like the most minor cases of accidental handball.
Keith Edwards summed it up well on Radio Sheffield... he said that under the current rules their goal should be disallowed. However Edwards says he disagrees with those rules and he thinks when there’s minimal contact and no advantage gained by the attacking player then the goal should count.

Regards the Basham penalty...you’ve seen them given but it would have been soft.
There was a bit of contact, Basham felt it and decided to go down. It’s a bit 50/50.
if the ref had given a penalty then VAR wouldn’t have overturned it....as no obvious mistake.
My view is that it probably wasn’t a penalty.....but that’s because I like to see proper contact....but I can understand why it would be given.

Regards the Basham sending off....in real time it looked like a sending off.
Keith Edwards said it’s one of them 50/50 ones that are sometimes given....said he’s a bit unlucky to get sent off but would be a bit lucky to stay on.
The replay shows that there wasn’t almost no proper contact with the player...so a yellow card looks fair.

It was a stone wall penalty, the Norwich player was a right clumsy twat and got himself into a shocking position, I don’t know how it could be seen as anything else to be honest.

 

[Woodwardfan]

Their mind is made up, any ball to hand for the attacking teams sees the goal chalked off. Even after several replays I honestly couldn't tell you if it hit anyone's hand - ergo, correct decision



How do you know they didn`t check the penalty?



Good fortune that it got the call right (IMO)? That call is precisely the sort of issue that should be going to VAR - the ref had made an obvious (and understandable*) error

* I thought it was a red when I saw it in Real Time, and then after the first replay I still thought it was a red. Once I saw the behind the goal angle it was obvious that it wasn`t anything like a red.



How so? We had a red overturned, vs a debatable penalty not given and a debateable handball not given. I'd say we were in credit (for one of the first times this season) with VAR actually benefiting us.

Without VAR we are playing the last 20 with 10 men - and a good chance we don't win. Even assuming a best case of us holding on and Bash getting the card rescinded, we would also have another 20 mins of playing with 10 men in our legs.

VAR helped us yesterday. It actively penalised us against Southampton and Spurs. I still think the implementation is horrid, as is the level of information available to those in the ground.

The VAR screen at the ground showed 'checking goal' and then 'no goal- offside'. No mention of penalty check.

There's no doubt the ball glanced the lad's arm before their goal.

As for United defending 20 minutes with 10 men v Norwich, I'd back them.

 

[Trigger Blade]

Not wanting to sound paranoid but if Basham was playing for a team that is playing in red, based in Liverpool and tops the division it would be given. Penalties are even given to a player running away from goal to the edge of the box when there is absolutely no possible way that a goal scoring opportunity was denied

Look at George’s goal on Sunday. At one point he was facing away from goal moving towards the edge of the box, so if he’d been fouled, your logic says no pen. Five seconds later, the ball was in the net.

 

[Yewsman]

The whole VAR is just a dogs dinner:

1. They change the hand ball rule so that if it hits an attacker's hand it's a free kick to defending team. The rule is shown to be ridiculous after various stupid real life match situations (as in my view would have been the effect to disallow the Norwich goal) so they just don't enforce the rule! But rules are rules so how ridiculous. But this is not actually a VAR problem. It's Football governing body who make the rules. Will VAR be consistent in not enforcing it? Nobody knows!
2. Basham brought down. To me it was a nailed on penalty. Was that ever reviewed by VAR? No one knows. Certainly it should have been reviewed under VAR protocol.
3. Lundstram given offside instead. He was offside at the moment of the tackle/foul on Basham but not interfering in play so should not have been given off side until he touched or moved towards the ball, by which time the foul had been committed so was irrelevant. What was the thinking of VAR behind this decision?
4. VAR on Bash red card. I didn't even know those were reviewed! Thank God it was and I think the right decision was arrived at but again we can only speculate the reasoning.

Common theme in all the above no communication with the crowd. Compare Rugby where everyone knows the on field decision of the ref, the question he is asking or what the VAR is looking at (e.g. forward pass) and the reason behind the VAR decision so we can understand what the f--k is going on.