VAR VAR

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?


Large Mendonca said:
Agree with this - pitchside monitor (which they have) for which the 4th official has control, to flag CLEAR AND OBVIOUS errors to the ref. They all have a quick look and come to a sensible decision. No need for Stockley Park. We can then be left to talk about actual football :)
Click to expand...

100% correct approach. Would solve 99.9% of the problem and get VAR back in to tolerable and even useful space.
 
If all the players are already wearing sensors already, wouldn’t GPS be an answer. Put in a ‘zone’ for error - e.g players facing in different directions whilst being level - and it should be possible to get clear readings without the on-screen trigonometry bollocks.
 
JimPhipps said:
I am coming to believe that is the point of the PGMOL's abysmal implementation of VAR. Your starting point on VAR was, I think, like mine ... not sold, but hopeful (even optimistic) it could bring the officiating standard up and improve the game. As implemented, I am 100% against it. This is I think what the PGMOL wants. Through misapplication, they appear to be attacking the part of VAR that (surprise! surprise!) endangers the most officiating jobs (offsides/linesmen). I think the PGMOL is spiking VAR on purpose.
Click to expand...

I'm convinced this is the case.

Do it in such a way that everyone disagrees with how they have done it, rail it back next season to something akin to what it should have been in the first place.

Result - everyone next year is talking about how much better it is, rather than criticising the issues it causes.

VAR would have been criticised whatever was implemented - this way they can come out and say we listened and made changes.
 
If we score, this evening - away at Anfield - the players shouldn’t celebrate at all - nor the fans. Players should just leave the pitch really slowly, with heads down (and fans go into the concourse) and wait for the decision to come through from Stockley Park. If disallowed players should sit in protest 5 mins before agreeing to come back on the pitch.
Can’t be done for time wasting, just tell the ref to add on the time delay for stoppages.

bonus is that it fucks up BT Sport schedule.
 
Bruce Wayne said:
Time to abolish it and the shithouses that make it run so awful. It's killing the game.

Football has existed for way over a century and done pretty well. The odd error from the ref pales into insignificance to this abortion is having on the game.
Click to expand...

Spurs and Man City confirm VAR is horseshit.
 
GRUMPY BLADE said:
Spurs and Man City confirm VAR is horseshit.
Click to expand...

Are they going to add that 2 minutes of football between the challenge and the pen that now may aswell not have happened as injury time?
 
bromtom said:
Are they going to add that 2 minutes of football between the challenge and the pen that now may aswell not have happened as injury time?
Click to expand...

No idea, but a very valid question.

Edit:
Our lass says I can't have it both ways.

They didn't stop the game to review so do one on adding it on.
 
What if someone scored while they was waiting for var do they give the goal then the penalty
 

Uncle mick said:
What if someone scored while they was waiting for var do they give the goal then the penalty
Click to expand...

Raises all kinds of possibilities. All of them farcical.

Let’s say Man City score during the 2+ mins of open play before the pen is given, and VAR authorises the pen during the goal celebration. What happens next?

LAW 8: THE START AND RESTART OF PLAY
A kick-off starts both halves of a match, both halves of extra time and restarts play after a goal has been scored.

Having just conceded, does Mike Dean make Spurs restart with a kick-off in the centre circle, then immediately blow for a pen against them (making a complete bloody farce of the Laws)?

Does he ignore what Law 8 says about restarting the game with a kick-off, and segue from goal celebration straight to pen (meaning VAR is rewriting the Laws, not applying them, with Spurs conceding twice without kicking off in between the goals)?

Does he rule out the first goal, because if it was a pen then technically the game should never have carried on? If so, should the 2+ mins of open play be deemed never to have officially happened, and be added on at the end of the half (did this happen today? Was anyone told, one way or the other?).

And vice-versa, reverse all the above if Spurs score during the 2+ mins.

If the pen decision goes to the fuckers at Fuckwit Park, shouldn‘t Dean blow to halt the game, even if the ball is still in play, thereby avoiding the risk of the potential fuckwittery described above? If so, wtf didn’t he? If not, then surely he has to be able to, in the future, if we’re persisting with this fucked up process?

If he blows up to wait for a ruling with the ball still in play, how should the game then be restarted, if VAR rule no pen? In order to answer this, do the laws need rewriting to accommodate the most banal application of VAR (making a mockery of, well, the game itself, really)?

Should supporters be faced with all this unnecessary bollocks?

Yet again, what a massive fucking clusterfuck.

Pathetic.

Fuck VAR.
 
Last edited:
bromtom said:
Goes back to the pen.

Imagine if you might be getting a pen, score, it goes back to the pen and you miss it.

What a shitshow that would be.
Click to expand...
Surely the goal would count as an advantage played like it would on the good ol' days (of last season)
 
If someone had broken their leg in those two ‘non-minutes’, there’d be some repercussions.
 
That was the possibility with Southampton yesterday. They had a penalty shout and while VAR was checking, Liverpool scored. I think VAR bottled it.
 
ShockingBadBuy said:
Raises all kinds of possibilities. All of them farcical.

Let’s say Man City score during the 2+ mins of open play before the pen is given, and VAR authorises the pen during the goal celebration. What happens next?

LAW 8: THE START AND RESTART OF PLAY
A kick-off starts both halves of a match, both halves of extra time and restarts play after a goal has been scored.

Having just conceded, does Mike Dean make Spurs restart with a kick-off in the centre circle, then immediately blow for a pen against them (making a complete bloody farce of the Laws)?

Does he ignore what Law 8 says about restarting the game with a kick-off, and segue from goal celebration straight to pen (meaning VAR is rewriting the Laws, not applying them, with Spurs conceding twice without kicking off in between the goals)?

Does he rule out the first goal, because if it was a pen then technically the game should never have carried on? If so, should the 2+ mins of open play be deemed never to have officially happened, and be added on at the end of the half (did this happen today? Was anyone told, one way or the other?).

And vice-versa, reverse all the above if Spurs score during the 2+ mins.

If the pen decision goes to the fuckers at Fuckwit Park, shouldn‘t Dean blow to halt the game, even if the ball is still in play, thereby avoiding the risk of the potential fuckwittery described above? If so, wtf didn’t he? If not, then surely he has to be able to, in the future, if we’re persisting with this fucked up process?

If he blows up to wait for a ruling with the ball still in play, how should the game then be restarted, if VAR rule no pen? In order to answer this, do the laws need rewriting to accommodate the most banal application of VAR (making a mockery of, well, the game itself, really)?

Should supporters be faced with all this unnecessary bollocks?

Yet again, what a massive fucking clusterfuck.

Pathetic.

Fuck VAR.
Click to expand...

What about yellow and red cards and substitutes given/made during the two minutes?
 
Wapping Blade said:
That was the possibility with Southampton yesterday. They had a penalty shout and while VAR was checking, Liverpool scored. I think VAR bottled it.
Click to expand...

Not the first time it's happened with LiVARpool. Man City had one checked for offside, Liverpool went up other end and scored.
 
SwitchBLADE Smiles said:




I don't understand how Sterling didn't get sent off for this...
Click to expand...


It's nowhere near the same tackle as Aubamayang though.

The Sterling one was a genuine attempt to get the ball in a dangerous area but could have been a red, Aubamayang just went in on the Palace player from miles away on the halfway line and was definitely a red.
 
today is proof is needed that stockley park should only be allowed to advise zero power to overrule anything. referee should be told like normal. but to go over to the screen. i cant believe Garth crooks talked sense earlier they are abdication of their duties. as the saying goes if you give them an excuse to fail they will. get the referee back in charge of the game

less said about Jamie Redknapp the better cant believe he was seriously saying KDB was handball. worlds gone mad if you have to take a ball to face, as your not allowed to protect yourself.
 
sheff_blade90 said:
today is proof is needed that stockley park should only be allowed to advise zero power to overrule anything. referee should be told like normal. but to go over to the screen. i cant believe Garth crooks talked sense earlier they are abdication of their duties. as the saying goes if you give them an excuse to fail they will. get the referee back in charge of the game

less said about Jamie Redknapp the better cant believe he was seriously saying KDB was handball. worlds gone mad if you have to take a ball to face, as your not allowed to protect yourself.
Click to expand...
I think the KDB one was handball.

Conversely I think the two 'shoulders' that bournemouth were punished for in their game were a disgrace.
 
Tarqs said:
I think the KDB one was handball.

Conversely I think the two 'shoulders' that bournemouth were punished for in their game were a disgrace.
Click to expand...

The first one hit Billings hand didn't it? I thought that was quite clearly what they were looking at.

He had if across his chest and hit his shoulder and his hand.

Second one was top of the arm, tetanus jab zone, which isn't your hand, so where does handball go up to in the laws currently?

He did undoubtedly move his arm towards it though so it was a risk.

KDB handball all day. Unless he's Zaphod Beeblebrox and he's got two heads, he wasn't protecting his face there.
 
bromtom said:
The first one hit Billings hand didn't it? I thought that was quite clearly what they were looking at.

He had if across his chest and hit his shoulder and his hand.

Second one was top of the arm, tetanus jab zone, which isn't your hand, so where does handball go up to in the laws currently?

He did undoubtedly move his arm towards it though so it was a risk.

KDB handball all day. Unless he's Zaphod Beeblebrox and he's got two heads, he wasn't protecting his face there.
Click to expand...
If the ball didn't hit KDBs hand, it wouldn't have hit his face, simple.

Billing was definitely shoulder.

But as you say, where does the arm (handball) turn into a shoulder?!
 

Bournemouth thought they had scored but it was ruled out by VAR who awarded a penalty for Burnley!. 1-1 suddenly becomes 2-0! Glad it wasnt us!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

HeCanDoMagic
Reflecting on Wembley
2 3 4
Replies
109
Views
8K
Jan Age
Jan Age
NAnstonblade
There's more to life...?
2
Replies
43
Views
3K
Iron blade
Iron blade
Karaoke Blade
'Til I Die'
Replies
9
Views
1K
YorkBlade
YorkBlade
crazyblade1889
Replay the game
2
Replies
31
Views
3K
munksyb
M
Ron_Justice
It's not bias. We are ****ed by fate
Replies
24
Views
2K
Champagneblade
Champagneblade

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Back
Top Bottom