VAR - The Great Debate

[chara]

Without the adrenaline.....the penalty "discussion" first thought was "that's a pen" not with any sense that it would be awarded....it's a foul regardless but instinctively I didn't expect it to be given,,,even with replays the same reaction,,"It ain't gonna happen."

The Caicedo "incident'?....bit of a muddled view of it in real time...replays at the time looked just as muddled to me.usual Chelsea F'Up in a bad area,,,...later views ,for me, show a blatant foul as the Palace player just shoves our man over then takes, what ?..two steps to get to the loose ball ?...part of the game but VAR is supposed to pick up that sort of stuff,

Just my opinion and not an argument...without different perspectives on an incident it would be a waste of a debating platform.

Another viewpoint from me...a mid game mini headline implied PC blamed Petr for the goal...what he actually stated,,as I read it...our man ,,faced with all the choices being with the Palace player (my take) took an option that ultimately left him to have to change his footing ...watch a replay as he desperately adjusts his push off...but a great strike so no blame there..PC was making a technical keeping observation..far too sophisticated for the hacks...not a goal blame...my point of course is that it was yet another subtle attack on Chelsea...both our old hero keeper and the present incumbant,,manufactured and a distorted observation..sigh.

[Dwmh]

4 hours ago, Ham said:

Had we lost the game, a lot more would have been made of the foul on Caicedo and the penalty appeal. 

As it is, Chelsea twitter have been focusing on Bob Marley and crowd surfing. 

A lot was made of the Caicedo foul (with clips provided) in the match day forum.
Still looks like Caicedo had lost the ball to the first Palace player and was actually blocking the 2nd one who had a much more realistic chance of getting to the ball.

The crowd surfing is another big Reffing issue I brought up in the match day thread - another area where refs have been lenient to us yet still we have record numbers of yellows.
https://www.premierleague.com/stats/top/clubs/total_yel_card?se=578
3.1 yellows a game is quite new territory, I don't think anyone has got beyond 2.6 a game over a season before and only Sheff U (obvs) and Villa are above it this season.  

[Ham]

2 hours ago, chara said:

Without the adrenaline.....the penalty "discussion" first thought was "that's a pen" not with any sense that it would be awarded....it's a foul regardless but instinctively I didn't expect it to be given,,,even with replays the same reaction,,"It ain't gonna happen."

The Caicedo "incident'?....bit of a muddled view of it in real time...replays at the time looked just as muddled to me.usual Chelsea F'Up in a bad area,,,...later views ,for me, show a blatant foul as the Palace player just shoves our man over then takes, what ?..two steps to get to the loose ball ?...part of the game but VAR is supposed to pick up that sort of stuff,

Just my opinion and not an argument...without different perspectives on an incident it would be a waste of a debating platform.

Another viewpoint from me...a mid game mini headline implied PC blamed Petr for the goal...what he actually stated,,as I read it...our man ,,faced with all the choices being with the Palace player (my take) took an option that ultimately left him to have to change his footing ...watch a replay as he desperately adjusts his push off...but a great strike so no blame there..PC was making a technical keeping observation..far too sophisticated for the hacks...not a goal blame...my point of course is that it was yet another subtle attack on Chelsea...both our old hero keeper and the present incumbant,,manufactured and a distorted observation..sigh.

On the Palace goal, and in my opinion, I thought Petrovic was a bit slow adjusting his feet before the dive, which left him a bit short. Similar to what Kepa often did. 

What do you think?

[chara]

16 minutes ago, Ham said:

On the Palace goal, and in my opinion, I thought Petrovic was a bit slow adjusting his feet before the dive, which left him a bit short. Similar to what Kepa often did. 

What do you think?

Basically agree but he tried desperately to readjust his footing aware of the issue  but although I know we are not nick picking it is a change to be able to look at the finer extremes of the job than groan at the soft howlers. Kepa seemed to rely on reacting rather than getting the difficult angle reading right. If that makes any sense?

Often Petr...for me ....copes quietly with dangerous efforts that only now do I realise in the past had me "concerned".

Now I expect competence..not hope for it!...seems an age since even TC let alone PC !

[flllerywhereru2]

Interesting to see Forest go for the jugular with their twitter statement. It of course touches on something we have long suspected, non impartial use of the technology. That coming at the end of a weekend where another team gets a penalty for something we didnt just  a day later. Coventry had a winning goal disallowed probably correctly but if we are honest weve seen enough to doubt if that gets chalked off the other way round. I expect major changes next season to answer the doubters

[asvaberg]

VAR 

Very

Arguable

Refereeing

[east lower]

So, to the surprise of no one I suspect - Dear Dermot on Sky thinks that our ‘winning’  goal on Saturday was correctly ruled out, as it was a clear and obvious error by the referee. Ok, but Harry Kane, and others have been undertaking this same move for years without a free-kick. I also wonder if the roles were reversed, would a penalty have been the decision?

Oh, and there was no clear evidence to support the ball was out of play on Villa’s first goal!

And quelle-surprise, Liverpool should have scored from the mix-up that the ref and the West-Ham keeper made and it should have stood.

Life changes a lot and things are constantly changing, but there’s always one constant - and that is any decision that goes against that red mob is an injustice!!!

[paulw66]

1 minute ago, east lower said:

So, to the surprise of no one I suspect - Dear Dermot on Sky thinks that our ‘winning’  goal on Saturday was correctly ruled out

His job is to go on sky and say how well VAR have done. Once in a blue moon, when there is no possible argument, he will concede.

For me, if the ref gives a foul in the first place, I have no issue. It is one of those though that isn't clear enough to over turn, otherwise you may as well do away with the ref, and do it all on video. 

[paulw66]

And Spurs should have had a penalty at 0-1. Dermot doesn't agree. 

[east lower]

Personally and as the strap-line goes - “Football is for the fans”, they ought to poll all match going fans before the next round of  games with a straight Yes/No vote for VAR and the same for Goal-line technology. 
 

Then run with the results of those polls.

[paulw66]

5 minutes ago, east lower said:

Personally and as the strap-line goes - “Football is for the fans”, they ought to poll all match going fans before the next round of  games with a straight Yes/No vote for VAR and the same for Goal-line technology. 
 

Then run with the results of those polls.

Goal line technology is fine. More than fine, it's bloody brilliant. It's instant and 99.99% flawless. 

VAR is a crock of sh*t. 

[east lower]

1 minute ago, paulw66 said:

Goal line technology is fine. More than fine, it's bloody brilliant. It's instant and 99.99% flawless. 

VAR is a crock of sh*t. 

I’d agree 100%. There was one or two instances of the goal line technology not getting the decision correct - one was a camera being blocked I think, Sheffield Utd were involved I think. 
 

Goal line technology relies on the tech alone, VAR involves people and as soon as you do that it will inevitably be contentious. Might as well have left well alone and deal with the human-error we already had. To be fair to most linesmen/ladies they were pretty accurate with their immediate decisions anyways.

 

 

[My Blood Is Blue]

2 hours ago, east lower said:

I’d agree 100%. There was one or two instances of the goal line technology not getting the decision correct - one was a camera being blocked I think, Sheffield Utd were involved I think. 
 

Goal line technology relies on the tech alone, VAR involves people and as soon as you do that it will inevitably be contentious. Might as well have left well alone and deal with the human-error we already had. To be fair to most linesmen/ladies they were pretty accurate with their immediate decisions anyways.

 

 

Completely agree. Use technology to help where it can, but using it just to invite more humans into the decision making, makes no sense to me. We still have just as many inconsistencies, if not more, than we had before using VAR. Even the offsides I’d leave alone until technology can give a definitive answer.

If they are going to do it, then they should have a look how other sports implement it so well. 

[east lower]

Dear Mr Webb says that it’s a game officiated by humans and they make mistakes - stunning logic that. No wonder you made Inspector in the police force displaying such intelligence and perception.

But, that being the case then - let’s leave it to the human referee and not compound the errors being made by making them again using VAR. It’s destroying the very essence of the spontaneity and soul of the wonderful game and there’s not enough ‘payback’ from VAR to justify its use. 

The PL prides itself on being the best, being an innovator - Have some bravery, have some balls and get rid of it. 
 

Kickback from the PGMOL - Course there will be, couldn’t care less. It’s just more money in each of the referees who undertakes VAR, and to see the greed and abilities of those people within the PGMOL to get on board the gravy train - Assistant VAR’s. Asking them their thoughts on the matter, would be like asking a crack addict if they’d like a free rock.

Where there’s money, there’s greed and probably corruption somewhere and the likes of FIFA, UEFA and the leagues will be tied into that. 

First thing is to see if there is a fan consensus to get rid of it and then publish that. Then get investigative reporters involved to look at stuff the fans can’t get to. 

[Bison]

This is outrageous:

Both tussling for the ball? CHO gets a touch and the Everton player goes through him from behind. Scandalous. 

[paulw66]

7 minutes ago, Bison said:

This is outrageous:

Both tussling for the ball? CHO gets a touch and the Everton player goes through him from behind. Scandalous. 

The audio was never going to be "good" as no amount of words could justify the decision. 

I mean, you are in the realms here of, "what are they watching"

I was scoffed at for suggesting a conspiracy. I am curious as to what other explanation makes sense

[east lower]

 

51 minutes ago, Bison said:

This is outrageous:

Both tussling for the ball? CHO gets a touch and the Everton player goes through him from behind. Scandalous. 

 

43 minutes ago, paulw66 said:

The audio was never going to be "good" as no amount of words could justify the decision. 

I mean, you are in the realms here of, "what are they watching"

I was scoffed at for suggesting a conspiracy. I am curious as to what other explanation makes sense

Howard Webb put forward 'human error' and that had the referee been called to the pitchside screen to review then there would have been a different outcome. 

So Howard, two of your supposed 'elite-level' referees (three if you include the Assistant VAR) can't see what almost every other person saw immediately and even more so after a replay of the incident - Scandalous is the correct word and those involved should get stood-down with removal of any retainers.

[Ham]

1 hour ago, Bison said:

This is outrageous:

Both tussling for the ball? CHO gets a touch and the Everton player goes through him from behind. Scandalous. 

That wasn't even the worst decision against Forest in that game.

[Backbiter]

2 hours ago, east lower said:

 

 

Howard Webb put forward 'human error' and that had the referee been called to the pitchside screen to review then there would have been a different outcome. 

So Howard, two of your supposed 'elite-level' referees (three if you include the Assistant VAR) can't see what almost every other person saw immediately and even more so after a replay of the incident - Scandalous is the correct word and those involved should get stood-down with removal of any retainers.

How can he be sure Taylor wouldn't have made the same idiotic 'human error' Attwell made? He should be embarrassed that top officials are literally unable to process what the footage is showing.

[flllerywhereru2]

I think it confirms what we feared that the technology is open to bias and is being used with it. forest were right to highlight it and if Atwell does have Luton connections their could be a ground breaking court case. Just add this to Mike Deans comments re the spurs game at the bridge and the inconsistency of decisions in identical situations....they are scripting outcomes

[Sciatika]

They need VAR to make sure the outcomes are tight and ensure revenues at the end of the season

[Mark Kelly]

8 minutes ago, Sciatika said:

They need VAR to make sure the outcomes are tight and ensure revenues at the end of the season

What they love and seem to need is , a race for the league , a race for the CL spots and a race against relegation , the league has to be tough fought and full of incident so they can sell it on . 

[ROTG]

4 minutes ago, Mark Kelly said:

What they love and seem to need is , a race for the league , a race for the CL spots and a race against relegation , the league has to be tough fought and full of incident so they can sell it on . 

Fortunately or not we are now under the radar for both aspects of those headlines 

[east lower]

5 hours ago, Backbiter said:

How can he be sure Taylor wouldn't have made the same idiotic 'human error' Attwell made? He should be embarrassed that top officials are literally unable to process what the footage is showing.

Well, we don’t know. He said that they’ve reviewed it as a ‘team’ and had Taylor been called to the pitch side screen - he’d have given the penalty. So assumption taken from that is Taylor had told them he would have done.

[Sciatika]

Great lies of our time:

FFP is about making football fairer

VAR is about making football fairer

PGMOL and professional refereeing is about making football fairer.

Edited Wednesday at 17:40 by Sciatika