[Football] VAR does not work for England

[Easy 10]

Was that given by the ref, or VAR?

The ref gave it, and VAR didn't rule it out as an error, so the pen stood. That is how its supposed to work, he can't CALL for VAR assistance. He gives his decisions as he normally would, and VAR only gets involved if in the VARs opinion the ref has got it wrong.

 

[Triggaaar]

Would they have shown the Sissoko 'handball' against the Dippers on Saturday ? Hmmm, probably not.

The ref gave it, and VAR didn't rule it out as an error, so the pen stood.

So no then, they wouldn't show that on the screens, as it wasn't a decision made by VAR.

That is how its supposed to work, he can't CALL for VAR assistance. He gives his decisions as he normally would, and VAR only gets involved if in the VARs opinion the ref has got it wrong.

Yes I know.

 

[Nathan]

Not all premier league grounds have screens to show replays on. Some big clubs don't and smaller ones like Man Utd don't. I was up in Manchester during half term and did the OT stadium tour, the question was asked about screens and VAR, the bloke said they would lose 3,000 seats to fit the screens in. Not sure how true that is but shocking with all the money they have they can't afford to take the hit and put up the tv screens.

 

[Easy 10]

So no then, they wouldn't show that on the screens, as it wasn't a decision made by VAR

Maybe not, but its an example of exactly the type of decision that IS often subject to a review. Such as the Swiss penalty last night - can you imagine a highly contentious decision like that being played out on the big screens when the ref (eventually) pointed to the spot ? They'll either show it and everyone will go booloo, or they won't in which case everyone will know its a scabby one, ie NOT 'clear and obvious'.

It'll cause as much bother as what it "solves".

 

[father_and_son]

So if they DON'T show the review on the big screens, then by definition it means that the incident/decision was not considered "definitive"

Even though VAR is only supposed to be used to correct "clear and obvious errors".

Makes perfect sense dunnit

You can form a clear and definitive decision from viewing the same incident from multiple angles but not have one single angle that shows it as definitive.
There are instances where the decision required multiple camera angles that cannot quickly be edited into a media-friendly montage for the crowd.

Just sayin'

 

[Easy 10]

You can form a clear and definitive decision from viewing the same incident from multiple angles but not have one single angle that shows it as definitive.
There are instances where the decision required multiple camera angles that cannot quickly be edited into a media-friendly montage for the crowd.

Just sayin'

Surely at least one of the camera angles of the incident HAS to be definitive in order to reach an informed decision. Lots of "might be" angles shouldn't be enough to (for example) award a pen. The ref has to be sure, so if they've decided to go down this route, then we should all be shown the camera angle that made him sure of the decision.

 

[Triggaaar]

Maybe not, but its an example of exactly the type of decision that IS often subject to a review. Such as the Swiss penalty last night - can you imagine a highly contentious decision like that being played out on the big screens when the ref (eventually) pointed to the spot ? They'll either show it and everyone will go booloo, or they won't in which case everyone will know its a scabby one, ie NOT 'clear and obvious'.

I didn't see the Swiss penalty. I'd imagine that if they think the VAR decision is correct - clear and obvious - then they'll think it's ok to show it to the crowd. It doesn't make sense that they think 'wo, this is dodgy as hell, the crowd will go mad if they see this' and at the same time decide to make the decision.

There will of course be some bad decisions, and no doubt some screenings will cause a stir, but the general idea makes sense.

 

[Easy 10]

I didn't see the Swiss penalty. I'd imagine that if they think the VAR decision is correct - clear and obvious - then they'll think it's ok to show it to the crowd. It doesn't make sense that they think 'wo, this is dodgy as hell, the crowd will go mad if they see this' and at the same time decide to make the decision.

There will of course be some bad decisions, and no doubt some screenings will cause a stir, but the general idea makes sense.

Oh last nights was a beauty.

Swiss player goes down in the box by literally tripping himself up, goes full-on ZAHA with the incredulous wild-eyed appeal. Ref waves play on, Portugal go straight up the other end and are awarded a (legit) pen. Ref is alerted to the Swiss pen appeal by VAR though, stands with his finger in his ear for quite a while, then goes to the pitchside monitor for an extended review, and eventually, inexplicably, points to the spot for the Swiss one.

Clear and obvious ? Only if you were looking for a highly contrived dive. But there you are, he gave it anyway. Actually, unless we're on the end of a howler like that, its going to be quite fun when we get these decisions on the big screens, but for all the wrong reasons.

Must've taken about 4 minutes to sort all that out as well (but they only gave 5 mins additional time at the end of the game).

 

[Triggaaar]

Oh last nights was a beauty.

Swiss player goes down in the box by literally tripping himself up, goes full-on ZAHA with the incredulous wild-eyed appeal. Ref waves play on, Portugal go straight up the other end and are awarded a (legit) pen. Ref is alerted to the Swiss pen appeal by VAR though, stands with his finger in his ear for quite a while, then goes to the pitchside monitor for an extended review, and eventually, inexplicably, points to the spot for the Swiss one.

Clear and obvious ? Only if you were looking for a highly contrived dive. But there you are, he gave it anyway. Actually, unless we're on the end of a howler like that, its going to be quite fun when we get these decisions on the big screens, but for all the wrong reasons.

Must've taken about 4 minutes to sort all that out as well (but they only gave 5 mins additional time at the end of the game).

Sounds like a howler. I imagine they'd show that on the screen, as they'd have thought it was correct, and not contentious. Mistakes like that could be fun.

 

[Hugo Rune]

FFS

Should have been given the benefit of the doubt for our goal. So close.

 

[Bold Seagull]

FFS

Should have been given the benefit of the doubt for our goal. So close.

If you played to cricket rules, 'umpires call', that was so close, should have stayed with the on field decision.

 

[Hugo Rune]

If you played to cricket rules, 'umpires call', that was so close, should have stayed with the on field decision.

Exactly.

If we score again, I’ll not be able to celebrate now as I’ll be waiting for a VAR call!

 

[Bold Seagull]

Exactly.

If we score again, I’ll not be able to celebrate now as I’ll be waiting for a VAR call!

It's typical of football to come up with the shittish system possible.

 

[Eeyore]

Exactly.

If we score again, I’ll not be able to celebrate now as I’ll be waiting for a VAR call!

I don't think offside needs an on field bias. Technology will give a precise answer. I'm beginning to warm to it now. It took a while with cricket and rugby but I can't imagine being without it now.

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

The offside is fine - no issue

But why did the pen need to be referred? It wasn’t even close to being a pen.

 

[Super Steve Earle]

Exactly.

If we score again, I’ll not be able to celebrate now as I’ll be waiting for a VAR call!

Yes you can. You can have more celebrations than actual goals next season.

 

[Billy the Fish]

I still think they need to change the offside rule to favour the attacking team - if any part of your body is level or behind the defender then you're onside.

 

[Worried Man Blues]

I still think they need to change the offside rule to favour the attacking team - if any part of your body is level or behind the defender then you're onside.

Imagining strikers running along holding one arm stretched waayy behind them?

 

[Worried Man Blues]

Having given this a lot of thought, well 30 secs, can't they use those stats things they wear on their backs, at least it will be incontrovertible............

 

[Hugo Rune]

VAR has been used a lot in this Women’s World Cup. Sadly and yet again, it’s not going to do England any good.

Already today Vs ‘Roon

1. Clear red on elbow to the face of an England player missed.

2. England player covered in spit from ‘Roon player - disgusting and a clear red (intentional or not).