[Football] VAR question

[happypig]

Player goes down in the box, ref thinks it's a dive and gives him a second yellow card so he's sent off.
Then VAR pipes up and says "he WAS fouled so it's a penalty".
Does the ref invite him back on ?

 

[Swansman]

Player goes down in the box, ref thinks it's a dive and gives him a second yellow card so he's sent off.
Then VAR pipes up and says "he WAS fouled so it's a penalty".
Does the ref invite him back on ?

I think so. And while few players will leave the pitch immediatly as they know VAR could change a decision, its bound to happen at some point if the system stays (which is likely since it fits perfectly to the Huxleyorwellian shiet we're doing)..

 

[GT49er]

The ref's decision will stand - "not enough evidence to overturn the referee's decision (or to humiliate the referee!)"

Cue Dermot Gallagher on Ref-Watch on Monday morning: "I can see why he gave that". All jolly good then, controversy over ...................................

 

[Raleigh Chopper]

My VAR O METER has now dipped below 50% (from 60% in favour) after VAR could not see the Mane dive yesterday and it was such a crucial decision at the end of the game.
Ridiculous.

 

[Acker79]

I think so. And while few players will leave the pitch immediatly as they know VAR could change a decision, its bound to happen at some point if the system stays (which is likely since it fits perfectly to the Huxleyorwellian shiet we're doing)..

The ref's decision will stand - "not enough evidence to overturn the referee's decision (or to humiliate the referee!)"

Cue Dermot Gallagher on Ref-Watch on Monday morning: "I can see why he gave that". All jolly good then, controversy over ...................................

I think it's both of these. It will come down to how the on-field ref sees it. To me, a dive is when you choose to go to ground when, with reasonable effort, you can stay on your feet. I know for others it's about whether or not there was contact.

If the ref tells the VAR that he saw contact, but felt the attacker was looking for it and chose to go to ground, the VAR will look at the video and if he sees contact he won't be able to overturn the on-field ref. If the ref says there was no contact, and video shows there was, he is supposed to advise the ref that there was, and it should be a penalty (or that there was contact, and advise that he isn't sure it was enough for a penalty and the ref can look at the video himself if he wants). To be honest, I suspect there is similar advice to the offsides when a goal-scoring opportunity is imminent - don't make the decision, wait for the VAR check before giving the second yellow (he can still go through the process with the VAR - I think it's a dive, no contact but as a second yellow I'm gonna wait until you've completed your penalty check) either way there is a break in play.

 

[BensGrandad]

Some pundits last night saying Connolly should have been given a penalty or possibly a free.kick on the edge of the box The ref didnt give it but why didnt VAR intervene as I thought that was the prime function of VAR to correct wrong decisions, or ones the ref missed.

 

[BensGrandad]

Player goes down in the box, ref thinks it's a dive and gives him a second yellow card so he's sent off.
Then VAR pipes up and says "he WAS fouled so it's a penalty".
Does the ref invite him back on ?

Logically in that scenario the ref would wait until the VAR decision but then the argument is that if it was a yellow in the refs eyes it should be given immediately.

 

[Mr Bridger]

Only VAR decision I saw yesterday.

 

[wealdgull]

Some pundits last night saying Connolly should have been given a penalty or possibly a free.kick on the edge of the box The ref didnt give it but why didnt VAR intervene as I thought that was the prime function of VAR to correct wrong decisions, or ones the ref missed.

It was outside the box hence couldn't be a penalty hence not part of VAR's remit.

https://www.premierleague.com/var

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

There is a common theme here. I give advice to a science journal that keeps publishing research where in some papers the design and analysis is shit. The editors and referees ('peer review') don't know any better so let it pass. So I was asked to 'oversee' this aspect of papers submitted to the journal (I used to be a senior editor and wrote the journal's acceptance rules - the ones that are being flouted). Problem was, I was deemed by the editor in chief to be undermining the senior editors were I to have the right of veto. The solution was this: the senior editors can call me in if they feel the need, and can ignore my advice if they see fit. These are the same senior editors who have been accepting a load of old bollocks for publication.

Link with VAR? The VAR room boys (and girls) can decide, but this undermines the referee. So the referee must have the right to call in VAR only when he (or she) decides, and also has the right to overrule. A bit like the horoscope page in the Argus - you can read it, and you can ignore it - the choice is yours.

FFS you couldn't make this shit up. This is Grand Old Duke of York stuff, and we all know what happened when he marched his men up and down the hill, the fekkin eejit.

 

[GT49er]

My VAR O METER has now dipped below 50% (from 60% in favour) after VAR could not see the Mane dive yesterday and it was such a crucial decision at the end of the game.
Ridiculous.

VAR did see it. It was a penalty, albeit a soft one.

 

[mune ni kamome]

My VAR O METER has now dipped below 50% (from 60% in favour) after VAR could not see the Mane dive yesterday and it was such a crucial decision at the end of the game.
Ridiculous.

I think if it had been a Leicester player going down in the 95th minute then VAR may well have seen the dive.

 

[Justice]

VAR did see it. It was a penalty, albeit a soft one.

He dived no penalty Kavanagh is becoming one of the worst top 4 lickers. And in such an important moment why didn’t he check the monitor it’s all bollocks.

 

[GT49er]

He dived no penalty Kavanagh is becoming one of the worst top 4 lickers. And in such an important moment why didn’t he check the monitor it’s all bollocks.

Not according to the ref, the linos, or the VAR. And why would the ref check the monitor if he'd seen it as a penalty, given the penalty, and the VAR agreed with him? He would only look at the monitor if VAR was saying to him, "Err.....you might want to take another look at that".


And yes, I am aware that this is NSC and it was Liverpool that got the pen!

 

[Machiavelli]

Not according to the ref, the linos, or the VAR. And why would the ref check the monitor if he'd seen it as a penalty, given the penalty, and the VAR agreed with him? He would only look at the monitor if VAR was saying to him, "Err.....you might want to take another look at that".


And yes, I am aware that this is NSC and it was Liverpool that got the pen!

There is no looking at the monitor. And it wasn't a penalty. Mane dived.
I was pro-VAR but it's becoming increasingly difficult to defend how it's being used. Too many interminable protractors coming out for offsides, and diddly squat of the refereeing decisions being changed

 

[Machiavelli]

And in answer to the OP's question, I'm not 100% sure, but if VAR awards the penalty, it's indicating that the ref got the decision wrong (are we yet to see this, this season?), and that decision involves the non-award of the penalty which, in turn, resulted in the yellow card for the player. From that, it ought to be the case that the player's second yellow (and, hence, red) is overturned at the time and is returned to the pitch.

 

[Change at Barnham]

Just before half-time Maupay crossed the ball from the left that flew across the face of goal.
It looked like the ball may have gone over the line for a goal kick before he crossed it.
If a goal had been scored, could it have been reviewed by VAR to see if the ball had gone over the touchline?

 

[darkwolf666]

Just before half-time Maupay crossed the ball from the left that flew across the face of goal.
It looked like the ball may have gone over the line for a goal kick before he crossed it.
If a goal had been scored, could it have been reviewed by VAR to see if the ball had gone over the touchline?

Yes...

 

[BNthree]

Seems main purpose of VAR is to spend ages working out if a defender has an atom or two in front or behind a defender to determine offside.

 

[BensGrandad]

My TV must have different pictures to most as I saw it as an obvious penalty as Mane had his left ankle tapped and was tripped, and I dont like Liverpool but to me there is no question about it.