Machiavelli
Well-known member
What on earth was he on about after the match? If someone can find the cllip and post it on this thead, and anyone provide an explanation, because I'm baffled. I suspect he's just a fool that warrants the boot.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Football] Peter Walton
- Thread starter Machiavelli
- Start date
whosthedaddy
striker256
Yes, I think I heard what he said...
"Var isn't there to make the right decision" I believe was one of his inane comments
"Var isn't there to make the right decision" I believe was one of his inane comments
macbeth
Dismembered
It's strange because he usually agrees with whatever the decision was no matter how ridiculous.
METALMICKY
Well-known member
- Jan 30, 2004
- 6,076
Yes, I think I heard what he said...
"Var isn't there to make the right decision" I believe was one of his inane comments
This in spades! And his comments just prove further what a mess VAR is. He queried as to why VAR got involved as it was a not a " clear and obvious error ". That phrase gets used a lot but surely it's illogical? Surely VAR should be there to attempt to eradicate any type of error obvious or not.
Here you go. Baffling, contradictory rubbish [emoji23][emoji23][emoji23]
https://twitter.com/tiggerwhu/status/1330197461692985345?s=21
- May 8, 2018
- 9,235
southstandandy
WEST STAND ANDY
- Jul 9, 2003
- 5,643
Define clear and obvious. We benefitted from it today (and in my view it was the correct decision) but ultimately all these decisions are still SUBJECTIVE. Some would have given it, some wouldn't have. That's why I'd prefer to go back to as things were when the refs just reffed the game and if they make a mistake so be it (even though if VAR ultimately helped us today).
redoubtable seagull
Well-known member
- Oct 27, 2004
- 2,531
Looking at that replay it’s not even clear that March actually caught him let alone getting the first touch.
Neville's Breakfast
Well-known member
Yup. Bizarre. Solly gets the ball and makes zero contact with their pirhouetting gymnast. How can that not be a clear and obvious error.
He said that VAR cannot ever get involved in reversing a penalty given decision [by directing the ref to the screen, because it is not a clear and obvious error].
Laid that on thick. VAR should never have got involved.
If he’s correct, another aspect to VAR that needs amending. We want the correct decisions, not gobbledygook to protect the ancient sanctity of the match day ref.
Get your house in order like cricket and rugby union.
Laid that on thick. VAR should never have got involved.
If he’s correct, another aspect to VAR that needs amending. We want the correct decisions, not gobbledygook to protect the ancient sanctity of the match day ref.
Get your house in order like cricket and rugby union.
Machiavelli
Well-known member
- Thread starter
- #14
Yup. I'm still not convinced he touched him. Happy to be proved wrong. I do know that Trezeguet made a meal of it.
Farehamseagull
Solly March Fan Club
Walton is a buffoon.
Poor man should be taken off screen and put out of his misery. He’s just ridiculed these days.
Poor man should be taken off screen and put out of his misery. He’s just ridiculed these days.
Blinkered, emphatic Peter Walton didn’t see that as a clear and obvious error. Making it plain that he’s the all seeing eye and paragon of virtue.
Pavilionaire
Well-known member
- Jul 7, 2003
- 30,582
Why is Walton saying VAR is not about right or wrong but clear and obvious when we have had a multitude of VAR decisions given on offside goals with millimetres involved? That is complete opposite of clear and obvious, and the only justification for such rigorous intervention is to end up with the technically correct decision.
Someone needs to assess Walton via VAR.
Someone needs to assess Walton via VAR.
Seasidesage
New member
In general terms he's kinda right its supposed to only identify clear and obvious errors not armpit offsides but seeing as every other week since its been deployed its been used exactly like that and in this case it did show a clear and obvious error anyway his argument is well shit
Today wasn’t subjective. Ref gave a penalty. VAR shows March got the ball and there was no foul, or even any contact for that matter.
Stato
Well-known member
- Dec 21, 2011
- 6,584
Walton is right according to the letter of the law. This states that VAR should be involved in penalty decision only if a clear and obvious error has been spotted. This year, with the pitch side review, VAR refs seem to be working around this rule by asking the referee to look again. This one went our way, but we had a penalty taken away against United when the error was not clear and obvious. It was also not clear and obvious whether Lallana and Kane's collision was inside the box (although to me it was clear and obvious that Kane committed the foul).