Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

[Football] "Embarrassing, it’s an absolute disgrace"



Krafty

Well-known member
Apr 19, 2023
1,425
I find that, for any contentious decision, VAR will usually favour the home team - that is how it works.
 

Uh_huh_him

Well-known member
Sep 28, 2011
10,255
I find that, for any contentious decision, VAR will usually favour the home team - that is how it works.
Unless its us at home.

They had to go back a long way to find a marginal decision to rule out our third against Arsenal last season.
Then there was MacAllister's thunderbastard
then there was....... ad infinitum.
 

Littlemo

Well-known member
Aug 25, 2022
1,012
One of the biggest issues is that everyone (inc me!) think our interpretation is the correct one, and state it as a fact, when all of these decisions (except maybe offside) are subjective and depend on interpretation. That then gets spoken about as proof of incompetence, corruption, hatred for our team etc - building up a story that refs are against teams etc.

The Arsenal goal for example, the foul was debated on Match of the Day and the pundits were divided on whether it was a foul, it’s not a clearly wrong decision nor is the ball being out or the offside - if they didn’t have the angles to say it definitively then they are right not to rule it out.

VAR will always still have issues because you cannot make subjective calls into objective, factual ones. It helps but it can’t take that subjectivity away. It doesn’t help that media pundits etc don’t understand half the rules either, and will go on about incorrect decisions that once explained, are actually correct but the idea is out there it was wrong.

Part of the reason it works well in other sports is that they have more respect for the ref and accept marginal calls or subjective decisions as correct, or at least aren’t consistently in the media crying about those they disagree with.
 

nicko31

Well-known member
Jan 7, 2010
17,326
Gods country fortnightly
The Toon winner should have been chalked off for the one clear issue which was the push on the defender.

However, I wont shed too many tears for Arteta as Havertz should have got red. Nasty leg breaker tackle if he connects with the studs up front foot. Lucky for him it's only his trailing foot that connects for which ref gives yellow.
Crap decisions but every team is on the back of the odd crap decision. Arteta just can’t face it his team couldn’t score. Smug Eddie outfoxed him
 


PILTDOWN MAN

Well-known member
NSC Licker Extraordinaire
Sep 15, 2004
18,366
Hurst Green
I emailed PBOBE after the disallowed goal at Palace. I asked why the EPL do not insist where the cameras are positioned pitch side and how many. To cut a long response short, he said that due to the difference in stadiums this can't happen. I didn't bother replying as this is bollocks. All the stadiums have pitch long stands. Cameras could and should be placed along the full length of the pitch at intervals that give the best view of the goal line and also perhaps ones at running along the touchline.

Today cameras are small and should be easy to install either on the roof (Bournemouth for example) or on the second tier of the stand. There's no reason there can't be 200 plus cameras along the stand. This would allow the computer to easily use the best placed camera to use when determining offsides.
 

Bodian

Well-known member
May 3, 2012
11,142
Cumbria
One of the biggest issues is that everyone (inc me!) think our interpretation is the correct one, and state it as a fact, when all of these decisions (except maybe offside) are subjective and depend on interpretation. That then gets spoken about as proof of incompetence, corruption, hatred for our team etc - building up a story that refs are against teams etc.

The Arsenal goal for example, the foul was debated on Match of the Day and the pundits were divided on whether it was a foul, it’s not a clearly wrong decision nor is the ball being out or the offside - if they didn’t have the angles to say it definitively then they are right not to rule it out.

VAR will always still have issues because you cannot make subjective calls into objective, factual ones. It helps but it can’t take that subjectivity away. It doesn’t help that media pundits etc don’t understand half the rules either, and will go on about incorrect decisions that once explained, are actually correct but the idea is out there it was wrong.

Part of the reason it works well in other sports is that they have more respect for the ref and accept marginal calls or subjective decisions as correct, or at least aren’t consistently in the media crying about those they disagree with.
And that's why having the discussions actually relayed would help enormously.
 

peterward

Well-known member
NSC Licker Extraordinaire
Nov 11, 2009
10,847
The officiating has dropped in quality since the introduction of VAR. I’m convinced of it.
They have auto offside VAR in champions league. Why the hell don't we have that in the PL?

With Dunk yesterday, both linesman and referee gave it, only if auto VAR disagreed with considerable certainty (clear & obvious error) should then the VAR 4th officials be used to adjudicate.

For offside alone it's a seemingly easy fix, do the PGMOL fear the loss of power and control?
 


Kinky Gerbil

Im The Scatman
NSC Licker Extraordinaire
Jul 16, 2003
57,560
hassocks
They have auto offside VAR in champions league. Why the hell don't we have that in the PL?

With Dunk yesterday, both linesman and referee gave it, only if auto VAR disagreed with considerable certainty (clear & obvious error) should then the VAR 4th officials be used to adjudicate.

For offside alone it's a seemingly easy fix, do the PGMOL fear the loss of power and control?

The clubs voted it down, not the PGMOL
 

peterward

Well-known member
NSC Licker Extraordinaire
Nov 11, 2009
10,847
The clubs voted it down, not the PGMOL
Really? Why? And if so, I wonder which clubs voted against (shirley not unanimous?)

Maybe they might want to review that decision as its got to be more accurate than the current total farce.
 

Brian Fantana

Well-known member
Oct 8, 2006
7,112
In the field
They have auto offside VAR in champions league. Why the hell don't we have that in the PL?

With Dunk yesterday, both linesman and referee gave it, only if auto VAR disagreed with considerable certainty (clear & obvious error) should then the VAR 4th officials be used to adjudicate.

For offside alone it's a seemingly easy fix, do the PGMOL fear the loss of power and control?

Your last sentence sums it up, I think.

They see the whole system, as least from an outsider’s perspective, as a threat rather than a tool to help make their jobs easier.
 




drew

Drew
Oct 3, 2006
22,902
Burgess Hill
This.

Dyche was happy to call out the penalty appeals for his side, but didn't mention the ludicrous decision to rule out Dunk's equaliser.
Why was it ludicrous? I haven't seen any evidence suggesting that he was actually onside or that the lines were drawn in the wrong place. Frustrating as it was, it wasn't a ludicrous decision.
 

beorhthelm

A. Virgo, Football Genius
Jul 21, 2003
35,171
I emailed PBOBE after the disallowed goal at Palace. I asked why the EPL do not insist where the cameras are positioned pitch side and how many. To cut a long response short, he said that due to the difference in stadiums this can't happen. I didn't bother replying as this is bollocks. All the stadiums have pitch long stands. Cameras could and should be placed along the full length of the pitch at intervals that give the best view of the goal line and also perhaps ones at running along the touchline.

Today cameras are small and should be easy to install either on the roof (Bournemouth for example) or on the second tier of the stand. There's no reason there can't be 200 plus cameras along the stand. This would allow the computer to easily use the best placed camera to use when determining offsides.
its probably true, because we can be bloody stupid about things. some genius thought we must use the existing cameras (which move!) not something dedicated. given the stakes and money involved it couldnt be that expensive to fit a permenant array of HD cameras spanning a particular part of the pitch, ensuring there are consistent and properly calibrated images. doesnt need to be 200, 20 would probably do (versus present 4-5). reckon less than a squad player's weekly wage, that'll be in place for years.
 

Seagull58

In the Algarve
Jan 31, 2012
6,946
Vilamoura, Portugal
Umm…I don’t think he was on his way down…more trying to get his head under the ball ..an opinion isn’t it
Yes, he was trying to get his head under the ball to head it backwards. He was shoved in the back, a clear foul all day long. VAR officials seem to have lost the plot totally since Webb was appointed to try and sort the mess out.
 


drew

Drew
Oct 3, 2006
22,902
Burgess Hill
Except for the fact that the image they drew the lines on is clearly after the ball had left Gross's foot?
I've had a look at some of the still photos and am inclined to agree. It is bizarre that with high definition cameras, they can't get a better still shot!
 

Gazwag

5 millionth post poster
Mar 4, 2004
30,041
Bexhill-on-Sea
Media/saudi love child will.always get the decision nowadays too much money and threat involved for a level playing field
 

Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports

Paying the bills

Latest Discussions

Paying the bills

Paying the bills

Paying the bills


Top