VAR (Video Assistant Referee)

Good for the game?.

  • Yes

    Votes: 42 30.7%
  • No

    Votes: 95 69.3%

  • Total voters
    137

Grey Fox

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2008
Messages
3,860
I might have missed it , but who was at the VAR end of the operation the other night? because they got everything wrong (despite what BC says) Llorente was tripped before he made any contact with the Rochdale player so we should have had a penalty if Lamela hadn't scored, The Son pen should have stood, even Graham Poll has said so, so do the rules!, but the penalty shouldn't have been given the foul started outside the box and should have been a free kick, but Moura's was a pen and not given. Total f*** up IMHO.

If you have totally incompetent Referees managing the VAR you are always going to have issues.
 

worcestersauce

"I'm no optimist I'm just a prisoner of hope
Joined
Jan 23, 2006
Messages
17,218
I might have missed it , but who was at the VAR end of the operation the other night? because they got everything wrong (despite what BC says) Llorente was tripped before he made any contact with the Rochdale player so we should have had a penalty if Lamela hadn't scored, The Son pen should have stood, even Graham Poll has said so, so do the rules!, but the penalty shouldn't have been given the foul started outside the box and should have been a free kick, but Moura's was a pen and not given. Total f*** up IMHO.

If you have totally incompetent Referees managing the VAR you are always going to have issues.
Which is why var should never be used to get the operators opinion, Llorente's goal was his opinion and so should have stood.
I'm still not convinced about Son's penalty, Poll said it should have stood but that was just his opinion, Foy didn't and the referee on the night said it shouldn't and I believe their views are as valid and more valid respectively.
 

Archibald&Crooks

Aegina Expat
Admin
Joined
Feb 1, 2005
Messages
45,274
Fifa president Gianni Infantino defended the time taken by the VAR to review decisions.

"Let's look at the facts," he said. "We've analysed almost 1,000 games and the reality is you lose an average of 90 seconds per game. Is that too long? Perhaps.

"But we lose an average of seven minutes per game due to throw-ins. If we lose seven minutes on throw-ins, we can lose 90 seconds to get decisions right."

Seven minutes? Fucking do something about THAT you bald headed twat. But regardless, seven minutes for throw ins, however many for corners, another however many for injuries and free kicks, more for goals scored, even more for substitutions and now a couple of minutes for VAR..........And all they add on at the end is two to four minutes?

Does a game actually last a fucking hour? And we 'play' too many games. It's laughable.
 

Jgplk1

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2005
Messages
785
I was watching Taiwanese channel that seemed to show Son was onside against Swansea yesterday. The commentary wasn't on in the bar though. Did they talk about the incident on the UK channels ?
 
Joined
Jan 30, 2005
Messages
7,464
I was watching Taiwanese channel that seemed to show Son was onside against Swansea yesterday. The commentary wasn't on in the bar though. Did they talk about the incident on the UK channels ?
The were going on about the video evidence being inconclusive. I thought you can either be onside or offside.:banghead:
 

Jgplk1

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2005
Messages
785
The were going on about the video evidence being inconclusive. I thought you can either be onside or offside.:banghead:
The channel I watched it on showed the line and it looked like he was right on it, but still onside. Would've been a lovely goal
 
Last edited:

Dundalk_Spur

The only Spur in the village
Joined
Jul 17, 2008
Messages
4,114
FA trial VAR and PL teams decide that's its not ready.

FIFA see this ......


"Let's use this in the first of two crooked World Cups nobody will mind"
 

nailsy

SC Supporter
Joined
Jul 24, 2005
Messages
18,422
The were going on about the video evidence being inconclusive. I thought you can either be onside or offside.:banghead:
I think it depends where you put the line. If you put it against his feet he's probably level, but if you put it against his head or shoulders he's probably just offside. There was probably an inch or two in it either way. Was it a clear and obvious error? He wasn't clearly onside, so maybe not.
 

Gb160

I could catch a monkey
Joined
Jun 20, 2012
Messages
12,085
I think it depends where you put the line. If you put it against his feet he's probably level, but if you put it against his head or shoulders he's probably just offside. There was probably an inch or two in it either way. Was it a clear and obvious error? He wasn't clearly onside, so maybe not.
Rather than spamming the FACup thread I suppose this belongs in here:

screenshot001.png

screenshot000.png


I honestly don't think theres even a debate to be had on this one.
Even from the first image alone you can clearly see that Son's head and torso are offside, can't believe some are suggesting that the images have been altered by the BBC to support VAR lol.
 

Jgplk1

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2005
Messages
785
Rather than spamming the FACup thread I suppose this belongs in here:

View attachment 36710
View attachment 36711

I honestly don't think theres even a debate to be had on this one.
Even from the first image alone you can clearly see that Son's head and torso are offside, can't believe some are suggesting that the images have been altered by the BBC to support VAR lol.
Yeah this isn't the picture down on TV out here. The line they had made it look onside.

This looks offside for sure. Shame as it was a really well taken goal.
 

Gb160

I could catch a monkey
Joined
Jun 20, 2012
Messages
12,085
Yeah this isn't the picture down on TV out here. The line they had made it look onside.

This looks offside for sure. Shame as it was a really well taken goal.
Definitely, it was an excellent finish.
What makes it worse is if Son had held his run for that split second, he's easily fast enough to beat that CB anyway.
 

BehindEnemyLines

Twisting a Melon with the Rev. Black Grape
Joined
Apr 13, 2006
Messages
1,639
Rather than spamming the FACup thread I suppose this belongs in here:

View attachment 36710
View attachment 36711

I honestly don't think theres even a debate to be had on this one.
Even from the first image alone you can clearly see that Son's head and torso are offside, can't believe some are suggesting that the images have been altered by the BBC to support VAR lol.
I think from the first pic it is just about offside and a correct call, but I am very dubious about the 2nd pic as the cut of the grass appears to bow and isn't straight. Was the 2nd pic manipulated in some way? Also, I notice that the three players to the left look at exactly the same perspective, whereas Son and the two defenders have shifted - very odd
 
Last edited:

Spurs 1961

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2012
Messages
3,867
I am not really sure how conclusive the film is. What I can say is that the on field decision was not clearly and obviously wrong therefore sticking with the decision of the referee is the right result. In cricket this is the approach taken and I think it is a good one as it keeps the officials on the pitch in charge of the game. the problem with our Rochdale game was decisions were overturned on less than obvious evidence which undermines the match officials completely
 

Armstrong_11

Spurs makes me happy, you... not so much :)
Joined
Aug 3, 2011
Messages
6,383
I think we need a Son vs VAR thread.

I am thinking this VAR might be racist. :ROFLMAO:

I think eventually... VAR will kill off players like Son, Keano who plays on the shoulder of defenders. The kind of players who always walk the line between onside and offside. Thankfully for Son... He has more then that in his locker.
 

Gb160

I could catch a monkey
Joined
Jun 20, 2012
Messages
12,085
I think from the first pic it is just about offside and a correct call, but I am very dubious about the 2nd pic as the cut of the grass appears to bow and isn't straight. Was the 2nd pic manipulated in some way? Also, I notice that the three players to the left look at exactly the same perspective, whereas Son and the two defenders have shifted - very odd
What are you going on about lol?
Cut of grass? Dubious? Very odd?
The second image is computer generated from the first image...it takes reference points, i.e. Sons head, to show that he is clearly offside...not just about, look at his head in the first pic, compared to the heads of the defenders....there's no just offside about it, I have no idea why people are having trouble just accepting it tbh, thats the only thing that's odd imo.
 
Last edited:
Top