Spurs and VAR

[C0YS]

VAR is not the problem. The people looking at the monitors are.

VAR has been more successful in other leagues.

I dunno. People always say this. But I've yet to meet an italian or spaniard who is enthusiastic about VAR. In both countries VAR is very controversial and in both countries it is applied better than here.

 

[Spurslove]

VAR is not the problem. The people looking at the monitors are.

VAR has been more successful in other leagues.

That makes our own system an utter shambles then. If it's working that much better in other countries, then why the hell are we not following their example?

We have put together a system which nobody seems able to administer correctly, despite years of study, meetings, millions of pounds on research, trials and re-trials and we STILL can't get it to work properly. VAR is actually ruining the game as an entertainment and creating more controversy and outrage than was ever necessary amongst the national fan-base, and fans are actually turning away from football as a result of this mass incompetence because their enjoyment of football is being eroded by the often nonsensical VAR decisions...and frankly I have every sympathy for them.

.

 

[MR_BEN]

But that seems a grey area because if a goal was scored during that same period, it would be ruled out.

Depends which team score the goal.... had City scored during the review period the goal would have stood and there would have been no penalty.
Had spurs scored - it would have been ruled out.
I guess this is why they allow play to continue. A penalty isn’t necessarily a goal... so it’s just like playing advantage for a long phase of play....

 

[buckley]

Because the Aurier penalty took so long it was not a clear and obvious error .
Perhaps in these type of situations there should be a time limit to decide otherwise the refs decision should stand .
Setting the time limit is the problem perhaps 30 secs is reasonable time to decide .
I know that sometimes there will be times that under two or three minutes you could get a different decision but to speed up the game and stop the sought if thing that happened regard Aurier happening .
If it was clear and obvious 10 secs would have been enough time .

 

[HedgieSpur]

Completely agree. If it takes more than 30 seconds, then by definition it was neither clear nor obvious and the on play decision should stand. It means we'd have better flow to the game and reviews would be very quick

 

[Riandor]

The issue was that VAR had to wait for the ball to be in a neutral area (such as out for a throw in, or not in an attacking phase). This exsacerbated the issue because the decision was made earlier than the 1min 55secs.

Frankly once VAR has a decision, it should tell the ref to stop play immediately, because why wouldn't you want a penalty?!

 

[Spurslove]

Depends which team score the goal.... had City scored during the review period the goal would have stood and there would have been no penalty.
Had spurs scored - it would have been ruled out.
I guess this is why they allow play to continue. A penalty isn’t necessarily a goal... so it’s just like playing advantage for a long phase of play....

This shows just what a complete nonsense VAR is. "Had City scored during the review period the goal would have stood and there would have been no penalty". That's beyond ridiculous and I'm almost at the point where I no longer give a shit. They're making up the rules as they go. These bloody refs have created something they can't control with this fucking VAR bullshit. The toothpaste is out of the tube and they can't get it back in.

Imagine how we'd feel if we'd scored a fantastic and perfectly legal goal in those two minutes, only to have the idiot in the VAR box tell us it had to be ruled out because the ref had gotten a penalty decision wrong two minutes previously !!!

Jesus, I can imagine the entire Spurs fan-base going into meltdown. Maybe that's what they want, to create controversy and debate? Fuck me, I wouldn't put anything past them.

SCRAP VAR and SAVE THE GAME !!!

 

[Gassin's finest]

Ranking the Premier League clubs by who has been most affected by VAR - Planet Football

The implementation of VAR has been one of the biggest talking points of the 2019-20 Premier League season, but which clubs have been most affected by its use?

www.planetfootball.com

 

[allatsea]

I thought the decision by VAR (or rather the officials watching VAR) not to allow Kane’s goal but to say it was handball by Moura was an fing disgrace. How can anyone say with any certainty Moura touched the ball with his hand/arm ?

 

[Deleted member 27995]

Ranking the Premier League clubs by who has been most affected by VAR - Planet Football

The implementation of VAR has been one of the biggest talking points of the 2019-20 Premier League season, but which clubs have been most affected by its use?

www.planetfootball.com

They were saved against Manchester United in June as a late penalty awarded for a foul on Bruno Fernandes was overturned

Saved? Yeah, from the ineptitude of Moss, again.

 

[doctor stefan Freud]

Ranking the Premier League clubs by who has been most affected by VAR - Planet Football

The implementation of VAR has been one of the biggest talking points of the 2019-20 Premier League season, but which clubs have been most affected by its use?

www.planetfootball.com

Utd leading the table for greatest beneficiaries of VAR- never saw that coming

 

[theShiznit]

I see Leicester are on zero... The thing is the overturning of Son's goal Vs Leicester. (was it Son or Aurier with Son offside by 1mm?)
Anyway that changed the whole complexion of a game we were in total control of it lifted the crowd and the course of the game changed on that decision.

 

[Saoirse]

I see Leicester are on zero... The thing is the overturning of Son's goal Vs Leicester. (was it Son or Aurier with Son offside by 1mm?)
Anyway that changed the whole complexion of a game we were in total control of it lifted the crowd and the course of the game changed on that decision.

That's not just on VAR though. That's because the squad is mentally weak, just like we saw again against Sheffield United.

 

[theShiznit]

That's not just on VAR though. That's because the squad is mentally weak, just like we saw again against Sheffield United.

Crowd reaction was a factor in that game though.

Also, no mention in that article of Sanchez's goal that was ruled out for handball (although although i can't remember if that was league or cup?)

 

[Cambridge Spur]

I said this in the match day forum and I reiterate....what do the powers that be want for the game? Using the current ‘rules’ I honestly believe that if you really wanted to, you could find a reason to disallow every goal ever scored. At the moment it just feels like someone is sitting there watching the game and simply going ‘let’s find something wrong with this and rule it out’. It is still so random, checking some goals and not others. Every time we play now I just don’t celebrate a ‘goal’ like I would have done in the past. It makes the game so boring and frustrating. It needs to be drastically revamped or even cut altogether. I would suggest the ref being in complete control and if he was concerned that he had missed something he asks to see it again on a pitch side monitor.

 

[BringBack_leGin]

I wonder if, rather than referees, the var official was an ex player, it would improve the application of the rules?

It’s a completely different job to which referees were trained for, so it’s no surprise they can’t apply it well. Especially doesn’t help when they guy at Stockley Park is Clattenburg mkii Mike Oliver who wants it to be all about him, so will almost certainly make the decision that’ll cause the most discussion.

I got so angry seeing Dermot defending the decision by saying that it’s the fault of the rule, as it’s the right call by the letter of the law, because like Dean Smith said, I’m yet to see an angle that shows the ball making clear contact with the attackers arm. Oliver has ruled out a goal that the ref gave, and that Sheffield didn’t appeal against, after a long VAR review which wasn’t in any way conclusive in the direction of the decision.

 

[buckley]

In my opinion the only thing that needs changing is the hand ball rule leading to a goal and instead of " intentional or unintentional " it needs to be " intentional hand ball " leaving out the unintentional bit .

 

[Gbspurs]

VAR needs to remember why it was brought in, it's was to help referees by correct obvious mistakes. Not armpits offside, not handball where the ball strokes a hair on their arm by accident.

The way this should work is simple, the rules should be in place to support the ref and contribute to the flow of the game. Offside rule should be changed to feet only and the tech improved to make it clearer where an offence has been caused. If the tech isn't good enough then make the rule broader (daylight/clear foot infront etc)

Handball should be deliberate offences or ones that directly influence a goal or goalscoring chances (deflections). If the technology can't tell if an arm has been hit then it didn't impact the goal.

Finally VAR should refer all decisions that aren't black and white to the referee for video review where they think they need to.

For example, Ref sees a foul and gives a yellow, VAR checks (all checks must be concluded in 1 minute) and if it feels there is cause for a red it goes "you might want to take a closer look at that one buddy", ref stops the game and reviews the pitch side cameras. Tannoys and screen inform fans that a referee review is underway. Final decision lies with the ref with a view that if a decision can't be made in 1 minute then the orignal call remains.

Why is that so bloody difficult?

 

[BringBack_leGin]

In my opinion the only thing that needs changing is the hand ball rule leading to a goal and instead of " intentional or unintentional " it needs to be " intentional hand ball " leaving out the unintentional bit .

Problem is, if there’s an accidental handball which causes the ball to change direction and that leads to a goal, it probably shouldn’t be allowed. My issue here is that even if it did hit Lucas arm, which again I haven’t seen a conclusive angle on, the ball ricocheting to Kane was happening regardless. Its not like his arm was miles away from his body or like there was a movement with it towards the ball.

 

[glacierSpurs]

It was obvious that Lucas had not touch the ball. I had no idea why the officials must always err on the side of the goal-scoring team and give such benefits of doubts to the goal-concede team.

If it is non-conclusive, like when you couldn't even stupidly draw all those lines to help you, the decision should fall back to pre-VAR days, and the goal should stand.