The VAR Thread

TheBlueRooster

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 10, 2005
Messages
2,735
Which is what I am saying.
Sorry I read it wrong.

It's about time the relaxed laws were reintroduced. If I recall the offside law was relaxed after Kevin Keegan had a glorious goal disallowed for Southampton against Man Utd as one of the Southampton players was in an offside position. There were calls for the law to be changed as he wasn't interfering with play. In my opinion, tough.
 

TheHodFather

New Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
12
But if that is the case then the ball hitting the hand anywhere on the pitch , regardless of following actions should be handball.

I just don’t agree that the ball accidentally hitting a hand leading to a goal is handball but anywhere else it isn’t.

This is the bit I struggle with as well. Ball accidentally hits an attacking player's hand and sets up a goalscoring chance which is scored = handball. Ball accidentally hits a defender's hand and prevents a goalscoring chance = no handball. Seems a bit inconsistent...
 

Mattspur

Champions League Finalist
Joined
Jan 7, 2004
Messages
4,087
This is the bit I struggle with as well. Ball accidentally hits an attacking player's hand and sets up a goalscoring chance which is scored = handball. Ball accidentally hits a defender's hand and prevents a goalscoring chance = no handball. Seems a bit inconsistent...
Seems clear and logical to me.
 

Shadydan

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2012
Messages
25,464
This is the bit I struggle with as well. Ball accidentally hits an attacking player's hand and sets up a goalscoring chance which is scored = handball. Ball accidentally hits a defender's hand and prevents a goalscoring chance = no handball. Seems a bit inconsistent...
The first bit is wrong, if the ball hits an attacking player's hand and they benefit from it from scoring then it's chalked off, at least that's what the rules are in the Premier League interpretation of VAR.

It doesn't help when the Prem has a different interpretation of the laws to UEFA and FIFA mind you.
 

WalkerboyUK

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2009
Messages
17,094
Gary Neville (and a lot of other pundits) needs to get his head around what VAR stands for - Video ASSISTANT Referee.
It's not a Video Referee, it's there to assist the on field referee and spot things he might have missed, such as the Laporte handball.
Neville was prattling on after the match about the Lamela incident in the first half, saying that the VAR official in the studio should have been stronger, and should have over-ruled Michael Oliver.
That's not what VAR is there for though!
A VAR official cannot contact the referee and say "you got that wrong, it's a foul".
The referee can refer to VAR, and ask for an opinion but at the end of the day, the ref has to believe in his own convictions.
That's exactly why the Lamela incident wasn't deemed a foul and a penalty wasn't given.
Michael Oliver saw the incident, decided it was 50/50 and let play continue. At most he may have gone to VAR for confirmation, but even then, VAR could only have suggested it was a foul and that he might want to review.
If VAR is going to question every decision the on-field referee makes, then what's the point of having the on-field referee?

As for the handball, yes it's a bit of an extreme rule now that it's been modified, but accidental or not, the direction of the ball completely changed, favourably for City. If it doesn't hit Laporte then it's heading right to Ndombele who will then take the ball up field. Instead it changes direction and ends up with Jesus, who sticks it in the net.
No different to Rose conceding a penalty against City in the CL - changed the direction of a goal-bound effort.

We know full well that, across the entire season, we're bound to be on the receiving end of some VAR decisions we don't like.
 
Last edited:

FibreOpticJesus

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2005
Messages
995
Gary Neville (and a lot of other pundits) needs to get his head around what VAR stands for - Video ASSISTANT Referee.
It's not a Video Referee, it's there to assist the on field referee and spot things he might have missed, such as the Laporte handball.
Neville was prattling on after the match about the Lamela incident in the first half, saying that the VAR official in the studio should have been stronger, and should have over-ruled Michael Oliver.
That's not what VAR is there for though!
A VAR official cannot contact the referee and say "you got that wrong, it's a foul".
The referee can refer to VAR, and ask for an opinion but at the end of the day, the ref has to believe in his own convictions.
That's exactly why the Lamela incident wasn't deemed a foul and a penalty wasn't given.
Michael Oliver saw the incident, decided it was 50/50 and let play continue. At most he may have gone to VAR for confirmation, but even then, VAR could only have suggested it was a foul and that he might want to review.
If VAR is going to question every decision the on-field referee makes, then what's the point of having the on-field referee?

As for the handball, yes it's a bit of an extreme rule now that it's been modified, but accidental or not, the direction of the ball completely changed, favourably for City. If it doesn't hi Laporte then it's heading right to Ndombele who will then take the ball up field. Instead it changes direction and ends up with Jesus, who sticks it in the net.
No different to Rose conceding a penalty against City in the CL - changed the direction of a goal-bound effort.

We know full well that, across the entire season, we're bound to be on the receiving end of some VAR decisions we don't like.
Excellent comments. My only bugbear is that in the ground you have no idea what is going on. We are treated with contempt by the authorities by not displaying what the Video referee is looking at. I have not seen anywhere where we have been given a definitive reason as to why it cannot be shown. The paying public are entitled to see the replays. What other entertainment would you pay to see and then only see the bits they want you to see? Oh and Liverpool and Man U should be forced to put up screens to accommodate this.
 

WalkerboyUK

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2009
Messages
17,094
Excellent comments. My only bugbear is that in the ground you have no idea what is going on. We are treated with contempt by the authorities by not displaying what the Video referee is looking at. I have not seen anywhere where we have been given a definitive reason as to why it cannot be shown. The paying public are entitled to see the replays. What other entertainment would you pay to see and then only see the bits they want you to see? Oh and Liverpool and Man U should be forced to put up screens to accommodate this.
Totally agree that there needs to be better communication within the stadium about what's going on.
The replays should be shown on screens and if clubs don't have the facilities for that, then they need to catch up with the times!
 

arunspurs

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2012
Messages
5,517
My take :

VAR should only be used when there is a Yes/no situation. It should not used in places where there is a subjective call to be made.

Did ball cross the goal line ? Yes/No - Use VAR
Did Ref sent off the wrong player ? Yes/No - Use VAR
Was there a offside ? Yes/No - Use VAR

Did Danny Rose intentionally or unintentionally handled ball - Different refs would answer differently ? then dont use VAR
Did Sissoko handled ball or chest first so no hand ball - Different refs would answer differently ? then dont use VAR
Did Lamela do enough to foul Rodri on corner - Different refs would answer differently ? then dont use VAR
Did Modric stepping on opponent leg intentionally or unintentionally- Different refs would answer differently ? then dont use VAR

Problem is, FIFA changed the Handball rule so VAR need not make subjective decision on it. Hit the hand of defender - hand ball. This is classic case of Tail wagging dog.

FIFA should cancel the handball rule and mandate VAR should not make a decision on handball and leave it to main referee.
 

nailsy

SC Supporter
Joined
Jul 24, 2005
Messages
22,146
This is the bit I struggle with as well. Ball accidentally hits an attacking player's hand and sets up a goalscoring chance which is scored = handball. Ball accidentally hits a defender's hand and prevents a goalscoring chance = no handball. Seems a bit inconsistent...
I agree, that it's inconsistent, but I think the rule has been written to make the game fairer. We don't want attacking players to start aiming crosses at defenders arms to get a cheap penalty like we saw in the Champions League final. Likewise attacking players shouldn't be able to control the ball with a part of the body that they aren't allowed to score with. Defenders are also a lot more likely to accidentally handle the ball in the area as they have to try to block shots/crosses from close range.
 

buckley

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2012
Messages
979
I am loving all the salty remarks about how unlucky city were because of var and this city love in by the media is sickening in the extreme. You can bet your bottom dollar that if that was us with the disallowed goal the comments would have been along the lines of
"well that's the rules " " its the same for everybody " " city deserved that bit of luck " thankfully we now have a rule with no ambiguity
if the ball striking a hand results in a goal whether on purpose or accident it will be ruled no goal.
I feel overall we will be beneficiary's of this rule and it will stop some of the downright disgraceful referee decisions as it is not in their hands . Without var a goal would have been awarded but the ref does not get to decide thank god long live var.
As one newspaper writer said the ball brushed Laportes hand when in fact it altered the course of the ball as without the deflection it would have gone to Ndombele .LONG LIVE VAR the best thing to happen in years and as for slowing the game or altering goal celebrations I personally have already got used to it and am prepared to be made look a dick when celebrating a later goal ruled out.
 

Mattspur

Champions League Finalist
Joined
Jan 7, 2004
Messages
4,087
My take :



Problem is, FIFA changed the Handball rule so VAR need not make subjective decision on it. Hit the hand of defender - hand ball. This is classic case of Tail wagging dog.

FIFA should cancel the handball rule and mandate VAR should not make a decision on handball and leave it to main referee.
o_O Errr... That's not the handball rule.
 
Last edited:

SirHarryHotspur

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 9, 2017
Messages
869
Think what you like about VAR but goals that contravene laws of the game will rightly be ruled out, so no more hard luck stories about being beaten by an offside goal etc. , sure every club will get goals ruled out.
For so long professional footballers have spent so much time trying to cheat the rules now they are going to get found out , two spring to mind Maradona against England and Terry "Woolwich" Henry against Ireland.
 

easley91

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2011
Messages
7,662
Right, can we clear something up here? How are we pronouncing VAR? Some say it as a word like 'far' with a 'v', some say the letters individually. Which is it?
 

GMI

G.
Joined
Dec 13, 2006
Messages
863
It’s all bollocks. People don’t like change. People also don’t like goals being given when there was an infringement. People need to suck it up. Under the old rules we would have lost and Spurs fans would be complaining about a handball while fans of other teams would be taking the piss. Bollocks to them. We weren’t screwed over, neither were City. Give VAR more time to settle and people will treat it as standard much the same as they have previous rules. People love moaning. People are adaptable.



People. What a great word. People.
Agreed. However, the chances are we wouldn't have even picked up on the handball anyway. No one was claiming handball. They showed a replay after the goal and I certainly wasn't shouting for handball. I doubt even Laporte knew it hit his arm.

Anyway...VAR will be fine once people get used to it. This time next year we won't know how we coped without it..just like t'internet, mobile phones and hipster ales.
 

Dougal

Staff
Staff
Joined
Jun 4, 2004
Messages
52,405
Agreed. However, the chances are we wouldn't have even picked up on the handball anyway. No one was claiming handball. They showed a replay after the goal and I certainly wasn't shouting for handball. I doubt even Laporte knew it hit his arm.

Anyway...VAR will be fine once people get used to it. This time next year we won't know how we coped without it..just like t'internet, mobile phones and hipster ales.
VAR picked up on it within seconds. This forum alone analyses everything to within an inch of its life. Someone would be complaining before the dust had settled.
 

spursfan77

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2005
Messages
20,345
Excellent comments. My only bugbear is that in the ground you have no idea what is going on. We are treated with contempt by the authorities by not displaying what the Video referee is looking at. I have not seen anywhere where we have been given a definitive reason as to why it cannot be shown. The paying public are entitled to see the replays. What other entertainment would you pay to see and then only see the bits they want you to see? Oh and Liverpool and Man U should be forced to put up screens to accommodate this.
I thought they said they were going to show the video in the ground before the season started. But alas no.
 

Tucker

Jizz Rhino
Joined
Jul 15, 2013
Messages
7,443
Excellent comments. My only bugbear is that in the ground you have no idea what is going on. We are treated with contempt by the authorities by not displaying what the Video referee is looking at. I have not seen anywhere where we have been given a definitive reason as to why it cannot be shown. The paying public are entitled to see the replays. What other entertainment would you pay to see and then only see the bits they want you to see? Oh and Liverpool and Man U should be forced to put up screens to accommodate this.
I understand where you’re coming from, but there have always been contentious decisions that the crowd had no idea what happened, all you ever had to go on was a vague hand signal from the ref. I don’t see why this has to be different. They signal for tv ref, and signal that it’s handball/offside/etc. If there’s a big screen, sure show it, if not, that’s the individual clubs problem.
 
Top