Art Vandelay_
TheBrownDog
- Oct 28, 2012
- 104,220
- 141,853
- AFL Club
- Geelong
- Other Teams
- Bushrangers - Tottenham
VAR Thread
- Thread starter Zidane98
- Start date
- Tagged users None
moomba
TheBrownDog
moomba
TheBrownDog
moomba
TheBrownDog
Which makes Riley's refusal to encourage the use of pitch side monitors where the actual ref makes the decision bizarre.
- Dec 22, 2009
- 62,606
- 36,665
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
- Other Teams
- Matildas/Socceroos/LFC/MVFC/RCStrasbourg
- Thread starter
- #155
Complete opposite in the A League where the monitors are hmused nearly every game.
Last edited:
Look in all honesty it’s a useful part of our game when the transparent process is underlined and evidence of consistent application is apparent. I mean this in terms of it not being at the whim and interpretations of a second referee who escapes genuine scrutiny and fan discontent from his far away palace.
I didn’t favour the system before but in the light of the FA’s recent transparent approach I’m on the path of conversion. Really impressed they released photos of the VAR room, it does allow us viewers an opportunity to see where the decisions are being made.
I didn’t favour the system before but in the light of the FA’s recent transparent approach I’m on the path of conversion. Really impressed they released photos of the VAR room, it does allow us viewers an opportunity to see where the decisions are being made.
Bradesmaen
TheBrownDog
Let's start a petition to rename this the Liverpool thread
- Oct 20, 2014
- 18,360
- 19,488
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
- Other Teams
- Liverpool
Well it can’t be the Everton thread because no one would post in it
- Dec 22, 2009
- 62,606
- 36,665
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
- Other Teams
- Matildas/Socceroos/LFC/MVFC/RCStrasbourg
- Thread starter
- #159
Should be LeicstVAR City FC thread. They have gone up 2 positions thanks to VAR.
Last edited:
Bradesmaen
TheBrownDog
We'd also have to look like scoring a goal.
moomba
TheBrownDog
Would be a big improvement
Not so much VAR related, but what is the definition of encroachment in regards to penalties. Specifically looking at the Norwich v Arsenal penalty incident.
Looking at the replay, while the Norwich players body and legs were leaning over the line, looking at his feet he hadn't actually taken a step inside the penalty area (i.e feet touching the ground in the area)? If its just leaning in, then there will be encroachment every penalty as all players basically start in that position??
Looking at the replay, while the Norwich players body and legs were leaning over the line, looking at his feet he hadn't actually taken a step inside the penalty area (i.e feet touching the ground in the area)? If its just leaning in, then there will be encroachment every penalty as all players basically start in that position??
Current offside interpretation is terrible. Unless the technology can be that precise then the interpretation cannot be.
I like what Graeme Souness said (I think it was Souness) and if any part of the attackers body is behind the defender then it should be play on. Or at the Least some tolerance margin
I like what Graeme Souness said (I think it was Souness) and if any part of the attackers body is behind the defender then it should be play on. Or at the Least some tolerance margin
- Mar 4, 2002
- 16,164
- 40,027
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Other Teams
- Liverpool, Red Sox, Melbourne Storm
It all depends on whether you want to give the benefit of doubt to the attacker or defender. Reality is the linesman has no hope of making the correct call on these tight ones, so saying leave it to the officials is moot as they would just be guessing
It should only be overturned if it's a clear and obvious error by the linesman. A player being a few mils offside isn't clear and obvious IMO.
The FA obviously clearly needs to have a margin to determine a clear and obvious, what that is and should be would be up to them, but for all we can ask for now is for it to be consistent, which is exactly what they are doing atm.
On SM-A505YN using BigFooty.com mobile app
The FA obviously clearly needs to have a margin to determine a clear and obvious, what that is and should be would be up to them, but for all we can ask for now is for it to be consistent, which is exactly what they are doing atm.
On SM-A505YN using BigFooty.com mobile app
moomba
TheBrownDog
Changes to offside coming hopefully.
www.bbc.com
Football law-makers to give VAR guidance
Football's rule-making body says the video assistant referee should not be "too forensic" over offsides - and should only be used to reverse "clear and obvious" errors.
www.bbc.com
- Dec 22, 2009
- 62,606
- 36,665
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
- Other Teams
- Matildas/Socceroos/LFC/MVFC/RCStrasbourg
- Thread starter
- #169
Rule should be written so the benefit goes to the attacker. Offside only given if it's visible to the naked eye.
ossie_21
Premium Platinum
I didn't expect so many very marginal calls within quick succession, but I'm also not surprised it's still an issue when VAR is there for "obvious errors" for one thing & than absolutely anything for offside
That’s a very broad definition though. It needs to be hard and fast but maybe they need to allow a 10cm margin so that anything given as offside definitely is. Under 10 cm the attacker gets the benefit
- Dec 22, 2009
- 62,606
- 36,665
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
- Other Teams
- Matildas/Socceroos/LFC/MVFC/RCStrasbourg
- Thread starter
- #172
VAR: Attacking possession phase explained
www.premierleague.com
Good explanation of whst VAR looks at. Only the immediate phase of play is looked at. For the LFC opener vs Wolves VAR got it spot on. Lallana passed to Mane, VAR can only rule on those two things. Makes sense becase if you didnt limit VAR to the immwdiate phase of play you could go back endlessly and find all sorts of minor infringements.
moomba
TheBrownDog
Like they have on numerous occasions this season like the Chelsea example I gave earlier.VAR: Attacking possession phase explained
Good explanation of whst VAR looks at. Only the immediate phase of play is looked at. For the LFC opener vs Wolves VAR got it spot on. Lallana passed to Mane, VAR can only rule on those two things. Makes sense becase if you didnt limit VAR to the immwdiate phase of play you could go back endlessly and find all sorts of minor infringements.
It was explained at that time that as the defence didn't have the opportunity to reset, VAR could rule.
A phase of play isn't limited to the shot or the pass before it. Which is exactly what it says in the link you provided.
Last edited:
- Dec 22, 2009
- 62,606
- 36,665
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
- Other Teams
- Matildas/Socceroos/LFC/MVFC/RCStrasbourg
- Thread starter
- #174
Former referee gives verdict on van Dijk 'hand ball' in Liverpool vs Wolves
Virgil van Dijk was accused of handling the ball during the build-up to Sadio Mane's winner for Liverpool against Wolves on Sunday
www.google.com
Also your Chelsea example isnt comparable. The player that crossed the ball was the one that was offside.
VAR could only rule on Lallana and Mane. It was correct to reverse the Lallana handball call.
moomba
TheBrownDog
Former referee gives verdict on van Dijk 'hand ball' in Liverpool vs Wolves
Virgil van Dijk was accused of handling the ball during the build-up to Sadio Mane's winner for Liverpool against Wolves on Sunday
Also your Chelsea example isnt comparable. The player that crossed the ball was the one that was offside.
VAR could only rule on Lallana and Mane. It was correct to reverse the Lallana handball call.
Absolutely wrong. Your own link explains perfectly that VAR is not limited to the shot or the pass leading to the shot.
So many examples prove that.
I think Dermott Gallagher has agreed with every VAR decision so far. It's been a bit of a joke for months.
