VAR - The Great Debate

[Backbiter]

10 minutes ago, east lower said:

Even Mr Gallagher on the 'Dear Dermot' session on Sky Sports News this morning says the decision made in not giving a penalty for the foul on Sterling was incorrect and should have been a penalty.

For more than one, so called 'Elite-Level' referees not to give a penalty smacks of something else less than honest and frank refereeing, with other agenda's in play. 

Another reason to get rid of any non-technical based systems. 

The bar for getting DG to admit that a ref and VAR team have got something wrong is very high. Which tells you how bad that decision was.

The bar for VAR to get a ref to review a penalty call is very very high. And yet we've had several penalties after VAR has intervened this season, which tells you how reluctant refs are to give us pens. 

The bar to get refs - especially the 'elite' Taylor and Oliver - to come to the monitor and be forced to review their own cock-ups  is very, very, very high.  Which explains the notorious Dean hairpull non-intervention and the refusal of VAR to get involved with the Sterling pen yesterday.

[Mark Kelly]

12 minutes ago, Backbiter said:

The bar for getting DG to admit that a ref and VAR team have got something wrong is very high. Which tells you how bad that decision was.

The bar for VAR to get a ref to review a penalty call is very very high. And yet we've had several penalties after VAR has intervened this season, which tells you how reluctant refs are to give us pens. 

The bar to get refs - especially the 'elite' Taylor and Oliver - to come to the monitor and be forced to review their own cock-ups  is very, very, very high.  Which explains the notorious Dean hairpull non-intervention and the refusal of VAR to get involved with the Sterling pen yesterday.

It's the weaseling out that really galls me, where if it's something that benefits us if overruled then the commentators chirp up with " VAR are going with the referee on this instance" but when is Reece James red card for instance then they will overrule the referee. 

What is it they can or they can't? 

It's an agenda that the entire media play along with. 

[paulw66]

34 minutes ago, east lower said:

Even Mr Gallagher on the 'Dear Dermot' session on Sky Sports News this morning says the decision made in not giving a penalty for the foul on Sterling was incorrect and should have been a penalty.

For more than one, so called 'Elite-Level' referees not to give a penalty smacks of something else less than honest and frank refereeing, with other agenda's in play. 

Another reason to get rid of any non-technical based systems. 

100% this. One of the things Wolves said in their statement was how it makes people believe (with some reason) that there is corruption as well as incompetence.

16 minutes ago, Backbiter said:

 

The bar for VAR to get a ref to review a penalty call is very very high. And yet we've had several penalties after VAR has intervened this season, which tells you how reluctant refs are to give us pens. 

 

How quick was the VAR review? It felt like about 5 seconds from checking penalty to decision made. When Chalobah scored, the took 5 minutes to try and find a fault 

[Bob Singleton]

Makes for interesting reading...

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2024/05/15/var-league-table-clubs-premier-league-benefited-wronged/
 

[Backbiter]

17 minutes ago, Bob Singleton said:

Makes for interesting reading...

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2024/05/15/var-league-table-clubs-premier-league-benefited-wronged/
 

It's paywalled. What does it say?

[Backbiter]

 

Note to Chelsea strikers: Don't go near a defender's space.

[east lower]

12 minutes ago, Backbiter said:

 

Note to Chelsea strikers: Don't go near a defender's space.

The Sky presenter on this section is a big Chelsea fan. Used to see him regularly at away games. He hides it quite well though!

[east lower]

44 minutes ago, paulw66 said:

100% this. One of the things Wolves said in their statement was how it makes people believe (with some reason) that there is corruption as well as incompetence.

How quick was the VAR review? It felt like about 5 seconds from checking penalty to decision made. When Chalobah scored, the took 5 minutes to try and find a fault 

The corruption may be just the intangible things such as political influence ‘senior’ referees have on other’s careers etc, but something is happening and not for the good of the game or getting decisions correct. Which after all is said and done, is the biggest part of their jobs.

Being at the ground you don’t know much, but the VAR Decision Being Checked screen appeared and no more than 10-15 second's later the No Foul/Penalty Screen was displayed. Seemed too quick to me, especially for one that was almost a nailed on penalty and for that to be dismissed as a ‘no foul’.

Edited May 20 by east lower

[paulw66]

15 minutes ago, east lower said:

The corruption may be just the intangible things such as political influence ‘senior’ referees have on other’s careers etc, but something is happening and not for the good of the game or getting decisions correct. Which after all is said and done, is the biggest part of their jobs.

Being at the ground you don’t know much, but the VAR Decision Being Checked screen appeared and no more than 10-15 second's later the No Foul/Penalty Screen was displayed. Seemed too quick to me, especially for one that was almost a nailed on penalty and for that to be dismissed as a ‘no foul’.

I have just watched it on Sky.

It's just an absolute 100% penalty. 

[Mark Kelly]

18 minutes ago, east lower said:

The Sky presenter on this section is a big Chelsea fan. Used to see him regularly at away games. He hides it quite well though!

Yes , he always sticks up for us too which is great to see 

[Mark Kelly]

Just now, paulw66 said:

I have just watched it on Sky.

It's just an absolute 100% penalty. 

Literally any other club in the league get that , not us.

I'm sure I bore people rigid on here banging on about it but from memory the last two or three penalties we have actually been awarded were given by VAR review where the ref "missed it" because the lot of them are biased against Chelsea and have been for absolutely years , we see it every game where we are carded for the same type of challenges the opposition aren't . 

Many of our yellow cards are for dissent and kicking the ball away and having watched a lot of football this season I cannot recall a single time another club has been penalised for kicking the ball away , I'm sure it must happen but I haven't seen it and I have seen clubs kick the ball away against us and not been penalised for it. 

[east lower]

7 minutes ago, paulw66 said:

I have just watched it on Sky.

It's just an absolute 100% penalty. 

First time I saw it re-run was this morning and there’s just no debate to be had, 100%er

[east lower]

3 minutes ago, Mark Kelly said:

Literally any other club in the league get that , not us.

I'm sure I bore people rigid on here banging on about it but from memory the last two or three penalties we have actually been awarded were given by VAR review where the ref "missed it" because the lot of them are biased against Chelsea and have been for absolutely years , we see it every game where we are carded for the same type of challenges the opposition aren't . 

Many of our yellow cards are for dissent and kicking the ball away and having watched a lot of football this season I cannot recall a single time another club has been penalised for kicking the ball away , I'm sure it must happen but I haven't seen it and I have seen clubs kick the ball away against us and not been penalised for it. 

Kicking the ball away - One of ours got booked for it yesterday and a Bournemouth player did similarly yesterday and nothing. The full-back who got booked for diving then threw the ball in an opposite direction, nothing. Happens way too often for it to be chance.

The Mikel/Clattenberg incident made things way worse and now it’s institutional.

[Mark Kelly]

Just now, east lower said:

First time I saw it re-run was this morning and there’s just no debate to be had, 100%er

If the PGMOL had anything about them they'd be sacking the idiot VAR operative who deemed that Sterling had inhabited the space of the defender ( who was their CF and made a CF's tackle ) and so it wasn't a penalty as that was complete and utter garbage.

[Sciatika]

58 minutes ago, Backbiter said:

It's paywalled. What does it say?

VAR league table: Which club has been wronged most – and who has benefited (archive.ph)

[martin1905]

1 hour ago, Bob Singleton said:

Makes for interesting reading...

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2024/05/15/var-league-table-clubs-premier-league-benefited-wronged/
 

Does it take into account of the decisions VAR got wrong?

[chara]

As alluded to by others...PGs**t lot stated that Sterling was occupying the defenders space...huh...can someone explain what that actually means?....It's aggravating enough when what appear to be strong penalty claims, as seen by  reasonable folks, are dismissed but it was a case ,I think, a long time ago of things leveling out over a season,,human error or just bad luck with officials not having a clear view but now we seem to be at a stage when the ref can decide as he wants to rather than on what occurs.

The newly constructed English language terms ,,as Mr Blair suggested many years ago.."Newspeak" as I recall...appear to explain incompetence and possible bias (as if) by an organisation who..as mentioned before..are there for the game not the game there for them.( Big salary checks say differently?)

[Mark Kelly]

8 minutes ago, chara said:

As alluded to by others...PGs**t lot stated that Sterling was occupying the defenders space...huh...can someone explain what that actually means?....It's aggravating enough when what appear to be strong penalty claims, as seen by  reasonable folks, are dismissed but it was a case ,I think, a long time ago of things leveling out over a season,,human error or just bad luck with officials not having a clear view but now we seem to be at a stage when the ref can decide as he wants to rather than on what occurs.

The newly constructed English language terms ,,as Mr Blair suggested many years ago.."Newspeak" as I recall...appear to explain incompetence and possible bias (as if) by an organisation who..as mentioned before..are there for the game not the game there for them.( Big salary checks say differently?)

That "occupying the defenders space" is the biggest crock of shit I've ever heard in my life if you'll pardon my expression , whoever came up with that assessment is not fit to referee / operate VAR and should be removed , but knowing the PGMOL he'll get promoted . 

Edited May 20 by Mark Kelly

[Backbiter]

2 hours ago, martin1905 said:

Does it take into account of the decisions VAR got wrong?

I posted earlier in the thread about how inaccurate these tables are, as they take no account of failures by VAR to deal with clear and obvious errors, such as the Sterling pen yesterday, or the encroachment by Soucek at West Ham after Enzo's pen was saved and Soucek cleared the ball.

 

[chara]

15 minutes ago, Mark Kelly said:

That "occupying the defenders space" is the biggest crock of shit I've ever heard in my life if you'll pardon my expression , whoever came up with that assessment is not fit to referee / operate VAR and should be removed , but knowing the PGMOL he'll get promoted . 

It doesn't even make any sense...... "The player wasn't fouled...just a contact thing in a contact sport",,,, not correct as I saw it, but makes sense....Occupying a defenders space surely means no oppo player in the penalty area or to take it a sillier stage further,,in the opponents half.

Off side...as I recall the original change in the "LAW" of the game was to prevent that most reviled of playground players.."The Goal Hanger"...the spirit of the law is correct,,,the application a mockery.

[paulw66]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/cgxx1l4wez7o

No errors in the final round of game.

The Sterling "foul" doesnt get a mention

[Mark Kelly]

8 minutes ago, paulw66 said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/cgxx1l4wez7o

No errors in the final round of game.

The Sterling "foul" doesnt get a mention

It's because we don't count.

No , seriously.

[Ham]

51 minutes ago, paulw66 said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/cgxx1l4wez7o

No errors in the final round of game.

The Sterling "foul" doesnt get a mention

That they insist the Arsenal goal was ok is too much for me to take in.  

[Sciatika]

The Key Match Incidents Panel, a body set up by the Premier League, has five members: three former players and/or coaches and one representative from each of the Premier League and PGMOL. This must be a whole new meaning of the word "independent" that had escaped me.

Edited May 24 by Sciatika

[chara]

@Sciatika.....interesting...my mole Nory at SB has hinted of plans..as yet unwrapped but rumoured,,of a new Professional split off from the PGMOL referred to provisionally...bit vague here,,as PAOA ,Professional Associates of Absolute Oversight...who will be the VAR controlling and operatoring Authority ..separate from the PG lot and consisting of the present main Controlling figures at PG etc and soon to be ex game officials ,,a schism akin to the Henry V111 breakaway from the accepted Church doctrines of that time.

That should do the trick don't you think?