VAR - The Great Debate

[flllerywhereru2]

So once again we get the rough end of the VAR deal, once...Ok can happen...twice pretty unlucky but possible...three...four....can only mean one thing...Liverpool are involved....when you factor in this was the ref at Spurs when they played them...the fuss that Liverpool made has paid off royally....

[Mark Kelly]

Just now, flllerywhereru2 said:

So once again we get the rough end of the VAR deal, once...Ok can happen...twice pretty unlucky but possible...three...four....can only mean one thing...Liverpool are involved....when you factor in this was the ref at Spurs when they played them...the fuss that Liverpool made has paid off royally....

Which is exactly why a mumbling bumbling "maybe" Pochettino has to do better by us .

If he doesn't care , and he clearly doesn't , can't he just fuck off and let someone who does come in? 

[My Blood Is Blue]

7 minutes ago, flllerywhereru2 said:

So once again we get the rough end of the VAR deal, once...Ok can happen...twice pretty unlucky but possible...three...four....can only mean one thing...Liverpool are involved....when you factor in this was the ref at Spurs when they played them...the fuss that Liverpool made has paid off royally....

When even the pundits are suggesting we were hard done by, vs Liverpool, you know it’s bad.

Will the PGMOL come out and say anything, let alone apologise? Not a hope in hell.

As @Mark Kelly has said, why the hell has our manager not come out and kicked off? He can easily say, we were terrible and didn’t deserve anything out the game, however, we need the games refereed correctly and fairly and this match was not.

He’ll get a fine, may even get a touch line ban, but if you’re not afraid to risk those things for your club, then how much do you really care?!

[Dwmh]

2 hours ago, My Blood Is Blue said:

As @Mark Kelly has said, why the hell has our manager not come out and kicked off? He can easily say, we were terrible and didn’t deserve anything out the game, however, we need the games refereed correctly and fairly and this match was not.

 

Because it looks like really sour grapes in a game we were totally outplayed in, finished 4-1 and they hit the woodwork 4 times if I counted right.
Best say nothing.

There was one clearly bad decision (Nkunku pen) and that definitely would have relied on VAR as no ref can see that clearly.

[Bones]

He did protest fairly fiercely for the foul on Nkunku

[Mark Kelly]

26 minutes ago, Dwmh said:

Because it looks like really sour grapes in a game we were totally outplayed in, finished 4-1 and they hit the woodwork 4 times if I counted right.
Best say nothing.

There was one clearly bad decision (Nkunku pen) and that definitely would have relied on VAR as no ref can see that clearly.

Do you think Jose would have said nothing , sucked it up and meekly moved on?

Nobody is mental enough to argue that we weren't comprehensively outplayed it was as plain as the nose on our faces their side was coached and ours wasn't . 

Our denied penalties were penalties particularly when viewed in comparison to their penalty and that's the issue , we want even handed fair refereeing not one eyed Liverpool good Chelsea bad officiating .  I don't care if we don't get ours if they don't get theirs 

I don't care if we get booked for dissent or kicking the ball away or late challenges or simulation if they do too but it wasn't like that was it? It was a referee hand picked by the PGMOL to get the result they wanted and he delivered in spades. 

[Dwmh]

2 minutes ago, Mark Kelly said:

Our denied penalties were penalties particularly when viewed in comparison to their penalty and that's the issue , we want even handed fair refereeing not one eyed Liverpool good Chelsea bad officiating .  I don't care if we don't get ours if they don't get theirs 

One wasn't, one certainly was, and one was only going to be given if the ref saw it clearly which neither he nor the live TV cameras did.
The Liverpool one was the same as the Gallagher one, but the ref did have a clear view of that.

There is only one significantly bad decision in the match.  Everything else is the kind of randomness that makes football a great game, including the random hitting of our woodwork.

4 minutes ago, Mark Kelly said:

Nobody is mental enough to argue that we weren't comprehensively outplayed it was as plain as the nose on our faces their side was coached and ours wasn't . 

Quite so it is fortunate that this misjudgement came in a game where it did not matter.
 

5 minutes ago, Mark Kelly said:

Do you think Jose would have said nothing , sucked it up and meekly moved on?

No, but Conte or CA or TT would.  I'm not sure that is JM's greatest strength.  
I appreciate I don't have a long coach trip back through the night to get angry about this.  But I really don't think fixing the PMGOL should be high on the clubs priorities right now.  What we need is an adult squad.

 

[Bert19]

3 hours ago, flllerywhereru2 said:

So once again we get the rough end of the VAR deal, once...Ok can happen...twice pretty unlucky but possible...three...four....can only mean one thing...Liverpool are involved....when you factor in this was the ref at Spurs when they played them...the fuss that Liverpool made has paid off royally....

I said months ago that Klopp had played a blinder there.  He made such a fuss that barely anything would go against them again all season. 

Factor in the endless list of stuff that's gone for them or against us in our games with them over recent years, there was no chance either penalty shout was going our way. 

[Mark Kelly]

18 minutes ago, Dwmh said:

What we need is an adult squad.

 

I agree we need some more experienced players 

But , if you don't get the deserved penalty and they do it really doesn't matter in the long run does it? 

[Dwmh]

14 minutes ago, Mark Kelly said:

I agree we need some more experienced players 

But , if you don't get the deserved penalty and they do it really doesn't matter in the long run does it? 

In a match that finished 4-1?  I really don't think it matters.

On the other hand the 2 Gusto potential Red cards did matter a lot.  Red against Villa and we lost.
Not Red against Fulham and we won.
Both were of the kind where Ref could give it or not, and VAR would be unlikely to over rule.
My best guess the Villa one would be given 40% of the time, and the Fulham one 25% of the time.  It was a little harsh but not out rageous and we have had reds go our way too.

In the decisions that matter we have done ok on average.

[flllerywhereru2]

59 minutes ago, Dwmh said:

In a match that finished 4-1?  I really don't think it matters.

On the other hand the 2 Gusto potential Red cards did matter a lot.  Red against Villa and we lost.
Not Red against Fulham and we won.
Both were of the kind where Ref could give it or not, and VAR would be unlikely to over rule.
My best guess the Villa one would be given 40% of the time, and the Fulham one 25% of the time.  It was a little harsh but not out rageous and we have had reds go our way too.

In the decisions that matter we have done ok on average.

With those two ''red card'' VAR decisions yes. With with penalty decisions it has been roughly one for one , Sterling for instance was booked for being tripped V Wolves with minutes to go at 1-2 but he had dived and not got one just previously. Against Brighton the ref wasnt going to give Milners foul on Mudryk  but VAR overturned him. V City we got the obvious one but there was another where the city defenders face (Stones) gave the game away and of course it wasnt given. 

That's where last night was a bit of an anomaly, I thought both were pens but you can imagine the ref (not that it is right) thinking was it enough contact/its too early. But the is it enough goes out the window when he has a chance to give liverpool a pen. So at 3-1 down he has a chance to make up for his error of judgement with Gallagher....but blows it (its hard not to think that decision with VAR team also playing along) is made without bias  and in one blows any chance of Chelsea getting back into the match. 

The joker in the pack of course was the pressure liverpool and Klopp had been allowed to put on officials after one poor offside call at Spurs.

 

 

[Bert19]

1 hour ago, Dwmh said:

In a match that finished 4-1?  I really don't think it matters.

On the other hand the 2 Gusto potential Red cards did matter a lot.  Red against Villa and we lost.
Not Red against Fulham and we won.
Both were of the kind where Ref could give it or not, and VAR would be unlikely to over rule.
My best guess the Villa one would be given 40% of the time, and the Fulham one 25% of the time.  It was a little harsh but not out rageous and we have had reds go our way too.

In the decisions that matter we have done ok on average.

But not against Liverpool for several years however.  

- Mane's bionic elbow 

- Lukaku's goal 

- Keita's boot to Trev's groin 

- Enhanced VAR checks on Chelsea goals 

- Werner being half a yard onside and then having his goal ruled out 

- Thiago's lunge from behind and then attempt to do a scissor tackle when already booked. 

 

There have been a few before the decisions last night. 

 

[Bert19]

4 minutes ago, flllerywhereru2 said:

With those two ''red card'' VAR decisions yes. With with penalty decisions it has been roughly one for one , Sterling for instance was booked for being tripped V Wolves with minutes to go at 1-2 but he had dived and not got one just previously. Against Brighton the ref wasnt going to give Milners foul on Mudryk  but VAR overturned him. V City we got the obvious one but there was another where the city defenders face (Stones) gave the game away and of course it wasnt given. 

That's where last night was a bit of an anomaly, I thought both were pens but you can imagine the ref (not that it is right) thinking was it enough contact/its too early. But the is it enough goes out the window when he has a chance to give liverpool a pen. So at 3-1 down he has a chance to make up for his error of judgement with Gallagher....but blows it (its hard not to think that decision with VAR team also playing along) is made without bias  and in one blows any chance of Chelsea getting back into the match. 

The joker in the pack of course was the pressure liverpool and Klopp had been allowed to put on officials after one poor offside call at Spurs.

 

 

He also neglected to send Milner off for that one too.  Despite no attempt at playing the ball when fouling as last man. 

[paulw66]

And Tierney tonight gives Wolves the softest penalty you'll ever see 

[Backbiter]

10 hours ago, Dwmh said:

In a match that finished 4-1?  I really don't think it matters.

On the other hand the 2 Gusto potential Red cards did matter a lot.  Red against Villa and we lost.
Not Red against Fulham and we won.
Both were of the kind where Ref could give it or not, and VAR would be unlikely to over rule.
 

With the Villa one, the ref gave a yellow but VAR then intervened.

[Dwmh]

1 hour ago, Backbiter said:

With the Villa one, the ref gave a yellow but VAR then intervened.

Sorry, you are probably right.  

[flllerywhereru2]

Sunday will also be interesting behing the VAR is the guy who didnt give a pen against odegaard at anfield...of course that has since been highlighted and focussed on. What chance a major decision goes against arsenal??

[Mark Kelly]

8 hours ago, paulw66 said:

And Tierney tonight gives Wolves the softest penalty you'll ever see 

Of course.

Scripted.

[flllerywhereru2]

On 02/02/2024 at 08:24, flllerywhereru2 said:

Sunday will also be interesting behing the VAR is the guy who didnt give a pen against odegaard at anfield...of course that has since been highlighted and focussed on. What chance a major decision goes against arsenal??

Further to this, actually it did, there was a penalty not given when macallisterwent through havertz to get the ball. Almost identical to Gustos tackle that did concede a penalty. Obviously where arsenal obviously had enough to overcome that Chelsea were already 3-1 down and the 4th goal pretty much sealed Wolves 3 points.  As with the Liverpool game VAR didnt cost us the game but it did seal the deal for the opposition.

[Mark Kelly]

Notice that Klopp was all over the officiating again post match , complaining about having players booked for something the opposition weren't booked for .

Pochettino ? Meh. 

[flllerywhereru2]

37 minutes ago, Mark Kelly said:

Notice that Klopp was all over the officiating again post match , complaining about having players booked for something the opposition weren't booked for .

Pochettino ? Meh. 

Jose used to0 do it Ferguson before him most successful coaches try and influence officials. there is of course a difference with how the media reports it...or not

[flllerywhereru2]

So the media reporting that the ''use of VAR'' is nowhere near good enough at the moment. It takes too long and impacts on the enjoyment of the spectators at the live event I agree and having attended matches in the champions league and the dutch eredvise i concur in fact you hardly notice that VAR is even present . Why is that i ask?  How can the use/ interpretation of it be so different in England? Pressure on the officials to make a correct decision is most probably a factor, which of course comes from the media who focus massively on contentious decisions and without doubt influence the work of the officials in the stadium.

The use of it feels different in live televised matches having been to games last season (Wolves/bournemouth/necastle at home) there was relatively little use of the VAR. then compare that with games away at spurs and liverpool where there was several referals/non referals to VAR.

And there is another point the consistency of decision making and when or not that VAR gets to overule is an issue still, some teams get preferential treatment it seems and some not. You dont see many VAR controversies when Luton play bournemouth or palace V burnley for instance. 

I think overall they have to stop being the centre of attention of what should be a sporting contest. Some things of course wont change such as media interference, talking of which in both articles i read BBC and guardian ''Notorious example of VAR mistakes'' such as in the LIverpool Spurs game...were mentioned....now i wonder what the effect of that being highlighted could be...

 

[east lower]

1 hour ago, flllerywhereru2 said:

So the media reporting that the ''use of VAR'' is nowhere near good enough at the moment. It takes too long and impacts on the enjoyment of the spectators at the live event I agree and having attended matches in the champions league and the dutch eredvise i concur in fact you hardly notice that VAR is even present . Why is that i ask?  How can the use/ interpretation of it be so different in England? Pressure on the officials to make a correct decision is most probably a factor, which of course comes from the media who focus massively on contentious decisions and without doubt influence the work of the officials in the stadium.

The use of it feels different in live televised matches having been to games last season (Wolves/bournemouth/necastle at home) there was relatively little use of the VAR. then compare that with games away at spurs and liverpool where there was several referals/non referals to VAR.

And there is another point the consistency of decision making and when or not that VAR gets to overule is an issue still, some teams get preferential treatment it seems and some not. You dont see many VAR controversies when Luton play bournemouth or palace V burnley for instance. 

I think overall they have to stop being the centre of attention of what should be a sporting contest. Some things of course wont change such as media interference, talking of which in both articles i read BBC and guardian ''Notorious example of VAR mistakes'' such as in the LIverpool Spurs game...were mentioned....now i wonder what the effect of that being highlighted could be...

 

Apparently they also ran a fan survey where the use of VAR was preferred by a 'majority' of fans, but not the size of 'majority' they expected.

I'd like to know what sample they took, because most people (80/20 split, I would estimate) I speak to want it disposed of. Just keep the goal-line technology, that's reliable and I think fans and the clubs trust the technology and application.

The Football Supporters Association should run their own survey and then use the information (assuming it's the way I would believe it will go i.e. against VAR) to lobby the FA & PL to drop the abomination. 

[paulw66]

30 minutes ago, east lower said:

Apparently they also ran a fan survey where the use of VAR was preferred by a 'majority' of fans, but not the size of 'majority' they expected.

 

It's a bit like COVID and the vaccines; have you ever met a fan who likes VAR?

[Dwmh]

43 minutes ago, east lower said:

I'd like to know what sample they took, because most people (80/20 split, I would estimate) I speak to want it disposed of. Just keep the goal-line technology, that's reliable and I think fans and the clubs trust the technology and application.

You might be right about popular opinion now, but if they really did drop VAR they'd be riots.  It has been a massive improvement.
No one would ever have expected that now we would have huge rows over such minor errors.
Wrong penalty decisions were just an accepted part of the game 5 years ago.
Every fan was like @Mark Kelly after the game furious with the ref, me included.
TV commentators were just - well that could have gone either way, move on (well up to the last year when they became firm protagonists for VAR on TV)

There is still a lot wrong with VAR.  It has been designed to protect refs from accusations of bias rather than reduce or eliminate real bias.  The big gain has been less randomness, no improvement in reducing bias and nothing at all has been done to protect players in the pro game or more importantly discourage foul play in the amateur game.
Randomness is supposed to be part of sport - it is actually a pity it has gone.

But remove VAR now and everyone will be furious inside a month.