VAR

[taxman 12]

Does anyone else think the ruling out of goals due to millimetres measured by VAR is a bit pathetic?

 

Before VAR the common rule was that the benefit of the doubt be given to the attacking player, leading to more goals and better games. Now with VAR we are seeing goals ruled out because someone's arm or big toe was marginally in front of the last defender.

 

If they are a yard offside then fine, VAR was introduced to counter the most egregious of referee errors but for touch and go decisions I think the attacker should get the advantage.

[Bash Street 10]

55 minutes ago, taxman said:

Does anyone else think the ruling out of goals due to millimetres measured by VAR is a bit pathetic?

 

Before VAR the common rule was that the benefit of the doubt be given to the attacking player, leading to more goals and better games. Now with VAR we are seeing goals ruled out because someone's arm or big toe was marginally in front of the last defender.

 

If they are a yard offside then fine, VAR was introduced to counter the most egregious of referee errors but for touch and go decisions I think the attacker should get the advantage.

They're making a mess of things aren't they.

[Longcol 594]

1 hour ago, taxman said:

Does anyone else think the ruling out of goals due to millimetres measured by VAR is a bit pathetic?

 

Before VAR the common rule was that the benefit of the doubt be given to the attacking player, leading to more goals and better games. Now with VAR we are seeing goals ruled out because someone's arm or big toe was marginally in front of the last defender.

 

If they are a yard offside then fine, VAR was introduced to counter the most egregious of referee errors but for touch and go decisions I think the attacker should get the advantage.

Quite agree.

 

They need to interpret the bit in bold as the attacker being in line with the last defender - in fact looking across the line there should be daylight between the two for the attacker to be offside - bit like all the ball must cross the line for a goal.

[RiffRaff 10]

In my day, "offside" was only given if there was a visible gap between attacker and defender, decided by the linesman's line of sight. To pare it down to millimetres seems a backward step to me.

Same with the "hand to ball" v. "ball to hand" problem.

[Ontarian1981 10]

Never saw the match, who actually called VAR into the decision and why. I assume the ref gave the goal as obviously the linesman never flagged, so why the VAR anyway, was it requested by the Dutch manager?

[Dontquoteme 0]

All too late for England; Where was VAR in 2010 when Frank Lampard's clear goal was ruled not to  be a goal?! lost all interest since then to be honest.

[taxman 12]

Another travesty....a Cameroon player has her big toe in front of the last defender and VAR rules it offside....it's not!

[Baron99 775]

No VAR for the elbow to the face of the English player & not even a yellow?  For Dion Dublin, it was a straight red. 

 

Agree with Neville's assessment of the poor professionalism of the Cameroon players.  I couldn't believe Gabby Logan's half time comments, that the Cameroon players, (in response to England being awarded their 2nd goal, thanks to VAR), were going down the tunnel & playing the race card, accusing the FIFA officials of racism? 

 

As for the Cameroon captain standing over an injured Houghton having a full raged rant, not even a yellow card? 

Edited June 23, 2019 by Baron99
Amendments

[tinfoilhat 11]

I always thought that Phil Neville wasn’t good enough for England, or Utd and was an awful pundit. But he’s rather impressed me as England manager and I thought his comments were spot on and well presented. Looks the part!

 

VAR is a good idea, badly handled. The Cameroon goal should have stood but equally they should have been down to 10 after the elbow. Cricket took awhile to get it right and while it’s still not perfect it works pretty well. Football will get it right eventually.

 

 

[Baron99 775]

2 minutes ago, tinfoilhat said:

I always thought that Phil Neville wasn’t good enough for England, or Utd and was an awful pundit. But he’s rather impressed me as England manager and I thought his comments were spot on and well presented. Looks the part!

 

VAR is a good idea, badly handled. The Cameroon goal should have stood but equally they should have been down to 10 after the elbow. Cricket took awhile to get it right and while it’s still not perfect it works pretty well. Football will get it right eventually.

 

 

The tv pundits castigating VAR are the same lot who use to castigate the officials for getting decisions wrong during a match, by watching endless after match, slow motion replays from multiple camera angles. 

 

Now there is very little doubt, perhaps 1 incident in 100 will remain an after match talking point if VAR is used correctly?  It might also stop the endless shirt tugging during corners, when it's responsible for a few red & yellow cards?

[JamesR123 0]

18 hours ago, taxman said:

Another travesty....a Cameroon player has her big toe in front of the last defender and VAR rules it offside....it's not!

Yes it is.  Any part of the body that you can play the ball with must be inline with, or behind, any part of the 2nd to last player on the defending teams body that can play the ball.

 

The Cameroon player was offside.

On 09/06/2019 at 23:58, RiffRaff said:

In my day, "offside" was only given if there was a visible gap between attacker and defender, decided by the linesman's line of sight. To pare it down to millimetres seems a backward step to me.

Same with the "hand to ball" v. "ball to hand" problem.

In your day we didn't have the technology that we have now.

 

Are you suggesting that when someone is a millimetre offside, that we should just pretend they aren't?

[Michael_W 11]

VAR wants binning, no need for it really, it can only be used at the very top levels of the game for a start, you have four people scrutinising slow motion replays on screens, and even then they often pass the incident back for the referee to view, it all takes far too long and some things are still left open to interpretation, may as well just leave it to the match officials as it has always been, at least their mistakes take seconds to decide rather than minutes.

The England v Cameroon women's match yesterday became ridiculous, the pathetic reaction of the Cameroon players coupled with the referee losing control didn't help, VAR seems to be putting these 'arguably' inexperienced (at top level) female referees in an awkward decision making predicament, and they are probably becoming fearful of making mistakes, it also highlights how difficult the referees job actually is.

As for the offside rule, it really does need changing to daylight merely to simplify it for officials at every level of the game, it will then genuinely advantage the strikers …. more goals and proper refereeing controversy really do make better games IMHO !