Video Assistant Referee

  • The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...

    Get involved!

Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports

Should be interesting!

The Premier League is writing to clubs asking for feedback from managers, directors of football and captains on VAR with a view to implementing improvements to the technology next season. (Mail)
 
"May delay"!?! Where is the statement that confirms what laws they were following?

However, let's suppose they followed the law's of 18/19:
Handling the ball
Handling the ball involves a deliberate act of a player making contact with the ball with the hand or arm. The following must be considered:
• the movement of the hand towards the ball (not the ball towards the hand)
• the distance between the opponent and the ball (unexpected ball)
• the position of the hand does not necessarily mean that there is an offence.
The goalkeeper has the same restrictions on handling the ball as any other player outside the penalty area. Inside their penalty area, the goalkeeper cannot be guilty of a handling offence incurring a direct free kick or any related sanction but can be guilty of handling offences that incur an indirect free kick.


Under the above laws it's categorically not handball, as all three areas of consideration comply with it not being handball given the actions of Sissoko.

The added complexity that you alluded to in your earlier post was that the interpretation of deliberate being played in Europe but not in PL and where you gave examples of Rose incident was all centred around the act of intent and the interpretation of "deliberate". In Europe the Officials were applying their definition of deliberate if the player was making a deliberate act to block the ball, the handball might have been accidental e.g Rose deliberately made an action to block the ball, in doing so it hit his arm, it was therefore given as handball (the block was deliberate). Same happened in the PSG vs Man U game where a PSG player jumped to block a ball being kicked into the box, the player had his back half turned, eyes closed. It hit his arm and handball was given because the act to block the ball was deliberate, even if the act of handballing it wasn't.

Sissoko made no attempt to block the ball, his arm was already outstretch pointing before the ball was kicked, there was zero attempt made to block.

So, take your pick of the two different laws in place (or not as the case might be), then apply the interpretations of the law, PL or Europe. No matter what way you cut it, no matter what law you choose, it's 100% not handball.

Irrespective of this and back to the wider subject matter of VAR and it's use, had the officials in Madrid spent more than 23 seconds (1 view/angle of a replay) reviewing it, they would have no choice but to not award a pen (under existing or new laws).
Problem was, they issued "guidance" mid competition (which is fucking nonsense in itself) saying that in situations like ours or the PSG/Man utd one, a penalty should be given.

Add that to the implication of who the governing body wanted to win our game via the changing room shenanigans

(yes, I believe in in any given match, in any sports, in any tournament, governing bodies have a team they would prefer to win. Usually for commercial reasons. I have no issue with this as long is they don't do anything to make it known, as it pressures officials, even if its subconscious. IMO, in the case of our CL final, I think the dressing room swap implied they preferred a dippers win. And let me add, I dont think it was fixed. Not for 1 second)
 
This whole VAR thing is turning in to massive joke and it's also showing how terrible officiating can be, even with VAR.

Clear and obvious is no longer a clear concept and there almost needs to be a definition in the laws of the game stating what "clear and obvious" really means because it's not happening now.

I'm sure that between all of us on here we can probably think of at least one VAR incident per game this season that can be deemed questionable, if not terrible. At least before we could apply human error in to the excuse for a bad call; now it's just showing how bad and confused the officials are themselves at how to use the new technology.

Personally, I think VAR can work, and by incorporating already working rules and styles of VAR in other sports it could be a success.

1) Introducing a "Challenge" system
Each team would be allocated 3 "challenges" (+1 if it goes in to ET) that could be used to ask the referee for VAR if the team feel that the officials missed something at any point during the game.
This power would be held by only 2 people on one team; The gaffer and the skipper.

This could solve the problem of the constant waiting for VAR as well.

2) Officials to have mics
Similar to the NFL, it's time for referees to explain their decisions.

This means that the decision has to be absolutely CLEAR and OBVIOUS enough for the refs to explain: if everyone at home can now catch obvious mistakes by referees because of VAR then they really need to know the law better and be able to explain what just happened and why it goes against the rules of the game.

3) Implementation of the system through lower tiers and U-19 to U-23 league system.

I know this isn't exactly feasible in every league or country and it's already too late but the way that they just tested it in shit leagues and then just expected everyone to know how to work it off the bat was fucking ridiculous. It felt like it was just thrown on to most of us, fans, players and officials alike and the inconsistency even between different European leagues means that it just falls further in to disarray and confusion.

Starting the system in the youth leagues would have allowed for players to have had time to adapt as well as for officials to get used to it as well; at some point most senior players will drop down when coming back from serious injury.

...but FIFA are filled with moronic cock sucking dipshits with no interest in the game any longer and just want to squeeze it for every penny and pound so doubt that'll ever happen. They'll probably try and start squeezing in adverts during VAR checks next
 
This whole VAR thing is turning in to massive joke and it's also showing how terrible officiating can be, even with VAR.

Clear and obvious is no longer a clear concept and there almost needs to be a definition in the laws of the game stating what "clear and obvious" really means because it's not happening now.

I'm sure that between all of us on here we can probably think of at least one VAR incident per game this season that can be deemed questionable, if not terrible. At least before we could apply human error in to the excuse for a bad call; now it's just showing how bad and confused the officials are themselves at how to use the new technology.

Personally, I think VAR can work, and by incorporating already working rules and styles of VAR in other sports it could be a success.

1) Introducing a "Challenge" system
Each team would be allocated 3 "challenges" (+1 if it goes in to ET) that could be used to ask the referee for VAR if the team feel that the officials missed something at any point during the game.
This power would be held by only 2 people on one team; The gaffer and the skipper.

This could solve the problem of the constant waiting for VAR as well.

2) Officials to have mics
Similar to the NFL, it's time for referees to explain their decisions.

This means that the decision has to be absolutely CLEAR and OBVIOUS enough for the refs to explain: if everyone at home can now catch obvious mistakes by referees because of VAR then they really need to know the law better and be able to explain what just happened and why it goes against the rules of the game.

3) Implementation of the system through lower tiers and U-19 to U-23 league system.

I know this isn't exactly feasible in every league or country and it's already too late but the way that they just tested it in shit leagues and then just expected everyone to know how to work it off the bat was fucking ridiculous. It felt like it was just thrown on to most of us, fans, players and officials alike and the inconsistency even between different European leagues means that it just falls further in to disarray and confusion.

Starting the system in the youth leagues would have allowed for players to have had time to adapt as well as for officials to get used to it as well; at some point most senior players will drop down when coming back from serious injury.

...but FIFA are filled with moronic cock sucking dipshits with no interest in the game any longer and just want to squeeze it for every penny and pound so doubt that'll ever happen. They'll probably try and start squeezing in adverts during VAR checks next

It is not turning in to a joke. It clearly always was fucking ridiculous, but some people just failed to get it.

"Clear and obvious" is one of the many great examples of the astonishing stupidity surrounding VAR. I remember being dumbfounded as I was watching moronic pundits discussing how great VAR would be with the "clear and obvious" rule that would, according to them, guarantee the success of VAR as it would limit the usage of it and ensure that it would get the correct decisions. They failed too understand, however, that it is near impossible to define "clear and obvious" in a sensible, logical and, to anyone with interest in the game, acceptable manner.

The system is shit, and can only ever be shit, because the information we get out of the system will always be too limited to ensure absolute correct and sufficiently timely decisions.

The only surprise of VAR, to many of us that were already negative since we first heard mention of it, is how much worse it is than we actually feared.

I expected that it would take time to make decisions. I expected that decisions would often be controversial and erroneous. What I did not expect was the accompanying retarded changes to the already retarded handball rules and the fact that refs would stop giving absolutely clear penalties like the one we should have had yesterday.

VAR is shit. And you can not do anything about it by trying to redefine "clear and obvious", particularly if your only change is to put "clear" and "obvious" in capital letters and put "absolutely" as a prefix.
 
FSA: "We did a survey and the fans think VAR is rubbish"

Premier League:

200.gif
 
I was watching a few old games on YouTube today, none obviously with VAR. There were a couple of dodgy decisions (the Wigan goal in our 9-1 victory was handball), but all in all, no more mistakes than there are at the moment!
 
I was watching a few old games on YouTube today, none obviously with VAR. There were a couple of dodgy decisions (the Wigan goal in our 9-1 victory was handball), but all in all, no more mistakes than there are at the moment!
Mendes' "goal" against Man Utd years ago is a perfect argument for VAR.

On another stage, Frank Lampard's "Goal" against Germany in the World Cup is another.
 
I guess there's always going to be people arguing over measurements at an atomic level.
The media will always hype it up because it serves their interests in terms of engagement.

That situation, clearly it was an isolated incident and massively outweighed by all the times that it has been perfect... but Sky made a huge deal of it, got the usual Roy Keanes of the world up to have a rant about how the game's gone and if we can't rely on this 100% of the time it's worthless... raise the controversy, raise the clicks. Problem is, people fall for it and it has a genuine impact on the sport.

Same goes for the antivax movement against the AZ and J&J vaccines at the moment. We have 1 in 1,000,000 getting a complication and the whole thing collapses.

People have really no concept of odds at all, or that nothing in the world has 100% efficacy (insert Sissoko joke here)
 
The media will always hype it up because it serves their interests in terms of engagement.

That situation, clearly it was an isolated incident and massively outweighed by all the times that it has been perfect... but Sky made a huge deal of it, got the usual Roy Keanes of the world up to have a rant about how the game's gone and if we can't rely on this 100% of the time it's worthless... raise the controversy, raise the clicks. Problem is, people fall for it and it has a genuine impact on the sport.

Same goes for the antivax movement against the AZ and J&J vaccines at the moment. We have 1 in 1,000,000 getting a complication and the whole thing collapses.

People have really no concept of odds at all, or that nothing in the world has 100% efficacy (insert Sissoko joke here)
Probably greater odds of dying from a simple anaesthetic.

Anomalies happen. That's why they're called anomalies (insert another Sissoko joke here)
 
Back
Top Bottom