Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
VAR - are you a fan?
Comments
-
Only my opinion, but no. I stand by my posting.Briston_Addick said:
Was Enzo - the Man City player wearing the Superman cape in the middle of the penalty area, occupying the attention of the Man Utd defender and also in the view of the goalkeeper - interfering with play in your opinion?PeterGage said:My take on the Haaland goal is that if the defender who attempted to block the cross touched the ball, then Haaland was onside. The touch, or lack of it, was inconclusive to me4 -
So ProRef are wrong?PeterGage said:
Only my opinion, but no. I stand by my posting.Briston_Addick said:
Was Enzo - the Man City player wearing the Superman cape in the middle of the penalty area, occupying the attention of the Man Utd defender and also in the view of the goalkeeper - interfering with play in your opinion?PeterGage said:My take on the Haaland goal is that if the defender who attempted to block the cross touched the ball, then Haaland was onside. The touch, or lack of it, was inconclusive to me0 -
Is that your opinion wearing your referee goggles or as a normal football watcher?PeterGage said:
Only my opinion, but no. I stand by my posting.Briston_Addick said:
Was Enzo - the Man City player wearing the Superman cape in the middle of the penalty area, occupying the attention of the Man Utd defender and also in the view of the goalkeeper - interfering with play in your opinion?PeterGage said:My take on the Haaland goal is that if the defender who attempted to block the cross touched the ball, then Haaland was onside. The touch, or lack of it, was inconclusive to me
I fail to see how a player actively trying to make contact with the ball in that position is NOT interfering with play.
It's not like an offside player walking back onside watching the ball sail past him and making no attempt to touch it, often with his hands in a "ignore me, I'm not here" position; Enzo has made a deliberate attempt to score and directly affected the actions of the defender and 'keeper.
If that's not interfering with play then the offside law is a bigger load of crap than I previously thought (and I've been of the opinion that offside has been one of the most ****ed-up laws over the last 20 years ... with handball not far behind).
Is it now time to scrap the offside law?2 -
VAR can’t become what proponents seem to want it to be (100% correct) until the laws are rewritten to be binary with no levels of subjectivity.This won’t / can’t happen.As such, all VAR can do in many cases is to kick the can of subjectivity down the road from the pitch - to some other faceless goons in Stockley Park.0
-
Even the referees governing body (or whatever ProRef are) has said it was the wrong decision, hard to sustain an argument that Fernandez was onside in those circumstances.1
-
Sorry what?PeterGage said:
Only my opinion, but no. I stand by my posting.Briston_Addick said:
Was Enzo - the Man City player wearing the Superman cape in the middle of the penalty area, occupying the attention of the Man Utd defender and also in the view of the goalkeeper - interfering with play in your opinion?PeterGage said:My take on the Haaland goal is that if the defender who attempted to block the cross touched the ball, then Haaland was onside. The touch, or lack of it, was inconclusive to me
How can a guy who is dead centre of the goal, 7 yards out, who dives head first for the ball (and wasn't far off connecting), and causes the United centre back Martinez to try and challenge him..........not be interfering with play?
7 -
This is a really interesting debate. Because it revolves around the accuracy of the referees' and VAR's decisions with regards to Enzo and whether he was "interfering with play".
Lots of people are getting themselves very upset - not just on here - with regards to the decision and have various levels of confidence - from "sure" to "certain" - that Enzo was interfering with play and should therefore be penalised for being offside.
These people are wrong. Enzo did not interfere with play as spelled out in IFAB Law 11.2. You're welcome.1 -
I didn't say that, as you well know. I saw the game on TV and from that came to my opinion. I have seen any pundits viewsStu_of_Kunming said:
So ProRef are wrong?PeterGage said:
Only my opinion, but no. I stand by my posting.Briston_Addick said:
Was Enzo - the Man City player wearing the Superman cape in the middle of the penalty area, occupying the attention of the Man Utd defender and also in the view of the goalkeeper - interfering with play in your opinion?PeterGage said:My take on the Haaland goal is that if the defender who attempted to block the cross touched the ball, then Haaland was onside. The touch, or lack of it, was inconclusive to me0 -
I think we need Noel Gallagher’s opinion.0
-
Sponsored links:
-
One of the linos at our game on Saturday, Antrobus, was the assistant VAR at the Manchester derby.
I haven't checked but presumably Antrobus is qualified as a referee at some level but what possible use is a 2nd division linesman supposed to be to the VAR process?
If he was the East Stand yellow flag muppet on Saturday then he clearly doesn't get offside at all.
The Manc derby ref, Oliver, probably didn't have a decent view to make an offside decision, that's the lino's 2nd job on the lino's very short list of stuff they're there to do, ergo Burt or Wood ballsed up.
VAR Donohue inexcusably ballsed up cos he's got replays and a moment or 2 to actually think.
When it's apparent that Donohue is inadequate shouldn't Antrobus stick in his tuppenyworth and raise the glaring issue of Fernandez being yards offside?
All that technical guff about "subjective offside" does mean the offside laws are all to cock. Refs should have minimal discretion, cos they've proved conclusively down the years that the more brain they have to use the closer to worthless they become.
While we're on Michael Oliver's performance, the red card for Foden is a total no brainer, all wiffling about Foden wasn't malicious blah blah is risible toss. Foden flipped out like the petulant toddler he is - red card all day long.
Bruno F provoked him with a sly coward's dig when Foden hit the deck - minimum yellow card for that too.
Did the PGMOL rabble of incompetents and nitwits piss their collective nappies and "even things up" for City, getting offside amnesia as compensation for sending off the spawny faced scally twat?
1 -
Funny how everyone seems to accept Haaland was onside because they put up a cartoon picture on screen at the end of the match as "proof".1
-
I'm confident you could pick anyone off this forum and they could quite easily manage VAR in a game. You simply need to know the rules and whether you are a PL level official, or league one or even national league, the rules don't change.Billy_Mix said:One of the linos at our game on Saturday, Antrobus, was the assistant VAR at the Manchester derby.
I haven't checked but presumably Antrobus is qualified as a referee at some level but what possible use is a 2nd division linesman supposed to be to the VAR process?
If he was the East Stand yellow flag muppet on Saturday then he clearly doesn't get offside at all.
The Manc derby ref, Oliver, probably didn't have a decent view to make an offside decision, that's the lino's 2nd job on the lino's very short list of stuff they're there to do, ergo Burt or Wood ballsed up.
VAR Donohue inexcusably ballsed up cos he's got replays and a moment or 2 to actually think.
When it's apparent that Donohue is inadequate shouldn't Antrobus stick in his tuppenyworth and raise the glaring issue of Fernandez being yards offside?
All that technical guff about "subjective offside" does mean the offside laws are all to cock. Refs should have minimal discretion, cos they've proved conclusively down the years that the more brain they have to use the closer to worthless they become.
While we're on Michael Oliver's performance, the red card for Foden is a total no brainer, all wiffling about Foden wasn't malicious blah blah is risible toss. Foden flipped out like the petulant toddler he is - red card all day long.
Bruno F provoked him with a sly coward's dig when Foden hit the deck - minimum yellow card for that too.
Did the PGMOL rabble of incompetents and nitwits piss their collective nappies and "even things up" for City, getting offside amnesia as compensation for sending off the spawny faced scally twat?
0 -
*LawsChris_from_Sidcup said:
I'm confident you could pick anyone off this forum and they could quite easily manage VAR in a game. You simply need to know the rules and whether you are a PL level official, or league one or even national league, the rules don't change.Billy_Mix said:One of the linos at our game on Saturday, Antrobus, was the assistant VAR at the Manchester derby.
I haven't checked but presumably Antrobus is qualified as a referee at some level but what possible use is a 2nd division linesman supposed to be to the VAR process?
If he was the East Stand yellow flag muppet on Saturday then he clearly doesn't get offside at all.
The Manc derby ref, Oliver, probably didn't have a decent view to make an offside decision, that's the lino's 2nd job on the lino's very short list of stuff they're there to do, ergo Burt or Wood ballsed up.
VAR Donohue inexcusably ballsed up cos he's got replays and a moment or 2 to actually think.
When it's apparent that Donohue is inadequate shouldn't Antrobus stick in his tuppenyworth and raise the glaring issue of Fernandez being yards offside?
All that technical guff about "subjective offside" does mean the offside laws are all to cock. Refs should have minimal discretion, cos they've proved conclusively down the years that the more brain they have to use the closer to worthless they become.
While we're on Michael Oliver's performance, the red card for Foden is a total no brainer, all wiffling about Foden wasn't malicious blah blah is risible toss. Foden flipped out like the petulant toddler he is - red card all day long.
Bruno F provoked him with a sly coward's dig when Foden hit the deck - minimum yellow card for that too.
Did the PGMOL rabble of incompetents and nitwits piss their collective nappies and "even things up" for City, getting offside amnesia as compensation for sending off the spawny faced scally twat?2 -
Anyone who knows the rules cannot possibly operate VAR. Rules are for off field activities such as the time clubs hand officials their team sheets etc, etc.Chris_from_Sidcup said:
I'm confident you could pick anyone off this forum and they could quite easily manage VAR in a game. You simply need to know the rules and whether you are a PL level official, or league one or even national league, the rules don't change.Billy_Mix said:One of the linos at our game on Saturday, Antrobus, was the assistant VAR at the Manchester derby.
I haven't checked but presumably Antrobus is qualified as a referee at some level but what possible use is a 2nd division linesman supposed to be to the VAR process?
If he was the East Stand yellow flag muppet on Saturday then he clearly doesn't get offside at all.
The Manc derby ref, Oliver, probably didn't have a decent view to make an offside decision, that's the lino's 2nd job on the lino's very short list of stuff they're there to do, ergo Burt or Wood ballsed up.
VAR Donohue inexcusably ballsed up cos he's got replays and a moment or 2 to actually think.
When it's apparent that Donohue is inadequate shouldn't Antrobus stick in his tuppenyworth and raise the glaring issue of Fernandez being yards offside?
All that technical guff about "subjective offside" does mean the offside laws are all to cock. Refs should have minimal discretion, cos they've proved conclusively down the years that the more brain they have to use the closer to worthless they become.
While we're on Michael Oliver's performance, the red card for Foden is a total no brainer, all wiffling about Foden wasn't malicious blah blah is risible toss. Foden flipped out like the petulant toddler he is - red card all day long.
Bruno F provoked him with a sly coward's dig when Foden hit the deck - minimum yellow card for that too.
Did the PGMOL rabble of incompetents and nitwits piss their collective nappies and "even things up" for City, getting offside amnesia as compensation for sending off the spawny faced scally twat?
To operate VAR you need to understand the 17 Laws of the Game which govern on-field actions.2 -
Unbelievable.PeterGage said:
Only my opinion, but no. I stand by my posting.Briston_Addick said:
Was Enzo - the Man City player wearing the Superman cape in the middle of the penalty area, occupying the attention of the Man Utd defender and also in the view of the goalkeeper - interfering with play in your opinion?PeterGage said:My take on the Haaland goal is that if the defender who attempted to block the cross touched the ball, then Haaland was onside. The touch, or lack of it, was inconclusive to me
The United defender was marking Haaland and left Haaland unmarked to try and stop Enzo from scoring.
It's almost impossible to believe that anyone can honestly say a player is not interfering with play, when they were inches from scoring with a diving header.6 -
This is one of my biggest bones of contention with offside VAR decisions.Off_it said:Funny how everyone seems to accept Haaland was onside because they put up a cartoon picture on screen at the end of the match as "proof".
We've gone from still pictures of the action, to showing a computer graphic, which quite frankly could show them onside, offside and a millimeter or a meter on or off and I've not heard one person on TV quering this.
I really don't get it.
I mean, being a bit pedantic if the police held cctv of someone that showed they were innocent, would they be allowed to show a CGI image and they would be found guilty?1 -
The fact the player didn't touch the ball proves - within the law - that he wasn't interfering with play.Covered End said:
Unbelievable.PeterGage said:
Only my opinion, but no. I stand by my posting.Briston_Addick said:
Was Enzo - the Man City player wearing the Superman cape in the middle of the penalty area, occupying the attention of the Man Utd defender and also in the view of the goalkeeper - interfering with play in your opinion?PeterGage said:My take on the Haaland goal is that if the defender who attempted to block the cross touched the ball, then Haaland was onside. The touch, or lack of it, was inconclusive to me
The United defender was marking Haaland and left Haaland unmarked to try and stop Enzo from scoring.
It's almost impossible to believe that anyone can honestly say a player is not interfering with play, when they were inches from scoring with a diving header.
If more people - especially TV pundits - knew the laws, then there would be fewer arguments.0 -
Rules/laws, excuse the terminology but we are talking about the same thing ie. on the pitch. You quite obviously don't need VAR for the pre-match team sheets!PeterGage said:
Anyone who knows the rules cannot possibly operate VAR. Rules are for off field activities such as the time clubs hand officials their team sheets etc, etc.Chris_from_Sidcup said:
I'm confident you could pick anyone off this forum and they could quite easily manage VAR in a game. You simply need to know the rules and whether you are a PL level official, or league one or even national league, the rules don't change.Billy_Mix said:One of the linos at our game on Saturday, Antrobus, was the assistant VAR at the Manchester derby.
I haven't checked but presumably Antrobus is qualified as a referee at some level but what possible use is a 2nd division linesman supposed to be to the VAR process?
If he was the East Stand yellow flag muppet on Saturday then he clearly doesn't get offside at all.
The Manc derby ref, Oliver, probably didn't have a decent view to make an offside decision, that's the lino's 2nd job on the lino's very short list of stuff they're there to do, ergo Burt or Wood ballsed up.
VAR Donohue inexcusably ballsed up cos he's got replays and a moment or 2 to actually think.
When it's apparent that Donohue is inadequate shouldn't Antrobus stick in his tuppenyworth and raise the glaring issue of Fernandez being yards offside?
All that technical guff about "subjective offside" does mean the offside laws are all to cock. Refs should have minimal discretion, cos they've proved conclusively down the years that the more brain they have to use the closer to worthless they become.
While we're on Michael Oliver's performance, the red card for Foden is a total no brainer, all wiffling about Foden wasn't malicious blah blah is risible toss. Foden flipped out like the petulant toddler he is - red card all day long.
Bruno F provoked him with a sly coward's dig when Foden hit the deck - minimum yellow card for that too.
Did the PGMOL rabble of incompetents and nitwits piss their collective nappies and "even things up" for City, getting offside amnesia as compensation for sending off the spawny faced scally twat?
To operate VAR you need to understand the 17 Laws of the Game which govern on-field actions.
I stand by my opinion that operating VAR should actually be fairly simple, and yet time and time again we seem to end up with officials who somehow combine to make it look much harder than it should be.0 -
So why did Pro Ref admit to an 'error of judgement' and why have both VAR officials from the Manchester derby have been stood down for this weekends games?Chizz said:
The fact the player didn't touch the ball proves - within the law - that he wasn't interfering with play.Covered End said:
Unbelievable.PeterGage said:
Only my opinion, but no. I stand by my posting.Briston_Addick said:
Was Enzo - the Man City player wearing the Superman cape in the middle of the penalty area, occupying the attention of the Man Utd defender and also in the view of the goalkeeper - interfering with play in your opinion?PeterGage said:My take on the Haaland goal is that if the defender who attempted to block the cross touched the ball, then Haaland was onside. The touch, or lack of it, was inconclusive to me
The United defender was marking Haaland and left Haaland unmarked to try and stop Enzo from scoring.
It's almost impossible to believe that anyone can honestly say a player is not interfering with play, when they were inches from scoring with a diving header.
If more people - especially TV pundits - knew the laws, then there would be fewer arguments.2 -
Sponsored links:
-
Why unbelievable.I didn't give an opinion on the situation.. I merely said that if the wide defender played the ball when attempting to stop the cross, the fact whether or not Haarland was offside, or the other attacker disrupted the goalkeeper by his actions of attempting to head the ball, are irrelevant. The goal would stand. I finished by saying that to me, the touching or otherwise of the ball by the wide defender was not conclusive. That I assumed when watching the game on TV, could have the reason for the decision by VARCovered End said:
Unbelievable.PeterGage said:
Only my opinion, but no. I stand by my posting.Briston_Addick said:
Was Enzo - the Man City player wearing the Superman cape in the middle of the penalty area, occupying the attention of the Man Utd defender and also in the view of the goalkeeper - interfering with play in your opinion?PeterGage said:My take on the Haaland goal is that if the defender who attempted to block the cross touched the ball, then Haaland was onside. The touch, or lack of it, was inconclusive to me
The United defender was marking Haaland and left Haaland unmarked to try and stop Enzo from scoring.
It's almost impossible to believe that anyone can honestly say a player is not interfering with play, when they were inches from scoring with a diving header.0 -
Because they got the decision wrong.Chris_from_Sidcup said:
So why did Pro Ref admit to an 'error of judgement' and why have both VAR officials from the Manchester derby have been stood down for this weekends games?Chizz said:
The fact the player didn't touch the ball proves - within the law - that he wasn't interfering with play.Covered End said:
Unbelievable.PeterGage said:
Only my opinion, but no. I stand by my posting.Briston_Addick said:
Was Enzo - the Man City player wearing the Superman cape in the middle of the penalty area, occupying the attention of the Man Utd defender and also in the view of the goalkeeper - interfering with play in your opinion?PeterGage said:My take on the Haaland goal is that if the defender who attempted to block the cross touched the ball, then Haaland was onside. The touch, or lack of it, was inconclusive to me
The United defender was marking Haaland and left Haaland unmarked to try and stop Enzo from scoring.
It's almost impossible to believe that anyone can honestly say a player is not interfering with play, when they were inches from scoring with a diving header.
If more people - especially TV pundits - knew the laws, then there would be fewer arguments.
The player, however, was not "interfering with play".0 -
I said it once, I've said it a million times. We genuinely have awful standards of refereeing in this country, and the referees union allow bad decisions to go unchecked because how dare you criticise our beautiful referees.If a player on the pitch makes an serious error, they get dropped.These VAR guys will take a little paid holiday for one week and then be back making errors like nothing has happened.Where's the accountability for them to know the laws and do their jobs correctly?0
-
For anyone still thinking that the goal should have stood, here is the full VAR check and Howard Webb's explanation:
https://youtu.be/CUrlkWUpPuQ?is=hkGq77tR9OQY5gFY
0 -
Why isn't there more concern that Bruno Fernandes got away with kicking Foden when he was on the ground.
Violent. Foden got sent off. In this case kinda pleased City won in the circumstances2 -
Do you really think there is no accountability? They get assessed each game and the VAR referees have been stood down and publicly slammed. It is their livelihood and professionalism in full public view, hardly a paid holiday...Yes, they made an error, a big one, so did Foden, so did Fernandes. So has every player and manager. And every supporter. We are so lucky to have a punditry profession that is infallible. I wonder if anyone has ever thought about the human element in this case? Have we not learned the tragic costs of media pile ones?SELR_addicks said:I said it once, I've said it a million times. We genuinely have awful standards of refereeing in this country, and the referees union allow bad decisions to go unchecked because how dare you criticise our beautiful referees.If a player on the pitch makes an serious error, they get dropped.These VAR guys will take a little paid holiday for one week and then be back making errors like nothing has happened.Where's the accountability for them to know the laws and do their jobs correctly?
I am not a referee but am just fed up of the continuous complaints about refereeing. Given the social media fury and attitudes of some players and parents in youth and local football do we wonder why there are not loads of people signing up to be a referee. Why would you?3 -
Cajetan said:
Do you really think there is no accountability? They get assessed each game and the VAR referees have been stood down and publicly slammed. It is their livelihood and professionalism in full public view, hardly a paid holiday...Yes, they made an error, a big one, so did Foden, so did Fernandes. So has every player and manager. And every supporter. We are so lucky to have a punditry profession that is infallible. I wonder if anyone has ever thought about the human element in this case? Have we not learned the tragic costs of media pile ones?SELR_addicks said:I said it once, I've said it a million times. We genuinely have awful standards of refereeing in this country, and the referees union allow bad decisions to go unchecked because how dare you criticise our beautiful referees.If a player on the pitch makes an serious error, they get dropped.These VAR guys will take a little paid holiday for one week and then be back making errors like nothing has happened.Where's the accountability for them to know the laws and do their jobs correctly?
I am not a referee but am just fed up of the continuous complaints about refereeing. Given the social media fury and attitudes of some players and parents in youth and local football do we wonder why there are not loads of people signing up to be a referee. Why would you?This is the typical nonsense spewed when professional referees are held to account. They are paid a handsome amount and this is their job.Add in the 'tragic costs of media pile-ons' and you've hit the apologist bingo.Foden making an error is rightly criticised.Referees? They have a swarm of former refs coming out to try and explain away the decision, before all having to pivot because the referees union did end up admitting they made a mistake. It makes a mockery of the whole profession.Who says they're assessed each game? Where is the transparency about the assessments?
0 -
How much do Premier League referees earn?
Premier League referees are known as Select Group One (SG1). There are 21 full-time referees in this group.
The average salary for these referees is £180,000, with a match fee being added on top of that.
Some of these SG1 referees will earn extra for officiating European and international matches.
Referees' chief Howard Webb recently told EFL clubs that the average salary for assistant referees is £110,000.
0 -
If he isn't interfering with play what's he doing on the pitch. Sure Danny blanchflower said that once.0
-
I mean, I guess we shouldn't really expect anything else from a staunch defender of all referees than a shitty pedantic reply like that. Well done.PeterGage said:
Anyone who knows the rules cannot possibly operate VAR. Rules are for off field activities such as the time clubs hand officials their team sheets etc, etc.Chris_from_Sidcup said:
I'm confident you could pick anyone off this forum and they could quite easily manage VAR in a game. You simply need to know the rules and whether you are a PL level official, or league one or even national league, the rules don't change.Billy_Mix said:One of the linos at our game on Saturday, Antrobus, was the assistant VAR at the Manchester derby.
I haven't checked but presumably Antrobus is qualified as a referee at some level but what possible use is a 2nd division linesman supposed to be to the VAR process?
If he was the East Stand yellow flag muppet on Saturday then he clearly doesn't get offside at all.
The Manc derby ref, Oliver, probably didn't have a decent view to make an offside decision, that's the lino's 2nd job on the lino's very short list of stuff they're there to do, ergo Burt or Wood ballsed up.
VAR Donohue inexcusably ballsed up cos he's got replays and a moment or 2 to actually think.
When it's apparent that Donohue is inadequate shouldn't Antrobus stick in his tuppenyworth and raise the glaring issue of Fernandez being yards offside?
All that technical guff about "subjective offside" does mean the offside laws are all to cock. Refs should have minimal discretion, cos they've proved conclusively down the years that the more brain they have to use the closer to worthless they become.
While we're on Michael Oliver's performance, the red card for Foden is a total no brainer, all wiffling about Foden wasn't malicious blah blah is risible toss. Foden flipped out like the petulant toddler he is - red card all day long.
Bruno F provoked him with a sly coward's dig when Foden hit the deck - minimum yellow card for that too.
Did the PGMOL rabble of incompetents and nitwits piss their collective nappies and "even things up" for City, getting offside amnesia as compensation for sending off the spawny faced scally twat?
To operate VAR you need to understand the 17 Laws of the Game which govern on-field actions.1
