Dogawful Officiating

[The Prophet]

It's almost like if you give incompetent officials VAR, they're still incompetent.

 

[madras]

1 hour ago, Kaizero said:

 

The PL is in another league entirely when it comes to VAR being used horribly, tbf. To my knowledge (happy to be proven wrong by any natives of those countries) the English are the only ones really complaining as well. The Norwegian league is introducing VAR this season, everybody is happy as fuck with it and can't wait for it to come into action. Fans have been demanding it being used for years now.

Some of that may be that they think it will overcome bias from the officials when it just seems to make it more stark.

[madras]

And we all know a very similar decision to yesterday's will be allowed against us in the near future and will cost us.

[mouldy_uk]

 

[huss9]

1 hour ago, The Prophet said:

It's almost like if you give incompetent officials VAR, they're still incompetent.

 

 

[duo]

5 hours ago, Hanshithispantz said:

Our first goal could have been chalked off too for Willocks foul in the build up, again a subjective decision. We got lucky with that (although it didn't feel like it given the decisions up to that point) so it's not like it was a blatantly bent game or anything. Just shit.

 

 

EDIT:

 

Added to here as the triple post made me look unhinged.

 

 

 

 

It's not even subjective either, by the conditions Neville brings up Felipe cannot be adjudged to not be in control, he literally ticks every box for the criteria they're looking for with the exception that the ball was moving quickly.

 

 

 

Proof the refs in this league are incompetent

 

 

Edited March 18, 2023 by duo

[huss9]

the tug on anderson, too.

clear pen.

VAR didnt even blink, but the got Quincy out for his header.

[80]

4 hours ago, Unbelievable said:

Another aspect to it is that I think most people can stomach an honest human (referee) mistake much easier than an inexplicable VAR call where you need five angles and a large amount of subjectivity to still not have a “clear and obvious” error that needs overturning. Between Isak’s Liverpool goal, the Crystal Palace push, Joelinton’s supposed handling of the ball vs Leicester, the Man U final offside decision and now this goal chalked off for bullshit reasons, that’s at least five curious decisions involving only us this season, that I would challenge being “correct” even if according to Kaizero’s stats they undoubtedly are counted as such.

 

The bottom line is that goals and penalty decisions now seem much more subjective than they ever were before. If VAR was used to correct clear errors from the officials on the pitch, such as missing a clear offside or a horror tackle, nobody would object. It is however being used selectively and subjectively to influence the outcome of games. I was critical when it was introduced and told it would improve, but it hasn’t. It needs to go, simple as.

Spot on.

 

I don't accept the validity of the statistics being quoted in the slightest. I predict the methodology will be subjective, incomplete junk.

[duo]

They need to clearly define clear and obvious as the refs currently seem clueless. There should be a tolerance -

• someone being offside by a mm isn't getting any advantage - so if the offside isn't 'obvious' i.e. can be clearly seen and isn't subjective i.e. trying to figure out where their toe is - they are NOT offside.
• If a reply has to be watched numerous times from multiple angles to check for a foul or pen - it isn't 'clear and 'obvious'.

VAR is just ruining the game in it's current form and refs need to be re-educated as to how it needs to be applied.  Because atm they are deciding who wins the league and who gets relegated not the 11 players on the pitch.

 

 

Edited March 18, 2023 by duo

[AyeDubbleYoo]

There’s one debate about the decisions being right or wrong, and there’s another about the mechanisms of VAR IMO. 
 

That goal last night was a subjective decision, I don’t agree with it but I guess the part of the rule they were using was that the CBs action was instinctive and not controlled etc. 

 

Different people will always come up with different judgements on that, that’s the nature of the laws. They aren’t black and white. So a replay doesn’t help a right decision except that it gives someone a chance to see something that they might have missed.

 

Even that aspect itself is annoying, but I think we could get used to it if everyone knew the rules and the decisions were explained. So I would say the referees have to use consistent, known hand signals and they have to be put on mic for 15 seconds to set out the decision. In the stadium and on TV. Either the on-field referee or the VAR. 

 

Things like the handball situation we’re in, that’s the fault of the rules. The addition of VAR just means that things that humans would ignore or not notice are now having to be examined. That makes the rules of football look bad, because they aren’t up to that level of scrutiny. 
 

Bit of a ramble but basically the combo of subjective rules, forensic examination of petty, minor infringements and the lack of communication to fans make the whole thing a shitshow. 

It’s probably right than it results in a slightly higher percentage of “correct” decisions, but it has wreaked havoc on the game to get there. 

 

 

Edited March 18, 2023 by AyeDubbleYoo

[magvicar]

12 hours ago, Toon No9 said:

I don't get that VAR decision at all. What is the decision based on?

 

Must be some strange rule that nobody's ever heard of.

Basically cheating.

[Stifler]

1 hour ago, mouldy_uk said:

 

I saw that, but is that really him?

[54]

Just a reminder, this was deemed as onside with the goal standing.

 

https://youtube.com/clip/Ugkx8zhNZmD8om0lhhd3Ikf3-0UgP9vGydQc

 

[magvicar]

11 hours ago, 80 said:

How anyone can claim VAR is not spoiling the game after tonight, I do not know.

VAR technology in itself is fantastic. It's the inept/incompetent/cheating people who oversee it that's the real problem.

[Bimpy474]

If the ball is deflected by a Forest player with no intent to play the ball then Longstaff is offside. It was clearly played at by the Forest player so Longstaff should be ruled onside.

 

I still think that's a bullshit law as Longstaff should be ruled offside in either case, but as the law stands he wasn't and the officials got it wrong. And something seemingly overlooked is the ball was played at twice by Forest players. 

 

Just piss poor interpretation by piss poor officials.

 

 

Edited March 18, 2023 by Bimpy474

[ohmelads]

29 minutes ago, AyeDubbleYoo said:

There’s one debate about the decisions being right or wrong, and there’s another about the mechanisms of VAR IMO. 
 

That goal last night was a subjective decision, I don’t agree with it but I guess the part of the rule they were using was that the CBs action was instinctive and not controlled etc. 

 

Different people will always come up with different judgements on that, that’s the nature of the laws. They aren’t black and white. So a replay doesn’t help a right decision except that it gives someone a chance to see something that they might have missed.

 

Even that aspect itself is annoying, but I think we could get used to it if everyone knew the rules and the decisions were explained. So I would say the referees have to use consistent, known hand signals and they have to be put on mic for 15 seconds to set out the decision. In the stadium and on TV. Either the on-field referee or the VAR. 

 

Things like the handball situation we’re in, that’s the fault of the rules. The addition of VAR just means that things that humans would ignore or not notice are now having to be examined. That makes the rules of football look bad, because they aren’t up to that level of scrutiny. 
 

Bit of a ramble but basically the combo of subjective rules, forensic examination of petty, minor infringements and the lack of communication to fans make the whole thing a shitshow. 

It’s probably right than it results in a slightly higher percentage of “correct” decisions, but it has wreaked havoc on the game to get there. 

 

 

 

 

Which part of the rules are you referring to here?

 

From what I can see it's pretty clear: 

A player in an offside position receiving the ball from an opponent who deliberately plays the ball, including by deliberate handball, is not considered to have gained an advantage, unless it was a deliberate save by any opponent. 

 

Not one but twice they deliberately cleared the ball.

[Sima]

 

[AyeDubbleYoo]

Just now, ohmelads said:

 

Which part of the rules are you referring to here?

 

From what I can see it's pretty clear: 

A player in an offside position receiving the ball from an opponent who deliberately plays the ball, including by deliberate handball, is not considered to have gained an advantage, unless it was a deliberate save by any opponent. 

 

Not one but twice they deliberately cleared the ball.

They showed it on sky but I can’t remember what exactly. There was a line about the defender making an instinctive reaction and not a deliberate considered move. I’m not arguing for it but that’s the only line I could think could justify it. 

[Bimpy474]

7 minutes ago, Sima said:

 

 

How that can be ruled onside is ridiculous, that's where tweaking the offside law is detrimental to the game.

 

How on earth can the defender know if Salah hasn't run from an onside position, he has to play at the ball he cannot know Salah was offside from the initial pass. Just a shambles by the fucktards who decide and make those changes.

 

 

Edited March 18, 2023 by Bimpy474

[Stifler]

28 minutes ago, AyeDubbleYoo said:

They showed it on sky but I can’t remember what exactly. There was a line about the defender making an instinctive reaction and not a deliberate considered move. I’m not arguing for it but that’s the only line I could think could justify it. 

But then they other player after him plays it as well. Also even if that is the case, Willock is behind him and likely to score. You can’t both deny the goal scoring opportunity, and also play someone offside in the same move.

[80]

1 hour ago, duo said:

VAR is just ruining the game in it's current form and refs need to be re-educated as to how it needs to be applied.  Because atm they are deciding who wins the league and who gets relegated not the 11 players on the pitch.

 

 

 

Maybe a bit of an overstatement, but they certainly have a lot of influence over the incomes of businessmen and international gamblers...

[80]

39 minutes ago, magvicar said:

VAR technology in itself is fantastic. It's the inept/incompetent/cheating people who oversee it that's the real problem.

Apparently VAR and Marxism are cousins

 

The thing is, if someone's primary aim is to improve the precision of information used in decisions - for the sake of fairness - then VAR has to only get more involved in more parts of the game. There's no room for a lighter touch, the touch can only get heavier.

[robbo_11]

The idea about VAR with Howard Webb was to only get involved with clear and obvious judgements or 'light touch' as has been mentioned. The disallowed goal has been deemed as subjective based on the official, but VAR has intervened. Should it be the case that in this moment the VAR official should not have got involved and left it to the onfield referee?

 

I know the Salah goal has been highlighted in this thread, but I'm sure there was a Fernandes goal where Rashford could have been deemed to be involved but VAR did not get involved.

[Hanshithispantz]

1 hour ago, Bimpy474 said:

If the ball is deflected by a Forest player with no intent to play the ball then Longstaff is offside. It was clearly played at by the Forest player so Longstaff should be ruled onside.

 

I still think that's a bullshit law as Longstaff should be ruled offside in either case, but as the law stands he wasn't and the officials got it wrong. And something seemingly overlooked is the ball was played at twice by Forest players. 

 

Just piss poor interpretation by piss poor officials.

 

 

 

Why though?

 

The purpose of the rule is to prevent goals like the (apparently legal) Salah one. Where a deflection or 'unfair clearance' goes through to an attacker in an advantageous position. It's not meant to bail out sloppy defending. Felipe had more than enough of an opportunity to clear the ball properly, the fact he played it towards a teammate under pressure is his own fault.

 

Similarly Niahkate could have poked it out for a corner instead of playing a low ball across his own box, he had plenty of time.

 

 

Edited March 18, 2023 by Hanshithispantz

[magvicar]

7 minutes ago, 80 said:

Apparently VAR and Marxism are cousins

 

The thing is, if someone's primary aim is to improve the precision of information used in decisions - for the sake of fairness - then VAR has to only get more involved in more parts of the game. There's no room for a lighter touch, the touch can only get heavier.

What appears to have happened is, VAR has came in and the rules of the game have altered to bring in some kind of complicated addition to the set up of the basic rules, turning what was once a simple game into almost a scientific mish mash.

 

Basic common sense and logic can cut out a lot of this garbage decision making we currently see but seeing that come to fruition is likely never going to happen because to be fair would mean being fair and that could impact the elite clubs in a dramatic way and I highly doubt they would be having that.