Off Topic IS VIDEO ASSISTANT REFEREE WORKING?

The obvious descions are still getting missed, plus if you where the ref, would you err on the side of caution when making a descion you where not sure on, thinking that var might pick up the slack?

 

Whilst i liked the idea of only countermanding "clear & obvious" errors we have now ended up with the worst of both worlds i.e. VAR checks but obvious errors not being overturned .

 

I think that's one of the big issues at the moment, the refs aren't making a decision as they're assuming var will make it for them but var doesn't seem to want to overturn any ref decisions.

Yeah its mental that we're completely re-refereeing the game in some aspects like offsides and then overturning nothing in pen decisions.

 

The Matip decision went to VAR and the VAR referee confirmed yes the game was actually at Anfield so no penalty could be awarded to Liverpool.

Spurs still have more penalties at Anfield than Liverpool do for the last 3 seasons.

 

My concerns over VAR go back to when it was just a glint in the eye of the authorities. Yes, it could cut out some bad decisions, but only at the expense of interrupting the flow of the game, imo - and that's something I don't want to see. Now it seems that they don't want to do that, so the advantages of it are being lost. Add to that the reluctance to undermine the ref, and it's just a mess atm.
Perhaps it will improve, but I still don't see how the momentum of the game can be maintained whilst also correcting bad decisions.
In theory it should help with offsides, but it's far from perfect even there, because players are having to continue long after a decision should have been made.
The incident in our game with Arsenal springs to mind: Aubamayang was clearly offside, but there was no flag - belatedly Matip flies across and blocks his effort. One or both players could have been injured in such a challenge, when the whistle should have gone earlier to prevent it happening.
Moreover, a corner was given from that challenge, so what happens if a goal results?
It's just not as easy to implement as some people were seemingly expecting - it's neither fish nor fowl atm.

 

100% agree with all of that but just thought I'd chuck in the authorises defence of the highlighted bit...

They claim there are, on average, three contentious incidents per game and therefore, there isn't much disruption.

This shows a complete lack of understand from men who simply have not played the game!

 

Apparently UEFA's boss ref thinks we're not disrupting the game enough. He says we're not implementing the tech properly, and that refs should consult pitch-side monitors on all contentious decisions. I see his point, that it gives the ref the opportunity to alter his decision and not be usurped by someone a long way away, but I really don't want to see that, unless the ball is dead.
Of course I'd like to see an improvement on the accuracy of decisions, but not if it makes the game stop and start too much.
I accept that their intentions are good, but the problem is not so easily solved, imo.

On a related note, Mike Riley was lauded a few days ago for admitting 4 incorrect decisions. Well, I've seen many more than that, and I've only watched a fraction of the number of games that have been played.

 

There were 3 contentious decisions per game BEFORE VAR was introduced. Now they've stopped applying the offside rule for some reason, every time a team plays a ball forward it's turned into a contentious decision and a waste of time.

 

The offside rule change is a joke.

 

Ref Watch: VAR correct to stick with on-field decision for Trent Alexander-Arnold handball, says Dermot Gallagher

please log in to view this image

https://www.skysports.com/football/...exander-arnold-handball-says-dermot-gallagher

 

If and when we become the first team to win the Prem with VAR, would this not prove that all previous titles have been won when the wishes -sorry, mistakes - of the on-field officials cannot be scrutinised and corrected in real time? No country for old Webbs, as it were. Or Bennets, Atkinsons, Halseys and others who might be financially incentivised to err on the side of brown envelopes.

 

No, it will just mean a lot of teams have been ****/in transition.

 

If we'd have had VAR last season we would have had 2 points more for Mane's ludicrously disallowed goal at The Emirates, when an inept lino didn't know the rules; and two more points at home to Leicester when Keita was blatantly scythed down only five yards away from Twatkinson.

Oh, and does this table include the two extra points we would have got at OT this season had Mane's handball goal not been - rightly- disallowed? The on-field officials didn't see it. Or are we only deducting points from sides if VAR decisions went for Liverpool, regardless or whether they're right (Lala's 'handball' last night) or wrong (Bobby's clearly onside goal at Villa, or Origi being creamed in the back of the calf right in front of Pratkinson)?

 

No need idea.

As for last season, you've got 380 games to inspect, enjoy...

 

The first honest PL

 

Weird that they're only ****/in transition in the league, and all 7 teams have qualified from their European groups

 

Your transition* may be longer than you think when your club's paradigm has previously been to buy the officials. VAR may be a lot of things, but (Atkinson's best efforts to the contrary) it's incorruptible.

* Maybe not 30 years, in fairness.

 

Plus teams such as Leicester, Wolves and Man Utd are exceeding expectations