Var is shite, Klopp calling for spurs game to be replayed, hopefully other clubs will follow suit & the FA will be forced into either improving or scrapping it
-
Welcome to the new B.I.R.D. Forum. Please be sure to read the "New Member / New Registered ? Please Read" thread in the Coffee Shop. This contains some important information. To become a full member ( £5.90 a year ) simply click on your user name near the top on the right I hope you enjoy the new site ................ Jaws ( John )
Told ya
- Thread starter derek kelly
- Start date
It won’t happen.
My mind is still boggling that almost nobody on tv understands what happened and are still making it more complicated than it is.
It is very, very simple. VAR thought they were checking that the goal was onside (obviously a massive error) and as such the process worked perfectly.
Anything else is just noise.
Liverpool were so wrong coming out and talking about integrity. It was simply an error. A bad one, but an error.
The communication between onfield and VAR needs to be tightened up so VAR know what they are checking…in egg chasing the referee states ‘the onfield decision is ‘try’’ or similar to,start the process and that is needed in football.
One thing the video/audio release highlighted is that VAR did not see the assistant flagging for offside although this was shown on live Tv. That exacerbated the error and again I am perplexed why nobody has picked this up - it is very relevant.
Replaying the game would set a dangerous precedent and would cause chaos. Incorrect decisions are part of football…you need look no further than without VAR the goal would (ironicslly) also have been disallowed.
And there is a massive difference between an incorrect decision (as in this case I..e. offside that is factual) and a difference of opinion/interpretation such as Jones’ dismissal in the same game (which I don’t think will be overturned).
Liverpool haven’t done themselves any favours by taking the high and mighty stance. They need to suck it up and move on the same as every other club in the world has to.
Maradona hand of god v England, Geoff Hurst ‘non goal’ in the 1966 World Cup final, Henri stopping a shot on the line with his hand v RoI, all howlers, Drogba v Man United that cost them the league title. The world didn’t stop turning.
The problem is that these poor decisions whether deliberate or not are having an adverse effect on clubs, there was an alternative table published last season without var, Leeds although very poor woluld have actually finished clear of the relegation places, clubs are getting pissed off with the inconsistencies in decisions & the stupid way a player is offside because his hand is nearer the goal than the defender despite not being able to score with the hand, I really do hope more clubs start demanding replays.
‘Hand’?? No. Not sure where you are getting that from.
As I said above VAR gets pretty much every offside decision correct in accordance with the Laws - the fact that most people don’t know the Laws and many look at situations involving their team on a biased basis doesn’t make those decisions wrong.
You will never get away from different people having different views in a subjective situation. Jones being a good example - I said he was off in real time before any replays/VAR etc, others will say he got the ball and rolled over the top (partially true) but in my view he had lost control of the ball, stretched for it with raised studs and endangered an opponent (who was extremely lucky not to get a broken leg). I will be surprised if that is overturned but if it is that will be the subjective view of the reviewing panel.
The incident in the Man United v Wolves game at the start of the season is the same - I thought it was a stonewall penalty, the referee and VAR didn’t, Howard Webb did and apologised on behalf of PGMOL (throwing everyone else under the bus) but they were all subjective opinions. That’s never, ever going to change.
Whichever way it is cut, VAR has increased the number of correct decisions being made. If I was still refereeing and was at the elite level I would be glad it was there to get to the right decisions almost 100% of the time it was used.
The mighty Toffees have had a goal disallowed in two games we lost 1-0 and in the after match analysis by a ref they couldn't see why the goals had been disallowed the difference is we just accepted the result, Liverpool have had a number of decisions go in their favour
So you are saying Bamford’s goal should have stood?
No idea what you are talking about.
From what I have read this morning it woukd appear that if VAR had been in use at Leeds game last night the QPR goalkeeper woukd not have been dismissed?
The incident v qpr that I’ve mentioned many times.
I watched the game last night but missed the replay, I believe the replay showed no contact however it could be argued that the keeper obstructed Bamford, fortunately QPR can dispute the red card & get it overturned.
As for the game itself, yes we won, yes we got three points however I was disappointed as we should have had the game dead & buried in the first half.
Just watched again but no slow motion close up so can’t say if there was connection, the way Bamford went down indicates contact.
Last edited:
Having watched it again I believe that if there is no contact then the red card was for intent, Bamford flipped the ball over the keeper so there was no need for him to slide in unless his intent was to stop Bamford.
And that shows what I mean when I bang on about subjectivity - to me there was no foul whatsoever.
I'm curious, how do you determine "intent"?
Can't say I've ever seen a match where I thought I saw a referee appear to go ask a player what he'd intended.
Often the decision and an appropriate card's waved without even talking to a player.
Or is that a referee making a subjective decision based on his interpretation of what he's just seen?
Can't say I've ever seen a match where I thought I saw a referee appear to go ask a player what he'd intended.
Often the decision and an appropriate card's waved without even talking to a player.
Or is that a referee making a subjective decision based on his interpretation of what he's just seen?
There is the expert opinion of a manure supporter
Maybe no contact but Bamford had flipped the ball over him & went to run by him, the keeper instead of heading back to his goal slid in towards Bamford’s feet, two seasons back Pascal Struijk was sent off for a none foul because the Liverpool player ended up with a broken leg.
Bamford apparently went for a header & turned his back on the QPR defender & received a warning (not a card) for intent.
So essentially it all comes down to whether a player is wearing a Leeds shirt or not.
An obvious example would be a player diving in at knee height in an attempt to hi5 the opponent and 5he opponent jumping three feet in the air to avoid it.
I once had to drive all the way to Dover after work to attend an appeal against a dismissal after I sent off a player for trying to violently foul someone but no contact was made - the latter being the basis of the appeal. The hearing lasted about three minutes, mandatory 42 day suspension was increased to 63 days.
Not at all, I’m sure there’s other incidents with lesser interesting clubs, just using Leeds as an example for obvious reasons.So essentially it all comes down to whether a player is wearing a Leeds shirt or not.
Why just knee height? What about causing bad ankles?
Another twist, apparently Bamford told the Ref & QPR Manager that there was no contact, despite this on review Bamford could (probably will knowing the corrupt twats) receive a two match ban for trying to get a player sent off.
Looks like this was the reason it was a red card, studs up.
It may be but a single picture from a particular angle never tells the whole story.