Discussion in 'The Hornets' Nest - Watford Chat' started by hornetboy1, Aug 10, 2019.
Palace have had cheerleaders for ages and flying Eagles ..
As opposed to the other kind: the non-flying eagle?
Football will always be subjective. I wouldn’t want that decision given against me, but by the letter of the law it’s a penalty.
I like VAR and think it’s an improvement, but it will be ridiculous for the match attending fans until the decision gets shown (preferably with audio) on the big screen.
I don't think they'd use audio. All their mystique would instantly disappear. I can imagine the conversation
PAWSON "Andy, could you check the video for the freekick-handball-penalty incident?" "...….Andy.....ANDY"
MADLEY "What.....mom.....erm...I mean, yes of course"
PAWSON "Andy....were you asleep again?"
MADLEY "No..….erm…..well I may have nodded off a bit. Anyway, how do you turn the TV on?"
PAWSON "You press the green button on the remote"
MADLEY "Oh yes.....Sky Sports is that right?"
PAWSON "I'm not sure......might be. What's Jeff Stelling saying?"
MADLEY " He says we're checking a penalty incident on VAR"
PAWSON "Hey…..am I on TV?"
PAWSON "Cool.....anyway...is it a penalty or not?"
MADLEY " how the f&ck do I know.....I'm in bloody Stockley Park....and you're right there"
PAWSON " Andy, you know the rule. VAR is the magical thing that everyone believes will solve all issues......you know how this works"
MADLEY " Ok....head or tails?...….heads a penalty, tails no penalty"
PAWSON "Do you really want to put it to a 50/50 outcome?.....it's a penalty to Watford we're talking about here"
MADLEY " Why the f&ck didn't you say that in the first place. NO PENALTY...…..how long have you been a referee? you know the rule on favourable Watford decisions. You didn't even need to call me"
How the f**k is it possible to make yourself 'unnaturally bigger'???
Guns for hire, it would seem.
Fat chance of that. I fully expect that nearly every post match thread will be littered with VAR discussion.. just as every thread pre VAR was littered with referee discussion. I doubt anything will change there.
I guess it's too much to ask the mods to quarantine all posts mentioning VAR in this thread is it?
I didnt see any games this past weekend as i was working. But if it (VAR) is set up in a way as to be barely noticeable then it's ok by me. Only thing is that leaves it more debatable amongst fans.. and that isnt.
I guess we just have to accept that a good majority of football followers will always believe their club is hard done by.. and VAR wont change that. They will just find other aspects of it's use to prove their point. Oddly though this is true of followers of all clubs. Apparently they are all hard done by!
Danny Murphy was just talking about it on TalkSport and absolutely nailed why it was a penalty...
Say it was an (indirect) FK in the box and the wall had to be on the line - and the same thing happens, ball hits Murray’s arm. It would stop a goal and penalty would be given. It’s inconceivable that it wouldn’t be. So why was what happened on Saturday treated differently?
VAR is essentially a good idea. So long as the people who use it are competent and properly trained.
In itself it is not a change to the rules - merely the opportunity to check whether the rules have been correctly applied. We are used to inconsistency of referees - but have learned across many long and bitter years to put up with it. VAR should not be like that - it has to be correct or it is worthless.
One of those vacuum pump thingys?
As expected in Ref Watch, Dermott Gallagher backed the decision, even though he was in agreement for the handball in the PSG v Man Utd game. So he's agreed with both decisions, even though the are two different ones for the same offence!!
Anyhow, it was the last incident SSN focused on, and they just glossed over it quickly, even though DG said it was the decision that was the most talked about over the weekend.
What I noticed, is that the overturned VAR decisions are being recorded and publicly shown. Now, seeing that referee's are operating VAR, is it in their interest to overturn VAR decisions? Would they be wary of giving their own profession a bad reputation. Lots of overturned decisions would be a sign of poor officiating during the actual games. It's like a company doing their own audits, or the police investigating police corruption. It's open to manipulation.
I thought VAR would be used in a better way. I don't agree with every goal being analysed or on field challenges for red cards. It should be used just for blatant injustices.
Not that we know anything about it, but a double cheer when a goal is scored does not sit well with me.
The goal Wolves scored, for example, should not have been disallowed, but it was a correct decision under the rules. But we should have been given a penalty, which is also the correct decision under the rules, but they seem to be happy not to apply it. You cannot pick and choose what FIFA rules you apply or not.
A ball bouncing around the box, accidently touching an arm, but not diverting the ball in an obvious way and a goal is scored as a result, has to stand. You want the Henry, Maradona cheat goals ruled out, but not ones like that. For me that's a nonsense.
A VAR check should only be used once in a blue moon. In the case of real injustices. We had three VAR checks on Saturday. The penalty, the third goal and a red card for Deeney (which I suspect is compulsory in all Watford games). But I think that's too many.
It seemed a clear pen. to me. But until we see what happens the next time there's a similar handball?/pen.? VAR call there's no need to start off with the usual the officials are useless, they've got it in for us stuff from the usual suspect.
So far we have a sample of one VAR review of this type of incident this season under whatever set of rules the officials are choosing to operate under. So let's not rush to judgement until we have something to compare it against.
Seeing as most pundits seem to have thought it was a penalty though then maybe it will be used as an example of getting it wrong and such incidents will be given in future. In which case we'll have missed out this time and set the precedent for a wrong decision which would be unfortunate but still wouldn't imply bias against us.
What does seem clear however is that under the 'clear and obvious mistake' stuff the default position will be to back up the ref's original decision. And that then becomes subjective. How 'clear and obvious' does it need to be? I thought this was a 'clear and obvious' mistake so VAR should have intervened.
If the ref. had given it in the first instance that decision would almost certainly have stood too. I hope the bar is not set too high here. The whole point about VAR is that it's easier to make the correct decision than in real time. So the ref's decision should be overturned more often than I fear it will be.
On offside. Well the rules are the rules. You can't have some kind of arbitrary 'offside enough?' kind of thing so toenails have to count.
I thought it was interesting that the Mooners' pen. was retaken because of Rice's encroachment rather than Fabianski's over-zealousness. If the keeper moves forward too quickly then VAR should look at that too. Them's the rules as well.
The goalkeeper foot on the line is an interesting one. You HAVE to have one foot on or above the line before the ball is struck. This makes it virtually impossible for keepers to save a penalty, unless the striker hits it straight at him.
I know it's a factual thing, foot on the line or not, but I hope it's used in a common sense way. Not like in cricket when they review a stumping or runout. Was the bat on/over the line or not. Fabianski was only a fraction off the line and in the still I saw, Aguero had already hit the ball, as it was a blur. Fortunately it was retaken because of encroachment. Rice ran into the box early and cleared the rebound. This is a perfect illustration where VAR got it absolutely correct. Last season that would not have been retaken.
It hasn't affected us yet but did Citeh on Saturday when Sterling was offside by a fraction. I have not seen that incident but I thought offside was when it was played forward by a teammate in which case surely VAR will have to look at both the moment it left the teammates foot and then sync it with the line that says the player receiving it is offside.
If you down to fractions looking across the line for the second part of the "transaction" what about the first part and can that be measured in fractions ?
This was why it was often impossible for the lino to get it right because they couldn't do both unless it was clear and obvious-if we are using technology now then surely it must do what the lino couldn't.
Er --- yes. So what's your point?
I mentioned something similar earlier in the summer. But on Friday night Sky had a preview feature about VAR behind the scenes at Stockley Park. When the offside checking process was explained, it was shown how they first get the video tech to identify the frame where the ball is kicked. Then they use that timestamp to find the best angle across the line. And finally their line-drawing software does its thing. So in theory at least it’s covered.
On a slightly different note, it was also interesting the VAR sits and watches the game live but has a monitor directly underneath the main one which plays the same feed on a 3 second delay and showing 4 angles. So they can see something happen live and swing straight to reviewing it without any technical intervention.
What is the definition of passing the ball forward? Foot connects with ball or ball completely leaves foot?
I’d like to see us revert to solely backheel passing, in order to circumvent the forward pass rule.
Yes i did rather leave it hanging. The two subsequent posts sums up what i should have said-if the angle (s) for offside on the attacking player are so fine as to be a hairs breadth then does the same apply for when the ball is propelled forward.
Clear and obvious i thought was the principle but now we are into timestamping and line drawing software to ascertain whether there was a millimetre of advantage.
In the hope that we will score against West Ham i will not be celebrating immediately unless our player receives the ball in our own half and runs/scores from that position in a solo effort (possibly unlikely unless its GD or IS -not Isaac-or DW)
The latter surely.
Why? The ball is moving forward as I strike my foot through it. Why is the leaving of foot relevant to forward motion?
Because until it leaves your foot you haven't actually passed it yet? You are only in the process of passing it.
“A player in an offside position at the moment the ball is played or touched* by a team-mate...
*The first point of contact of the 'play' or 'touch' of the ball should be used”
That bit surely applies? The word ‘forward’ does not appear in the law itself incidentally.
Comes down to how the rule is defined. Forward motion of ball to team mate or completed pass ( I don’t know)
So from that it’s the first act of passing? Makes quite a difference in which frame VAR uses!
Edit: quite right forward is irrelevant.
Looks like I'm wrong then. Seems weird though. I'd have thought that a new passage of play had been enacted when the ball had left your boot and was on its way to someone else.
Indeed. Especially when we're talking toenails.
It does. And I suspect, despite it being the first step in the VAR offside check process, it’ll also be the one the least time is spent on.
The main reason linos make mistakes is that the rules are not really enforceable. You have to be looking in two directions at once.
Bizarre that the VAR haven’t accounted for this.
VAR is not being used for the keeper coming off the line, Premier League decided against it. That's still down to onfield officials.
But surely what's being said here is that they have accounted for it.
First they will look at the passer of the ball and decide on the exact moment that the ball is passed according to their definition. Then they will apply that exact timeframe to the receiver of the ball, draw their lines, and decide whether he's offside or not. By a toenail or more.
That seems to me to be about as objective and accurate as you can get. Unless the VAR team are going to disagree around the definition of when the ball is passed. A debate which we just had on here of course!
Sure, a major problem for linos in real time was being required to look in two directions at once. But it would appear that VAR can.
The whole point of VAR is to improve objectivity and accuracy in the decision making of officials. And as far as offside is concerned, it seems to me that it can do exactly that. With regard to penalties and red cards degrees of subjectivity will remain. As we saw on Saturday. Our penalty or not was the only VAR decision that was really argued over last weekend.
I know. But that seems daft to me. The keeper coming off his line too early is 'encroachment' in exactly the same way as a defender (or an attacker) entering the box too early is. And VAR would be able to check on that just as objectively and accurately as it can for offside as we saw on Saturday with Fabianski as a side issue.
Much has been made of the keeper's need to have some forward momentum as the penalty kick is taken to make it a fair contest. Well, if he can have one foot forward of the line then he can achieve some at least. Personally, I'd change the law though so the keeper can start behind the line if he likes as long as both feet haven't crossed it by the time the kick is taken. The opportunity for plenty of forward momentum there.
What will bring officials into disrepute is if they're being seen to be over lenient regarding goalies at penalties where VAR, if allowed, could easily have fixed it. And that footage will be seen. Every weekend.
With regard to penalty shoot-outs I'd switch off the VAR machine though. Otherwise an already lengthy process could become extraordinarily tedious. It would then be incumbent on the ref. not to allow some of the outrageous goalkeeping 'encroachments' we've seen in the past.
Genuinely unsnarky point coming up but can't think of a way to write it that doesn't come across like that. So apologies in advance...
Linesmen have ears too!
I know there'll be big points in big games at big stadiums where they're not going to be able to hear the ball being kicked. But I bet it still works most of the time at pitch level, even in the PL.