VAR decisions

Discussion in 'The Hornets' Nest - Watford Chat' started by hornetboy1, Aug 10, 2019.

  1. CleyHorn

    CleyHorn Reservist

    Interesting. Do you think they really do that? Will Smith, Lineaker and Prince Charles would have made exceptional linesmen then. At what point of the 'audio signal' do you think they'd decide the ball had been passed? Would there be a problem surrounding the differing speeds of sound and light? We're talking toenails here.
    Last edited: Aug 13, 2019
  2. WillisWasTheWorst

    WillisWasTheWorst Its making less grammar mistake's thats important

  3. foxywfc

    foxywfc Reservist

    Penalty today or not, I only got to see one replay of it and I never saw Mina touch the ball and he certainly took Deulofeu’s legs.

    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  4. hornetboy1

    hornetboy1 First Team

    Looked like a penalty to me. So that's now 2 controversial decisions against, and none for. The trend is as I expected.

    It was Mason and Friend on VAR today. Two more officials who always seem to have it in for Watford.

    Hopefully we'll have a more neutral couple of officials in our next match.
  5. GoingDown

    GoingDown Pizza & Figs

  6. wfc4ever

    wfc4ever First Team Captain

    Or if your Spanish mate dive and fall over so often !

    We seem to get a bit of a reputation for that which probably goes against us unlike with other teams .
  7. UEA_Hornet

    UEA_Hornet First Team Captain

    Next up, Uriah Rennie and Rob Styles.
  8. hornetboy1

    hornetboy1 First Team

    Nothing wrong with Rennie. Had it been Milford, now you'd be talking.
  9. Arakel

    Arakel First Team

    I thought the Mina challenge was a penalty. Certainly wasn't a corner though!
  10. wfc4ever

    wfc4ever First Team Captain

    Guess VAR might be the only thing that stops City !

    Like last season in Champions league ..

    More blame to the handball rule I feel
    though .
    Last edited: Aug 17, 2019
    The Voice of Reason and CleyHorn like this.
  11. GoingDown

    GoingDown Pizza & Figs

    No no no. Only the big clubs get the decisions with VAR, didn't you know?
    Cassetti's Beard likes this.
  12. kVA

    kVA Reservist

    Whatever the outcome of a VAR decision it’s all good for pub landlords and owners of late night drinking establishments as gentle discussion and light banter takes place over a few bitters.

  13. Jumbolina

    Jumbolina First Team

    Surely that is bad? Man City last minute winner was fine in my view. I won a lot of money by that decision. But it’s bad.
  14. GoingDown

    GoingDown Pizza & Figs

    After all......

    That's what it's all about.
  15. Markoa$

    Markoa$ Reservist

    Great decision to disallow the goal. Exactly why VAR was brought in. Man City scored from a handball, that had it not hit Laporte’s arm, City wouldn’t have scored. The deflection set Jesus up perfectly.

    However had that happened to us, I would be going nuts.
  16. Jumbolina

    Jumbolina First Team

    I don’t know friend. Aren’t we killing football here? VAR is gonna chalk stuff off. VAR ain’t adding new goals.
    Markoa$ and wimbornet like this.
  17. UEA_Hornet

    UEA_Hornet First Team Captain

    That’s for VAR 2.0

    And when VAR: Skynet launches it’ll eliminate all players, managers, referees, fans and pundits and achieve perfection. Live on Sky, naturally.
  18. Markoa$

    Markoa$ Reservist

    I think we are killing off the injustice of the big 6 getting all the decisions. I have no issue with VAR.

    Hypothetically speaking, cause that’s the only way we are ever drawing 2-2 with Man City, but let’s say today was game 38 and we needed a point to stay up. The event plays out as it does, do you want VAR to keep us in the league or relegate us because we are killing football with it?

    Personally speaking I would be fuming if we were relegated because of a deflection off the arm that set them up to send us down.
  19. Jumbolina

    Jumbolina First Team

    Fair point
    wfc4ever likes this.
  20. wfc4ever

    wfc4ever First Team Captain

    Anyway it's the rule to blame this time ..
  21. foxywfc

    foxywfc Reservist

    Shouldn’t make a difference if it’s a foul, it’s a foul

    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  22. hornetboy1

    hornetboy1 First Team

    VAR is a bit of a nonsense right now. VAR itself is great, but I knew the FA would f*** it all up.

    How can a goal scored after the ball accidently brushes an attacking players arm be disallowed, yet a ball which strikes a defending player's arm not be a penalty? If any part of an arm is a punishable offence why are they picking and choosing between attackers and defenders. All this is doing is reducing goals.

    It's just farcical.
  23. Ekstranding

    Ekstranding Academy Graduate

    Sounds like your issue is with the handball rule rather than VAR. I agree though, it seems completely inconsistent.

    I like VAR for the most part, but they just need to make it quicker. Like the Sterling offside last week, instead of spending ages drawing lines, just have an official look at it and say 'yeah that's about level', and move on. But on the whole I think it's a good thing.
    CleyHorn and wfc4ever like this.
  24. hornetboy1

    hornetboy1 First Team

    Yes....the rule is a joke. If a defender handballs it's ignored. If an attacker handballs it's penalised. How can that be right?
    CleyHorn likes this.
  25. wfc4ever

    wfc4ever First Team Captain

    I'd agree with that .

    Not that the ball touching a hand should mean handball all the time .
  26. Totally agree there is nothing wrong with VAR it is already proving to be a great leveller IMO.

    If City, or anyone else for that matter have any complaint it would have to be the new hand ball law, VAR is just the instrument that points out if any football law has been misinterpreted by the on field Ref, it does not make the LAWS!!!
    CleyHorn and FromDiv4 like this.
  27. Smudger

    Smudger Messi's Mad Coach Staff Member

    It can go the other way. Certainly in additional penalties or marginal offside decisions. However human error can still creep in and never be fully ruled out. I have not seen the Mina incident so I cannot comment. However the ruling on Abu Dhabi United Wa fine to me. Without the deflection off Laporte the ball does not arrive to Jesus in an ideal position. If it hits a defenders arm in an unnatural position then it is a penalty although again being open to human intepretation we are going to get variability in terms of what gets awarded and what does not. I think Bobby P was tremendously unlucky not to win an award last week for instance.

    Perhaps after a length of time and numerous decisions officials can come to parameters where they can categorically state VAR decisions as penalties and non penalties. No doubt there are committees looking at it all the time.
  28. hornetboy1

    hornetboy1 First Team

    They reviewed the penalty incident on Goals on Sunday. They were all in agreement that it should have been a penalty. Deulofeu was pushed in the back. Contact was made and the defender didn't get the ball. Pretty conclusive.
    folkestone orn and foxywfc like this.
  29. Markoa$

    Markoa$ Reservist

    So that’s 2 decisions gone against us which could have easily turned out us having 6 points right now instead of 0. Likelyhood is though had we been awarded the two penalties, Javi would have found a way to make sure we lose, so we are where we would be anyway, on 0 points.
  30. wfc4ever

    wfc4ever First Team Captain

  31. hornetboy1

    hornetboy1 First Team

    Had those two decisions gone in our favour, I think we'd have 2 or even 4 points right now. Even though we were poor against Brighton, had we scored a penalty at that particular phase in the match, there would have been a momentum shift. We were pressing and a goal would have lifted everyone.

    A penalty at Everton and I'm sure we'd have managed to take a point from a tight game.

    Although we can never rely on refereeing decisions, and we have to make our own luck, it does make a huge difference to the end result.
    PowerJugs and Markoa$ like this.
  32. CleyHorn

    CleyHorn Reservist

    A question. It concerns two 'goals' chalked off for offside via VAR for Jesus (Mooners) at Wet Spam two weekends ago and for Trossard (Seagulls) at home to Wet Spam again on Saturday. Both incidents came from a free-kick on the right.

    In the first, much was made of Sterling's toenail being offside at the time of the free-kick. The lines were drawn and it took ages to come to the decision. Sterling received the ball, moved forward with it and played it back to Jesus for a tap in. Critically, Jesus was a couple of yards ahead of Sterling at the time of the free-kick, so miles offside.

    In the second instance, Burn had a whole leg offside at the time of the free-kick. He wasn't the first Brighton player to receive the ball though (I forget which one was) but it was moved through to him and, from the goal-line, he crossed it for Trossard to volley home. So, in both instances, from free-kick to 'goal' was regarded as the same 'phase of play'.

    Why then all the angst around Sterling's toenail in the first instance? Jesus was a mile offside at the time of the free-kick too. So just rule the goal out immediately for offside against him then rather than drawing lines and worrying about whether Sterling's cut his toenails recently or not.
    Last edited: Aug 19, 2019
  33. Steve Leo Beleck

    Steve Leo Beleck Squad Player

    Someone on Twitter pointed out how ridiculous this interpretation of handball is with this example:

    Team X is defending a corner and the ball comes in and is deflected onto the arm of a defender at point blank range who can't do anything about it and has arm down by his side. No penalty at this point.

    But the defender then punts the ball clear, having accidentally controlled it with his arm and this puts Team X's striker in on goal and he scores. At this point the initial controlling of the ball becomes a key part in the goal so the ref has to disallow the goal, go back up the other end and award a penalty!

    It needs something like this to happen to illustrate how stupid this law is.
    PowerJugs, EB Hornet and hornetboy1 like this.
  34. UEA_Hornet

    UEA_Hornet First Team Captain

    I suppose that's theoretically possible. The main issue in that case isn't the handball definition though, it's that the law talks about 'creating a goal scoring opportunity'. Whack in the word 'obvious' to describe the goal scoring opportunity and your scenario become much less likely to ever happen.
  35. hornetboy1

    hornetboy1 First Team

    Apparently if a goal like that was scored, they would allow it. They have vaguely explained that there is a cut-off point, which is up to the referee's discretion, as to how far back they would go before a goal is scored. In the scenario you describe I believe they would ignore the initial handball. It's of course highly controversial, but one thing is certain, if that scenario does happen, Watford will be one of the teams involved in it.

    I think the handball defenders v strikers is wrong and if VAR is going to be credible it has to penalise both offenses or none at all.

    I'm certain they will review this, as what they are doing is reducing goals. No penalties and already Wolves and City have had goals disallowed, which would have stood last season. This will have a detrimental impact to the Premier League. They are strangling the Golden Goose. There is so much money in the EPL, and anything that will be seen as harming the overall package will be stopped, you can be certain of that.

    These things have to occur to the big clubs, or else it will not get spoken about, so it's good it happened to City.
    Last edited: Aug 19, 2019
    PowerJugs and WillisWasTheWorst like this.

Share This Page