| How can VAR review it when it isn't a red card? (n/t) 21:11 - Oct 23 with 1994 views | Nthsuffolkblue |
|  |
| |  |
| How can VAR review it when it isn't a red card? (n/t) on 21:12 - Oct 23 with 1492 views | Blue_Uprising |
No idea must have change the rules? |  | | |
| How can VAR review it when it isn't a red card? (n/t) on 21:16 - Oct 23 with 1414 views | homer_123 |
VAR asked Ref to check his decision as VAR thought it might have been a red.
Ref's final decision was spot on. |  |
| |
| How can VAR review it when it isn't a red card? (n/t) on 22:07 - Oct 23 with 1289 views | vapour_trail |
| How can VAR review it when it isn't a red card? (n/t) on 21:16 - Oct 23 by homer_123 |
VAR asked Ref to check his decision as VAR thought it might have been a red.
Ref's final decision was spot on. |
It was a red all day long. We got away with one there. |  |
| |
| How can VAR review it when it isn't a red card? (n/t) on 22:14 - Oct 23 with 1230 views | DarkHorse |
| How can VAR review it when it isn't a red card? (n/t) on 22:07 - Oct 23 by vapour_trail |
It was a red all day long. We got away with one there. |
Nah, not a clear goalscoring opportunity. He wasn't fully in control, Davis/Walton had it covered. |  | | |
| How can VAR review it when it isn't a red card? (n/t) on 22:20 - Oct 23 with 1181 views | Nthsuffolkblue |
| How can VAR review it when it isn't a red card? (n/t) on 21:16 - Oct 23 by homer_123 |
VAR asked Ref to check his decision as VAR thought it might have been a red.
Ref's final decision was spot on. |
But VAR shouldn't be reviewing "think it might be a red card".
They should only be reviewing a clear and obvious error (i.e. definitely is a red card). They are moving into re-refereeing the game because the ref missed a very obvious foul.
Ultimately the correct decision (that should have been given by the linesman/ref onfield) was reached. But VAR were wrong to get involved. | |
| |
| How can VAR review it when it isn't a red card? (n/t) on 22:29 - Oct 23 with 1130 views | GlasgowBlue |
Becuase they don't understand the bloody rules.
See Harry Maguire's goal against us at Old Trafford and City's goal against Man U.
VAR would be great of the standard of the people operating it were better qualified. |  |
| |
| How can VAR review it when it isn't a red card? (n/t) on 22:30 - Oct 23 with 1122 views | alexlanark64 |
How do you know its not a red, unless you review it? |  | | |
| How can VAR review it when it isn't a red card? (n/t) on 22:31 - Oct 23 with 1110 views | GlasgowBlue |
| How can VAR review it when it isn't a red card? (n/t) on 22:07 - Oct 23 by vapour_trail |
It was a red all day long. We got away with one there. |
That's the view of somebody who doesn't understand football. | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| How can VAR review it when it isn't a red card? (n/t) on 22:41 - Oct 23 with 1065 views | vapour_trail |
| How can VAR review it when it isn't a red card? (n/t) on 22:31 - Oct 23 by GlasgowBlue |
That's the view of somebody who doesn't understand football. |
It’s the view of someone with a different opinion to yourself. I could well be wrong. I suspect I’d have more support if it had been down the other end.
Gone in a bit two footed there sunshine. Lay off the ale. | |
| |
| How can VAR review it when it isn't a red card? (n/t) on 22:47 - Oct 23 with 1023 views | GlasgowBlue |
| How can VAR review it when it isn't a red card? (n/t) on 22:41 - Oct 23 by vapour_trail |
It’s the view of someone with a different opinion to yourself. I could well be wrong. I suspect I’d have more support if it had been down the other end.
Gone in a bit two footed there sunshine. Lay off the ale. |
Don't judge others by your own standards sunshine Never drink the night before a park run. | |
| |
| How can VAR review it when it isn't a red card? (n/t) on 22:50 - Oct 23 with 1010 views | Nthsuffolkblue |
| How can VAR review it when it isn't a red card? (n/t) on 22:30 - Oct 23 by alexlanark64 |
How do you know its not a red, unless you review it? |
Isn't the point that VAR look at it, see there is at most there is a big doubt that it should be a red (and actually there is very little argument that it is) and decide it isn't a clear and obvious error on a red card so no review?
Or are you saying every time there is a foul, they should stop the game and get the referee to look at it in case there was excessive force and it should be a red card? That is re-refereeing the game and was expressly not what VAR is for.
And I know even while typing all that you are going to Whoosh me! | |
| |
| How can VAR review it when it isn't a red card? (n/t) on 22:51 - Oct 23 with 1004 views | RetroBlue |
| How can VAR review it when it isn't a red card? (n/t) on 22:07 - Oct 23 by vapour_trail |
It was a red all day long. We got away with one there. |
Diop made ZERO contact with the player. |  |
| |
| How can VAR review it when it isn't a red card? (n/t) on 22:51 - Oct 23 with 1001 views | Swansea_Blue |
| How can VAR review it when it isn't a red card? (n/t) on 22:07 - Oct 23 by vapour_trail |
It was a red all day long. We got away with one there. |
Seen em given. If Diop wipes him out there he’d have been gone for dangerous play. Denying a goalscoring opportunity? I’m not sure. I don’t think it’s as clear cut a non-red as some are saying though. He was ahead of Leif and only knocked the ball forward because he was avoiding Diop’s challenge. No Diop and he’s got a run and shot at goal. Although he was slightly going away from goal, which probably saves us. |  |
| |
| How can VAR review it when it isn't a red card? (n/t) on 22:52 - Oct 23 with 991 views | GlasgowBlue |
| How can VAR review it when it isn't a red card? (n/t) on 22:50 - Oct 23 by Nthsuffolkblue |
Isn't the point that VAR look at it, see there is at most there is a big doubt that it should be a red (and actually there is very little argument that it is) and decide it isn't a clear and obvious error on a red card so no review?
Or are you saying every time there is a foul, they should stop the game and get the referee to look at it in case there was excessive force and it should be a red card? That is re-refereeing the game and was expressly not what VAR is for.
And I know even while typing all that you are going to Whoosh me! |
And VAR should only get involved in the red card. So if it wasn't a red acrd then the onfield decision of no foul should stand rather than a free kick and a yellow. | |
| |
| How can VAR review it when it isn't a red card? (n/t) on 22:52 - Oct 23 with 996 views | TheMoralMajority |
It was reviewed for "Denial of a goal scoring opportunity".
Ref 100% should have caught it on field. Crazy that he didn't. Should never have needed to go to VAR |  |
| 100% committed to Dear Leader Ham |
| |
| How can VAR review it when it isn't a red card? (n/t) on 22:55 - Oct 23 with 962 views | GlasgowBlue |
| How can VAR review it when it isn't a red card? (n/t) on 22:51 - Oct 23 by RetroBlue |
Diop made ZERO contact with the player. |
The player actually went over the top of Diop's arse didn't he? | |
| |
| How can VAR review it when it isn't a red card? (n/t) on 22:56 - Oct 23 with 959 views | TheMoralMajority |
| How can VAR review it when it isn't a red card? (n/t) on 22:52 - Oct 23 by GlasgowBlue |
And VAR should only get involved in the red card. So if it wasn't a red acrd then the onfield decision of no foul should stand rather than a free kick and a yellow. |
I am prepared to be corrected, but I don't think that is right for DOGSO. VAR felt it needed reviewing (and taking the blue-tinted specs off for a bit, I'm inclined to agree). I think the final outcome was the correct one, but it should not have required VAR in the first place. [Post edited 23 Oct 22:57]
| |
| 100% committed to Dear Leader Ham |
| |
| How can VAR review it when it isn't a red card? (n/t) on 22:58 - Oct 23 with 951 views | Nthsuffolkblue |
| How can VAR review it when it isn't a red card? (n/t) on 22:52 - Oct 23 by TheMoralMajority |
It was reviewed for "Denial of a goal scoring opportunity".
Ref 100% should have caught it on field. Crazy that he didn't. Should never have needed to go to VAR |
Although, had the referee got it right, the implication is that VAR would have still got him to take a second look because they thought it was a clear and obvious error on a red card.
I don't think they would have done would they? Which would mean they did it in order to re-referee the match because it was such a poor decision on no foul.
There are multiple reasons it was never a red card:
It was a little way from goal (possibly red);
Going wide away from goal (probably not a red);
Overhit so unlikely to get the ball (definitely not a red);
Covering defender (definitely not a red).
It's like VAR didn't consider most of the criteria at all. | |
| |
| How can VAR review it when it isn't a red card? (n/t) on 23:01 - Oct 23 with 925 views | TheMoralMajority |
| How can VAR review it when it isn't a red card? (n/t) on 22:58 - Oct 23 by Nthsuffolkblue |
Although, had the referee got it right, the implication is that VAR would have still got him to take a second look because they thought it was a clear and obvious error on a red card.
I don't think they would have done would they? Which would mean they did it in order to re-referee the match because it was such a poor decision on no foul.
There are multiple reasons it was never a red card:
It was a little way from goal (possibly red);
Going wide away from goal (probably not a red);
Overhit so unlikely to get the ball (definitely not a red);
Covering defender (definitely not a red).
It's like VAR didn't consider most of the criteria at all. |
I don't think the criteria is that it needs to be a red, just that the video assistants felt that there was potentially a denial of a goal scoring opportunity. As it happens, there wasn't, but it 'could' have been as the referee made a clearly glaring error.
Whether that is enough to clear the threshold of pulling the game back, I do not know, as it is painfully subjective, and all it does is underline why VAR really doesn't work for football, but I can't see it going anywhere, sadly. | |
| 100% committed to Dear Leader Ham |
| |
| How can VAR review it when it isn't a red card? (n/t) on 23:02 - Oct 23 with 917 views | GlasgowBlue |
| How can VAR review it when it isn't a red card? (n/t) on 22:56 - Oct 23 by TheMoralMajority |
I am prepared to be corrected, but I don't think that is right for DOGSO. VAR felt it needed reviewing (and taking the blue-tinted specs off for a bit, I'm inclined to agree). I think the final outcome was the correct one, but it should not have required VAR in the first place. [Post edited 23 Oct 22:57]
|
Yes it was a foul and a clear yellow. But that isn't VAR'S job. VAR were wrong to ask the ref to review the DOGSO as it was clear there was a covering defender and the attacker lost control of the ball. By bringing the foul to the ref's attention he re reffed the game. [Post edited 23 Oct 23:02]
| |
| |
| How can VAR review it when it isn't a red card? (n/t) on 23:04 - Oct 23 with 900 views | TheMoralMajority |
| How can VAR review it when it isn't a red card? (n/t) on 23:02 - Oct 23 by GlasgowBlue |
Yes it was a foul and a clear yellow. But that isn't VAR'S job. VAR were wrong to ask the ref to review the DOGSO as it was clear there was a covering defender and the attacker lost control of the ball. By bringing the foul to the ref's attention he re reffed the game. [Post edited 23 Oct 23:02]
|
It's a subjective call. You can argue the toss all day long about whether it should or shouldn't be reviewed. It just underlines VAR is not fit for football because as soon as you enter the realms of subjectivity the system can only fail. | |
| 100% committed to Dear Leader Ham |
| |
| How can VAR review it when it isn't a red card? (n/t) on 23:05 - Oct 23 with 896 views | Nthsuffolkblue |
| How can VAR review it when it isn't a red card? (n/t) on 23:02 - Oct 23 by GlasgowBlue |
Yes it was a foul and a clear yellow. But that isn't VAR'S job. VAR were wrong to ask the ref to review the DOGSO as it was clear there was a covering defender and the attacker lost control of the ball. By bringing the foul to the ref's attention he re reffed the game. [Post edited 23 Oct 23:02]
|
It doesn't matter in the final analysis and it is ironic that it actually led to the correct outcome.
But it is VAR all over. | |
| |
| How can VAR review it when it isn't a red card? (n/t) on 23:06 - Oct 23 with 884 views | Cheltenham_Blue |
| How can VAR review it when it isn't a red card? (n/t) on 22:07 - Oct 23 by vapour_trail |
It was a red all day long. We got away with one there. |
Absolutely wasn't. Are you Keith Hackett? |  |
| |
| How can VAR review it when it isn't a red card? (n/t) on 23:10 - Oct 23 with 857 views | vapour_trail |
| How can VAR review it when it isn't a red card? (n/t) on 22:51 - Oct 23 by RetroBlue |
Diop made ZERO contact with the player. |
 | |
| |
| How can VAR review it when it isn't a red card? (n/t) on 23:11 - Oct 23 with 842 views | vapour_trail |
| How can VAR review it when it isn't a red card? (n/t) on 23:06 - Oct 23 by Cheltenham_Blue |
Absolutely wasn't. Are you Keith Hackett? |
Fair enough I’m in the minority. Sort of expected that.
Fcking good point that tonight though. Forest are a high mid table team for my money. We are doing well this time around. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
