Will VAR Change Football for the Better?
Discussion
G-wiz said:
DaveTheRave87 said:
The DCL one last night isn't a judgement call based on how hard the contact was, it's 3 factual yes/no decisions:
Did the player lunge with a straight leg? Yes
Were the studs showing? Yes
Was contact made? Yes
Red card.
Just because it wouldn't have been given pre-VAR doesn't make it the wrong decision.
Guilty, as charged.Did the player lunge with a straight leg? Yes
Were the studs showing? Yes
Was contact made? Yes
Red card.
Just because it wouldn't have been given pre-VAR doesn't make it the wrong decision.
Funny no-one agrees.
The contact in that incident was worse than people are making out. If Clyne's leg wasn't in mid air it wouldn't have moved back. That had the potential to be serious. It still hurt him.
McAnuff and Aluko have influenced people by making false claims that nobody claimed for a foul. The crowd reacts and players appeal twice for the foul. There has been too many incidents with pundits getting things wrong. I hate when fans try to hide behind what a pundit says. They do it when it suits.
I do think the red card is harsh, but it's not the no incident that other people are saying. If the referee had awarded a freekick and issued a yellow card that would be the end of the matter. It wouldn't be a clear and obvious error to upgrade to a red. When he's missed it VAR had to point out that he missed a foul that did make the criteria of endangering an opponent.
Edited by Driver101 on Friday 5th January 12:03
Driver101 said:
I think a lot of the issue is pundits mislead people. They are deemed the experts, but many don't understand the rules, or their view of an incident is wrong especially during live games.
The contact in that incident was worse than people are making out. If Clyne's leg wasn't in mid air it wouldn't have moved back. That had the potential to be serious. It still hurt him.
McAnuff and Aluko have influenced people by making false claims that nobody claimed for a foul. The crowd reacts and players appeal twice for the foul. There has been too many incidents with pundits getting things wrong. I hate when fans try to hide behind what a pundit says. They do it when it suits.
I do think the red card is harsh, but it's not the no incident that other people are saying. If the referee had awarded a freekick and issued a yellow card that would be the end of the matter. It wouldn't be a clear and obvious error to upgrade to a red. When he's missed it VAR had to point out that he missed a foul that did make the criteria of endangering an opponent.
So if the on-field referee gave a foul and yellow card (which meets the threshold of reckless not dangerous), how would that be the end of the matter if as you assert the challenge is deemed by VAR and also yourself to be dangerous and a red card. Surely the awarding of a yellow would be a clear and obvious error given the "serious" nature of the challenge. The contact in that incident was worse than people are making out. If Clyne's leg wasn't in mid air it wouldn't have moved back. That had the potential to be serious. It still hurt him.
McAnuff and Aluko have influenced people by making false claims that nobody claimed for a foul. The crowd reacts and players appeal twice for the foul. There has been too many incidents with pundits getting things wrong. I hate when fans try to hide behind what a pundit says. They do it when it suits.
I do think the red card is harsh, but it's not the no incident that other people are saying. If the referee had awarded a freekick and issued a yellow card that would be the end of the matter. It wouldn't be a clear and obvious error to upgrade to a red. When he's missed it VAR had to point out that he missed a foul that did make the criteria of endangering an opponent.
Edited by Driver101 on Friday 5th January 12:03
Driver101 said:
I think a lot of the issue is pundits mislead people. They are deemed the experts, but many don't understand the rules,
This is absolutely correct. They don't know the laws, or they are stuck in the past, usually the era in which they played. You just have to listen to countless experts going on about intent. And claiming an incident isn't a penalty because "he never would have got the ball anyway".
pavarotti1980 said:
Driver101 said:
I think a lot of the issue is pundits mislead people. They are deemed the experts, but many don't understand the rules, or their view of an incident is wrong especially during live games.
The contact in that incident was worse than people are making out. If Clyne's leg wasn't in mid air it wouldn't have moved back. That had the potential to be serious. It still hurt him.
McAnuff and Aluko have influenced people by making false claims that nobody claimed for a foul. The crowd reacts and players appeal twice for the foul. There has been too many incidents with pundits getting things wrong. I hate when fans try to hide behind what a pundit says. They do it when it suits.
I do think the red card is harsh, but it's not the no incident that other people are saying. If the referee had awarded a freekick and issued a yellow card that would be the end of the matter. It wouldn't be a clear and obvious error to upgrade to a red. When he's missed it VAR had to point out that he missed a foul that did make the criteria of endangering an opponent.
So if the on-field referee gave a foul and yellow card (which meets the threshold of reckless not dangerous), how would that be the end of the matter if as you assert the challenge is deemed by VAR and also yourself to be dangerous and a red card. Surely the awarding of a yellow would be a clear and obvious error given the "serious" nature of the challenge. The contact in that incident was worse than people are making out. If Clyne's leg wasn't in mid air it wouldn't have moved back. That had the potential to be serious. It still hurt him.
McAnuff and Aluko have influenced people by making false claims that nobody claimed for a foul. The crowd reacts and players appeal twice for the foul. There has been too many incidents with pundits getting things wrong. I hate when fans try to hide behind what a pundit says. They do it when it suits.
I do think the red card is harsh, but it's not the no incident that other people are saying. If the referee had awarded a freekick and issued a yellow card that would be the end of the matter. It wouldn't be a clear and obvious error to upgrade to a red. When he's missed it VAR had to point out that he missed a foul that did make the criteria of endangering an opponent.
Edited by Driver101 on Friday 5th January 12:03
That is my opinion and hypothesis. Adding in opinions does confuse matters. If we stick solely to the rules then the tackle does fall into endangering an opponent.
Driver101 said:
VAR is only supposed to get involved if there has been a clear and obvious error. If the referee gave a yellow card I don't think VAR would have got involved. We often see orange card incidents that can go either way. The referee not awarding anything shows the referee didn't see the contact at all. The referee had made a clear error and that error did fit the criteria of a red card.
That is my opinion and hypothesis. Adding in opinions does confuse matters. If we stick solely to the rules then the tackle does fall into endangering an opponent.
But if the challenge is "endangering an opponent" as you suggest they would be getting involved even if a foul and yellow were given.That is my opinion and hypothesis. Adding in opinions does confuse matters. If we stick solely to the rules then the tackle does fall into endangering an opponent.
TwigtheWonderkid said:
Driver101 said:
I think a lot of the issue is pundits mislead people. They are deemed the experts, but many don't understand the rules,
This is absolutely correct. They don't know the laws, or they are stuck in the past, usually the era in which they played. You just have to listen to countless experts going on about intent. And claiming an incident isn't a penalty because "he never would have got the ball anyway".
I'll spare the bamboozling episode of the penalty argument from the recent Celtic v Rangers game. During the game the commentary team said that Bernardo what lucky not to be sent off for this tackle.
https://x.com/Zeshankenzo/status/17413871332044518...
Bernardo doesn't make a challenge. Both his feet are on the ground. Goldson takes a wild kick and boots Bernardo in the knee with his studs. He drags him to the ground in a scissor motion and rolls around the floor. Goldson was the player very lucky not to be sent off. That could have been a red on its own. He was also booked in the game.
I've read the comment "even Chris Sutton thinks Bernardo was lucky" a million times. Fans are influenced by his opinion, or want to hide behind his wrong interpretation rather than admit what is clear to see.
Edited by Driver101 on Friday 5th January 15:38
TwigtheWonderkid said:
Driver101 said:
I think a lot of the issue is pundits mislead people. They are deemed the experts, but many don't understand the rules,
This is absolutely correct. They don't know the laws, or they are stuck in the past, usually the era in which they played. You just have to listen to countless experts going on about intent. And claiming an incident isn't a penalty because "he never would have got the ball anyway".
TwigtheWonderkid said:
Heard Neil Warnock talking about the DCL red card this morning. He said referees have never played the game so are clueless. It's never a red as there was no intent and hardly any contact! Clearly Warnock has never reffed a game and is clueless about the laws.
I'm with Warnock ,as is every single person I have heard speak about it..... even Ally McCoist while commentating on the Newcastle v Sunderland game that is going on at the moment.LimmerickLad said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
Heard Neil Warnock talking about the DCL red card this morning. He said referees have never played the game so are clueless. It's never a red as there was no intent and hardly any contact! Clearly Warnock has never reffed a game and is clueless about the laws.
I'm with Warnock ,as is every single person I have heard speak about it..... even Ally McCoist while commentating on the Newcastle v Sunderland game that is going on at the moment.ETA: McCoist isn’t particularly relevant. His knowledge is painfully out of date and it shows in his commentary.
Dingu said:
LimmerickLad said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
Heard Neil Warnock talking about the DCL red card this morning. He said referees have never played the game so are clueless. It's never a red as there was no intent and hardly any contact! Clearly Warnock has never reffed a game and is clueless about the laws.
I'm with Warnock ,as is every single person I have heard speak about it..... even Ally McCoist while commentating on the Newcastle v Sunderland game that is going on at the moment.ETA: McCoist isn’t particularly relevant. His knowledge is painfully out of date and it shows in his commentary.
Outdated? I'd hazard a guess McC knows a bit more about football than you or I, current or otherwise...........this match is a proper old fashioned football match, all blood and thunder, strong tackles, some god some not so good yet the "fans" are loving every minute and cheering every strong tackle as they should do of a derby match like this.......thank god there is no VAR to ruin it.
Dingu said:
LimmerickLad said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
Heard Neil Warnock talking about the DCL red card this morning. He said referees have never played the game so are clueless. It's never a red as there was no intent and hardly any contact! Clearly Warnock has never reffed a game and is clueless about the laws.
I'm with Warnock ,as is every single person I have heard speak about it..... even Ally McCoist while commentating on the Newcastle v Sunderland game that is going on at the moment.ETA: McCoist isn’t particularly relevant. His knowledge is painfully out of date and it shows in his commentary.
McCoist is alright, but he says some silly stuff. There was a game a few weeks ago and someone was sent off. He agreed that it was a clear sending off. Then he spent the next few minutes criticising the referee for sending the player off. He didn't need to do it and he ruined the game.
Edited by Driver101 on Saturday 6th January 13:23
Dingu said:
LimmerickLad said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
Heard Neil Warnock talking about the DCL red card this morning. He said referees have never played the game so are clueless. It's never a red as there was no intent and hardly any contact! Clearly Warnock has never reffed a game and is clueless about the laws.
I'm with Warnock ,as is every single person I have heard speak about it..... even Ally McCoist while commentating on the Newcastle v Sunderland game that is going on at the moment.ETA: McCoist isn’t particularly relevant. His knowledge is painfully out of date and it shows in his commentary.
LimmerickLad said:
Now both Waddle & Keen saying how much better it is to have a competitive / physical match without VAR spoiling it............suppose they are both clueless and out of date as well?
What was enjoyable about that first half? There was maybe a few more meaty challenges, but the quality of football was poor especially Sunderland. Sunderland offered nothing positive. Driver101 said:
LimmerickLad said:
Now both Waddle & Keen saying how much better it is to have a competitive / physical match without VAR spoiling it............suppose they are both clueless and out of date as well?
What was enjoyable about that first half? There was maybe a few more meaty challenges, but the quality of football was poor especially Sunderland. Sunderland offered nothing positive. eta are you saying the quality of the football is poor because there is no VAR to stop the game every few minutes while everything is double checked?
Edited by LimmerickLad on Saturday 6th January 14:11
Driver101 said:
It's not just playing football from a different era, it is often errors of judgement. Sometimes they miss things or see them wrongly.
I'll spare the bamboozling episode of the penalty argument from the recent Celtic v Rangers game. During the game the commentary team said that Bernardo what lucky not to be sent off for this tackle.
https://x.com/Zeshankenzo/status/17413871332044518...
Bernardo doesn't make a challenge. Both his feet are on the ground. Goldson takes a wild kick and boots Bernardo in the knee with his studs. He drags him to the ground in a scissor motion and rolls around the floor. Goldson was the player very lucky not to be sent off. That could have been a red on its own. He was also booked in the game.
I've read the comment "even Chris Sutton thinks Bernardo was lucky" a million times. Fans are influenced by his opinion, or want to hide behind his wrong interpretation rather than admit what is clear to see.
I dont see a foul from either player there. I might have booked Goldson for simulation, though.I'll spare the bamboozling episode of the penalty argument from the recent Celtic v Rangers game. During the game the commentary team said that Bernardo what lucky not to be sent off for this tackle.
https://x.com/Zeshankenzo/status/17413871332044518...
Bernardo doesn't make a challenge. Both his feet are on the ground. Goldson takes a wild kick and boots Bernardo in the knee with his studs. He drags him to the ground in a scissor motion and rolls around the floor. Goldson was the player very lucky not to be sent off. That could have been a red on its own. He was also booked in the game.
I've read the comment "even Chris Sutton thinks Bernardo was lucky" a million times. Fans are influenced by his opinion, or want to hide behind his wrong interpretation rather than admit what is clear to see.
Edited by Driver101 on Friday 5th January 15:38
LimmerickLad said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
Heard Neil Warnock talking about the DCL red card this morning. He said referees have never played the game so are clueless. It's never a red as there was no intent and hardly any contact! Clearly Warnock has never reffed a game and is clueless about the laws.
I'm with Warnock ,as is every single person I have heard speak about it..... even Ally McCoist while commentating on the Newcastle v Sunderland game that is going on at the moment.TwigtheWonderkid said:
LimmerickLad said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
Heard Neil Warnock talking about the DCL red card this morning. He said referees have never played the game so are clueless. It's never a red as there was no intent and hardly any contact! Clearly Warnock has never reffed a game and is clueless about the laws.
I'm with Warnock ,as is every single person I have heard speak about it..... even Ally McCoist while commentating on the Newcastle v Sunderland game that is going on at the moment.LimmerickLad said:
I don't care what the "laws" say..........It wasn't even a foul let alone a red card but if you think it was then, the "laws" are crap and clearly our views on VAR, and probably anything else to do with football, will never align..IMO VAR is ruining football.
Not much to be said if you don't accept the current laws of the game as governing principles.The current law states that a red should be given when "Any player who lunges at an opponent in challenging for the ball from the front, from the side or from behind using one or both legs, with excessive force or endangers the safety of an opponent is guilty of serious foul play."
Intent is not mentioned, nor is the extent of contact. So I'm sorry to have to tell you that DCL was properly sent off.
Gassing Station | Football | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff