The Footie Thread

[Swango1980]

What if both VAR refs disagree? The more people involved, the worse it will become, in my opinion. We are in realms of diminishing returns to get VAR to 100% - it won't happen. However, I do believe there is still small room for improvement, so I'm open to any suggestion that gets us there.

That was exactly my point. If 2 VAR referees disagree, then pretty much by definition the issue is not obvious. So, in most cases that would rule out controversial decisions where one ref might happen to be in the extreme minority. It is not going to make VAR perfect, but it should iron out the issues. If 2 VAR referees have a different opinion, that should be enough to stick with the onfield referees decision. However, if both VAR referees agree that the ref might have made a mistake (or more likely missed something from his angle), then they can intervene.

The problem with just the one VAR ref is that, if they are in the minority (even though that may only be in a small number of overall decisions they need to make), then those will be the decisions that cause huge controversy. It is flawed to assume that this can be solved by having the onfield referee make the final decision, once he is asked to review. The very fact he has been asked to review is that one of his peers thinks a different decision should / could have been made. That peer has looked at more angles of the incident. So, if the onfield ref still sticks with his original decision, with the eyes of the world on him, he will be lambasted by fans that the decision went against. Especially now that it appears one of his colleagues disagreed with him. So, it is going to make the onfield refs life much easier to agree with VAR, rather than risking going against it. If he goes against VAR, it is also suggesting one of his colleagues is wrong, despite having more "evidence" to review. Big call that.

 

[clubchamp98]

I have often said that referees should start 'enforcing' the rules from the start. None of the "It's early in the game so that foul isn't a yellow card" - if it is a bookable offence then show a card. Also, clamp down on foul and abusive language and then when games are called off after 20 minutes as one side has too few players (less than 7?), award the game to the other side. Things will soon change as players and managers get the message


Unless they really are as stupid as we often think they are

That’s never going to happen in a million years.
Far to sensible!

 

[Jimaroid]

So here we are then, the future. Watch the video in the second tweet, video quality is not the best but shows what we can expect.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1567228202350788609

 

[Orikoru]

Ian Darke and Robbie Savage, utterly painful and cringeworthy to listen to. Almost as bad as City wearing a knock-off West Ham away kit for the game.

 

[Tashyboy]

Ian Darke and Robbie Savage, utterly painful and cringeworthy to listen to. Almost as bad as City wearing a knock-off West Ham away kit for the game.

Club badge and colours

Manchester City's stadium and shirt have been sponsored by Etihad Airwayssince 2009.

Wikimedia Commons has media related to Manchester City F.C. kits.
Manchester City's home colours are sky blue and white. Traditional away kitcolours have been either maroon or (from the 1960s) red and black;
??

 

[Orikoru]

Club badge and colours

Manchester City's stadium and shirt have been sponsored by Etihad Airwayssince 2009.

Wikimedia Commons has media related to Manchester City F.C. kits.
Manchester City's home colours are sky blue and white. Traditional away kitcolours have been either maroon or (from the 1960s) red and black;
??

It looked bloody horrible.

 

[Tashyboy]

It looked bloody horrible.

compared to some of the kits we have had in the last 10 years it’s a classic ? the under 21’s wore it tonight for the first team and a lot of the City fans like the old retro look.

 

[JSims]

The officials, I believe, have already come out and said it was wrong though. Have they not?

If you still think it is correct, then VAR MUST intervene every single time any part of a players body touches part of an opponents body. Just for the sake that, there may be a small chance the player could have acted differently so that zero contact was made. We have been repeatedly told that VAR only should intervene when there has been an obvious mistake. So, when you say "just because most think it wasn't a foul" seems like the most definitive answer as to exactly why VAR should never intervene in this specific case. If most think it wasn't a foul, how could you argue it was an obvious foul and therefore an obvious mistake!?

As I said before, if you had at least 2 VAR referees, then at least you'd iron out the issue of an obvious mistake. If a single VAR referee is in the 5% of people who thinks a mistake was made, then maybe to them it is 100% a mistake but to 95% of people it was 100% the right call. If you had a couple in the VAR studio, then VAR may have a chance of working better as intended, as there is a better chance that a colleague would argue against a mistake being made, thus both having to agree there was nothing obvious. However, while there is only a single VAR guy in the studio, then these sorts of problems will always arise, as there will always come a time when the VAR ref is in the extreme minority.

By the time the VAR suggests that the on-field Ref checks the monitor, there ARE 2 Referees. Having 2 VAR Refs wouldn't actually eliminate the 'obvious mistake' mistake either, as such cases are unlikely to be in the 5% v 95% category you state.
What I believe is for the VAR Ref to apply it's own rules that a review is only suggested when a clear mistake is determined by VAR, or, perhaps, where something that would change the decision may have been missed is discussed and the OFR wants a 2nd look. OFRs should have the courage to stick to their original decision, as also happened for the 1st time in EFL last weekend.

 

[Slime]

Having Erling Haaland in your side is just plain cheating .......................... he's that good.
Best player in the world and incoming Ballon d'Or winner.
Only an injury can stop him.
He's scary good.

 

[Swango1980]

By the time the VAR suggests that the on-field Ref checks the monitor, there ARE 2 Referees. Having 2 VAR Refs wouldn't actually eliminate the 'obvious mistake' mistake either, as such cases are unlikely to be in the 5% v 95% category you state.
What I believe is for the VAR Ref to apply it's own rules that a review is only suggested when a clear mistake is determined by VAR, or, perhaps, where something that would change the decision may have been missed is discussed and the OFR wants a 2nd look. OFRs should have the courage to stick to their original decision, as also happened for the 1st time in EFL last weekend.

I also made the point that you don't really have 2 refs, at the moment, giving their independent decision. Because, once the OFR is asked to review something, he is under immense pressure as the eyes of the world, players and managers are on him. It is expected he should change his mind, as the VAR is really only meant to intervene when an obvious mistake had been made. So, it is a huge call for the OFR to ignore VAR once he is asked to review. However, 2 VARs means they can quickly discuss a call off camera, so to speak, and thus any doubt can be ironed out without interrupting the game. The game would only be interrupted if both VAR agreed something had been missed.

In terms of your second paragraph, that IS how VAR is currently meant to work, is it not? And that clearly doesn't resolve the issues we have seen.

 

[Swango1980]

Having Erling Haaland in your side is just plain cheating .......................... he's that good.
Best player in the world and incoming Ballon d'Or winner.
Only an injury can stop him.
He's scary good.

It appears he has improved them by about 20%, which is scary given how good they were. Whereas their closest challenger, Liverpool, have probably gone backwards about 10% after losing Mane. Nunez has given them nothing yet, but once he does get going, it'll be difficult to see him replacing what was lost in Mane, let alone improve them.

Everyone else were miles away anyway. Funny how things can change so quickly though. After Brentford, some so called experts were questioning ten Hag, and that Utd should have brought in a big manager like Conte when they had the chance, to compete with the big 3 managers at City, Liverpool and Chelsea. 4 games later, and ten Hag doesn't look so bad, whilst some are questioning Tuchel.

So, who knows where we'll be this time next month. However, I reckon Haaland may have added at least another 10 goals to his tally by then.

 

[JSims]

I also made the point that you don't really have 2 refs, at the moment, giving their independent decision. Because, once the OFR is asked to review something, he is under immense pressure as the eyes of the world, players and managers are on him. It is expected he should change his mind, as the VAR is really only meant to intervene when an obvious mistake had been made. So, it is a huge call for the OFR to ignore VAR once he is asked to review. However, 2 VARs means they can quickly discuss a call off camera, so to speak, and thus any doubt can be ironed out without interrupting the game. The game would only be interrupted if both VAR agreed something had been missed.

In terms of your second paragraph, that IS how VAR is currently meant to work, is it not? And that clearly doesn't resolve the issues we have seen.

There's a period between the initiation of VAR and the suggestion to review. That's the point where I'm saying there are 2 refs involved - which is before the review is suggested - that a discussion could be had. In the case of the West Ham one, which I watched, the VAR presumably deemed that the Keeper had been fouled, whereas the OFR either deemed there had been no foul or had missed it. The discussion should have been along he lines of whether the OFR had seen the contact and disregarded it. At that point there were 2 Refs discussing an incident. If the OFR wanted a 2nd look, then the monitor was available. There should be no pressure - apart perhaps from a suggestion from the VAR that a 2nd look should be had - to change on field decision.

 

[Swango1980]

There's a period between the initiation of VAR and the suggestion to review. That's the point where I'm saying there are 2 refs involved - which is before the review is suggested - that a discussion could be had. In the case of the West Ham one, which I watched, the VAR presumably deemed that the Keeper had been fouled, whereas the OFR either deemed there had been no foul or had missed it. The discussion should have been along he lines of whether the OFR had seen the contact and disregarded it. At that point there were 2 Refs discussing an incident. If the OFR wanted a 2nd look, then the monitor was available. There should be no pressure - apart perhaps from a suggestion from the VAR that a 2nd look should be had - to change on field decision.

Yes, but the problem is, one of those 2 people are handicapped. The OFR has only seen the incident from where he was standing, in real time. He has not had the benefit of looking at multiple angles and replays. So, if VAR is suggesting something different to the original decision, the OFR can never be in a position to decide properly for himself until he sees what VAR is seeing.

In West Ham game, the OFR would have seen what most of us had seen. Mendy making a save, but no foul on Mendy, even if slight contact was made. However, VAR might have decided that Bowen had kicked out intentionally, thus a foul. The OFR would have to realise that the VAR is in a better position to make an assessment, and that he, the OFR, might have missed something in that instant. So, he needs to review it. However, once he does, the expectation and pressure is to reverse that decision.

 

[Tashyboy]

It appears he has improved them by about 20%, which is scary given how good they were. Whereas their closest challenger, Liverpool, have probably gone backwards about 10% after losing Mane. Nunez has given them nothing yet, but once he does get going, it'll be difficult to see him replacing what was lost in Mane, let alone improve them.

Everyone else were miles away anyway. Funny how things can change so quickly though. After Brentford, some so called experts were questioning ten Hag, and that Utd should have brought in a big manager like Conte when they had the chance, to compete with the big 3 managers at City, Liverpool and Chelsea. 4 games later, and ten Hag doesn't look so bad, whilst some are questioning Tuchel.

So, who knows where we'll be this time next month. However, I reckon Haaland may have added at least another 10 goals to his tally by then.

Listening to some City fans last night and they were suggesting that Pep once more could try a 5-3-2 formation with Haaland and Alvarez up front. I get where they are Coming from but your three in midfield will include Rodri, so after that who do you play, Foden, KDB, Gundoghan, Grealish, Silva, Mahrez. Seems a case of robbing Peter to pay Paul.
I thought last nights performance against a poor Sevilla side was as good as I have seen. Really does go to show how Good Villas performance was at the weekend.

 

[Pin-seeker]

Having Erling Haaland in your side is just plain cheating .......................... he's that good.
Best player in the world and incoming Ballon d'Or winner.
Only an injury can stop him.
He's scary good.

Plus he gets a rest during the WC ?

 

[Swango1980]

Listening to some City fans last night and they were suggesting that Pep once more could try a 5-3-2 formation with Haaland and Alvarez up front. I get where they are Coming from but your three in midfield will include Rodri, so after that who do you play, Foden, KDB, Gundoghan, Grealish, Silva, Mahrez. Seems a case of robbing Peter to pay Paul.
I thought last nights performance against a poor Sevilla side was as good as I have seen. Really does go to show how Good Villas performance was at the weekend.

Strange. I don't think Haaland needs to much help up front. Just give him a strong midfield that can string passes together, he hints out space to score. And he is a monster, can't see any defender bullying him

 

[Piece]

Tuchel on his way....

Auba needs to cash-in on his 14 day cooling off period!

 

[fundy]

New owners, same old Chelsea.......................

 

[Deleted member 15344]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1567439761027072001

madness

 

[Aztecs27]

hahaha! bonkers.