Orikoru
Tour Winner
I knew he was quick, but damn.
clubchamp98
Journeyman Pro
MOTD don’t talk about controversial incidents anymore.
I can't find the report, but from what I read ESPN said there were 20 VAR errors this season, and Liverpool suffered from most (strange, because if you talk to fans weekly, there seem to be at least 3 or 4 bad calls every weekend)
I'd like to know exactly what those 20 VAR errors were. There was the Diaz goal ruled out for offside which was 100% wrong, but of the rest would be interesting to know how many of those errors were still somewhat subjective. Furthermore, I'd also then like to know how many VAR incidents were NOT included. Any slightly controversial VAR call in a Liverpool game will be all over the media, and I can hear the violins being played in Liverpool all the way from Lincoln. But how much publicity will VAR decisions in games like Palace v Burnley make? There might be a snippet about it on MOTD, but it'll barely be talked about thereafter. People like Howard Webb will be less inclined to come out to the media and admit a mistake may have been made.
I've a sneaky suspicion that this report has some big flaws. But, maybe I'm wrong, after all it is summarised on Twitter.
They cherry pick things that suit them.
Many times I have watched a game and thought I wonder what Shearer or Wrighty has to say about that .
but nothing.
Swango1980
Well-known member
Exactly.
So if they are talking about Palace v Burnley, they probably won't make a massive deal about terrible decisions. And if they do, many might have tuned out by then.
Whereas if you have a big game broadcast on Sky/BT (usually featuring the top teams, with most fans), then pundits could be talking about an incident as long as an hour or more after the game. Then it is all repeated on Sky Sports News. Then it is heard on every TalkSport show for the next week or so. And fans add pages and pages to forum threads talking about it. And then Howard Webb feels the need to come out and placate the mob.
So, to me, any slightly controversial VAR incident could be blown out of all proportion in big games. Whereas a pretty big howler in a less popular game could be barely talked about, outside the clubs fanbase that were negatively impacted upon.
Mind you, I also think ESPN did a similar study this time last year, and it appears Liverpool were joint second (behind Brentford) in beneficial VAR decisions, those clubs a pretty long way in front of others. Bottom of the pile, with most decisions going against them, were Man City. The term LiVARpool has been going around for some time. So even if you are to believe what these reports are trying to tell you, then there seems to be "evidence" backing LiVARpool up. But, I suppose you can cherry pick a game or a group of games to try and indicate otherwise
Pin point placement.
HampshireHog
Assistant Pro
Why do VAR decisions appear to go against Liverpool?
’Cause so many on pitch calls favour them, evidently unjustly.
’Cause so many on pitch calls favour them, evidently unjustly.
Pin-seeker
Well-known member
This episode is a good watch.
clubchamp98
Journeyman Pro
That’s true of any media outlet though.
The newspapers ( remember them ) don’t have headlines on the back page that Burnley were denied a Penalty.
But a top of the table clash will attract those headlines for bad mistakes.
The main thing is VAR was brought in to stop those headlines !
But the headlines are now about VAR making howlers that’s just not good enough.
Slime
Tour Winner
Swango1980
Well-known member
I know, but the purpose of me mentioning it is pretty much exactly that. VAR decisions in Liverpool games are likely to be huge talking points, as it involves the fans of most of the most heavily supported clubs in the country / world (and in my opinion, Liverpool fans, generally are a different breed to fans of other big clubs, but maybe that's just me).
So, as I was responding to the post in which a Tweet was shared about Liverpool being hard done by with VAR, my point was that I'm not convinced with the conclusions of that report, given there may already be a bias on what VAR decisions that were actually used in the "investigation".
Neilds
Assistant Pro
Just seen an article that the rule makers are considering a trial of blue cards (10min sin bin) for dissent and cynical fouls. 2 blue or blue/yellow will be a red. Will be interesting to see if they class the hack down of a counter attack as cynical- the one where commentators always say “took one for the team”
clubchamp98
Journeyman Pro
Blue will be worse than yellow in this scenario.
They will be down to ten men.
so they are going to need strict guidelines as to what’s blue and what’s yellow!
You can bring someone off if it’s a yellow but can’t sub someone in a sin bin.
Given the errors refs and VAR are making, this will cause chaos.
Imo Blue is 10 mins off but that’s all ! Should not count towards a red.
Swango1980
Well-known member
There is so much money in football now, that I suspect there are now many people within the footballing authorities that are desperate to justify their salaries. Implementing new laws seems a great way to make it look like you are keeping busy.
The proposals, of what little I know about them, seem pathetic. Referees already have the power to deal with all these various infringments. There is no need to make it more complicated by giving them many more potential "penalties" to these infringments. We have enough arguments about whether something should be a yellow card or not, or a yellow/red card. We do not need to make this worse, by arguing whether it should be a blue card or not, yellow card or not, yellow or blue card, blue/red card, yellow/red card, etc.
Two blues make a red. Two yellows make a red. One of each makes a red. Well, if b+b=r, y+y=r, b+y=r, then the way I see it, b=y. So we could just simplify it by substituting b with y, and we don't even need b at all. O, hang on, that is what we have now
At some point we will have yellows for a bad foul (that is not considered at red level). Blue cards for insulting a referee. Purple cards for tactical fouls. Brown cards for kicking the ball away. Green cards for taking your top off when celebrating. White cards for timewasting. Various different combinations may lead to an upgraded yellow card, and further combinations an upgraded red card. It'll all sound fantastic to the guys in suits that meet in Geneva (or wherever) for a weeks jolly, all expenses paid and a few rounds of golf, when they come up with these proposals. To the rest of us, we'll just be thinking
Sat musing, as you do. Not seen this since the introduction of more than one sub, but that doesn’t mean it hasn’t happened.
A team has used all its subs and subsequently a player is hacked down and has to go off because of injury. The player making the tackle receives a yellow, which also means he, or she, gets to stay on. Seems a bit harsh that one team ends up with 10 men, the having 11… I guess it’s just rub of the green.
A team has used all its subs and subsequently a player is hacked down and has to go off because of injury. The player making the tackle receives a yellow, which also means he, or she, gets to stay on. Seems a bit harsh that one team ends up with 10 men, the having 11… I guess it’s just rub of the green.
clubchamp98
Journeyman Pro
I would make the player getting the yellow for a deliberate foul stand off the pitch until the injured player is ready to come back on.
Or 10 mins whichever is first.
In a normal scenario make him wait until the player can come back on or a sub replaces them.
Neilds
Assistant Pro
Maybe a sin bin will make players think twice but then again……There is so much money in football now, that I suspect there are now many people within the footballing authorities that are desperate to justify their salaries. Implementing new laws seems a great way to make it look like you are keeping busy.
The proposals, of what little I know about them, seem pathetic. Referees already have the power to deal with all these various infringments. There is no need to make it more complicated by giving them many more potential "penalties" to these infringments. We have enough arguments about whether something should be a yellow card or not, or a yellow/red card. We do not need to make this worse, by arguing whether it should be a blue card or not, yellow card or not, yellow or blue card, blue/red card, yellow/red card, etc.
Two blues make a red. Two yellows make a red. One of each makes a red. Well, if b+b=r, y+y=r, b+y=r, then the way I see it, b=y. So we could just simplify it by substituting b with y, and we don't even need b at all. O, hang on, that is what we have now
At some point we will have yellows for a bad foul (that is not considered at red level). Blue cards for insulting a referee. Purple cards for tactical fouls. Brown cards for kicking the ball away. Green cards for taking your top off when celebrating. White cards for timewasting. Various different combinations may lead to an upgraded yellow card, and further combinations an upgraded red card. It'll all sound fantastic to the guys in suits that meet in Geneva (or wherever) for a weeks jolly, all expenses paid and a few rounds of golf, when they come up with these proposals. To the rest of us, we'll just be thinking
D
Deleted member 15344
Guest
It has happened before but don’t think it’s a common thing but it’s just the rub of the green , someone could get injured in a clean tackle and goes off
But if a sin bin is in play then maybe that’s something that can be used
Sin bins are used in hockey and they work well , rugby is a perfect example of it working
But as with VAR I’m not sure can it work in football- I think it’s certainly worth a trial in maybe cup games, but would need some clear guidelines on what’s a yellow or what’s a sin bin
Don’t think things like dissent etc should be a sin bin but we have seen lots of tackles that are in between a yellow and a red - have it as a sin bin and then they have 10 mins to decide if it’s a red
Pin-seeker
Well-known member
Suppose that’s the gamble if you use all your subs.
I would have thought sin bins for dissent would be a radical step towards getting a degree of respect in the game for refs. Utopian thought of course but if people are showing clear dissent (kicking the ball away running ten yards to surround the ref) then ten minutes off the pitch may help. It would need clear guidance and but would need officials to have the gumption to stand there and stick with it. A cup comp would be an ideal testing ground but I can't see it ever taking off and we'll never get football to the same place rugby is
Orikoru
Tour Winner
They've had sin bins in Sunday League for about 5 years. Honestly it's kind of been forgotten about, you rarely ever see it used now. Can't really say if it was a success or not.
If they aren't bothering to use it then I'd say a/ that's a mistake and b/ it was a failure. Unless of course there is no longer any dissent, abuse towards refs etc. at which point it was a roaring success
