VAR - Thoughts

[Deleted member 16999]

I have massive empathy for Gomes, but that is irrelevant. A red card should not be based on empathy?

As I have said time and time again, there are dozens of deliberate fouls a match. some petulant. Some tactical. See how the game goes if you give a red card out every time.

You are only talking about the Son incident because of what happened to Gomes. Let's go back, review every single game this season, and pick out every challenge similar to Son's or worse, and then see how many red cards we dish out.

Please go back and help yourself, I don’t need to discuss any other foul, you’ve said yourself VAR couldn’t be 100% the Ref got it wrong.

 

[Swango1980]

Please go back and help yourself, I don’t need to discuss any other foul, you’ve said yourself VAR couldn’t be 100% the Ref got it wrong.

I did say that, doesn't support your argument in anyway, especially as my opinion on VAR is very low anyway.

How often do we see a player score, and pundits being critical of the defense, saying they should have taken the player out before they got near the box.

By your definition, that would be an automatic red card. Not by the pundits though, nor by refs because, when they do take the player out, it is always a yellow card unless it is an obvious goal scoring chance.

It is odd that you keep trying to sustain a massively flawed argument, but by all means continue.

 

[MegaSteve]

Did he elbow him intentionally? If yes, it was a deliberate act and should have been a red.

Did he elbow him accidentally? Ifyes, the injury was unfortunate.

Easy question to answer in all fairness

Going to stick with my earlier opinion that any subsequent injury from a deliberate foul, such as a trip, can't be described as "unfortunate" ...

Guessing we'll just have to agree to disagree ?✌...

 

[Blue in Munich]

VAR Officials make decisions:

Son tackle on Gomes, Yellow Card, changed to Red, 3 match Ban; then overturned, Spurs get Son back for 3 games. (Majority agree correct decision)

Son tackle on Rudiger, Red Card, not overturned, Son miss’s 3 games. (Majority agree correct decision)

Maguire tackle last night, VAR says not a Red Card, Maguire then scores, (Majority agree wrong decision) unlucky, get over it. Chelsea don’t play against 10 men, totally changed the game. Man Utd have Maguire available for the next 3 games.

If the FA are allowing VAR decisions to be overturned then it should be all decisions reviewed.

Neither of United’s scorers should have been on the pitch last night at the time they scored, Martial’s elbow was no accident.

 

[Blue in Munich]

Did he elbow him intentionally? If yes, it was a deliberate act and should have been a red.

Did he elbow him accidentally? Ifyes, the injury was unfortunate.

Easy question to answer in all fairness

He has a sly look for him first. Therein lies your answer.

 

[Swango1980]

He has a sly look for him first. Therein lies your answer.

Nope, therein lies your answer, which you like to speculate to make you feel like your correct.

 

[Swango1980]

Neither of United’s scorers should have been on the pitch last night at the time they scored, Martial’s elbow was no accident.

It's a great pity for Chelsea fans that they think they can win a match so long as the opponents are down to 9 men. And, you may be right, Chelsea might not have lost that game had the opposition gone down to 9 men. Funny how nobody talked about the elbow last night, I guess new camera angles have only shown an incident today that we didn't see last night.

Or, are you clutching at straws?

 

[Swango1980]

Going to stick with my earlier opinion that any subsequent injury from a deliberate foul, such as a trip, can't be described as "unfortunate" ...

Guessing we'll just have to agree to disagree ?✌...

Ok. But, I guess you would describe it as fortunate then.

Fortunate for who? Because, I reckon somebody would only find it fortunate if they intended it to happen.

I simply don't believe that is the case with Son at all. Unless he was play acting afterwards, and he was actually overjoyed rather than distraught

 

[MegaSteve]

Ok. But, I guess you would describe it as fortunate then.

Fortunate for who? Because, I reckon somebody would only find it fortunate if they intended it to happen.

I simply don't believe that is the case with Son at all. Unless he was play acting afterwards, and he was actually overjoyed rather than distraught

Seems to me you are now attempting to put words into my mouth...

 

[Deleted member 16999]

It's a great pity for Chelsea fans that they think they can win a match so long as the opponents are down to 9 men. And, you may be right, Chelsea might not have lost that game had the opposition gone down to 9 men. Funny how nobody talked about the elbow last night, I guess new camera angles have only shown an incident today that we didn't see last night.

Or, are you clutching at straws?

I reckon this post sum’s you up, you now decide to tar all Chelsea fans with the same brush, at no time has BiM stated what you claim.

I’ve tried to explain numerous (boring) times it’s not the fact Gomes broke his ankle but Son’s behaviour leading up to the late, deliberate, act of retaliation on Gomes I have the issue with.

You obviously know better than everyone else and with your attitude you’ll probably find less and less people will discuss/debate with you on here.

I’m out.

 

[Tashyboy]

It's a great pity for Chelsea fans that they think they can win a match so long as the opponents are down to 9 men. And, you may be right, Chelsea might not have lost that game had the opposition gone down to 9 men. Funny how nobody talked about the elbow last night, I guess new camera angles have only shown an incident today that we didn't see last night.

Or, are you clutching at straws?

As a neutral, ? there was that much rammel that went on re referees decisions, VAR etc Last night I don’t think it was overlooked. There was just so much else that went on that undoubtedly affected the result. Kick in the bollox aside and a sneaky elbow aside that could of smashed his face in. The thing that’s proper bogs me off again re referees and VAR is this. On both occasions both Chelsea players have suffered injuries that stopped the game. Why has the referee not had an amble over to the screen to see what went off. Al tell you why because he was rammel.

 

[Blue in Munich]

Nope, therein lies your answer, which you like to speculate to make you feel like your correct.

It's a great pity for Chelsea fans that they think they can win a match so long as the opponents are down to 9 men. And, you may be right, Chelsea might not have lost that game had the opposition gone down to 9 men. Funny how nobody talked about the elbow last night, I guess new camera angles have only shown an incident today that we didn't see last night.

Or, are you clutching at straws?

Just what this forum needs, another troll. ?

The pub quiz beckons, goodnight.

 

[Swango1980]

Seems to me you are now attempting to put words into my mouth...

No, I'm only trying to understand you when you imply it wasn't unfortunate, that's all.

At no point have I said the injury wasn't down to Son's actions, nor have I stated he was correct in what he did. I'm just saying it was a yellow card challenge, and trying to explain the ramifications if you think it was a red. That's all.

Regarding other posts related to match last night, I've also said Maguire may have kicked out, but I am prepared to believe it is also feasible to say he didn't mean to harm the player and it was just a reaction. I cannot comment on Martial as I didn't see it, nor do I remember it even being raised in the 90 minutes after the game on MNF. What frustrates me is the certainty others show in describing his intent, especially when they try and convince others. I'm not trying to convince people that Maguire didn't kick out after all. Of course, I have no problem if some believeh kicked out, that's their entitled opinion, just don't try and use explanations as if they prove they are correct (for example, no issue with okiru on his opinion, cos that's all he has really given). I suspect a lot of the opinion is down to tribalism at times.

 

[Swango1980]

Just what this forum needs, another troll. ?

The pub quiz beckons, goodnight.

Is that what you do? Struggle to make a definitive argument, so resort to calling someone a troll?

Bit too easy that?

I've no desire to debate it, but if you keep feel like you need to make your point, then why can't I make mine? I'm only responding to your replies to my comments after all.

 

[Tashyboy]

Seems to me that last nights “ incidents “ re Martial and Maguire are now being dis used a day later as apparently they were not picked up on last night, ( according to some).
So really only Two questions.
Was the actions of Maguire falling backwards natural with his leg kicking out rather than following his body. No, there was intent.
Was the actions of Martial jumping with his arm/ elbow behind him natural. No, there was intent.

 

[Swango1980]

Seems to me that last nights “ incidents “ re Martial and Maguire are now being dis used a day later as apparently they were not picked up on last night, ( according to some).
So really only Two questions.
Was the actions of Maguire falling backwards natural with his leg kicking out rather than following his body. No, there was intent.
Was the actions of Martial jumping with his arm/ elbow behind him natural. No, there was intent.

Only according to this forum (certainly the Martial incident, I've not heard about it anywhere but this thread)

And, as far as intent is concerned, there is no proof, just opinion. More importantly, it depends what you mean by intent, such as simply intent to move their leg or elbow. If so, then yes, I am sure there was an intent to move those body parts. If you mean intent to hurt the opponent, that is what I'm arguing against, as that is what is likely to matter in terms of ut being a red card.

Anyway, I've made my point. If anyone is offended because you think I'm having a personal dig, then I apologise. Not trying to have a dig, but do try and use strong wording to try and make my points clear.

If you are offended because I don't agree with you, don't be. That is just the way it is. I'm not offended that you continually dont agree with me either. Nothing personal, I am sure there are a million topics that's we'd probably be on the same side on

Time to watch Athletico v Liverpool

 

[Tashyboy]

Only according to this forum (certainly the Martial incident, I've not heard about it anywhere but this thread)

And, as far as intent is concerned, there is no proof, just opinion. More importantly, it depends what you mean by intent, such as simply intent to move their leg or elbow. If so, then yes, I am sure there was an intent to move those body parts. If you mean intent to hurt the opponent, that is what I'm arguing against, as that is what is likely to matter in terms of ut being a red card.

Anyway, I've made my point. If anyone is offended because you think I'm having a personal dig, then I apologise. Not trying to have a dig, but do try and use strong wording to try and make my points clear.

If you are offended because I don't agree with you, don't be. That is just the way it is. I'm not offended that you continually dont agree with me either. Nothing personal, I am sure there are a million topics that's we'd probably be on the same side on

Time to watch Athletico v Liverpool

certainly not offended ?

 

[Swango1980]

Not sure if anyone is watching the wolves v espanyol match tonight. Jota was fairly obviously headbutted, but VAR was happy with the original decision of a yellow card.

Seems like the Premier League aren't the only ones to make a balls of it

 

[Tashyboy]

Watched City last night, Aguero is flagged as offside. At the same time he is wrestled back by a West Ham defender. Aguero is 8 yds from the goal. It’s a blatant penalty and argue if it is a yellow or red according to pundits. But replays show he is probably not offside. Why not let play continue if there’s a goal, check for offside. Check it’s a penalty. Both the offside and non penalty were wrong. But hey ho it’s VAR, so nothing should surprise.
What about when the West Ham player trapped his hand on the ball. No penalty, probably accidental, but if that’s an attacker and any team scores it’s pulled back coz of the handball. So handball for attacker but not defender.
Theres just so much that is wrong.

 

[Old Colner]

Watched City last night, Aguero is flagged as offside. At the same time he is wrestled back by a West Ham defender. Aguero is 8 yds from the goal. It’s a blatant penalty and argue if it is a yellow or red according to pundits. But replays show he is probably not offside. Why not let play continue if there’s a goal, check for offside. Check it’s a penalty. Both the offside and non penalty were wrong. But hey ho it’s VAR, so nothing should surprise.
What about when the West Ham player trapped his hand on the ball. No penalty, probably accidental, but if that’s an attacker and any team scores it’s pulled back coz of the handball. So handball for attacker but not defender.
Theres just so much that is wrong.

I agree, I was under the impression that the assistants very supposed to hold off with the flags and let VAR sort it if a goal occurs, it seems to happen for some teams and not for others, they seem to be making adjustments as the season progresses.

I believe on the whole VAR is good in principle, it is just the clowns who are making the decisions, why the hell do the referees not go to the pitchside screens and have another look themselves, then make a judgement, it would be a far better way of going about things, the recent red cards rescinded by VAR, all looks rather silly in my opinion.

VAR will even things out they said, I have yet to see that happening, decisions still going to the big clubs, Solskjaer in his interview the other night, thought VAR was great got all the calls right.