VAR - Thoughts

[Deleted member 16999]

I think that is rubbish, especially in the Son and Gomes case. Basically, you are only saying Son should be given a red card because of the complete freak in the way Gomes fell after. That is ludicrous. There are dozens of fouls, even silly little niggly fouls, in every single match where is is clear that a player has no intent to actually win the ball. All they are doing is either breaking up play, or pressuring the opponent by letting them know they are there. City are well known for it, but I'm sure many teams make a point of doing it as well. So, either you are saying that they SHOULD be red carded every time because it was a deliberate action. Or, you are saying that in the 0.001% of cases, where the opponent actually lands awkwardly and ends up with a serious ankle, knee, shoulder, etc injury, then you give the player a red card, otherwise it is no card at all. That is ludicrous.

Yes, if Maguire intended to kick out at the player to hurt him, red card. But, even when I saw multiple replays before the VAR call was finalised, I couldn't tell whether he intended to kick out at the player maliciously, or it was a split second movement of his foot upwards to protect himself as a reaction that the player was falling towards him, rather than an intentional move to hurt the player. Even after he initially moved his foot upwards, he immediately stopped from following through, which could indicate he wasn't wanting to hurt the player. All anybody can do is speculate what was in his mind, and I think most people tend to agree that VAR shouldn't speculate when over-turning a refs decision, it needs to be clear and obvious. When it isn't, and VAR intervenes, we've already seen the chaos that causes this season.

Read what I actually posted rather than what you think I posted!

Son made no attempt to play the ball, he DELIBERATELY fouled Gomes, ie played the man. Everything that followed, complete freak or not, was as a result of Son’s intent.
If Son had got the ball or was making a genuine tackle then fine, it would of been a complete accident.
The VAR official, at the time, saw it as violent conduct, just like last night a VAR official didn’t see Maguires as that.

If last night Maguire had damaged the Chelsea players testicles, or ripped his scrotum etc, would you be saying it wasn’t Maguire’s fault, despite the fact he admitted stretching his leg out?

Why did Gomes fall in a complete freak way? Answer that please, followed by, Did Son make a genuine attempt to play the ball?

Then decide whose talking rubbish!

It seems you support VAR when you agree with the decision and dislike it when you disagree!

 

[Lord Tyrion]

Maguire made a second movement. If he had not made that second movement then his case would stand up but he definitely pushed his foot out. Anyone who has ever played a contact sport knew that he meant that. That was a red card every day of the week, I don't know how it could not be given.

 

[Big_G]

I was watching the review of last nights game on ESPN, they were brutal about the implementation of VAR in the Premier League

The bottom line is, we have a group of refs led by one of the worst refs in the history of top flight football, who really should fall on his sword over the way VAR is being used in England

He has made the decision to ignore the way all the other countries are using it, because in his arrogance he knows better.

Nothing wrong with VAR just the arrogant idiots using it, no wonder no English refs were selected for the World Cup

 

[Swango1980]

Read what I actually posted rather than what you think I posted!

Son made no attempt to play the ball, he DELIBERATELY fouled Gomes, ie played the man. Everything that followed, complete freak or not, was as a result of Son’s intent.
If Son had got the ball or was making a genuine tackle then fine, it would of been a complete accident.
The VAR official, at the time, saw it as violent conduct, just like last night a VAR official didn’t see Maguires as that.

If last night Maguire had damaged the Chelsea players testicles, or ripped his scrotum etc, would you be saying it wasn’t Maguire’s fault, despite the fact he admitted stretching his leg out?

Why did Gomes fall in a complete freak way? Answer that please, followed by, Did Son make a genuine attempt to play the ball?

Then decide whose talking rubbish!

It seems you support VAR when you agree with the decision and dislike it when you disagree!

I did read what you posted. And, this latest posts confirms I interpreted your post correctly, you've just made the same point again.

And, my point still stands. The fact you are using a potential outcome to decide whether a red card is necessary again proves my point that you are talking ludicrous. ANY foul, however minor, could cause serious injury. And, the serious injury would never have happened had that foul not taken place. So, why do we not just send a player off as soon as there is any contact at all?

My argument, by the way, has absolutely nothing to do with my like or dislike of VAR. It gets decisions wrong, it gets decisions right, etc. I think VAR is a mess overall, even if it does get decisions correct.

 

[Orikoru]

Read what I actually posted rather than what you think I posted!

Son made no attempt to play the ball, he DELIBERATELY fouled Gomes, ie played the man. Everything that followed, complete freak or not, was as a result of Son’s intent.
If Son had got the ball or was making a genuine tackle then fine, it would of been a complete accident.
The VAR official, at the time, saw it as violent conduct, just like last night a VAR official didn’t see Maguires as that.

If last night Maguire had damaged the Chelsea players testicles, or ripped his scrotum etc, would you be saying it wasn’t Maguire’s fault, despite the fact he admitted stretching his leg out?

Why did Gomes fall in a complete freak way? Answer that please, followed by, Did Son make a genuine attempt to play the ball?

Then decide whose talking rubbish!

It seems you support VAR when you agree with the decision and dislike it when you disagree!

Firstly, I don't know why you're dragging Son's tackle into it since he actually was given a red which was later overturned as it was a clear yellow card challenge. You cannot prove he deliberately fouled him, it just appeared as a late challenge, to which yellow card is the punishment. The way Gomes landed afterwards is irrelevant, he could have buggered his ankle like that on a fair challenge. And besides, pulling someone's shirt is a deliberate act, would you advocate a red card every time someone does that?

Maguire incident is not comparable to that, since there was absolutely no possibility he was playing the ball, the ball was not even in play, he just kicked his studs at Batshuayi, and it's a clear red card for me. It's exactly the same as Son's against Rudiger when we played Chelsea - and his red was not overturned for that one.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

I did read what you posted. And, this latest posts confirms I interpreted your post correctly, you've just made the same point again.

And, my point still stands. The fact you are using a potential outcome to decide whether a red card is necessary again proves my point that you are talking ludicrous. ANY foul, however minor, could cause serious injury. And, the serious injury would never have happened had that foul not taken place. So, why do we not just send a player off as soon as there is any contact at all?

My argument, by the way, has absolutely nothing to do with my like or dislike of VAR. It gets decisions wrong, it gets decisions right, etc. I think VAR is a mess overall, even if it does get decisions correct.

You haven’t read my post or you are deliberately ignoring the point!
I’m on about INTENT, Son made no attempt to play the ball, he went after Gomes to foul him. Totally different to a player trying to win the ball.

Were have I said any or every foul is a Red Card? Nowhere!

Son and Maguire both intentionally committed violent conduct imo, but yet the VAR official got it wrong on both occasions?

If me and you were arguing in the street and I violently jumped at you and you fell off the kerb and broke your ankle, would you see that as an accident?

 

[Deleted member 16999]

Firstly, I don't know why you're dragging Son's tackle into it since he actually was given a red which was later overturned as it was a clear yellow card challenge. You cannot prove he deliberately fouled him, it just appeared as a late challenge, to which yellow card is the punishment. The way Gomes landed afterwards is irrelevant, he could have buggered his ankle like that on a fair challenge. And besides, pulling someone's shirt is a deliberate act, would you advocate a red card every time someone does that?

Maguire incident is not comparable to that, since there was absolutely no possibility he was playing the ball, the ball was not even in play, he just kicked his studs at Batshuayi, and it's a clear red card for me. It's exactly the same as Son's against Rudiger when we played Chelsea - and his red was not overturned for that one.

I’m not dragging Son in to it, he was brought into it last night by Sky.

I brought his incident with Gomes in to it because people are bringing Maguire’s intent in to the discussion.
Most on here have agreed Maguire should of got a Red except for the few saying he never meant to harm him, were is the difference in Son deliberating taking Gomes out, Regardless of whether he broke his ankle or not. Son’s tackle to me was violent conduct.
You even confuse yourself by one minute stating fact and then saying what you think appears to happen.

I have absolutely no issue saying Son never intended to break Gomes ankle, but imo at the time he was hell bent on getting revenge on Gomes, he was late and deliberate and that to me is violent conduct.

 

[Orikoru]

@pauldj42 don't know what you've done there but I'm not seeing any words from you..
(Edit: he's sorted it now)

 

[Swango1980]

You haven’t read my post or you are deliberately ignoring the point!
I’m on about INTENT, Son made no attempt to play the ball, he went after Gomes to foul him. Totally different to a player trying to win the ball.

Were have I said any or every foul is a Red Card? Nowhere!

Son and Maguire both intentionally committed violent conduct imo, but yet the VAR official got it wrong on both occasions?

If me and you were arguing in the street and I violently jumped at you and you fell off the kerb and broke your ankle, would you see that as an accident?

No, it wouldn't be an accident, as you just said you "violently jumped" at me. I presume you did that on purpose to hurt me, otherwise what on earth would you be playing at???

Again, that is the third time you have made the same point, so my original comments still stand

 

[Swango1980]

I’m not dragging Son in to it, he was brought into it last night by Sky.

I brought his incident with Gomes in to it because people are bringing Maguire’s intent in to the discussion.
Most on here have agreed Maguire should of got a Red except for the few saying he never meant to harm him, were is the difference in Son deliberating taking Gomes out, Regardless of whether he broke his ankle or not. Son’s tackle to me was violent conduct.
You even confuse yourself by one minute stating fact and then saying what you think appears to happen.

I have absolutely no issue saying Son never intended to break Gomes ankle, but imo at the time he was hell bent on getting revenge on Gomes, he was late and deliberate and that to me is violent conduct.

Funny how you are so sure Son deserved a red card, yet the red card was over-ruled by a panel once they had time to review the incident. Doesn't really help your argument in the slightest now, does it???

 

[Deleted member 16999]

No, it wouldn't be an accident, as you just said you "violently jumped" at me. I presume you did that on purpose to hurt me, otherwise what on earth would you be playing at???

Again, that is the third time you have made the same point, so my original comments still stand

I would only be trying to push you away, it wouldn’t be my fault you landed awkwardly!
So you don’t see Son’s or Maguire’s actions as anything but harmless.

 

[chrisd]

The referee is on the pitch, has full context of the incident and the game as a whole, and may even have spotted something that the cameras don't particularly show. .

My experience of referees in the Premiership, when I've been to matches, is that they rarely spot something on the pitch that 50,000 fans clearly see ?

 

[Deleted member 16999]

Funny how you are so sure Son deserved a red card, yet the red card was over-ruled by a panel once they had time to review the incident. Doesn't really help your argument in the slightest now, does it???

Again you are not reading what I put!
Me and the VAR official at the time thought it was violent conduct, it is good we have review panels and I fully accept their decision regardless of whether I agree to it!

Were’s the justice for Chelsea last night? Will that decision be reviewed and Maguire banned for 3 matches?

 

[Swango1980]

I would only be trying to push you away, it wouldn’t be my fault you landed awkwardly!
So you don’t see Son’s or Maguire’s actions as anything but harmless.

If you had only been trying to push me away (for some strange reason), then if I landed awkwardly I WOULDN'T say that you deliberately tried to hurt me. Yes, it was your actions that caused me to fall, but you had no intention to actually do any damage.

If you clearly violently pushed me, then the circumstances might be otherwise, where your actions were completely inappropriate and likely to cause damage.

So, in terms of Maguire, if he meant to kick out and cause harm, I have said all along it would be red. But, it is too difficult to assume that is the case. Because, if you are falling backwards to the ground, and a player is falling pretty fast towards you, it could well be an instinct to put your leg forward to break the fall of the incoming player. The fact he stopped his follow through might suggest this to be the case. But, I don't know. Obviously the guy in charge of VAR at the time was not 100% confident it was a red card. If it goes to a panel after the match, perhaps they will decide it was intentional, although I suspect part of the decision might be based on the Son incident when he kicked upwards, just to try and remain consistent.

 

[Swango1980]

My experience of referees in the Premiership, when I've been to matches, is that they rarely spot something on the pitch that 50,000 fans clearly see ?

Conversely, it is not uncommon for 50,000 fans top spot something that never happened, but thankfully the referee does make the right call. For example, how often do you hear thousands of calls for handball, when it clearly isn't. And, fans basically 100% of time shout for a foul regardless of whether it is a foul. So, anytime a referee gets the wrong call, of course you'll say the fans got it right. Even a blind squirrel finds an acorn every now and then. Again, really poor argument.

 

[Orikoru]

I’m not dragging Son in to it, he was brought into it last night by Sky.

I brought his incident with Gomes in to it because people are bringing Maguire’s intent in to the discussion.
Most on here have agreed Maguire should of got a Red except for the few saying he never meant to harm him, were is the difference in Son deliberating taking Gomes out, Regardless of whether he broke his ankle or not. Son’s tackle to me was violent conduct.
You even confuse yourself by one minute stating fact and then saying what you think appears to happen.

I have absolutely no issue saying Son never intended to break Gomes ankle, but imo at the time he was hell bent on getting revenge on Gomes, he was late and deliberate and that to me is violent conduct.

I didn't confuse anything? I said Son's challenge on Gomes appeared to be a very late tackle, whether you believe him or not he could argue he was trying to play the ball. Maguire last night cannot argue that at all, the ball was not even in play. Late tackles and trips are just part of the game, studding someone in their gentleman's area away from the ball is not (or is not supposed to be anyway). THAT is 'the difference'.

Are you sure Sky brought Son's tackle on Gomes into it?? I didn't see it but that doesn't make any sense to me. Are you sure it wasn't Son's red against Chelsea they were talking about? Since that was actually identical to the Maguire one?

 

[Orikoru]

If you had only been trying to push me away (for some strange reason), then if I landed awkwardly I WOULDN'T say that you deliberately tried to hurt me. Yes, it was your actions that caused me to fall, but you had no intention to actually do any damage.

If you clearly violently pushed me, then the circumstances might be otherwise, where your actions were completely inappropriate and likely to cause damage.

So, in terms of Maguire, if he meant to kick out and cause harm, I have said all along it would be red. But, it is too difficult to assume that is the case. Because, if you are falling backwards to the ground, and a player is falling pretty fast towards you, it could well be an instinct to put your leg forward to break the fall of the incoming player. The fact he stopped his follow through might suggest this to be the case. But, I don't know. Obviously the guy in charge of VAR at the time was not 100% confident it was a red card. If it goes to a panel after the match, perhaps they will decide it was intentional, although I suspect part of the decision might be based on the Son incident when he kicked upwards, just to try and remain consistent.

Very, very tenuous that. If I'm falling over and I think another player is falling as well, my instinct would not be to stamp on his crotch to break his fall.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

I didn't confuse anything? I said Son's challenge on Gomes appeared to be a very late tackle, whether you believe him or not he could argue he was trying to play the ball. Maguire last night cannot argue that at all, the ball was not even in play. Late tackles and trips are just part of the game, studding someone in their gentleman's area away from the ball is not (or is not supposed to be anyway). THAT is 'the difference'.

Are you sure Sky brought Son's tackle on Gomes into it?? I didn't see it but that doesn't make any sense to me. Are you sure it wasn't Son's red against Chelsea they were talking about? Since that was actually identical to the Maguire one?

You’ve misread me mate, Sky brought Son v Chelsea, I stated I brought Gomes when people started talking about intent, as for the ball in or out of play, Maguire’s action were as a result of the tackle and him falling over, it was separate to the ball being in play, Maguire “claimed” the Bat was falling on him when replays showed he clearly wasn’t.

Once Son has left Spurs and you don’t have that loyalty to him, try and take a look at the 15-20 seconds prior to him tackling Gomes and see if you still think he was late? I believe he was in full control and only had one intention.

 

[Swango1980]

Very, very tenuous that. If I'm falling over and I think another player is falling as well, my instinct would not be to stamp on his crotch to break his fall.

My instinct wouldn't be to "stamp" either. But, I may well put my foot out as I'm bracing for it. It just depends on how you define "stamp" and whether that requires intent to injure or something else.

If it was a court of law rather than based on opinion, the question is would a judge rule that Maguire stamped out to cause harm? I doubt he could say that, without a doubt, that was the case. Whereas, if he was looking at the Roy Keane incident on Southgate, I'm pretty sure he'd find the evidence fairly clear cut (or when Keane stamped on Haaland)

I'm not saying Maguire DIDN'T mean to stamp out, just saying I can see the other side of the argument in his defence.

Also important worth noting, I wouldn't let this debate mask the fact Chelsea deserved to lose the game, no matter how hard it is for them to take.

 

[Orikoru]

You’ve misread me mate, Sky brought Son v Chelsea, I stated I brought Gomes when people started talking about intent, as for the ball in or out of play, Maguire’s action were as a result of the tackle and him falling over, it was separate to the ball being in play, Maguire “claimed” the Bat was falling on him when replays showed he clearly wasn’t.

Once Son has left Spurs and you don’t have that loyalty to him, try and take a look at the 15-20 seconds prior to him tackling Gomes and see if you still think he was late? I believe he was in full control and only had one intention.

At least we're agreed Maguire was a red.

We already discussed Son on Gomes at the time I don't know why we're doing it again. My position hasn't changed and it never will. In all likelihood he probably did bring him down deliberately but that is still not a red card in the laws of the game. Tripping him the way he did is a yellow card offence. I've said that all along but you always apply emotion to it where it isn't warranted or relevant. Whatever his intention was the challenge itself wasn't 'reckless' he just slide across the front of him and tripped him. Foul and a yellow card. That's it. If situation was the same but Son drove his studs into Gomes' ankle then that would have been a red card offence.

As I said earlier a deliberate foul does not make it a red card on it's own. If it was we would see red cards for shirt-pulling, and over exuberant shoulder barges that wipe the player out, you name it. Plenty of deliberate actions are not reds because they are not deemed reckless.