VAR

I don't think there was much, if any debate on the Grealish one. He didn't even look for a penalty, he actually managed to play the ball to his teammate while going down, then got straight up. Never looked at the ref or anything. To call it a dive was laughable, and the VAR would have clearly showed all that, surely??

If he wasn't looking for a penalty why the massively exaggerated fall. That was intended to convince the ref whether there was contact or not.

By his own manager's admission his reputation may have preceded him.
 
If he wasn't looking for a penalty why the massively exaggerated fall. That was intended to convince the ref whether there was contact or not.

By his own manager's admission his reputation may have preceded him.

So a Birmingham fan thinks that the Villa player was diving - suspect a bit rivalry there when every other report and pundit I have seen state it was a shocking decision.
 
So a Birmingham fan thinks that the Villa player was diving - suspect a bit rivalry there when every other report and pundit I have seen state it was a shocking decision.

Sorry but I fail to see where I have called it a dive.

The way he went down was exaggerated but as I said that was the case whether or not there was contact .

And it is not me suggesting he has a reputation but Dean Smith.

Unlike the ref we and the pundits only have recourse to the two-dimensional medium that is television.
 
If he wasn't looking for a penalty why the massively exaggerated fall. That was intended to convince the ref whether there was contact or not.

By his own manager's admission his reputation may have preceded him.

I don’t believe that was a dive, maybe the speed he was travelling at and the contact caused him to fall but he did look like he tried to stay on his feet.

Either way it wasn’t a dive nor a pen and the ref made a massive error. I can understand the error as it’s real time but that fits firmly into the clear and obvious error for me,
 
I don’t believe that was a dive, maybe the speed he was travelling at and the contact caused him to fall but he did look like he tried to stay on his feet.

Either way it wasn’t a dive nor a pen and the ref made a massive error. I can understand the error as it’s real time but that fits firmly into the clear and obvious error for me,

From my view it probably should have been a free-kick for the sly push by Zaha that effectively forced Grealish towards Cahill.
 
Grealish and Tielemans - both shocking VAR cock ups. The former went down under some contact BUT for me didn't dive...footballers fall over when knocked off balance but doesn't mean it's a dive. As for the leg-breaker foul...beggars belief how that wasn't a red.

VAR is ruining football and not even getting the big decisions right.
 
Grealish and Tielemans - both shocking VAR cock ups. The former went down under some contact BUT for me didn't dive...footballers fall over when knocked off balance but doesn't mean it's a dive. As for the leg-breaker foul...beggars belief how that wasn't a red.

VAR is ruining football and not even getting the big decisions right.

Can't blame VAR for the Grealish decision as it was never referred.
 
Could it have been/should it have been? Or had the ref blown? Could the yellow be referred.

As I understand it VAR could have intervened only if it was thought that there had been a "clear and obvious error".

Personally I am old school and have never wanted it preferring to accept the ref's decisions, right or wrong.

After all players make mistakes so why is it so difficult to accept that officials are human and will make occasional mistakes.
 
Can't blame VAR for the Grealish decision as it was never referred.

And this is what is wrong with the system. ALL goals are referred to VAR. A goal was scored but it never went to VAR. Why? Because allegedly the ref saw Something🤔 That no one else in the entire world saw, and allegadly blew his whistle. This rule, incident is as shocking as the City Spurs one where every player on the pitch thought it was a goal.
 
As I understand it VAR could have intervened only if it was thought that there had been a "clear and obvious error".

Personally I am old school and have never wanted it preferring to accept the ref's decisions, right or wrong.

After all players make mistakes so why is it so difficult to accept that officials are human and will make occasional mistakes.
Totally with you but sadly VAR is here for the foreseeable. I have seen some shocking decisions especially in the lower leagues when I use to go and watch Fulham home and away but you have to hope they even themselves out (never 100% that happens). I don't know how VAR can be tweaked and whether its the quality of the officials making the decisions, the fact they only get 2D images and can't see the larger context of an incident but as it stands its not working well
 
Just watched the Grealish one. Gets the ball away to a team mate. After the contact with Cahill he gets to his feet immediately, he never stops looking at the ball and never appeals to the referee for anything. It is the worst decision I have seen Kevin friend make, and he has made some shockers.

And how Tielemans stayed on the field is a complete mystery.

I wasn't expecting perfection straight away, but Christ, they have been appalling so far; I'd like to think it can only get better but I suspect there are worse depths to be plumbed.
 
I think VAR highlights the difference between being at the match and watching on TV.

Spectators in the ground have for years witnessed decisions they thought were wrong but, perhaps grudgingly, they accept them as the game moves on.

Those watching on TV, however, are subjected to endless replays from numerous angles and, thus find it more difficult to accept as they have more information.

Personally I prefer to adopt the "match day" experience even when watching at home as I feel that TV detracts from the spontaneity that is an essential element of sport.

I accept that others may prefer the more analytical view resulting from 20 odd cameras.

In any event our views on decisions are generally based upon results and who the participants may be.

After all there seemed to be little negative comment in this country about the shocking Not Out lbw decision at Headingley. Had it been Australia who had benefited I suspect that the outcry in the media and elsewhere would have been considerably greater.
 
I think VAR highlights the difference between being at the match and watching on TV.

Spectators in the ground have for years witnessed decisions they thought were wrong but, perhaps grudgingly, they accept them as the game moves on.

Those watching on TV, however, are subjected to endless replays from numerous angles and, thus find it more difficult to accept as they have more information.

Personally I prefer to adopt the "match day" experience even when watching at home as I feel that TV detracts from the spontaneity that is an essential element of sport.

I accept that others may prefer the more analytical view resulting from 20 odd cameras.

In any event our views on decisions are generally based upon results and who the participants may be.

After all there seemed to be little negative comment in this country about the shocking Not Out lbw decision at Headingley. Had it been Australia who had benefited I suspect that the outcry in the media and elsewhere would have been considerably greater.
That’s called home advantage .
Ask anyone who has been denied a penalty at Old Trafford , Anfield , And any big stadium.
The crowd do influence refs (or did)
I agree with you on the match going fan ,but they don’t care about them as most money comes from TV ,that’s what has driven VAR.
 
Top