21 Oct 2019 17:49:20
There’s a regular poster on here and can’t for the life’s of me remember he’s name but he’s at a high level of referring. I would love to get he’s take on yesterday game.
I ref under 12s and am at a loss as to how this var is supposed to work Including the handball. We see multiple angles of the kick on Origi but one shot of the hand ball.
I’d be really interested to get he’s take on the reffing in the hole game.
Thanks if you can help eds.

{Ed025's Note - i think that may be benny baller mate..

1.) 21 Oct 2019
21 Oct 2019 19:34:05
I thought VAR was only used in certain circumstances, red cards, mistaken identity, offsides penalties and handballs. So whilst I think it was a foul it didn’t fall under the VAR criteria and shouldn’t of been checked, it was the ref that missed it imo.
Regarding the handball, it only needs to touch his hand. No longer on purpose for it to be ruled out therefore you could tell from the first angle it touched him on his hand and was ruled out. Not VARs fault that is the new rule they have brought in.
As for the reffing in the game I just don’t think it was consistent imo.

2.) 21 Oct 2019
21 Oct 2019 20:43:34
Thanks for clearing that up 👍🏻👌🏻.

{Ed001's Note - WYRed is wrong. The foul was checked but they won't overturn a decision made by a referee unless they decide it is a 'clear and obvious error'. The PGMOL have also said they have set a high bar on what is an error. So basically they are never going to change a decision.}

3.) 21 Oct 2019
21 Oct 2019 20:58:49
Like a error like the hand of god?

{Ed001's Note - I doubt even that would be overturned in the Prem!}

4.) 21 Oct 2019
21 Oct 2019 21:36:01
I never seen you posting when Chelsea scored a goal against us and it was disallowed for offside would of been a 2-2 draw. VAR will even itself up over a season i. e. Last minute VAR penalty against Leicester never seen ye moaning THEN?

5.) 21 Oct 2019
21 Oct 2019 21:34:17
Apologies ed, I genuinely thought that with VAR they weren't going to check things like that.

{Ed001's Note - it is one of the main criteria, to check if there was a foul in the build up to the goal. It has happened a number of times now that there was one and they have not acted, even though they said that was supposed to be one of its most important facets.}

6.) 21 Oct 2019
21 Oct 2019 21:54:57
VAR shouldn’t have to even itself up over the season, it should be consistently correct from day 1.

{Ed001's Note - and 007 has obviously missed that we have had two clear penalties not given, one where the VAR check took less than a second to complete. VAR is millions of pounds wasted.}

7.) 21 Oct 2019
21 Oct 2019 22:24:33
I have tried not to post about it mate. I’m embarrassed to wear black. Even taking out all the var stuff, it was the worst and most bias performance I’ve ever seen, only outclassed by the Chelsea vs Barcelona ref many moons ago. I could come up with many in depth points as to why, but I’ll just be called bias.

8.) 21 Oct 2019
21 Oct 2019 22:52:16
It seems to have created more controversy than it solves at the minute. The only way anyone could even begin to understand what’s happening with some of these decisions is for the discussion that takes place between the ref and the VAR to be audible. There really is no other way, we used to say maybe the ref didn’t see it but that simply isn’t an option anymore. I mean, that pen that Watford should have been awarded, there can’t be anyone in football, even the most ardent spurs fan, who could say that it wasn’t a pen. If we can’t hear how they’ve decided that that isn’t a penalty then people are going to start drawing their own conclusions. I think that decision is the worst one yet, forget ours yesterday, that was crap refereeing and Origi didn’t help with the way he went down, but the Watford decision is a complete and utter joke. If VAR isn’t there for those decisions then we may as well forget it and have it for off side and hand ball and give up the pretence that it’s for anything else because it’s a waste of time.

9.) 21 Oct 2019
21 Oct 2019 22:52:31
VAR is simply ruining the game, the decisions is one thing but the way it’s been implemented is so poor when you compare to the rugby. In the rugby you watch the replay and you know for sure that a decision is right because the rules are clear. Not so with var in the prem. Tonight was a classic example arsenal defender clearly shirt pulled in box clear penalty no question yet nothing. It had the right intentions but currently it’s ruining the game fans never know when to celebrate or not now.

10.) 21 Oct 2019
21 Oct 2019 23:29:53
Surely the purpose of VAR is to clarify an incident the ref has missed or is not sure about. What an idiotic system where VAR checks and sees a clear foul but does nothing. I stupidly thought VAR was to assist the refs in making the correct decision. 'Clear and obvious error' what a joke.

11.) 21 Oct 2019
21 Oct 2019 23:45:00
There were 2 goals disallowed for fouls in the build up this weekend. One for a foul on the keeper and the most ridiculous ‘trip’ on Johnny Evans as he chased back as the ball was going in and Chris Wood slightly caught him accidentally as they were crossing over.
Fact is Evans was never getting there so it made no difference to the end result of it going in yet VAR disallowed it because there was contact.
There was clear contact on Origi and it was he outlawed ‘tackle from behind’ so how it wasn’t disallowed is beyond me when you see what’s happened in other games.

12.) 21 Oct 2019
21 Oct 2019 23:47:47
Ed01 so by setting such a high bar that clearly no incident in this context can meet as in this "clear and obvious" rubbish (as if anything in football is always ever clear and obv. ), the FA have pretty much covered their arses with a rule that is set up to make sure NOTHING is ever overturned at this point. Is that right?

{Ed001's Note - yep.}

13.) 22 Oct 2019
22 Oct 2019 00:56:29
As opposed to VAR what are people's opinions of having two refs on the pitch? The NHL did it years ago and the standard of officiating has gone up. Of course there are missed calls, but that is part of the game. The NHL has instituted replay as well, but that is handled in Toronto at the corporate headquarters by former officials. And the replays used are shown in the rinks and the tv
I for one feel that two refs would be good for the game.
Matt in FL.

14.) 22 Oct 2019
22 Oct 2019 03:36:19
It was a fairly weak foul. Atkinson doesn't blow for anything. I think the rule about unintentional hand ball is a bigger issue. It doesn't work imo. If the attacker is being penalised then the defender should be too. But if that were the case every half decent attacker would just chip the ball towards a defenders arm. I thought it was a brilliant goal by mane and he would have scored had it hit his hand or not.
Origi got a slight tap on his leg. Not enough to floor him, he jumped to the floor. But mane didn't do anything illegal. Had that goal stood, the Origi foul would not have mattered.

At the end of the day. Its good to see Liverpool fans so distraught with a draw at old Trafford. There was a time i would "phew" at that result

Top of the pile, by 6 points. What a position.

{Ed025's Note - agree or not robbie the fact is that it was a foul by lindelof where he challenged from behind and got the man not the ball, origi made the most of it but in the end its a foul all day mate..

15.) 22 Oct 2019
22 Oct 2019 03:56:19
VAR Can be used as cricket for initial rollout. Referring continues as it used to earlier.
Each team would have 2 chances or decisions to challenge the ref decision and refer to Var' it the team call is correct they give their chance if not they reduce the available chances.

This was we can see Var only for critical things like goals red cards etc and when its going to matter.

16.) 22 Oct 2019
22 Oct 2019 08:07:22
The worrying thing for me is like Sunday VAR have goal chalked off Man U fans goading Liverpool fans I can see trouble a head semi final of a big cup goal disallowed disgruntled fans equals trouble at game or after game when other side take piss over cancelled goals and they are through or won final . VAR is great for rugby or cricket but not football it will not work unless the ref is open and speaks on a mike to crowd then we can all hear what he says and by not doing this it is making the refs look idiots when they are not . If ref missed incident then VAR step in if ref seen incident then plays on the VAR steps in it is after all supposed to make the game even for both sides ask Watford do they think it was even on Saturday?

17.) 23 Oct 2019
22 Oct 2019 22:25:55
Spot on, Ed25. Robbie, I fully disagree with you here. It seems to be that any type of tackle on an LFC player of late, is deemed to be soft YET when other players get fouled, the goal posts seem to be moved and the same rules don't apply anymore. Let's even say it was soft. Why did the ref give utd soft fouls then? So Origi should have gotten his legs broken for it not to be soft? I did not know there was a level of contact that had to be there for it to be a foul. Come on, man.

Ed25 is on the money. A foul from behind is a foul from behind (regardless of the level of contact) and Atkinson should have blown for it, end of story. Lindelof got none of the ball and all of Origi so there is your proof. Even G Nev and Roy Keane said immediately that it was a foul, IMO, this whole "he lost his touch" or "he lost the ball" is just a cop out by some pundits to defend the fact that Atkinson had a stinker.