Villa on Sunday

alderz

ASLEFshrugged said:

alderz said:

Isn’t the suggestion that you’d rewind the clock to go back to that point of the decision in question? So it would be more like you’ve played an extra 5 minutes thinking it’s 0-0, but then you go back and carry on from 5 minutes ago?

Except as far as I'm aware there is nothing in the laws that allows a ref to "rewind the clock".

I don't think I've suggested that there is a rule to allow that, I was just clarifying what had been suggested in an earlier post.

Also, I'm sure that if there had been a thread in March 2004 about someone being annoyed at an overzealous goal celebration you could have posted that there is nothing in the laws that allows a ref to book someone for taking their shirt off to celebrate a goal, but in July 2004 they changed the rules, because that's something that happens literally every year.

Personally, I do not believe that the goal should have been stepped back to deal with the goal. I feel that there should be some form of common sense applied from VAR, but it was something that was unprecedented and (as can be seen on this thread) it's not an issue that has 100% on either side of it, so I think it's understandable that they got to the decision they did in the heat of the moment. However, I don't think that would stop a football club that has lost out on millions of pounds from claiming it was unfair, and I would not be surprised to see a legal challenge.

thornburyiron

They said they tested it before the game and it was working fine but I bet they were just kicking or throwing the ball into an empty net.
If a team puts a player on the goal line by each post would it register as a goal or would the players obscure the cameras.

MrsGrey

thornburyiron said:

If a team puts a player on the goal line by each post would it register as a goal or would the players obscure the cameras.

No they wouldn't.


https://www.wipo.int/wipo_magazine/en/2010/04/article_0001.html

thornburyiron

That actually states that the ball can be detected even when players are huddled together which is exactly what happened but the ball wasn’t detected. It mentions 25% must be visible which seems a lot to me. However none of their cameras or computers could detect it but a Sky camera did so maybe the system needs a review.

thornburyiron

I still believe that technology is a good thing but it must be used with common sense and not just assume that everything is working perfectly. I don’t expect them to suspect faulty readings all the time but If I remember correctly on the commentary they thought it was definitely over the line and the SheffIrks players all appealed (as you’d expect) but the Villa players looked a bit dejected fully expecting a goal.

MrsGrey

thornburyiron said:

However none of their cameras or computers could detect it but a Sky camera did so maybe the system needs a review.

Well obviously they have to place the cameras in fixed positions. Maybe they are reviewing the positioning ... although as in all the games it has been used for this is the only time it hasn't been effective, a more useful review would imo be to leave the technology as it is, but to make sure the on-field officials and the VAR have a protocol for this kind of (bizarre) eventuality in future.

Lukerz

So there must be something in the protocols that says ‘VAR WILL NOT get involved in any incident involving GDS’.

Because for the entire world to know within a minute that the ball was 100% over the line, VAR to no doubt be aware, but all sit there with their mouths shut is ridiculous.

Hamstew

thornburyiron said:

I still believe that technology is a good thing but it must be used with common sense and not just assume that everything is working perfectly. I don’t expect them to suspect faulty readings all the time but If I remember correctly on the commentary they thought it was definitely over the line and the SheffIrks players all appealed (as you’d expect) but the Villa players looked a bit dejected fully expecting a goal.

Exactly. It couldn't have been more obvious that something was up. Imo there would be less uproar if the ref had stopped play and gone back to give the goal after a few minutes than what actually happened.

thornburyiron

Mrs G by on field officials I presume you mean the ref because it seems to me more and more that the assistants are merely there to signal which way the throw in goes. The assistant at that game if he was positioned correctly would have seen that there was a strong possibility that the ball was in especially as the goalkeeper was physically holding it against the side netting.

thornburyiron

According to Sky the Bournemouth board are meeting this week to discuss suing Hawk Eye for compensation.

IronHerb

Hope they lose, but should they win then they should recompense all those who were ripped off when they went into Administration.

chicagohammer

VAR is not only involved when a goal is scored but also stops play to review potential violent conduct situations, surely VAR could easily have intervened and stopped play to review this goal/no goal situation.

Slightly different but Referees also have discretion to play advantage and then go back to punish offenders even to the point of issuing a red card, technically play is continuing and the potential exists for the offending player to still influence play until a natural stoppage occurs.

Either way, call me old fashioned if you will but it seems ridiculous to me that given the range of available camera angles and technology that the incident was not reviewed by someone for accuracy.

IronHerb

They will not be able to prove that the incident was the cause of their relegation.

thornburyiron

No more than they could really prove that Tevez was the only reason we survived in 2007 but it didn’t stop them awarding £30M against us.

thornburyiron

Had Villa lost that game by that goal they would still have survived by virtue of goals scored as points and goal difference would have been the same.

Expat_Hammer

thornburyiron said:

Had Villa lost that game by that goal they would still have survived by virtue of goals scored as points and goal difference would have been the same.

Villa would have the same points as Bournemouth with a GD of -27 against -25 for Bouremouth, so Villa would have dropped back down to where they belong.

IronHerb

No, their GD would have been 2 goals worse than Bournemouth on level points.

Expat_Hammer

IronHerb said:

No, their GD would have been 2 goals worse than Bournemouth on level points.

Beat yah ............................

IronHerb

thornburyiron

You’re right. I was looking at their gd the wrong way around and added 1 to Bournemouth’s rather than taking1 from Villa

MrsGrey

IronHerb said:

They will not be able to prove that the incident was the cause of their relegation.

Exactly. They won't be able to prove that if the goal had been given, the game would have ended with that score.

And finally, PL rules in any case say that if goal line technology isn't operating for a match, or part of a match, the match goes on and the refs decision about goals should stand.

buffybegood

Bournemouth to consider options:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/53571916

Tbh, I don't think they've got a leg to stand on, but the real issue for me is that VAR once again completely bottled the situation. It was 100% clear that the ball had crossed the line, as it was completely around the post and in the side netting at one point.

Everyone knew it was a goal, anyone watching with the benefit of a TV monitor and the ability to quickly rewind and review a passage of play should have been able to alert the ref at the next break in play, which wouldn't have been immediate as the keeper must have got himself out of the side netting, got back into the field of play, kicked or rolled the ball to another player, play continued etc. VAR decisions can take play back as long as play hasn't started from a goal kick, free kick, corner or throw-in.

At the absolute minimum it would have been 15-20 seconds before the next throw-in, corner or free kick took place, ample time for any VAR operator to inform the ref to halt play at the next break in play to enable the situation to be properly reviewed.

ASLEFshrugged

buffybegood said:

the real issue for me is that VAR once again completely bottled the situation. It was 100% clear that the ball had crossed the line, as it was completely around the post and in the side netting at one point.

VAR didn't bottle it because VAR is only used for goals, penalties, red cards and mistaken identity, according to Hawkeye there was no goal. The Premier League website doesn't say anything about VAR being allowed to tell the ref to stop at the next break to check on something that happened earlier.

VAR is only used in strictly limited situations, you can't blame it for not doing something its not allowed to do.

BubblesNeverDies

So in other words VAR is a bit of a jobsworth.

Lukerz

Bit of a ‘that’s not in my job description’.

alderz

I don't think that VAR can intervene if it is outside of its remit, so I'm not sure that those descriptions are accurate, personally. If it intervened in something that was not expressly permitted I'm sure there would be legal challenges the other way - and, tbh, the fact is that Bournemouth's potential legal challenge is with Hawkeye for failing, not with VAR or the Premier League, so it's clearly not the issue that they have.

For me, what it highlights is that it's not as simple as just saying "let's have technology" and bringing it in. There are always going to be oddities that have not been prepared for, and that is part of the learning. The league, VAR, FIFA need to adapt to these situations as they occur, and amend the rules and laws of the game to ensure they don't happen again.

As I've said before, I personally don't feel that Bournemouth will win an argument here, but I definitely think they'll challenge. Also, not being convinced they will win doesn't really mean anything, as I didn't expect the Tevez situation to go the way it did for us either, so what do I know?

We need the game to learn and adapt. We've got to remember that this is year one of VAR in England, and it will get better if we give it time.

buffybegood

VAR has come out and said that it could and should have intervened, the scenario was within its remit, it was more that it wasn't expecting it to happen and so wasn't specifically looking for it; going forward they'll definitely be more alert I'm sure.

Lukerz

Buffy - & that is why I feel there is a legal case.

They have admitted their negligence.

BubblesNeverDies

Aslef posts:
VAR didn't bottle it because VAR is only used for goals, penalties, red cards and mistaken identity, according to Hawkeye there was no goal. The Premier League website doesn't say anything about VAR being allowed to tell the ref to stop at the next break to check on something that happened earlier.

VAR is only used in strictly limited situations, you can't blame it for not doing something its not allowed to do.

Buffy posts:
VAR has come out and said that it could and should have intervened, the scenario was within its remit.


Now I'm confused,

IronHerb

Bubbles, it's like we need an independent arbiter........