Chelsea (A) - 3 Sep

alderz

I really don’t think Bowen “leaves” his leg in. I think he’s tried his best to hurdle him, but Mendy dived at his feet. Nearly every slide tackle from goalkeeper or outfield player leads to the tackled player connecting with the tackler. I don’t see what Bowen is meant to do. To be able to hurdle him completely would mean giving up on the ball early to avoid contact. The contact is inevitable, and it’s not illegal.

WHU_Champo_league_in_7_years

When is Fab gonna get dropped?

What is he doing jumping at the front post for the first goal?

Lukerz

Yeah but I am trying to work out how it was ruled out. I think it’s clear it’s not ‘corruption’, despite what many fans across social media are saying. I am trying to work out the thought process of the VAR to point out an infringement.

For example, if a defender slides to make a tackle, doesn’t get the ball & then an inevitable collision takes place (even if the defender can’t do much about it), it’s usually a foul. Bowen tries to get the ball, doesn’t win it, makes contact with Mendy (who does win the ball) via a ‘kicking motion’ (that’s what it looks like when VAR slows it down).

It’s a bit like when a forward goes for a 50-50 ball & makes contact with the keeper & there’s normally a big old bust up with players who think the player has gone in unfairly on the keeper. We all know they are a protected species anyway, even if the forward is perfectly entitled to go for the ball & a collision inevitable.

I stand by that if Bowen goes to ground as he makes contact with Mendy, nobody even looks at that goal.

OutcastLondoner

I really don’t see it as a kicking motion. Slowing it down just distorts how little time he has to try and get out of the way. He’s managed to get one leg over but not the other. When you hurdle something while running you tend to have a trailing leg. If he was trying to win a penalty that would’ve been enough contact to go down.

Lukerz

But if the goal hadn’t been scored & play had continued (say Cornet doesn’t get the ball & it ends up with us & we play it wide or into midfield), the play gets stopped because Mendy is down ‘injured’ out of his goal. I think that is the key bit here. Mendy has benefited from a bit of gamesmanship. The VAR is reluctant to allow the goal to stand given Mendy is on the floor & the goal empty.

OutcastLondoner

I don’t think there’s making sense of it.

I think there’s a fundamental flaw in the logic of VAR that it gives referees the tools to make the right decision. It doesn’t consider enough that they are humans who are even more the centre of a whole stadium’s scrutiny. Having made a decision based on what they thought at the time, when it is reasonable for them to get things wrong sometimes, they now have to watch with several angles which should mean they make the correct decision. It’s not a split-second decision but it’s one that still has to be taken quite quickly because there’s so much pressure from a crowd that is already impatient after the VAR has taken a minute reviewing it. The VAR telling them to go seems to implant doubt in their minds about their own decision. So they go to that screen with footage that often isn’t absolutely conclusive and already someone supposedly highly qualified telling them they might be wrong.

This is why VAR needs to have as little role in the game as possible. The idea that it works but the officials are the problems doesn’t sit with me. If it can’t operate autonomously then the refs are VAR and it doesn’t work properly.

yoyo

Slacker

The bottom line of it is that Mendy faked injury because he could see Cornet was going to score and the ref and VAR bought it.

thornburyiron

At the Newcastle game the VAR angles didn’t show the push into Willock’s back which was a crucial viewing.
They’re bringing in enhanced VAR technology for offsides in the CL and WC so let’s see if that speeds that side of things up and is clearer

OutcastLondoner

I think VAR needs to be automated as much as possible for objective calls - like offside. If they can nail that, great.

But for judgement calls, it needs to stay out as much as possible. Or maybe as others have suggested, being able to hear what the VAR official is saying will help transparency.

buffybegood

Tbh there needs to be some common sense in making these decisions, and that's what's lacking in so many of these decisions. I believe they're trying to give the VAR so many rules and guidelines in an attempt to ensure consistency that the bigger picture of an incident, and how to ref it, is being lost, and again that's down to the standard of the guys operating the system (and reffing on the pitch) being so poor.

Thank goodness someone (Oliver?) finally ignored the VAR and stuck to his original decision yesterday; if that had happened last week I think our goal woulda stood.

Yeoldhammer

No they just need competent refs. Or refs to be made accountable.
Rugby does not have this problem.
VAR show the different angles, you can hear the communication between officials which can be heard on TV, shows the play in real time and slow motion. Makes a call.
It really is that simple.
There is simply no excuse we have had this technology for a couple seasons now and it's still being used like Trash.

BubblesNeverDies

Posted this on the wrong thread.
The correct decision should have been that the goal was valid and Mendy yellow carded for simulation.
Also both referees (on-field and VAR) should be stood down from EPL games and demoted to Champo games or lower for at least a month.

buffybegood

Review of VAR announced:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/62787324

Hamstew

That's fair enough tbit it won't give us our goal back.

WHU_Champo_league_in_7_years

Hamstew said:

That's fair enough tbit it won't give us our goal back.

Pretty much

Like rescinded red cards

Tbf I sent expect any VAR changes....were how many years into its introduction, 4th season? And yet we are still having these conversations week in week out

alderz

I personally think VAR should be for if a ref is unsure of their own call. Michael Oliver calls a handball, but says “I think that’s handball, but I didn’t have a great view, so I’ll take a look at some replays / what do you think in the studio, lads?” that should be sufficient.

There used to feel like a lot of injustice at incorrect decisions, but it feels so, so much worse nowadays because there’s no excuse to get it so wrong.

thornburyiron

In rugby generally the ref asks the VAR is there any reason this try shouldn’t stand and that only if he has a doubt. In football it seems on every goal VAR looks at it in a “let’s see if we can find a reason to disallow this”.
If it’s blatantly obvious then VAR should tell the ref he’s made a mistake otherwise it should only be if the ref says “guys I couldn’t quite see there”.

BubblesNeverDies

Just for information purposes, in Rugby it's called the TMO (Television Match Official)

epsom_bubbles

It seems the incidents are now being looked into. Would the result ever be reversed if they spot an error, or do they just 'fudge' a response

Deanscaleshammer

Also in rugby the referees are respected and their decisions accepted. If there is any dissent then referees impose immediate and significant sanctions. Players know this.

MIAHammer

VAR couldn’t decide for themselves so asked the referee to decide. Surely then it’s not a clear and obvious error, so the referee’ decision should stand.

Fortuneseeker

Can’t wait to hear the conversation between the ref & VAR official. Didn’t they once think about moving free kicks forward if there was signs of dissent?

Slacker

It did actually happen for a season I think, but was dropped.

Slacker

I think I might’ve just lost a long friendship with a Chelsea mate.

* bothered.

EXETERHAMMER

Still angry.
Corruption.... Doubt it
Poor use of VAR.... for sure
Ref bottling it...... Yep
Foul..... No way
Mendy faking it.... Yes
Bowen leaves trailing leg in... Sort of, but never a foul.
A home decision.... Yep
VAR being reviewed...no use to us. Will still help top 6 or whoever they are in long run.

VAR only for offside and the obvious mistakes...Yes please

buffybegood

MIAHammer said:

VAR couldn’t decide for themselves so asked the referee to decide. Surely then it’s not a clear and obvious error, so the referee’ decision should stand.

Tbh I've no problem with a ref being asked to review an incident; when VAR was first introduced there seemed a real reluctance for the VAR to get involved at all as it would have meant admitting that the ref was wrong. Now we've swung too far the other way, and the ref, almost always until Michael Oliver yesterday, refuses to stick with his own decision and goes with whatever the VAR is suggesting. Sometimes a ref can be helped by a second look, especially if he was unsighted originally.

Football is a fast moving, contact sport, so there will always be times when a ref doesn't have a great view, or is mistaken in his initial assessment. Some decisions will always remain contentious, but the idea behind VAR was to reduce the number of obvious mistakes (like offsides, handballs where it doesn't hit his hand/arm, keepers or defenders getting a touch so avoiding a penalty etc). Instead there seems an insistence to re-referee the game, and that's clearly not what was intended; yesterday the ref had a clear view of what happened, so even if he was asked to look again he should have stuck with how he originally felt about the situation, that it wasn't a foul even though there was a slight bit of contact.

Brother_Sledge

It seems to me the VAR decide which bit of video the onfield ref should look at again thereby further influencing the decision. I think a full speed replay of the whole incident would often be more representative than a brief slo-mo clip which can make things look worse.

Also I agree with Lukerz that for whatever reason Bowen did leave his leg in and that is why the goal was (incorrectly imo) disallowed. Similarly with the forest one Antonio could have been a little less aggressive with his unavoidable collision. Both actions were unnecessary and we have paid heavily for them

PrestonHammer

Bowen was stumbling before he got to the keeper. Maybe after regaining his balance, his legs couldn't just jump enough to avoid contact.

Fortuneseeker

Brother Sledge, That’s what Alan Shearer said about the Newcastle goal. The key video evidence the referee didn’t see. 🤷‍♂️