Rant time!

I am annoyed, nay angry, nay absolutely livid at the VAR decided outcome of the West Ham v Arsenal game yesterday. Whatever anyone's opinion of the accuracy of the end descision, it is poor/weak refereeing that has caused it.

I accept that the WHU striker fouled the goalkeeper (albeit that Arsenal have done the same thing in other matches to win 1-0 and got away with it), and that being the case have no issue with the goal itself being disallowed. What I have a real problem with is the multiple fouls committed by Arsenal players before the foul on the goalkeeper. Trossard was not looking at, or even in the direction of, the ball as it came into play, he was intent solely on getting both arms around Pable (the WHU striker) and shepherding him away from his position, ultimately as it turned out into his own goalkeeper. The angle was never shown in the VAR review at the time but the camera behind the goal shown on Match of the Day in the evening highlighted it perfectly.

This wrestling at all corners, by all teams, is a blight on the game. If referees had been strong enough or good ebough they would give all of these as penalties and stop the whole thing withing 3 or 4 games. If they had done from the start of the season then (what I see as) the proper descision would have been made yesterday, that being a penalty to West Ham. Indeed VAR did give a penalty for exactly what Trossard did yesterday against Spurs earlier in the season (manhandling a player while looking away from the ball).

If this had happened in, say, October I'd probably be slightly less annoyed, but this poor officiating has effectively rubber stamped my own personal Championship double this season (albeit from different directions).

Rant over.

VAR is spoiling the game. Absolutely no question about it. So many similar incidents in games, some are given, some aren't. A real shame that it isn't being used for intended purpose. It took them over 4 minutes to decide that decision.

I think this incident ought to be a trigger to have a serious review of what is and what is not allowed within the penalty box. What happened was farcical and West Ham were robbed. MOTD pundits and a guest referee thought the decision was correct and whilst acknowledging that there were other fouls being committed, they said they were not impacting on the ball. They focussed on the point when Raya tries to catch the ball at which point Pablo's arm is across Raya's throat and Todibo has hold of Raya's top. They conclude that Raya is being fouled by 2 separate players and therefore the officials were right to rule the goal out. Bullsh*t

From before Bowen took the corner kick, both Pablo and Todibo were being being fouled by Trossard and Odegaard, both of whom had hold of their opponents with both hands and who never once looked at the ball. Despite being constantly fouled, both Pablo and Todibo had eyes only for the ball and tried their best to get to it.

As the ball came in, Trossard put his arms round Pablo and Gabriel joins in by pulling Pablo's shirt. Pablo tries to jump for the ball, but can't get a proper jump because of the fouling. His arm is forced into an unnatural position and Raya come onto his outstretched arm. Todibo also is stopped from jumping for the ball with Odegaard holding him round the waist with his head preventing Tobido getting his arm into a natural position. Todibo does grab hold of Raya's shirt but only well after Odegaard has started to foul him. Finally, as the ball comes in, Raya is actually impeded by his own player, Gabriel. He pushes Gabriel away before making a half-hearted attempt to get the ball

It is therefore absurd to say the fouls committed on these 2 West Ham players were not consequential on the play. Had they not been fouled themselves they would likely have made good challenges for the ball without fouling the keeper.

It is absurd that rules which are adhered to elsewhere on the park are not applied in the penalty area. We are in a position when nobody knows what constitutes a foul and what doesn't. As a result we get these farcical situations where the penalty box looks more like an episode of Strictly than a football match. After a corner kick has been taken, if a player is seen to be fouling an opponent, the referee should blow his whistle. Penalty or free kick depending on who is spotted committing an offence first. The rules would be clear and managers would very quickly be telling their players not to grab hold of their opponents.

I feel your pain Hammer, strangely at Palace v Everton on Saturday, VAR didn't intervene when an Everton player pushed Strand-Larsen off the ball in the penalty area with two hands without even trying to get the ball...Strand-Larsen was about to shoot. Not sure what the Ref was doing perhaps he was having a 'Scottish' moment, given what appears to be let go up here. But you can bet, if that had happened to a Arsenal, City or Liverpool player the ref's whistle would have gone straight to his mouth

Going to be a tense couple of weeks for you now, but Spur's ability to shoot themselves in the foot may save West Ham

5 hours ago, Eagle4Caley said:

Going to be a tense couple of weeks for you now, but Spur's ability to shoot themselves in the foot may save West Ham

I hope so. Spurs have to play Chelsea who have lost 5 of their last 6 PL games, three days after the cup final. I can't see anything other than a Spurs win, which means we need to win away at Newcastle and at home to Leeds and then hope Moyes does us a favour and Everton turn them over.

At Chrismas I'd resigned myself to relegation (and the bliss of no VAR next season) but the recent hope when we managed to escape the drop zone for a week or so means it'll be tense as you say. Not helped by the realisation that the team finishing 18th for the last 2 seasons has gone straight through the Championship to League 1!

Meanwhile, in Scotland, Willie Column agreed with VAR that Hearts should have been awarded a penalty that referee Steven Maclean waived away even after reviewing the footage on the VAR screen.

What an absolute joke.

That decision could well now cost Hearts the title...

The whole VAR setup is costing millions and they still can't get it right, a complete waste of money!

12 hours ago, IBM said:

The whole VAR setup is costing millions and they still can't get it right, a complete waste of money!

Instead of getting rid of controversial moments it's creating even more of it's own!

I always said it should be used like in cricket and tennis where a captain/manager has, say, two challenges per half. If they're proved right they keep their challenge, if they're wrong they lose it. That way we only get delays, etc if a team really does think they've been wronged - and they can point to that specific incident. Refs wouldn't then rely on it as a backup to their lack of descision making and linos would actually have to call an offside if they think it is. Oh, and the full audio of the discussion during a challenge should be played over the PA system in the stadium and put on the big screen where there is one. In cricket this adds to the spectacle rather than taking away from it as VAR currently does.

15 hours ago, tm4tj said:

Meanwhile, in Scotland, Willie Column agreed with VAR that Hearts should have been awarded a penalty that referee Steven Maclean waived away even after reviewing the footage on the VAR screen.

What an absolute joke.

That decision could well now cost Hearts the title...

I thought the handball shout was more of a penalty that the "trip" at the end. His arm definitely went up towards the ball, but the other one looked more like an accidental coming together to me. I can see why Hearts would want it, but I don't think theres enough in it to give a penalty for me.

Hopefully the draw doesn't cost Hearts the title. Celtic could easily drop a couple of points at Motherwell tonight which would make the match at the weekend a formality if Hearts can beat Falkirk. Otherwise it's a winner take all.

The aim and purpose of VAR is a great idea but it is only as good as the referees overseeing it (and the placement of the technology).

Too many refs seem to have ego issues that mean they can't admit they were wrong, even in the face of video evidence, and those working the VAR may be a little more unlikely to throw their colleague under the bus in terms of highlighting they are making a bad decision. I think this World Cup will make or break VAR and I hope FIFA have really experienced officials doing this as my experience of it in MLS games is about the same as opinions expressed about Scotland and England. When it works, it works well, but just like unassisted referees who can legitimately get things wrong on a split-second decision, when a clearly bad decision is made on VAR, its nonsensical as that should never happen.

The get-out clause here is always to use the wording that "VAR is designed to correct clear and obvious errors made by the official, if you have to look at it from 100 angles for 5 minutes then by definition this is not clear and obvious to the official on the field"

I kind of like the cricket idea of each team having limited challenges. They also use it in other sports on this side of the pond like Basketball and NFL I think. Doesn't seem to slow those sports down, although it could be argued that these sports already have more breaks in them than football.

The whole system likely needs an overhaul and review on a global scale. If for example it is to be in all the top leagues then you have to go all in and incorporate definitions of how many cameras, camera angles, goal-line technology all with standards. Not sure about Scotland, but it seems that over here that the quality of the VAR is all down to how many angles Apple TV can show with their cameras at any given stadium! This world cup is set to make FIFA billions in profit so perhaps some of that can be diverted to improving the technology that should make decision making consistent and fair.

It's not in this world cup, but happy to see that the Canadian Premier League is also trialling the 'daylight' offside rule proposed by Arsene Wenger (ironic that a former Arsenal manager is promoting a rule to achieve more attacking football). No more offside by a nostril hair or a knobbly knee, needs to be clear air between defender and attacker. This is another one that might add to the controversy of VAR as well ... although the VAR for that should be easier. Strange though that is being trialled in a league that does not use VAR!

1 hour ago, Scotty said:

The get-out clause here is always to use the wording that "VAR is designed to correct clear and obvious errors made by the official, if you have to look at it from 100 angles for 5 minutes then by definition this is not clear and obvious to the official on the field"

And if you have to look at it from 100 angles for 5 minutes then it's not clear and obvious to the VAR official either

4 hours ago, Scotty said:

It's not in this world cup, but happy to see that the Canadian Premier League is also trialling the 'daylight' offside rule proposed by Arsene Wenger (ironic that a former Arsenal manager is promoting a rule to achieve more attacking football). No more offside by a nostril hair or a knobbly knee, needs to be clear air between defender and attacker.

Surely it will still come down to mm?

Won't they have to draw lines to see if there is 1mm of daylight? Or is it just a naked eye call?

Seems to me its just moving the position of the hairs to split. I haven't read the detail of it though.

you are probably right, the nostril hair or knobbly knee will be behind now instead of in front.

Motherwell player saw the Greek sprinting towards the ball and immediately moved sideways to block him ultimately moving his leg towards the player and stamping on his foot. That is a penalty.

The handball have seen them given but his hand was in front of his chest and it was ball to hand not hand to ball. Cut off his arm with a powersaw and the ball hits him on the chest. No penalty for me.

Mahanwise or whatever he is called deliberately left his leg in there and should have been booked for diving.

Pi55ed off with people saying he rolled about too theatrically. If you run at speed and get tripped you fall at speed and roll.

Quite simple to be honest. If not there are too many trolls for my liking.

I feel that we need to re-focus on the "clear and obvious". One can argue that you are either on-side or offside and it might be possible to have technology sophisticated enough to determine whether the furthest forward part of one player's anatomy is a millimetre further forward than that of a player the other side of the pitch at the exact moment the ball is no longer in contact with the player making the pass, but we don't have it yet. Whether an incident in the penalty box warrants a penalty cannot simply be established by technology, however sophisticated.

So, let the officials on the park make the decisions with VAR having a quick look. If they see something which the shows the on-field decision was clearly and obviously wrong then this should be apparent within 20 - 30 seconds. If the referee is advised that VAR are looking at an incident, then if VAR haven't come up with any evidence to show the on-field decision was clearly and obviously wrong then the referee should confirm the on-field decision within 30 seconds and re-start the game.

I hate the delayed offside flags. Let the linesman flag if he thinks someone is offside. If he doesn't flag and VAR intervene when the player is clearly offside, then officials will tend to err on the side of not flagging rather than flagging when a player is actually on-side. Therefore there shouldn't be many occasions when a wrong decision prevents a goal.

No system is ever going to be perfect, but we need to end these lengthy VAR delays. If that means that slow motion analysis reveals a few decisions were actually wrong, then so be it. It is in the nature of things that sometimes these decisions will go for you and sometimes against you.

Another huge penalty call tonight which hands Celtic the advantage. I think VAR and then the ref have made an assumption that the ball must have hit the defender’s hand, but the footage shows no real evidence of a clear and obvious error.

11 hours ago, Yngwie said:

Another huge penalty call tonight which hands Celtic the advantage. I think VAR and then the ref have made an assumption that the ball must have hit the defender’s hand, but the footage shows no real evidence of a clear and obvious error.

Sometimes I wonder if there is an agenda in VAR only showing a particular angle and not looking at them all. It is certainly not a guarantee that the ball hit his hand from the one angle I saw shown. I was watching the Hearts game and when that finished I switched over in time to see the replay, VAR and penalty. Surely for a televised match there were other angles available.

It's an absolutely shameful decision. The defender clearly heads the ball powerfully and there were no appeals for handball from the Celtic players or their supporters massed behind the goal. One wonders why VAR even looked at it at all.

Given that they did look at it, what they would have seen was a thumping good clearance by the defender. I'm not sure whether the rules now say that if the hand is above shoulder height and there is any contact with the ball, then a penalty must be awarded, but even if it is, then this was not a penalty. Yes, his arm was raised above his shoulder but there is no clear and obvious evidence of the ball touching the hand. VAR should also have noticed that the Celtic player's shoulder was directly under the defenders arm, preventing the defender from lowering it to a more natural position and maybe actually pushing his hand towards his head.

How the referee could have concluded he had made a clear and obvious error is simply beyond belief. He should have told the VAR team to take off their Celtic scarfs and blown the full time whistle.

VAR is the tail wagging the dog. It was supposed to be introduced as a tool to assist the referee. Ie For me checking whether a ball had crossed the goal- line.

Add in it’s almost a contactless sport now then the officialdom or responsibility for making the call on any match tackle, corner-ball challenge or diving-(cheating, let’s call it what it is); is in the hands (or eyes) of the VAR officials. Refs are under such scrutiny that they are more likely to overturn their own decision and default onto the VAR.

The decision to award Celtic the penalty was simply shocking. I feel sorry for the Hearts as Celtic will now take the title on Saturday through a victory in their own patch. Whilst the Celtic fraternity will rejoice, it will be a hollow crowning with VAR the winner - not football.

I also agree with DD regarding the linesman raising their flag at the completion of the move. It should be raised immediately when the infraction is seen. It’s another step towards killing the game for the fans.

bc

Edited May 14May 14 by big cherly

56 minutes ago, big cherly said:

I also agree with DD regarding the linesman raising their flag at the completion of the move. It should be raised immediately when the infraction is see. It’s another step towards killing the game for the fans.

bc

100% on this one too. Have seen season ending injuries twice now because of this, with the injury happening after the flag should have been raised.

Wasn't it a foul throw that led to the penalty incident in the first place?

7 minutes ago, Gringo said:

Wasn't it a foul throw that led to the penalty incident in the first place?

It looked OK to me. Part of each foot looked to me to be on or behind the line, and arms looked OK. What made you think it was a foul throw?

I've been wrong about foul throws before when I was thinking of the older law where your feet had to be behind the line.

Such common sense and pragmatism in this thread.

Such a shame the lunatics in positions of authority, be that FIFA, UEFA, SFA or wherever, don’t know what common sense and pragmatism are.

That said, I only recall VAR affecting us twice and both decisions went our way (the penalty awarded to us against Falkirk in the cup semi and the Celtic goal disallowed in the final).

16 hours ago, The Hammer said:

It looked OK to me. Part of each foot looked to me to be on or behind the line, and arms looked OK. What made you think it was a foul throw?

I've been wrong about foul throws before when I was thinking of the older law where your feet had to be behind the line.

Ah, that maybe where I got from...both feet behind the line. 👍

There's an interesting development on this with a report by the English Premier League's "Key Match Incidents" panel. They were looking at an incident when Everton were denied a penalty against Man City when Bernardo Silva was holding Rohl at a corner. All 5 members of the panel agreed it should have been a penalty. They said "there is a clear, sustained holding offence which continues as the corner is taken and the ball comes into play".

Applying that unanimous opinion to the controversial incident at the end of the West Ham v Arsenal game, the referee should have blown for a penalty about 5 times before the ball came anywhere near the keeper.

Hopefully the panel's opinion can result in some clear guidance to referees not to tolerate all this sumo style wrestling that has become so commonplace in the modern game.

John Beaton and his family are receiving Police protection.

The irony of all this is that Celtic and their fans believe he is a Rangers diehard, and now he’s awarded Celtic one of the most controversial, and potentially one of the most significant, penalties ever.

I just hope Hearts don’t lose tomorrow’s game. If they can win the title it will be a welcome breath of fresh air for our top flight.