VAR

[cdbearsfan]

It wasn't even consistent yesterday though. Everton were awarded a penalty that was then overturned. Absolutely no "ref's call" there.

Saw that and thought it was a clear error so they were right to overturn it. Calvert-Lewin just lost his footing, never a penalty.

[chrisw1]

The official explanation was that Cash "didn't get enough of a touch on the ball to overturn the decision" What a complete load of bollocks. A touch on the ball is a touch on the ball however slight. It was enough to divert the ball away from Soucek to deny him the chance of getting a shot on goal. The only consideration in that instance is "did the defender get a touch on the ball or not" There was no malice in Cash's tackle and the ensuing tangle of legs were clearly instigated by Soucek. For them to then come out and say they don't want to undermine the refs decision is a total abdication of very reason Stockley Park exists. They have somehow contrived make VAR worse than it already was which took some doing.

Perfectly summed up.

[Somniloquism]

If they scrapped VAR we would have to totally change our defensive strategy as the high line would be exposed time and time again, with no VAR to rule them offside.

It would be worse for us than literally any other club and by some distance, if we were to get rid of VAR.

I thought that, but we only had I think 2 overturns in our favour and one against (low single digits anyway). So it seems the Lino's are calling it right the majority of the time. Obviously it might be a phenomena similar to Arsenal under Graham where the news gets out that they are well drilled, so the lino just assumes the player is offside, with added concurrence from VAR.

[Legion]

A bit of a mess yet again this evening. Nothing wrong with the goal by Watkins.

[Somniloquism]

A bit of a mess yet again this evening. Nothing wrong with the goal by Watkins.

They use semi-automated VAR for offsides which has an accelerometer in the ball. During the euros they called an accidental brush of the ball
 by the scorer using the same technology. So they might have for tonight. But if they used their eyes, it was too close to call and a bad decision unless some angle we haven't seen was used.

[edgysatsuma89]

A bit of a mess yet again this evening. Nothing wrong with the goal by Watkins.

They use semi-automated VAR for offsides which has an accelerometer in the ball. During the euros they called an accidental brush of the ball
 by the scorer using the same technology. So they might have for tonight. But if they used their eyes, it was too close to call and a bad decision unless some angle we haven't seen was used.

It was a shit angle they were showing us, you would assume they would have a better one more side-on to see it. It probably has brushed his hand but it is so sleight.

[Neil Hawkes]

What annoyed me so much was the Ref was not called to see the monitor for Ollie's goal, but was called to the monitor for Jhon's goal.

I quite liked the Ref, (his delay for the penalty call was excellent, allowing Jacob to score), and I think he would have given Ollies goal had he been allowed to look at it.

[Somniloquism]

One is definitive and doesn't need a refs judgement (like with offside 99% of the time) as any handball by the scorer is ruled out whether meant or not. The other is subjective and would need the ref's judgment (deliberate or arm in a un-natural position).

If Watkins hadn't have scored his goal (blocked and followed up by someone else), then the Ref would have been sent to the monitor to judge whether Watkins handball was deliberate.

[Risso]

A bit of a mess yet again this evening. Nothing wrong with the goal by Watkins.

They use semi-automated VAR for offsides which has an accelerometer in the ball. During the euros they called an accidental brush of the ball
 by the scorer using the same technology. So they might have for tonight. But if they used their eyes, it was too close to call and a bad decision unless some angle we haven't seen was used.

How would that technology help with whether it touched his arm or not?

[Holte132]

Surely the 'handball' was by Onana, not Ollie?

[Neil Hawkes]

One is definitive and doesn't need a refs judgement (like with offside 99% of the time) as any handball by the scorer is ruled out whether meant or not. The other is subjective and would need the ref's judgment (deliberate or arm in a un-natural position).

If Watkins hadn't have scored his goal (blocked and followed up by someone else), then the Ref would have been sent to the monitor to judge whether Watkins handball was deliberate.

Fair enough - except that every camera angle showed Ollie did not handle the ball, therefore it should have gone to Refs decision after monitor review and not VAR only, they where wrong.

[Dave]

A bit of a mess yet again this evening. Nothing wrong with the goal by Watkins.

They use semi-automated VAR for offsides which has an accelerometer in the ball. During the euros they called an accidental brush of the ball
 by the scorer using the same technology. So they might have for tonight. But if they used their eyes, it was too close to call and a bad decision unless some angle we haven't seen was used.

How would that technology help with whether it touched his arm or not?

Like he says, similar to in the Euros when they seemed to be disallowing everything that Lukaku did:



So if they had access to the same technology last night then it makes sense to disallow the Watkins goal even at the slightest touch. However if they did use that technology, you'd think the commentary bods would have mentioned it.

[Dave]

Surely the 'handball' was by Onana, not Ollie?

Different incidents - Ollie's first half disallowed goal vs Duran's second half disallowed goal. One obvious, one not.

[Risso]

But the ball appeared to hit Watkins in the stomach, roughly where his arm was, so there'd have been a 'snick' whatever. That wasn't the issue.

[Holte132]

 

Surely the 'handball' was by Onana, not Ollie?

Different incidents - Ollie's first half disallowed goal vs Duran's second half disallowed goal. One obvious, one not.

I get that, but I thought that Ollie's goal was disallowed because of handball by Onana, and Duran's was disallowed because Duran himself handled. Please don't tell me I've managed to get something else wrong!