VAR

[Stu82]

It’s a ridiculous decision, commentators saying that var not going to overturn refs decisions as often to stop undermining them?
What’s the point. If it’s a wrong decision, it’s wrong.

[Somniloquism]

Can't see it...

https://www.heroesandvillains.info/forumv3/index.php?topic=65108.0

[Legion]

Can't see it...

https://www.heroesandvillains.info/forumv3/index.php?topic=65108.0

It was a pathetic attempt at a joke.

[Toronto Villa]

Having watched the pen again in slow motion it absolutely should not have been given. Cash gets a touch before the two players become entangled. VAR should have told the ref it was a clear and obvious error, or at minimum asked him to check the monitor.

[Accent Guy]

VAR is a clear and obvious error

[The Edge]

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.

[The Edge]

Having watched the pen again in slow motion it absolutely should not have been given. Cash gets a touch before the two players become entangled. VAR should have told the ref it was a clear and obvious error, or at minimum asked him to check the monitor.

I hate watching things in slow motion as it invariably makes things look a lot worse but on this occasion slow motion was vital to see that Cash clearly got a touch on the ball. But they decided to ignore it anyway.

[Gareth]

It was a poor decision by a poor ref in real time & the fact VAR didn’t at least send him to the screen to review it was equally bad.

I hate slow motion replays & hate the screens being used but that scenario is exactly why both are allegedly there to be used.

Referees lack of improvement is still being hidden behind VAR

[Goldenballs]

Did Cash get the ball? Yes.
Was there contact after? Yes, but it was instigated by the big lanky goggle-eyed freak.
Shall we correct the decision? Nah.

Let's see what happens at somewhere like Old Trafford.

[Nev]

So instead of seeking the correct decision VAR will overlook incorrect decisions on the pretext that they are "not wrong enough".

So, that's all good then.

[Risso]

From the BBC:

"The Hammers were given a chance to equalise when Cash's foul on Soucek in the box resulted in a penalty being awarded.
After a quick video assistant referee (VAR) check, it was given, which is an example of a new rule for this season called "Referee's Call" which reaffirms a high bar for VAR intervention. It means subjective decisions will not be refereed again after a decision has been made by on-field officials."

Apart from in the Everton game, where the ref gave Everton a penalty for a foul on Calvert-Lewin, until VAR told him to overturn it.

[Nev]

We now have a subjective decision, on a subjective decision.

[The Edge]

So instead of seeking the correct decision VAR will overlook incorrect decisions on the pretext that they are "not wrong enough".

So, that's all good then.

Spot on and it leaves the door open for favouritism for the snide six or am I being a bit of a conspiracy theorist?

[dalians umbrella]

From the BBC:

"The Hammers were given a chance to equalise when Cash's foul on Soucek in the box resulted in a penalty being awarded.
After a quick video assistant referee (VAR) check, it was given, which is an example of a new rule for this season called "Referee's Call" which reaffirms a high bar for VAR intervention. It means subjective decisions will not be refereed again after a decision has been made by on-field officials."

Apart from in the Everton game, where the ref gave Everton a penalty for a foul on Calvert-Lewin, until VAR told him to overturn it.

A subjective opinion is when 2 or more parties come to different conclusions based on the same evidence. But this is not the case here because the ref probably didn't see Cash get the ball and wasn't privy to all the relevant evidence.

How ref's call should work is like this:

VAR: Hey ref, do you know Cash got the ball?
Ref: No I didn't, I'm coming over to look at it.
Ref: Oh yes, I see it now, but I'm a tw*t and my subjective opinion is that it is still a penalty. I'm invoking ref's call.

Just when I thought VAR couldn't get any worse, they've now ruined it for the areas of the game where it was actually useful and didn't disrupt the game because there was a break in play anyway - penalties and red cards.

I bet you anything ref's call isn't applied to offsides where VAR has completely ruined the game by stopping goal celebrations and cancelling out historic last-minute winners. They will still get out their rulers, protractors, set squares, compasses and Fisher Price calculators to spot that someone's bell-end is offside because they were hanging to the right rather than the left at that particular moment. And when semi-automated comes in, they'll still take 10 minutes to see if someone is interfering with play 5 minutes back.

[Somniloquism]

I will point out the obvious that offsides are absolute with the only "subjective" bit on if an offside player who didn't touch the ball but was interfering with if near the keeper.

I would rather wait until any audio is released if anything on this for whether the ref spotted it or not. I'm not sure as the touch is not obvious at all in the initial play. But I would argue it is like the Villa / Palace one last year. Guehi(?) touches the ball, but not enough to divert it from Watkins, then brings Watkins down. The slight difference is Guehi then knocks the ball again. VAR sent the ref to the screen but he stood by that the initial knock was not enough and then Watkins was brought down.