|
By:
I agree with you 1st time poster that betting isn't the biggest issue. However, that decision was clearly incorrect. A very poor decision. I'm just not convinced VAR is improving the percentage of correct decisions by much. The law for this says that the offside player has to 'impact the opponents ability to play the ball' in this type of case. No way did Tadic have any affect on Courteois playing the ball, the header sailed over them both.
|
|
By:
Yes. I agree. The keeper didn't even motion to complain as he knew he was well beaten. In tennis if they serve an ace (which is called out) then they challenge it is point to the server if it is deemed the opponent would not get the ball back. This should be applied here too. It's a clear fair goal imho.
|
|
By:
I thought it was brought in for clear and obvious errors. Either that's not the case, or VAR is consistently being used for the wrong reasons. That was a very marginal call which took minutes to decide on; nothing like clear and obvious.
|
|
By:
Yes, even if anyone thinks that Tadicmight have impacted Courteois with regard to making a save you'd have to be absolutely certain to reverse the decision as clear and obvious. Quite simply this wasn't the case. 2 mins 50 seconds to come up with a totally incorrect decision. Absolutely unacceptable.
|
|
By:
I think Tadic did have an impact on Courtois' ability to play the ball. It is irrelevant that the header went over their heads or that he wouldn't have got to it or saved it. Courtois spilled the ball upwards and could have gone to play the ball if Tadic wasn't there. Tadic being there prevented him from doing that - that is the impediment right there.
However, I agree that it wasn't clear and obvious (unless clear and obvious means clear and obvious from a paused video still in the the VAR room) and I would much rather see a goal like that given. I also don't think they'd have disallowed it if it was a Real Madrid goal especially if Real were at home. Technically correct decision imo but not a good thing for the game as it will only lead to less goals like this and more penalties which is not entertaining at all. And I think they will use VAR to help out the big teams when they are in trouble as I said they would when they announced it. |
|
By:
Lurka, you must only consider Tadic's position from the time of the header. At the time you are mentioning Tadic was not in an offside position so it's irrelevant. He is only in an offside position once the Ajax player headers towards goal so you only consider the impact on Courtois from that moment. From the moment of the header did Tadic have an impact on Courtois chances of saving the ball. Quite clearly no. He was never getting near it.
|
|
By:
unlike in rugby ...
we dont know if the referees or linos first thought is that the player did impact the goalkeeper and therefore he cant overturn his initial thoughts because of var. if refs are not miked up we will never know their initial thoughts they are encouraged to keep flags down in tight calls of course its possible that var did overturn this decision, but without clarification of the refs conversation with var , we cannot be sure. contrast with say nigel owens a rugby ref who will clearly state on live tv what he thinks he has seen, which incidents may give rise to a change , and how certain he is on his decisions which tells var how clear they must be to overturn his thoughts. still some controvesy in rugby var but at least we know why |
|
By:
From wiki... (VAR) is a football assistant referee who reviews decisions made by the head referee with the use of video footage and a headset for communication, mostly used to help Real Madrid win the Champions League. In 2018, VARs were written into the Laws of the Game by the International Football Association Board (IFAB) following trials in a number of major competitions.[1]
|
|
By:
It's been brought in to shape games. I said that from day 1. Initially they talk of 'clear and obvious errors' and over time it becomes a subjective tool to used to get the decisions they want.
|
|
By:
|
|
By:
https://twitter.com/ChampionsLeague/status/1095805860981469184 here is the still image
in the 2017–18 edition of the Laws of the Game, the IFAB made a further clarification that, "In situations where a player moving from, or standing in, an offside position is in the way of an opponent and interferes with the movement of the opponent towards the ball this is an offside offence if it impacts on the ability of the opponent to play or challenge for the ball Fairly clear cut imo. But still don't like that it was ruled out. |
|
By:
i think technically it is offside because of where tadic is standing, common sense tells you he made no obstruction to courtois's movement as is happened so fast and obviously wasnt in his line of vision, the keeper didnt even realise why the goal had been disallowed in the interview after, thinking it was for an earlier offside
its a decision that can go either way in real time but for VAR to spend 3 minutes looking at it then its definitely NOT clear and obvious and the goal should stand. i think VAR should only intervene where decisions can be made very quickly. btsport were trying to compare this to the ball being 1 cm over the line but its not the same, technology means an instant decision can be made 1 mm over the line watching VAR in operation in other leagues i think this goal would have stood and so there is too much inconsistency currently another question that needs answering is why only 2 minutes extra time were played, if you have VAR then you must compensate for the time it takes, the ref clearly didnt in this case the lino also got an important offside wrong and they need to learn to keep their flags down, tadic was clearly in his own half when the ball was played to him this is marginal at best so he should not have flagged, it denied ajax a dangerous looking counter attack, again through VAR not being implemented properly |
|
By:
I'd say a lot of the players don't know the very technical aspects of the rule, but that is irrelevant.
He clearly obstructed Courtois movement. If he wasn't there the keeper would move further towards and got closer to the ball. He'd have closed down the attacker somewhat and that is enough on a literal interpretation of the rules. I don't think he'd have got to the ball first or even got a touch on it but I do think he'd have made a better challenge for it by closing down the gap. That is enough for an offside ruling here. |
|
By:
I also think clear and obvious means clear and obvious on the video as opposed to in real time, ie there is no ambiguity on the video as to whether the attacker is in an offside position. I think when the image is stopped Tadic is clearly in an offside position and clearly impacting the keeper's ability to challenge for the ball.
I don't like to see the goal being disallowed but that is a problem with the rules rather than the interpretation of them. I think they interpreted the rules to the letter here and made the correct decision. But I also don't think they'll be as stringent in making such a ruling against one of the big clubs in a similar case and will use it to shape games. |
|
By:
worry for me would it have been chalked off if Real score that at The Bernabeu? I really have my doubts about VAR.
To late now but really wish they'd leave the game alone |
|
By:
I suspect they wouldn't even show the images if Real scored that at the Bernabeu, they would just tell the ref to award a goal
|
|
By:
correct lurka
|
|
By:
Lurka, I still think you are interpreting the law incorrectly. The consideration is, would Courtois have been able to get to the ball without Tadic there. It doesn't matter whether he might have got marginally closer to the ball, if he still couldn't have got to the ball then Tadic has made no impact on his ability to play or challenge for the ball.
Most importantly it certainly isn't a clear and obvious error. |
|
By:
Overall it seems we are all on the same side really but actually it's quite clear to me and top officials with whom i've checked that the goal should have stood.
|
|
By:
Is it being used today for Europa League games?
|
|
By:
asparagus, it's not ability to get to the ball for the umpteenth time. That's not what the rule says. It's about ability to play or to challenge for the ball (which is different to getting to or playing the ball) and if there's a player in an offside position between you and the ball your ability is impacted. If the ball was further away it might have had no affect on his ability because he wouldn't be close enough to play or to challenge for it but from that close he can't move or jump towards the ball and he is close enough to challenge for it.
I don't think it's used in EL. It wasn't yesterday and they only announced it for the CL. |
|
By:
you don't have to get to, play or touch the ball to challenge for it
|
|
By:
It just ruins the betting experience for me. Every time a goal goes in I end up holding my breath until they eventually kick off again and the score is confirmed.
|
|
By:
There was a game I had a bet in the other day, I can't remember the teams but it was a Spanish second division match. I'd backed unders and a goal was scored, on watching the replay the goalscorer was a good yard and a half offside and if VAR had have been in use it would have taken 2 seconds to review.
My point is this, if VAR was used for incidents like this were there is NO DOUBT a mistake has been made I'd be fine with it but I'm afraid it's impossible. When do you decide to give the benefit of doubt to the goalscorer? When he's less than 1/2 yard offside, less than 4 inches etc etc, it's just not plausible. The fact is at the moment all's VAR is doing is taking longer to decide on decisions, many of which are debatable and still being complained about after the game, so what has it solved? As many have said before if a goal is scored and there is no OBVIOUS reason to chalk it off then let it stand. The problem is you'll still get the odd one you feel has gone your way and the odd one you think hasn't. Basically just as we've had for more than a hundred years without the need to get anybody other than the officials on the pitch involved. It'd be interesting to hear the views of people in respect to whether you think there's any chance of it being scrapped in the future. I think it's unlikely but I wouldn't totally rule it out. |
|
By:
i dont think it will be scrapped, but i hope its constantly improved, as
they learn how negative some of its aspects are. allowing ref to make a statement, or var official to make a statement to media would be a good idea for me too, avoiding confusion. before a decision is made, and then again after it is made, so we dont have to guess what its about. i also hope betfair take a long look at dealing with markets and the problems that have already arisen. |
|
By:
Offsides are causing a lot of the debate at the moment. It would seem to me a vast improvement would be to scrap this idea that the linesman has to keep his flag down if he's not sure and go back to the old way of him making a decision on the spot.
If a goal is scored and the flag is not raised the only way VAR can rule it out is if there in 100% certainty there is an offside, 100 people out of 100 would agree. If a goal is scored and the flag is raised the opposite would be true and there would have to no doubt that the player is onside. It seems simple to me, it's the umpires call part of the VAR used in cricket. In lots of LBW reviews the ball is going to hit the stumps but because it's been given not out the original decision is upheld. I've babbled on but I think you can sum it up in one sentence. If the aim of VAR is to try and get everything in football right, it'll NEVER work, if it's aim is to eradicate massive errors, it's workable. It's as simple as that IMO. |
|
By:
|
|
By:
|
|
By:
That's the main point.
It changes the whole game. Football is about goals real time. Now no goal is a goal until it's confirmed it's a goal. |
|
By:
WTF was that in Eibar - Getafe? VAR utterly killing the game.
|
|
By:
QPR Watford earlier. Watford score "a goal" after the linesman raises flag for offside. Replays later show it was onside. If VAR had been operating I assume that once the flag goes up, VAR can't be used. Not sure if I'm right though?? The whole thing confuses the hell out of me.
|
|
By:
another thing with var, surely disadvantage for away sides at prem grounds in fa cup . not a level playing field imo.
|
|
By:
another thing with var, surely disadvantage for away sides at prem grounds in fa cup . not a level playing field imo
As far as I'm aware it's only being used in some FA Cup matches as part of the trial, ready for full implementation in the PL from next season. I don't think there are any plans to use it in FA Cup next season as they surely haven't the resources to cover every single match. Maybe they might use it in the semis and final? I wonder how the PL VAR will work next season. If there was a full fixture list of 10 matches (unlikely on a Saturday I accept), then each match needs 4 officials at the ground plus, I think, 2 VAR refs (one main plus an assistant). That would mean a total of 60 qualified refs, that's just for the PL. Have the PL got that many refs that they can call on? |
|
By:
Think when it comes in the prem the video refs are all in 1 room covering all the games. So on Saturday afternoon they could be watching 6 games if incidents in possibly 3 games at same time are we just going to have to wait.
There was a incident in the spanish primera couple of weeks ago where the ref stopped game for var after 3 and a half mins the tv refs told the ref to look at the incident, by the time he had done this the game had stopped for 5 and a half mins. At the end of the game there was only 5 mins added which supposedly incuded I think 4 yellows 6 subs and a goal. There may well been a stoppage for a injury as well. So surely its time to stop the clock when ball is out of play and play either 25 or 30 mins each half the ball is in play. |
|
By:
Another f up on the Marseille game, they've settled 2.5, goal VAR'd.
|
|
By:
Another 1 in Turkey, over 2.5 market settled and it's 1-1, a farce
|
|
By:
I wonder of anyone from Betfair ever reads the forum to get customer feedback. With my experience of their customer service standards, I very much doubt it.
They are without doubt the worst company I've ever dealt with, be it through work or privately, in the customer care dept and I've had to deal with some bad ones over the years. The saddest thing is I genuinely don't think they give a toss. |
|
By:
|
|
By:
PSV just equalised with a minute to go. Goes to VAR after which they're 40 seconds over time. So the referee blows up. Again one or both teams cheated out of a minute to win the game.
|
|
By:
You're right Darlo, VAR is the gift that keeps on taking away.
|