Var errors

[DeltaRay1903]

2 minutes ago, Sheeptastic said:

Aside from the Hoilett stonewall penalty shambles and the countless 50/50 decisions that went in their favour, I can't shake the feeling that had Carter-Vickers or Scales dallied on the ball and Miovski nicked it the way Kyogo did they would've blown for a foul.

I'm not saying it was a foul on MacDonald (for me it wasn't) but that is just the way it seems to work and it makes it difficult to not feel pretty hopeless about Scottish football. 

I think it was a foul. At least that was my immediate reaction upon seeing it live on telly. 

I'd need to watch it back but at the time I thought it was pretty much a two handed push on Macdonald's back. Soft maybe but that's a foul. 

[davierobb]

If you were a referee running a game would you not want to see the big issues on a screen before final decision is made ? Referee yesterday has his erse hanging out to dry and some bozo in a van decides whether it's a penalty or not . Some outsider decides if there is a foul in build up to a penalty in the last five minutes of a cup semi final and you then have no say. Surely in that situation the VAR official says there is a possible foul in the build up, do you want a look.

Germans had a big protest against VAR saying it was spoiling the game, came to nothing as Football authorities chase TV money...

[G man]

6 hours ago, Tommy said:

VAR is not so much the issue. It’s the clowns who are making the decisions.

I think it too easy to say it is clowns making the decisions. I think it is deliberate cheating and sadly as this nonsense goes on unchecked the officials are getting better at giving dodgy decisions in favour of what their paymasters - SFA/SPFL - want. 

[Torry Tosser]

Nurnberg 0 Paderborn 2 in German league2 Friday night.

Nurnberg had three goals disallowed by Var,scored a penalty,which they were made to take again and missed it...Games corrupt,money must have been on Paderborn.

[DeltaRay1903]

1 minute ago, Torry Tosser said:

Nurnberg 0 Paderborn 2 in German league2 Friday night.

Nurnberg had three goals disallowed by Var,scored a penalty,which they were made to take again and missed it...Games corrupt,money must have been on Paderborn.

.... and your money must have been on Nuremberg by the sounds of it 😄

[donswin1983]

13 minutes ago, davierobb said:

If you were a referee running a game would you not want to see the big issues on a screen before final decision is made ? Referee yesterday has his erse hanging out to dry and some bozo in a van decides whether it's a penalty or not . Some outsider decides if there is a foul in build up to a penalty in the last five minutes of a cup semi final and you then have no say. Surely in that situation the VAR official says there is a possible foul in the build up, do you want a look.

Germans had a big protest against VAR saying it was spoiling the game, came to nothing as Football authorities chase TV money...

To the best of my knowledge, it’s not in VARs jurisdiction to say to the ref it’s a free kick, in yesterday’s example. It should have been; var advise of possible penalty and then advise the referee that there may have been a clear and obvious error in not giving the penalty and awarding the free kick. When he gave the free kick the ball was still ‘in play’ when the penalty incident occurred. If I’m right and the VAR suggested there was a clear and obvious error, in awarding the free kick and not the penalty, he should have been instructed to go to the monitor. He wasn’t, which says that VAR didn’t advise of any potential error in the free kick award.

it reeks. If it was a free kick, he should have awarded it there and then. He didn’t, he cheated.

if I’m wrong and I dont think I am, the proof is the handball penalty we didn’t get. Var should have intervened, which they didn’t coz it’s not their job to, to say, it’s a free kick outside the box.

hope that makes sense. Still a bit pished from yesterday 😂

[strachanmcgheegoal]

23 minutes ago, DeltaRay1903 said:

I think it was a foul. At least that was my immediate reaction upon seeing it live on telly. 

I'd need to watch it back but at the time I thought it was pretty much a two handed push on Macdonald's back. Soft maybe but that's a foul. 

I don’t mean do this for real as we’d be there all night but the logical comparison is the one in (quell surprise) the arse cheeks earlier this season.  Celtic player dallying gets robbed leads to goal.  Forget who.

if they’re going to be televised all the time then use it against them.   

[DeltaRay1903]

Saggers, Keith Hackett and Mark Halsey debating the Everton v Forest caper. Interesting.

 

[strachanmcgheegoal]

7 minutes ago, donswin1983 said:

To the best of my knowledge, it’s not in VARs jurisdiction to say to the ref it’s a free kick, in yesterday’s example. It should have been; var advise of possible penalty and then advise the referee that there may have been a clear and obvious error in not giving the penalty and awarding the free kick. When he gave the free kick the ball was still ‘in play’ when the penalty incident occurred. If I’m right and the VAR suggested there was a clear and obvious error, in awarding the free kick and not the penalty, he should have been instructed to go to the monitor. He wasn’t, which says that VAR didn’t advise of any potential error in the free kick award.

it reeks. If it was a free kick, he should have awarded it there and then. He didn’t, he cheated.

if I’m wrong and I dont think I am, the proof is the handball penalty we didn’t get. Var should have intervened, which they didn’t coz it’s not their job to, to say, it’s a free kick outside the box.

hope that makes sense. Still a bit pished from yesterday 😂

For the hand ball the difficulty they had was the ball not going out so VAR can’t intervene until it does.  When it eventually goes out they can intervene to check the penalty only.  I’m guessing the tapes will show they conclusively proved the ball and hand were outside the box before the game stopped hence no referral to the screen.

Which is to say we pay a six figure sum annually for a system to say, (all affishul n’that like naw but) Move along cuntoes nothing to see here.

[Torry Tosser]

20 minutes ago, DeltaRay1903 said:

.... and your money must have been on Nuremberg by the sounds of it 😄

No.

[donswin1983]

6 minutes ago, strachanmcgheegoal said:

For the hand ball the difficulty they had was the ball not going out so VAR can’t intervene until it does.  When it eventually goes out they can intervene to check the penalty only.  I’m guessing the tapes will show they conclusively proved the ball and hand were outside the box before the game stopped hence no referral to the screen.

Which is to say we pay a six figure sum annually for a system to say, (all affishul n’that like naw but) Move along cuntoes nothing to see here.

That’s my point, min. The ball ‘going out’ in the CCV incident was when he awarded the free kick. The ball was still in play at the time of the penalty claim. They can check, possible penalty at that point against CCV. If they conclude that’s a penalty then the question is, was it a clear and obvious error in awarding the free kick and then send the ref to the monitor.

so, the ref gives a free kick for fuck all, 6 seconds after it occurred and VAR don’t see anything potentially wrong with that decision, despite the fact it’s been acknowledged it would have been a penalty.

Reeks to high heaven. 

[strachanmcgheegoal]

I think we’re at cross purposes I was talking about the handball incident.  The oddity with the Hoilet one is why initially let play go on?  Is he playing advantage to Celtic literally 5 yards from their own goal?  If he was sent to the monitor do you think he’s going to overturn the ‘foul’ he himself awarded?  And fwiw do you think Celtics 85% crowd might just influence that?

[Ke1t]

31 minutes ago, strachanmcgheegoal said:

I think we’re at cross purposes I was talking about the handball incident.  The oddity with the Hoilet one is why initially let play go on?  Is he playing advantage to Celtic literally 5 yards from their own goal?  If he was sent to the monitor do you think he’s going to overturn the ‘foul’ he himself awarded?  And fwiw do you think Celtics 85% crowd might just influence that?

[RAZOR]

2 hours ago, RabidGiraffe said:

Let's see how VAR performs ay Euro 2024

Any controversial decisions that result in any of the "big" nations being eliminated and there will be sparks. 

Hopefully England. 

[The Boofon]

9 hours ago, Ke1t said:

GBN (And album cover)

[milne_afc]

https://twitter.com/daisychristo/status/1782131160224518633?s=46
 

This mad bitch nails it, apart from when she veers off at the end about left or right wing post-modernism.

[Dandyesque]

13 hours ago, Sheeptastic said:

Aside from the Hoilett stonewall penalty shambles and the countless 50/50 decisions that went in their favour, I can't shake the feeling that had Carter-Vickers or Scales dallied on the ball and Miovski nicked it the way Kyogo did they would've blown for a foul.

I'm not saying it was a foul on MacDonald (for me it wasn't) but that is just the way it seems to work and it makes it difficult to not feel pretty hopeless about Scottish football. 

I don't think it was a foul either, but if they'd put it to VAR the slow motion would have shown 2 hands on McDonald's back and it would have looked like a shove.

[Schapenneuker]

12 hours ago, strachanmcgheegoal said:

I think we’re at cross purposes I was talking about the handball incident.  The oddity with the Hoilet one is why initially let play go on?  Is he playing advantage to Celtic literally 5 yards from their own goal?  If he was sent to the monitor do you think he’s going to overturn the ‘foul’ he himself awarded?  And fwiw do you think Celtics 85% crowd might just influence that?

If you watch the replay, there is absolutely no indication that Robertson intends to award a free kick to Celtic. Not one. He doesn't raise his whistle towards his mouth or move his arm, which would indicate that he sees it as a foul but (for some unknown reason) decides to play on. 

He waits 7 seconds, and only decides that it's a foul for Celtic once Hoilett is obviously fouled. 

If CCV had played the ball and it had went out for a throw in or corner, I have no doubt at all that he would have allowed play to continue. 

This has nothing to do with VAR. It's simply shocking bad refereeing, and I would love to hear the reasoning for what he did. 

But we'll never know. 

 

 

[Sheeptastic]

13 hours ago, DeltaRay1903 said:

I think it was a foul. At least that was my immediate reaction upon seeing it live on telly. 

I'd need to watch it back but at the time I thought it was pretty much a two handed push on Macdonald's back. Soft maybe but that's a foul. 

 

18 minutes ago, Dandyesque said:

I don't think it was a foul either, but if they'd put it to VAR the slow motion would have shown 2 hands on McDonald's back and it would have looked like a shove.

Both sound points but what I'm thinking is - regardless of whether it's a foul or not - if the exact same incident is replicated at the other end of the field, does the on-field referee blow for a foul? I think probably. If he doesn't, does VAR intervene? I'm thinking undoubtedly.

Perhaps I'm being cynical but the way that match was refereed on Saturday was an indictment of what supporters from outside of the Glasgow two have had to put up with for a long, long time and if I'm being honest I'm growing weary of it. 

[strachanmcgheegoal]

This is the risk when you get into the "re-refereeing the game situation."

Using the Macdonald one as an example in real time I don't think its a foul.  The replay shows (I understand, havent checked) that Kyogo does put two hands on Macdonald.  Its therefore possible to manufacture a technical foul in slow motion where in reality what you might call a practical foul doesn't exist.

All well and good, and unquestionably gets into the realms of that thats not what VAR was brought in for.  Your weariness simply with that is understandable.  But in Scotland I think its beyond question that whilst we are doing that, we're only doing it in certain situations, and not even consistently within those.  You can argue whether the arse cheeks continually being both the focus and typically the beneficiaries of those as mere co-incidence if you want.    

[strachanmcgheegoal]

Interesting twist (although outcome is the same) on the above.

The arse cheek one referred to was Dessers on Lagerbielke at Mordor in September.  It is more of a foul - the infamous planted foot - whereas in ours Kyogo does toe the ball from the side first.

Ref that day, who goes to the monitor to absolutely check?  One Don Robertson.

[strachanmcgheegoal]

I’m sure they like the fluidity of non-VAR football but I wonder if Southampton fans are quite so supportive of its absence at the moment.

(the off-side, it was never ever a foul)

[Misers Hill]

Over to the 🤡shttps://news.sky.com/story/nottingham-forest-to-privately-hear-var-audio-connected-to-three-penalty-claims-13121632

[Durrant Dived]

We should be more aggrieved at the scales than the Hoilett one. That would have put us 2-1 up. I doubt MacDonald would have been bombing forward in the 119th minute of the game if we had equalised from the spot 5 minutes before.

[DeltaRay1903]

6 hours ago, Misers Hill said:

Over to the 🤡shttps://news.sky.com/story/nottingham-forest-to-privately-hear-var-audio-connected-to-three-penalty-claims-13121632

Why only in private. Why are such decisions always shrouded in mystery. 

Fans need transparency and as the paying customers who still in one way or another fund the game we should hear exactly what is being said. 

[Big Hat Logan]

1 hour ago, DeltaRay1903 said:

Why only in private. Why are such decisions always shrouded in mystery. 

Fans need transparency and as the paying customers who still in one way or another fund the game we should hear exactly what is being said. 

lol fans don’t matter in the EPL, that’s how you can have teams like Bournemouth, palace etc with about 20k capacity stadiums in the top flight. Tv money is all that really matters.

[Daisy1903]

6 hours ago, Durrant Dived said:

We should be more aggrieved at the scales than the Hoilett one. That would have put us 2-1 up. I doubt MacDonald would have been bombing forward in the 119th minute of the game if we had equalised from the spot 5 minutes before.

Admittedly only seen it in real time but did look like the hand was outside the box. Are there any stills of it?

[redone]

27 minutes ago, Daisy1903 said:

Admittedly only seen it in real time but did look like the hand was outside the box. Are there any stills of it?

In real time at the game I was pretty much in line with the boundary line of the penalty box albeit from about 3 miles away at the back of the Dons end.  However my initial gut reaction was that it was a clear handball inside the box.

Having watched the incident and the half time discussion about it on iplayer my main bone of contention is that they seem to have used only completely fuckin useless camera angles to back up the apparent assumption that it was outside the box.  Surely the camera high up in the West stand behind the goal would have been more likely to give a clearer idea …..certainly better than the ground level camera beside the goal at the east end , which was the one they were mainly showing at half time.

[BIgMuff]

40 minutes ago, Daisy1903 said:

Are there any stills of it?

Loads, here's a few.

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler

 

[RabidGiraffe]

35 minutes ago, BIgMuff said:

Loads, here's a few.

  Hide contents

  Hide contents

  Hide contents

  Hide contents

 

Interesting, I've only seen the second one before.  I also missed the incident live because I was in the pisser.

Looks on the line to me, which counts as the box, does it not?

And I'm in full agreement with the gif at the bottom.