Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

Video Assistant Referee (VAR)

Being used in the cup tonight for first time.

Hopefully Palace will be the first team ever to have a last minute equaliser denied due to foul play in the build up!
«1

Comments

  • Macronate said:

    Zaha will have to be careful with his theatrics now.

    He will still get away with it.
  • He's not playing. Injured I think.
  • Bizarre that the Amex is so empty
  • Dave2l said:



    Losing points due to a crappy inaccurate ref decision is wrong and it's shit.

    .

    Maybe.....but gaining point because of it is great!
  • Dave2l said:

    About time!

    Got on my nerves when Ferdinand said "we still need the human error and debate" sure fair enough, I don't mind debating a penalty decision myself when watching football on the old box, but it's much better to actually just get something right for once and make big decisions in big games correct, right and fair.

    A debate is not more important then sport and fairness.

    Losing points due to a crappy inaccurate ref decision is wrong and it's shit.

    Where past that now.

    And we're not going to lose all debate - some decisions will still be open to questions as we have seen in other sports. The idea is to just make fewer mistakes, it will always be almost impossible to eliminate all mistakes.
  • It’s used here in Australia and these thick pr#*ks still get it wrong!
  • Imagine all the shit that Zaha would get if VAR was used in the league ? I assume there would be cards issued for simulation?
  • Sponsored links:


  • Was it used tonight?
  • edited January 8

    Was it used tonight?

    Brighton's winner was checked for handball but nothing on replay showed handball so the goal stood.
  • edited January 8
    Just to add, people watching on TV thought the winning goal wasn't checked because there was no obvious delay but refs post match said they did use replays to check the decision.
  • Credit to Hodgson for saying that the Brighton winner was genuine and that it would have been harsh for VAR to have disallowed it... Just a shame he's with Palace as despite his England failures I quite like him as a Manager

    Also interesting to read that the referee reviewing the incidents was based in West London rather than at the Ground which I found strange.

    Surely would be better to have them somewhere in the Ground so if that if comms go down there is still a potential way to keep in contact
  • Credit to Hodgson for saying that the Brighton winner was genuine and that it would have been harsh for VAR to have disallowed it... Just a shame he's with Palace as despite his England failures I quite like him as a Manager

    Also interesting to read that the referee reviewing the incidents was based in West London rather than at the Ground which I found strange.

    Surely would be better to have them somewhere in the Ground so if that if comms go down there is still a potential way to keep in contact

    They do the same in the NFL. Video referee is in New York for all games.
  • Being used in the cup tonight for first time.

    Hopefully Palace will be the first team ever to have a last minute equaliser denied due to foul play in the build up!

    You weren't far off there.

  • Also interesting to read that the referee reviewing the incidents was based in West London rather than at the Ground which I found strange.

    Surely would be better to have them somewhere in the Ground so if that if comms go down there is still a potential way to keep in contact

    I think it's 'Premier League Productions' (PLP) that run the VAR system, and they have a suite set up to do this in at their headquarters. To do it on location would mean an outside broadcast (OB) truck, unless the stadium happened to have a suite set up in it already (which no stadiums have as far as I know).

    If comms go down, it wouldn't really make any difference if they were 100 yards away in an OB truck, or 50 miles away - they're not going to send any other form of message to the ref if the system isn't working, they'll presumably just stop using it.

    I don't understand how it would work when doing multiple games at the same time, presumably PLP will have the facilities to do that.
  • JiMMy 85 said:


    Also interesting to read that the referee reviewing the incidents was based in West London rather than at the Ground which I found strange.

    Surely would be better to have them somewhere in the Ground so if that if comms go down there is still a potential way to keep in contact

    I think it's 'Premier League Productions' (PLP) that run the VAR system, and they have a suite set up to do this in at their headquarters. To do it on location would mean an outside broadcast (OB) truck, unless the stadium happened to have a suite set up in it already (which no stadiums have as far as I know).

    If comms go down, it wouldn't really make any difference if they were 100 yards away in an OB truck, or 50 miles away - they're not going to send any other form of message to the ref if the system isn't working, they'll presumably just stop using it.

    I don't understand how it would work when doing multiple games at the same time, presumably PLP will have the facilities to do that.
    One HQ, multiple officials. Easy.
  • JiMMy 85 said:


    Also interesting to read that the referee reviewing the incidents was based in West London rather than at the Ground which I found strange.

    Surely would be better to have them somewhere in the Ground so if that if comms go down there is still a potential way to keep in contact

    I think it's 'Premier League Productions' (PLP) that run the VAR system, and they have a suite set up to do this in at their headquarters. To do it on location would mean an outside broadcast (OB) truck, unless the stadium happened to have a suite set up in it already (which no stadiums have as far as I know).

    If comms go down, it wouldn't really make any difference if they were 100 yards away in an OB truck, or 50 miles away - they're not going to send any other form of message to the ref if the system isn't working, they'll presumably just stop using it.

    I don't understand how it would work when doing multiple games at the same time, presumably PLP will have the facilities to do that.
    One HQ, multiple officials. Easy.
    I meant, will they need a suite for each game, and do they have the facilities for that?
  • Bizarre that the Amex is so empty

    Brighton fan I know said the Palace mob were so aggressive and violent at the November fixture a lot of Brighton fans stayed away.
  • Sponsored links:


  • Did they have VAR? Why didn't they mention it at all? :wink:
  • Bizarre that the Amex is so empty

    Brighton fan I know said the Palace mob were so aggressive and violent at the November fixture a lot of Brighton fans stayed away.
    Lad I know who lives in Hastings told me it all kicked off at Polegate station (after the league game) causing his train (and others) to be delayed, don't think he could be arsed with going last night, not that he is slightly bothered by those 'nasty' nigels.
  • Bizarre that the Amex is so empty

    Brighton fan I know said the Palace mob were so aggressive and violent at the November fixture a lot of Brighton fans stayed away.
    Saw similar comments on the Have Your Say section of the BBC match report. I guess if you want to take your kids to football you don't want hassle from a load of wanky ultra-wannabe 15 year old throwing things at you.
  • Credit to Hodgson for saying that the Brighton winner was genuine and that it would have been harsh for VAR to have disallowed it... Just a shame he's with Palace as despite his England failures I quite like him as a Manager

    Also interesting to read that the referee reviewing the incidents was based in West London rather than at the Ground which I found strange.

    Surely would be better to have them somewhere in the Ground so if that if comms go down there is still a potential way to keep in contact

    That is NOT what he said, and what he did say is very important as it proves the value of VAR, on its very first outing in England.

    "Roy Hodgson admitted he had directed “spiteful” words at the referee, Andre Marriner, after watching the Brighton striker Glenn Murray put his Crystal Palace team out of the FA Cup with a potentially controversial late winner for 2-1. But Hodgson changed his tune entirely after being assured that Murray had not used his hand to ease the ball over the line."

    Now if VAR had not been available the media would now be full of "controversy" over a lst minute winner by an ex Palace player that Palace thought should have been disallowed. VAR nips that in the bud and everyone pipes down. Imagine the benefit if nex time you swap "Hodgson" for "Mourinho".

    Not before bloody time.

    Now to get full transparency over "time added on".
    YES. This has bothered me since the fourth official board thing came in. My understanding was that a ref stopped his watch when he saw fit. So how on Earth could he know how long was left to play after 45 straight minutes? Maybe he has a second watch for that. So that makes me wonder, why is it nearly always EXACTLY 2,3 or 4 minutes?

    And the rules state that the whistle must be blown unless it's a penalty. Not that the game just go on if it's halfway through an attack or corner or whatever.
  • JiMMy 85 said:

    Credit to Hodgson for saying that the Brighton winner was genuine and that it would have been harsh for VAR to have disallowed it... Just a shame he's with Palace as despite his England failures I quite like him as a Manager

    Also interesting to read that the referee reviewing the incidents was based in West London rather than at the Ground which I found strange.

    Surely would be better to have them somewhere in the Ground so if that if comms go down there is still a potential way to keep in contact

    That is NOT what he said, and what he did say is very important as it proves the value of VAR, on its very first outing in England.

    "Roy Hodgson admitted he had directed “spiteful” words at the referee, Andre Marriner, after watching the Brighton striker Glenn Murray put his Crystal Palace team out of the FA Cup with a potentially controversial late winner for 2-1. But Hodgson changed his tune entirely after being assured that Murray had not used his hand to ease the ball over the line."

    Now if VAR had not been available the media would now be full of "controversy" over a lst minute winner by an ex Palace player that Palace thought should have been disallowed. VAR nips that in the bud and everyone pipes down. Imagine the benefit if nex time you swap "Hodgson" for "Mourinho".

    Not before bloody time.

    Now to get full transparency over "time added on".
    YES. This has bothered me since the fourth official board thing came in. My understanding was that a ref stopped his watch when he saw fit. So how on Earth could he know how long was left to play after 45 straight minutes? Maybe he has a second watch for that. So that makes me wonder, why is it nearly always EXACTLY 2,3 or 4 minutes?

    And the rules state that the whistle must be blown unless it's a penalty. Not that the game just go on if it's halfway through an attack or corner or whatever.
    Exactly. It's highly suspicious that since I've been on the continent and watched games out here, I've noticed that injury time rarely clocks up more than max 3mins. How can that be explained if we are all following the same FIFA guidance on stoppages. I think it was the recent Gills game where there were two extra mins in the first half, yet there had been no stoppages I could remember. WTF?

    And the solution is straightforward. 4th official is responsible for "stopping the clock", and when he does so, the stadium clock stops too, so we can all see how much time has been added on. When time runs out, an electronic whistle blows (equiv. of the hooter in ice hockey).

    The demagogue element among the refs won't like it, but tough, we are customers, we pay for it, so we've got a right to know what's going on. An absolute right. Who wants to dispute that?

  • Official rules for the length of a football match.

    First half

    46 minutes
    47 minutes if the game was stopped for any injury.

    Second Half
    48 minutes
    +1 minute if the game was stopped for any injury.
    +1 minute if the away team is winning or drawing and has been slowing the game down.
    +1 minute if the game is deemed by the referee to be "very important".

    In addition, the referee will add time for serious injuries where the game is stopped for three minutes or more. In this case the referee adds the actual length of time lost less two minutes.


  • Isn't 30 seconds also added on for goals and substitutions?
  • JiMMy 85 said:

    Credit to Hodgson for saying that the Brighton winner was genuine and that it would have been harsh for VAR to have disallowed it... Just a shame he's with Palace as despite his England failures I quite like him as a Manager

    Also interesting to read that the referee reviewing the incidents was based in West London rather than at the Ground which I found strange.

    Surely would be better to have them somewhere in the Ground so if that if comms go down there is still a potential way to keep in contact

    That is NOT what he said, and what he did say is very important as it proves the value of VAR, on its very first outing in England.

    "Roy Hodgson admitted he had directed “spiteful” words at the referee, Andre Marriner, after watching the Brighton striker Glenn Murray put his Crystal Palace team out of the FA Cup with a potentially controversial late winner for 2-1. But Hodgson changed his tune entirely after being assured that Murray had not used his hand to ease the ball over the line."

    Now if VAR had not been available the media would now be full of "controversy" over a lst minute winner by an ex Palace player that Palace thought should have been disallowed. VAR nips that in the bud and everyone pipes down. Imagine the benefit if nex time you swap "Hodgson" for "Mourinho".

    Not before bloody time.

    Now to get full transparency over "time added on".
    YES. This has bothered me since the fourth official board thing came in. My understanding was that a ref stopped his watch when he saw fit. So how on Earth could he know how long was left to play after 45 straight minutes? Maybe he has a second watch for that. So that makes me wonder, why is it nearly always EXACTLY 2,3 or 4 minutes?

    And the rules state that the whistle must be blown unless it's a penalty. Not that the game just go on if it's halfway through an attack or corner or whatever.
    Exactly. It's highly suspicious that since I've been on the continent and watched games out here, I've noticed that injury time rarely clocks up more than max 3mins. How can that be explained if we are all following the same FIFA guidance on stoppages. I think it was the recent Gills game where there were two extra mins in the first half, yet there had been no stoppages I could remember. WTF?

    And the solution is straightforward. 4th official is responsible for "stopping the clock", and when he does so, the stadium clock stops too, so we can all see how much time has been added on. When time runs out, an electronic whistle blows (equiv. of the hooter in ice hockey).

    The demagogue element among the refs won't like it, but tough, we are customers, we pay for it, so we've got a right to know what's going on. An absolute right. Who wants to dispute that?

    Thank you Katrien......
  • I'd like to see "time ball in play" stats published. see how much of a 90 minute game we actually see.
Sign In or Register to comment.