Fans Against VAR - Join us

[fansagainstvar]

The screen thing is just bizarre and anti-football. The entire concept of VAR is anti football

 

[sycophantia]

Is the 'clear and obvious' mistake still a thing?
If so while people can debate whether the original decision was wrong, its certainly not an obvious error imo.

 

[sycophantia]

Same here. As soon as he made the square gesture I thought it had been disallowed.

Me and my lad were in the air fist pumping, then we noticed City players celebrating, a proper kick in the bollocks.

 

[Alan]

He did reverse the decision, the linesman gave offside, he agreed with the VAR. It just wasn't clear that happened on the tv. It's why I was confused that he did the tv screen hand gesture yet the City players were celebrating

Assume what EP means is that it seems very rare for VAR to say “go have a look” and then the on-field disagrees with VAR after that.

Which is an obvious flaw in “clear and obvious”, as had been said here many times over. If the ref gets told to go look, he’s already primed to see something that changes his mind.

 

[Alan]

The screen thing is just bizarre and anti-football. The entire concept of VAR is anti football

Goalkeeper gloves are anti-football. 7-man benches, too. And concussion subs? Extremely anti-football.

There’s no argument here. Sports change.

 

[Tony Towner]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1848383347317186797

 

[Boozad]

Poor old Arsenal

 

[Tony Towner]

Good job Brighton isn't a game we need to be targeting as we are well fucked.

 

[BillyDee]

Is the 'clear and obvious' mistake still a thing?
If so while people can debate whether the original decision was wrong, its certainly not an obvious error imo.

It's still poorly defined, but it's supposed to be a higher bar even than that to overturn a decision this season.
Unless Wolves, of course...

 

[Wolftone]

Goalkeeper gloves are anti-football. 7-man benches, too. And concussion subs? Extremely anti-football.

There’s no argument here. Sports change.

Not always for the best though. That is the argument.

 

[The Saturday Boy]

Silva was in an offside position when Stones heads the ball. The on field decision was offside. I don't think it is "clear and obvious" enough for VAR to get involved. The threshold for clear and obvious is inconsistent.

However, I think the ref and his assistant probably call the offside hoping to be sent to the screen for another look.

 

[Wellen Wolf]

I'm not a conspiracy theorist, but if if it just bad luck it's been going on a long time now. Also how many times has it been Attwell either on the field or in the booth?

Bloke posting on the E&S site says he has been VAR interferer nine times for us and we have yet to win. The fact is that even a parks level footballer can see that he does not understand the game.

 

[Wilf Wolf]

Me and my lad were in the air fist pumping, then we noticed City players celebrating, a proper kick in the bollocks.

Exactly.

 

[AndyWolves]

I think I'd expect var to intervene in a more positive fashion on teams that do well and more negatively on teams that do poorly.

In the same way I'd expect teams that attack more to get more penalties and teams that spend more time defending to concede more penalties.

That said, wolves are a huge outlier in terms of VAR interventions. If you wanted to propose conspiracy theories, that kind of data would back you up.

 

[Tony Towner]

I think I'd expect var to intervene in a more positive fashion on teams that do well and more negatively on teams that do poorly.

In the same way I'd expect teams that attack more to get more penalties and teams that spend more time defending to concede more penalties.

That said, wolves are a huge outlier in terms of VAR interventions. If you wanted to propose conspiracy theories, that kind of data would back you up.

That's just interventions changing the decision so doesn't include things like the soft headbutt, Pogba going over the top of the ball, or the Onana assault. Or when VAR agreed with the onfield decision like the Moutinho handball, the dives over Fabio and Hwang's feet or Luton's pen.

 

[Deutsch Wolf]

That's just interventions changing the decision so doesn't include things like the soft headbutt, Pogba going over the top of the ball, or the Onana assault. Or when VAR agreed with the onfield decision like the Moutinho handball, the dive over Fabio's foot or Luton's pen.

Albion getting a penalty for a challenge which was both not a foul and outside the box, then not conceding a penalty when Gibbs literally caught the ball with both hands.

 

[AndyWolves]

If you wanted to build a conspiracy case, it wouldn't be too difficult

 

[BillyDee]

It's beyond blatant. If you wanted to build a case against a conspiracy it would be very difficult.

 

[Elephant Pyjamas]

Assume what EP means is that it seems very rare for VAR to say “go have a look” and then the on-field disagrees with VAR after that.

Yep, poorly worded.

That and how it contradicts what Webb said about Kilman last season.

 

[Elephant Pyjamas]

Albion getting a penalty for a challenge which was both not a foul and outside the box, then not conceding a penalty when Gibbs literally caught the ball with both hands.

Yep.

Had to be against those particular cunts as well.