Wolves 1-1 Southampton - Verdict Thread

[Charlie Wolf]

Replay officiating works well in many sports, however, those in which it works best have a natural break in play regularly (ie cricket, NFL, rugby etc). Football has much more flow to it, therefore, the break and long delays caused by VAR kill the spontaneity.

It should be restricted to 'clear and obvious' errors, not checking the minutiae of every offside. If there ain't daylight, it ain't offside. If you check handball, if it is not clearly obvious and requiring many replays, it ain't handball.

They already dealt with the greatest errors with goalline tech, this is just overkill. Also, I seem to recall a lot of penalties being awarded (and overturned) at World cup trials, not sure I have seen one yet this season. Seems PGMOL buddies are just covering each others arses and refusing to second guess when they get the on pitch decision wrong.

System should work fine, but key component is banjaxed - the officials operating it.

Yup, agree with that and used the same example following the disallowed Boly handball against Leicester.

Clear and obvious should be the emphasis, technology is not sufficiently accurate at this time.

We have to get some common sense back into our game, otherwise we’re on a downward spiral leading to us watching an American style of sport. I’m getting my knife sharpened to slit my wrists already!!!

 

[Deleted Cyber]

We have EL football this year, that should be a big draw too. For whatever reason we either aimed low or our top 2/3 targets didn't come off. I didn't believe anyone we signed were seriously our first options in the summer and I don't now.

There are other issues, like the long ball stuff, EL tiredness, trying to crowbar Traore in, Jota not firing/being injured, but the continuing lack of viable alternatives to the tried and trusted first XI doesn't help if players are tired/uninspired.

I'm not as concerned as I was after the Everton and Chelsea games, but something still isn't 100% right

Yep andThat is fair enough. But on the cyber tosis Thread it has been an issue of mine for some time that we are easy to work out by teams that sit back. Southampton got what they came for yesterday and it was clear that they had been schooled well in the international break. You cannot force players to come to Wolverhampton. And we are not paying stupid money for established stars. I have highlighted what I think appears to be the problem as an armchair fan. But that problem is not insurmountable even with thin squad that we have. The Europa league is a lovely distraction and one that I am pleased to have. It does however mean a lot of Sunday Thursday games as we knew. Get everybody back to full fitness and I am sure results will improve I do think we are tough to beat but we also find it difficult to break sides down I said before for a ball was kicked there may be a lot of draws This season. So far it appears to be the case.

 

[MobNet Wolf]

On a more micro level, something I really noticed yesterday and I think has been a feature this year is the frequency with which we return the ball to sender.

Playing a first time pass to the person who has passed it to you is a perfectly valid option, but my sense is this season we are doing it to the detriment of options which would spread the play.

Our strength the previous two seasons has been moving the opposition quickly from flank to flank. That’s either by the Coady diagonal or quick ball by the midfield.

This season both the midfield and Coady appear reluctant to be more adventurous, and our play is suffering as a result.

 

[Alan]

Yep. Injured during the Besiktas game

Ah, cheers. That does ring a bell.

 

[AndyWolves]

In summary, mid table team is inconsistent

 

[The Saturday Boy]

There was no need for the technology, the game doesn’t need it. But it’s not going anywhere so other rules could change to provide some balance. Cutrone was offside yesterday but if the law was tweaked so that any art of the body (that can legitimately touch the ball) is level with the defender...it’s onside. No rule change undoes Raul’s first goal because his body movement was deliberate and towards the ball, but a rule change enables Dendocker’s goal at Leicester to be awarded.

The benefit of the doubt be with the attacking side while preventing deliberate foul play and that’s not where it is at the moment.

 

[Paul]

I just think it's being used too enthusiastically , take Neves goal at Man U, how over analysed the pass from Moutinho to Jota was, seemingly down to the millimeter, It's as if they're trying all ways possible to negate a goal !

 

[Johnny75]

There was no need for the technology, the game doesn’t need it. But it’s not going anywhere so other rules could change to provide some balance. Cutrone was offside yesterday but if the law was tweaked so that any art of the body (that can legitimately touch the ball) is level with the defender...it’s onside. No rule change undoes Raul’s first goal because his body movement was deliberate and towards the ball, but a rule change enables Dendocker’s goal at Leicester to be awarded.

The benefit of the doubt be with the attacking side while preventing deliberate foul play and that’s not where it is at the moment.

Don't agree that the tech wasn't needed. It clearly is as the officials consistently make horrific errors. They just aren't good enough and need the help.

The offside law I agree with as it's a nonsense to have things checked by the pixel. Your idea would give the game its attacking nature back.

I do wonder if the refs are deliberately making a hash of this so it can be scrapped and give them the power in the middle back again.

 

[Deleted Cyber]

As long as the majority of the player is level, a foot an arm a head should not matter. Unlike cricket VAR is not capable of being used tactically by the captains.

 

[The Saturday Boy]

Don't agree that the tech wasn't needed. It clearly is as the officials consistently make horrific errors. They just aren't good enough and need the help.

The offside law I agree with as it's a nonsense to have things checked by the pixel. Your idea would give the game its attacking nature back.

I do wonder if the refs are deliberately making a hash of this so it can be scrapped and give them the power in the middle back again.

I am sure there was some work done which showed that officials got the vast majority of decisions correct and, for me, the few mistakes were part of the game. I can sort of live with goal line technology but everything else is purely as a result of increased TV coverage, it adds nothing of value to the supporters at the game.

 

[Deano]

I am sure there was some work done which showed that officials got the vast majority of decisions correct and, for me, the few mistakes were part of the game. I can sort of live with goal line technology but everything else is purely as a result of increased TV coverage, it adds nothing of value to the supporters at the game.

Agreed, said before the season started it's another sign of the game being taken away from the fan in the ground and further towards the TV remote.

 

[Johnny75]

I am sure there was some work done which showed that officials got the vast majority of decisions correct and, for me, the few mistakes were part of the game. I can sort of live with goal line technology but everything else is purely as a result of increased TV coverage, it adds nothing of value to the supporters at the game.

The work was on decisions as a whole. Contentious decisions or close decisions don't have any data to my knowledge. I did some work many years ago on the offside rule which was based on a Spanish paper that showed that there is a certain arc and speed that assistant referees can't see the ball and player at the same time and so will always guess at the decision. We should not have officials that are guessing at the decision.

As you say it is the rule that is wrong not the technology.

Camera technology should be a good thing as it should improve the game, sadly it hasn't as those using it are incompetent.

I don't see why a referee getting a decision wrong is part of the game. That seems a nonsense to me.

 

[Tony Towner]

I've seen the argument numerous times on here and elsewhere that the issue isn't VAR it's those you are using it. I get the point, but don't see how in reality you can seperate them.

If you take Saturday as an example. Is getting the correct decision worth the time it took for the team scoring, celebrating, resetting, the opposition restarting, before there is even an indication it's being checked? What damages the integrity of the game more, a marginal offside goal standing or 2 minutes to decide it shouldn't?

For me, that demonstated why I have always and continue to be against it.

 

[MARKakaJIM]

Agreed, said before the season started it's another sign of the game being taken away from the fan in the ground and further towards the TV remote.

How does it improve anything for the TV viewer?

VAR is for the clubs, they want correct decisions.

 

[Johnny75]

Agreed, said before the season started it's another sign of the game being taken away from the fan in the ground and further towards the TV remote.

I think this is a false equivalence. The technology was implemented to get decisions correct and nothing to do with fans at all. The fact that it is implemented so poorly at the moment means it is detrimental to the atmosphere in the ground.

Having said that, this proves the theory on early adopters and those that never will accept change.

 

[Johnny75]

I've seen the argument numerous times on here and elsewhere that the issue isn't VAR it's those you are using it. I get the point, but don't see how in reality you can seperate them.

If you take Saturday as an example. Is getting the correct decision worth the time it took for the team scoring, celebrating, resetting, the opposition restarting, before there is even an indication it's being checked? What damages the integrity of the game more, a marginal offside goal standing or 2 minutes to decide it shouldn't?

For me, that demonstated why I have always and continue to be against it.

So you'd rather have wrong decisions than right ones?

May as well throw the game in the bin then and just let anybody with an opinion have a go at refereeing and if it all goes wrong, tough shit, you can bleat and moan about it on Talksport. To emphasise my point look at the state of the refereeing on Saturday. He was abysmal and got numerous decisions wrong for both teams.

Of course you can separate the technology from those implementing it as it works fine in other places. We have people who are referees backing up referees and their obvious bias, that is all wrong. The operators should have no connection to the referees as the technology should be about right and wrong. The referee in the booth should be independent and from another association or league with no connection to the PGMOL.

 

[Kenny]

So you'd rather have wrong decisions than right ones?

that is where I am at with it.

 

[BGreenWolf]

Let's be fair- the only reason we're as fixated as we are on VAR as a fanbase is because of how often it's gone against us so far this season.

If everything played out exactly the same as this season only without VAR (impossible, but a thought experiment), we'd be in fifth in the table, thanks to the Leicester and Southampton matches.

 

[Norman Deeley]

Let's be fair- the only reason we're as fixated as we are on VAR as a fanbase is because of how often it's gone against us so far this season.

If everything played out exactly the same as this season only without VAR (impossible, but a thought experiment), we'd be in fifth in the table, thanks to the Leicester and Southampton matches.

But we wouldn't would we? This is one of the biggest load of bollocks in football. "If that goal had been allowed we'd have won instead of drawn." Nope, if that goal had been allowed the rest of the game would have been different. The result could have gone either way. You might have a point with a goal allowed or disallowed in the 94th minute, but for 'goals' in the 40th/60th minute assuming the rest of the game would have been the same is just silly

 

[BGreenWolf]

But we wouldn't would we? This is one of the biggest load of bollocks in football. "If that goal had been allowed we'd have won instead of drawn." Nope, if that goal had been allowed the rest of the game would have been different. The result could have gone either way. You might have a point with a goal allowed or disallowed in the 94th minute, but for 'goals' in the 40th/60th minute assuming the rest of the game would have been the same is just silly

(impossible, but a thought experiment)

It's just highlighting a general point that VAR has exclusively chalked off our goals rather than those of our opponents.