Retroactive VAR is a farce

[Woolly Mammoth]

Even Wilder didn't think it was one, from his reaction, he talked about 'things evening themselves out and they had harsh calls this season.'

It's nonsense that they carry on playing, then a few minutes later the 'dynamics' of the match can be changed.

Unfortunately there is no guarantee that these things even themselves out over the season, and those two points could be crucial by the end of the season.
So I don't believe that they generally even themselves out, that is fools gold.
VAR is more often than not a farce of epic proportions and in the hands of Buffoons who wouldn't know the difference between a football and a snowball.

[ffcne]

LMAO we had a penalty and missed due to the taker changing his mind where he wanted to slot it. Strikers error.

Harsh penalty? No such thing a penalty is a penalty. We had ours flopped, they had theirs and scored.

VAR was correct.

You do realise that if 'VAR was correct' there would be about 10 penalties per game.

Plus - should it really be possible to cancel out the 3mins of play that took place before the ref was told to review the video.  As others have mentioned - what would happen if one or more goals are scored that period?

They have to let play continue because otherwise if they decide it is not a penalty they would otherwise have denied Fulham a counter attack. Had Fulham scored the goal would have stood if the ref had decided that it wasn't a penalty, otherwise the goal is cancelled. That is not the part of this that is wrong, but a necessary byproduct of the rule. Also only one goal could have been scored, because after play stops they will review the previous incident.

What could and should be questioned in my opinion is what constitutes a valid call for VAR review. It should be a clear mistake by the referee, or at least so I thought. As such, a second subjective review of an incident between players that was already obviously witnessed by the referee should not qualify in my book. The ref saw it, he made a judgment call and that should have been it. The use of VAR should be as restrictive as possible, but instead they have implemented it in the worst possible manner. It is as if though they have really tried to mess it up on purpose.

Exactly referee had decided no foul.
Why is then looked at by VAR.?.

[alfie]

 

Even Wilder didn't think it was one, from his reaction, he talked about 'things evening themselves out and they had harsh calls this season.'

It's nonsense that they carry on playing, then a few minutes later the 'dynamics' of the match can be changed.

Unfortunately there is no guarantee that these things even themselves out over the season, and those two points could be crucial by the end of the season.
So I don't believe that they generally even themselves out, that is fools gold.
VAR is more often than not a farce of epic proportions and in the hands of Buffoons who wouldn't know the difference between a football and a snowball.

:plus one:

[rebel]

Mariner saw the incident ,no one appealed .
Then 2 Yorkshiremen Atkinson and Halliday .
Strictly speaking over rule the referee  and say it is a penalty.
Bloody Farce.
Atkinson hates Fulham.

They just told Atkinson to take a look a the monitor, but having told him to take a look, that probably gives him 'guidance' on the possibility that he has missed something in real-time, so awards the penalty.

[SuffolkWhite]

The official's are generally good in the Prem, it's not an easy job and VAR complicates things. They all miss shirt pulling. Never forget Hangeland's shirt being pulled every game in the Europa Cup even with the officials behind the goals who did nothing, same happens to Mitro.

[cmg]

Never forget Hangeland's shirt being pulled every game in the Europa Cup even with the officials behind the goals who did nothing...

Another stunning innovation. Did any of them ever make any decision about anything? I think the experiment ended when they decided to get them to pay to get in.

[Denver Fulham]

Based on this interpretation of VAR rules, I expect any header from Mitrovic that doesn't go in while a defender is grabbing him and/or making contact but not touching the ball to retroactively be awarded a penalty.

Of course that won't happen, because that's how stupid and out of context this call was -- except this was actually worse, as the contact had nothing to do with the outcome of the play. It created no change in advantage given the ball was blindly hoofed into the air and easily cleared.

[bencher]

Having watched the 90 mins replay, something I don't think anyone has so far commented on is VAR is being used so selectively. What I mean is, if you look at the build up to the penalty incident, there are two free kicks in close succession. The second was the rugby tackle by Cav, no argument there, however the first was given for a foul by Ream on Billy Sharp. If you look at it, Sharp was pulling Ream's shirt and then went down, but the ref got it totally wrong and gave SU a free-kick. That free-kick led almost immediately to the 2nd free-kick, and then the penalty incident.

Now I accept that you can't check all aspects of build up to every different decision being reviewed, but it seems to me that they ought to at least check that there is no prior mistake, which results in another incident and decision to be made. For example, what would happen if on the handball that led to our missed penalty, we found on VAR that Cav's corner kick had been taken from the wrong place. By rules of natural justice, there should be no penalty, as it would have emanated from a rule breach.

Similarly, by rules of natural justice, the two free kicks should be reversed and no penalty given.

Why is the referee's prior decision not reviewed? As we know, if Cairney had scored, it would have been ruled out due to a prior foul at the other end. I just don't get it and the fans generally have no faith in the way it is applied.

Reading this morning that the FA will take no action against Pickford for his GBH on VVD just takes the biscuit.