Who's a fan of VAR now?

[Enfield]

Saved us today

[fulhamben]

Nope it's still crap. How did it take 2 mins to spot a hand ball.

[General]

If we'd not had the penalty given to Liverpool, which I still think was tough, and lost the points today (although a clearer handball), we'd still have one extra point. Right now I think VAR is just about washing its own face in terms of value... I think it still leaves a lot to subjective though... some of the pundits against liverpool were suggesting the referee only saw one angle on the screen which was the one where Fabinho did touch the ball. If that's true then what's the point? He clearly took the leg first to take the ball... then with Kamara's handball, the ball A) was seemingly going over - although I get that doesn't matter, but B) I don't see how his handball was at all intentional.

Too contentious still.

[Craven Mad]

I just wish it was more of a 'challenge' system, like in tennis. Teams could challenge a moment or decision if they feel strongly (only when a ball is out of play), but the game otherwise flows. Teams start with three challenges, and lose one each time they challenge unsuccessfully. Whilst improving the flow of a game, this would have the added benefit or reducing the need for theatrics to win fouls/pens (as players could just issue a challenge when they know there's contact, rather than attempting to persuade the ref to blow the whistle by rolling around on the floor or pressuring the ref aggressively).

We got lucky today, as I don't think anyone saw that handball before the umpteenth replay. Feels a bit hollow but I'll take the decision - it was clearly a handball. VAR is generally correct but does somewhat spoil the fun...

[Sgt Fulham]

Today's call was an example of how it should be used. Without the handball they don't score, and so an advantage was gained illegally. Correct decision.
Hair's breadth offsides and enforcement of penalties for minor infringements that don't significantly impact the play or prevent clear goalscoring opportunities? No.

[Arthur]

The pecking order of VAR decisions is as follows:
1. Favour bigger clubs over smaller clubs
2. Favour London clubs over those outside the capital.
3. Favour other southern-based clubs over northern-based ones.

Had we scored that goal tonight, not a chance would it have been disallowed. That's the advantage we had going into the game. This is why you won't find me complaining about VAR. Over the course of the season, we'll do more-than-okay out of it.

[jarv]

VAR needs to go...hate it. Ruining football a a spectacle.  If it stays give a time limit. 20 seconds to decide else refs decision is final (or something like that). My preference....get rid of it.

[Woolly Mammoth]

VAR is not for me, it is contributing to football eating itself from within and ruining what was once the beautiful game.
VAR plus all the feigning of injuries and diving and cheating, not forgetting weak refereeing has ruined football as we once knew it, and is now past the point of no return, and will never recover to its former glories.

[Holders]

The ref missed the handball but, to me, the offside was clear. The handball was just the first offence.

[toshes mate]

If we'd not had the penalty given to Liverpool, which I still think was tough, and lost the points today (although a clearer handball), we'd still have one extra point. Right now I think VAR is just about washing its own face in terms of value... I think it still leaves a lot to subjective though... some of the pundits against liverpool were suggesting the referee only saw one angle on the screen which was the one where Fabinho did touch the ball. If that's true then what's the point? He clearly took the leg first to take the ball... then with Kamara's handball, the ball A) was seemingly going over - although I get that doesn't matter, but B) I don't see how his handball was at all intentional.

Too contentious still.

This is how I see it too.
In the Brighton attack last night a player is clearly offside but no signal from the assistant but when the ball bobbles up in a tackle there is a very clear handball unseen by neither referee nor assistant.  The VAR check is being made not for handball but for offside and yet the VAR monitors cover all angles and so does that mean nobody at VAR saw the handball until the offside check?

[fulhamben]

The ref missed the handball but, to me, the offside was clear. The handball was just the first offence.

which offside was clear? The player that scored the goal was actually onside when the ball was played through to him. They were checking to see if the bloke who handled made a touch keeping him onside, that's when they spotted the infringement.

[Moltobueno]

What about the incident on the other side?

Didn't Lookman reach the ball first?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SoFFeHWHg_s

[filham]

Funny how VAR is bringing more contentious issues to our notice when it was intended to remove doubt.

[_Putney_]

Don't like it.

[Whitesideup]

The ref missed the handball but, to me, the offside was clear. The handball was just the first offence.

When the ball was played in first of all, Lallana was off-side. Tosin challenged for the ball with Welbeck but had to play the ball and couldn't let it run as Lallana was behind him, and therefore interfering with play. I suppose you could argue that as it was Wellbeck trying to get the first contact that Lallana was not interfering, but I don't buy that. The handball wasn't clear at first; clearly it wasn't intentional, his arm was not in an unnatural position, not raised or away from his body, so was this given because it struck the arm in the build-up to a goal and therefore has to be classed as handball? One that were it the defender, it wouldn't have been given? So a ridiculous rule that applies or not depending on which way you are kicking. But yes, it worked for us yesterday.

And by the way the VAR referral on Lookman ... well, the guy got the ball, but when sliding through also caught Lookman's back leg bringing him down. Technically that is still a foul. I'm happy that it is not declared as such, and by no means was a clear and obvious error, but Mitro's touch against Sheff Utd, and Andersen against City were also both for me also minor contacts that technically were fouls but should not have been given as such.

[Bill2]

The ref missed the handball but, to me, the offside was clear. The handball was just the first offence.

Agree the offside was obvious and the lino should have spotted that.

[Bill2]

The ref missed the handball but, to me, the offside was clear. The handball was just the first offence.

When the ball was played in first of all, Lallana was off-side. Tosin challenged for the ball with Welbeck but had to play the ball and couldn't let it run as Lallana was behind him, and therefore interfering with play. I suppose you could argue that as it was Wellbeck trying to get the first contact that Lallana was not interfering, but I don't buy that. The handball wasn't clear at first; clearly it wasn't intentional, his arm was not in an unnatural position, not raised or away from his body, so was this given because it struck the arm in the build-up to a goal and therefore has to be classed as handball? One that were it the defender, it wouldn't have been given? So a ridiculous rule that applies or not depending on which way you are kicking. But yes, it worked for us yesterday.

And by the way the VAR referral on Lookman ... well, the guy got the ball, but when sliding through also caught Lookman's back leg bringing him down. Technically that is still a foul. I'm happy that it is not declared as such, and by no means was a clear and obvious error, but Mitro's touch against Sheff Utd, and Andersen against City were also both for me also minor contacts that technically were fouls but should not have been given as such.

Don't know if it was unintentional or not, he seemed to play it down with his fist to his feet, I would;d have thought he would have knocked it on harder than that if by accident.

[fulhamben]

The ref missed the handball but, to me, the offside was clear. The handball was just the first offence.

When the ball was played in first of all, Lallana was off-side. Tosin challenged for the ball with Welbeck but had to play the ball and couldn't let it run as Lallana was behind him, and therefore interfering with play. I suppose you could argue that as it was Wellbeck trying to get the first contact that Lallana was not interfering, but I don't buy that. The handball wasn't clear at first; clearly it wasn't intentional, his arm was not in an unnatural position, not raised or away from his body, so was this given because it struck the arm in the build-up to a goal and therefore has to be classed as handball? One that were it the defender, it wouldn't have been given? So a ridiculous rule that applies or not depending on which way you are kicking. But yes, it worked for us yesterday.

And by the way the VAR referral on Lookman ... well, the guy got the ball, but when sliding through also caught Lookman's back leg bringing him down. Technically that is still a foul. I'm happy that it is not declared as such, and by no means was a clear and obvious error, but Mitro's touch against Sheff Utd, and Andersen against City were also both for me also minor contacts that technically were fouls but should not have been given as such.

Don't know if it was unintentional or not, he seemed to play it down with his fist to his feet, I would;d have thought he would have knocked it on harder than that if by accident.

it was hand to ball in a sweeping motion. Hand ball all day long.

[Finnans Right Peg]

Var is ruining the Game and we should use it like rugby does where we can hear what is been said and why they are looking at it .we still might not agree with the decision but at least we would know why they gave it .

Also if it takes 3 or more minutes to decide its obviously not clear or obvious

[fulhamben]

Var is ruining the Game and we should use it like rugby does where we can hear what is been said and why they are looking at it .we still might not agree with the decision but at least we would know why they gave it .

Also if it takes 3 or more minutes to decide its obviously not clear or obvious

do you mean hear what is happening in the ground, if so I agree. But on the telly it does tell you if it's looking at pen, red card, offside and the like.