dirty leeds wrote:So... 'sod opinion' and then 'I think' three times in the following comments. Hmm.Phil LUFC wrote: Sod opinion in situations like that and ours on Sunday. The question shouldn't be what the officials think was likely to happen, they should be looking at whether it's possible it influenced things. If it's possible then it has to be given. It's possible (highly likely in fact) that Meslier dives differently if Bowen isn't there and it's certainly possible Cavani can do enough to prevent a completely free header if not blocked by an offside player (I don't think he can get to the ball first but he can make it a much more difficult header). I think if that lad had been onside and Cavani plows into him then nothing doing as he didn't make a significant effort to block the run, he was already there before the free kick. But there's no doubt it's a training ground move, he's positioned exactly where he needs to be to give his team mate an advantage.
Fuck knows what the officials reviewed to come up with the decision to disallow as I didn't watch that match and 3 minutes plus is way too long for a decision but I think it's the right decision.
As for the use in some games not others, I disagree with Shearer on that too, unless it could technically be done at every ground with their current infrastructure (not Stockley Park's) - it's not really any different to goal line technology. If it's there, use it. One of the arguments against tech was the cost and not being possible at grass roots, who pays for it to be there? In many games it probably costs more than the profits from gate receipts.
I agree with you that they probably ended up in the right place with the Man U decision process - provided, in the ref's opinion, Cavani would have challenged for the ball/affected play, then the ref is entitled to disallow the goal.
But it is about the ref's opinion on that.
I don't have to agree with that opinion, but if that's how it all worked and that's what he thought, then there's nowhere else to go.
In our case, what's galling is that Bowen clearly DID interfere with play [as regards Meslier], and it seems they didn't even ask the ref to decide on that - they just told him it wasn't offside. If the ref had looked at that and had been asked if Bowen interfered, there's no way he would have said no, surely?
I was all for VAR as an idea. Think I probably said it needs real-match trialling and adjusting if there are problems, too.
But a couple of season in and we're now getting to the point where it's discussed every bleeding week, and there's no real sign that any adjustments have made it a streamlined and well-respected process.
Are we nearing the time when we decide to scrap it [for all but goal line decisions] and just go back to refs' and linos' judgement/mistakes?
Opinions?
Not my opinions, obviously.It's a complicated game with an impossible number of different situations to govern but there's too much grey in the rules. Certain things are more prescribed, like offside and obstruction, with enough definition for the goalposts to be set set tighter for the officials.
If at any point there saying "well, it's Cavani, he's a bit shit at defending" or "It's Meslier, he's young, inexperienced and prone to an error" as part of their assessment then the whole thing is fucked. See also Xhaka seemingly getting away with 3 bookable offences per match.
For scum it doesn't matter if he'd have got there, he was the marker of the guy who headed it and he was impeded.
For us it doesn't matter what impact Bowen ultimately had, he was offside and made a deliberate move towards playing the ball - to the point he would have played it has someone else not been fractionally quicker. That's enough to be considered interfering no matter what you think the ultimate outcome might have been.
As for VAR, I don't think you can go back, the genie is out of the bottle. From here its only a case of doing it better - as has been proven possible at the Euros. Certain laws need to have a VAR subclause written into them and others need a bigger tweak to be compatible with both technology and where it's not available. They've tied themselves in knots over offside and the limits of what they'll review.
The boundaries are mostly sensible but if they deem something worth reviewing as a potential penalty or red card that should have the power to then say it was outside the box but you missed the foul or it should have at least been yellow and you gave nothing, go look and decide. The VAR saying not red or outside the box is still an injustice if nothing was given on field. If that makes any sense.
I'd also like them to have a view on 2nd yellows (or retrospectively looking at the first in the case a 2nd is brandished) but that's really tricky ground they're probably right to stay away from.
