Question about VAR.

[the other bob wilson]

Don’t know if anyone’s watching the Arsenal v Man United game, but why was Anthony Taylor continually only shown one view (the one that made it look least like a penalty) of that penalty he originally gave? There were other views where it looked more like a foul, yet he wasn’t shown those - Man United being treated differently from other clubs again perhaps?

[PontBlue]

Re: Question about VAR.

Wouldn't surprise me if there was favouritism. VAR certainly hasn't levelled the playing field. The second Man City goal should have been chalked off yesterday unless the offside rule is even more of an ass than I thought

[splott parker]

Re: Question about VAR.

Well that evened things up!!!

[NYCBlue]

Re: Question about VAR.

Well that evened things up!!!

Not really. The offside was "clear and obvious". I didn't see anything on the awarded penalty replays to suggest that the referee's decision should be overturned.

[the other bob wilson]

Re: Question about VAR.

Shocking marking from a corner by Man United - I was just going to say the keeper could have done better, but the replay shows he had no chance after the deflection.

[splott parker]

Re: Question about VAR.

Not really. The offside was "clear and obvious". I didn't see anything on the awarded penalty replays to suggest that the referee's decision should be overturned.

Don’t matter now, Jesus on a Sunday.

[the other bob wilson]

Re: Question about VAR.

Not really. The offside was "clear and obvious". I didn't see anything on the awarded penalty replays to suggest that the referee's decision should be overturned.

Offside decisions are given which would never have been before (that goal being an example), but it’s always the correct decision because of the use of the technology. Other VAR decisions use technology, but then the call is made by officials interpreting what the technology is showing them.

[Maurice Swan]

Re: Question about VAR.

Second Arsenal goal...if that had been our keeper (whichever one) we would be saying 'could have done better...)

[chrisp_1927]

Re: Question about VAR.

Only caught the second half, that offside was incredibly tight. In shock that arsenal managed to score 3, they looked utterly toothless. Sakas shot from 6 yards was beyond pathetic.


That marking for the rice goal was unbelievable. Must have had about 4/5 seconds and 4 metres just given to him.

[The Lone Gunman]

Re: Question about VAR.

Don’t know if anyone’s watching the Arsenal v Man United game, but why was Anthony Taylor continually only shown one view (the one that made it look least like a penalty) of that penalty he originally gave? There were other views where it looked more like a foul, yet he wasn’t shown those - Man United being treated differently from other clubs again perhaps?

I think you’re pushing it a bit here. Never a penalty, not touched by the first player, on his way down before contact from the second player. No need for sixteen different angles, one was enough to demonstrate it clearly shouldn’t have been a penalty. Correct decision in the end.

[Maurice Swan]

Re: Question about VAR.

I think you’re pushing it a bit here. Never a penalty, not touched by the first player, on his way down before contact from the second player. No need for sixteen different angles, one was enough to demonstrate it clearly shouldn’t have been a penalty. Correct decision in the end.

Agree..

[jon1959]

Re: Question about VAR.

I think you’re pushing it a bit here. Never a penalty, not touched by the first player, on his way down before contact from the second player. No need for sixteen different angles, one was enough to demonstrate it clearly shouldn’t have been a penalty. Correct decision in the end.

Agree.

[LA Bluebird]

Re: Question about VAR.

The thing is, the remit of VAR has clearly gone from overturning clear and obvious errors to re-refereeing the game upstairs. Which is fine, but then if that's the criteria then we can't complain when VAR has the exact same biases and makes the same judgement calls that the referees on the field do.

To me, that was not a clear and obvious error. There was contact and Wan-Bissaka clearly clipped Havertz on the way through. It was soft and probably shouldn't have been a penalty in the first place, but to me I agree with Bob, that isn't what we were told VAR was being brought in for.

And yes, the Man City decision was a disgrace - again one of the smaller clubs on the wrong end of a VAR decision.

[jon1959]

Re: Question about VAR.

Second Arsenal goal...if that had been our keeper (whichever one) we would be saying 'could have done better...)

Maybe, but there was a deflection that wrong footed him.

[fugsyphil]

Re: Question about VAR.

The penalty was var working at it's very best for me. Soft penalty award overturned correctly when proven that attacker was playing for a foul