Forum | VAR -4 by Dennyx4

Forum index | Previous Thread | Next thread

VAR -4 10:47 - Oct 28 with 3010 views

Gary O’Neill in his pre match interview, that Wolves were minus 20 on VAR decisions. By his definition the minus 20 is from when he started at Wolves, so just over a season.

I am not sure how many decisions VAR have judged, but if 30, he is saying 5 have gone for Wolves and 25 against. He did quantify that doesn’t mean that all of the decisions were wrong, albeit he implied there was a big club bias.

As far as I can recall from this season we have had 4 VAR decisions, and all have gone against us, making our score currently minus 4.

I do think all 4 decisions could have gone either way, some more subjective than others, because of the re-reffing decisions by VAR, that should not be happening.

Gary O’Neill said West Ham were second lowest at minus 6 - however they benefitted from a debatable decision yesterday.

I do wonder why there was not more of a debate when Wolves wanted VAR scrapped?

VAR -4 on 11:22 - Oct 28 with 2842 views

Cheltenham_Blue

"I do wonder why there was not more of a debate when Wolves wanted VAR scrapped?"

As I understand it, there were very strong assurances that VAR would be fixed, and thats the reason that the vote was 19-1

Poll:

Is it more annoying when builders

VAR -4 on 11:24 - Oct 28 with 2825 views

Reuser_is_God

I was shocked at the 19-1 vote in favour of keeping it.

	Evans out
Poll:	Are Burgers the new Cheese?

VAR -4 on 11:26 - Oct 28 with 2802 views

Swansea_Blue

It's a bit like the old conspiracy around Liverpool and Man U getting penalties regularly (back when Man U were good). Of course the better teams are going to get more pens as they have far more touches in the opponent's box. It's similar with VAR. We're going to be facing many more VAR calls in our box than in the opponents because we'll be defending a lot more.

The intervention yesterday seems to be the right call. What's frustrating is that they couldn't intervene with Clarke's second yellow. That's when we needed VAR (assuming it was indeed a good challenge, which looks to be the case from the limited replay we have of it).

Poll:

Do you think Pert is key to all of this?

VAR -4 on 11:41 - Oct 28 with 2723 views

ITFC_Forever

There's also the penalty we didn't get against Man City which didn't get reviewed.

So that's:
1) Man City first goal - was a penalty all day long, laziness on the part of the ref not to give it.
2) The penalty not given / reviewed v Man City.
3) Clarke's penalty not given vs Villa - was a penalty.
4) Brentford's second goal - was onside.
5) Brentford's penalty - foul was outside the box.

So we've had 5 go against us, of which only 2 were correct.

	P 1162, W 506, D 298, L 358, F 1749, A 1435 92/92
Blog:	Confessions of a Statto - Why We Bother

VAR -4 on 11:49 - Oct 28 with 2638 views

Dennyx4

VAR -4 on 11:41 - Oct 28 by ITFC_Forever

I had discounted the offside decision, as not subjective, but had the other four, which in my opinion all could have gone either way.

The clear and obvious error / re-reffing games appears to be unclear, as to when this applies.

1) First Man City penalty - could see why it would be a penalty if the referee had given originally and on balance probably is a penalty, but is it clear and obvious?

2) same game, same ref and VAR our penalty not given on pitch and not overturned by VAR - this is where the inconsistencies come in, both not awarded on pitch and one given and one not. Not sure how this is not clear and obvious, if the first one was.

3) Clarke penalty, how is it clear and obviously an error.

4) Harry Clarke foul outside box and continues in - big debate on forum already.

But to have all 4 marginal decisions go against us, seems very unlucky or a potential big club bias.

VAR -4 on 11:54 - Oct 28 with 2597 views

Dennyx4

VAR -4 on 11:26 - Oct 28 by Swansea_Blue

If I take my blue tinted specs off, I think that the Man City and Brentford penalties are penalties, but Davis penalty at Man City should have been given and Clarke v Everton should have remained a penalty.

That would give us a break even on VAR 2 For and 2 Against.

VAR -4 on 11:54 - Oct 28 with 2590 views

ozzy_itfc

VAR -4 on 11:26 - Oct 28 by Swansea_Blue

Ipswich were the 2nd best team in the league last year but we only got 3 penalties, 12th in the league. Yet we scored the most goals in the league, so surely spent a lot of time in the opposition box.

It has felt over the past 3 years we have not had the rub of the green in decisions, even when we were one of the top teams in the league.

VAR -4 on 11:58 - Oct 28 with 2524 views

Reus30

VAR -4 on 11:54 - Oct 28 by ozzy_itfc
Ipswich were the 2nd best team in the league last year but we only got 3 penalties, 12th in the league. Yet we scored the most goals in the league, so surely spent a lot of time in the opposition box. It has felt over the past 3 years we have not had the rub of the green in decisions, even when we were one of the top teams in the league.

Exactly, we are still due the two decisions from Preston back. I don't think we had those and we continue to get effed by refs.

Appalling

VAR -4 on 12:11 - Oct 28 with 2437 views

Marshalls_Mullet

VAR -4 on 11:22 - Oct 28 by Cheltenham_Blue
"I do wonder why there was not more of a debate when Wolves wanted VAR scrapped?" As I understand it, there were very strong assurances that VAR would be fixed, and thats the reason that the vote was 19-1

At the start of the season they applied the 'clear and obvious error' rule.

....a few weeks in and they seem to have thrown that in the bin.

It worked quite well early on.

Poll:

Would Lambert have acheived better results than Cook if given the same resources

VAR -4 on 13:05 - Oct 28 with 2298 views

stonojnr

VAR -4 on 11:26 - Oct 28 by Swansea_Blue

That's not as big a conspiracy as you might like to think. Matt Holland always told the story of how the refs in the Premier league spoke to all the Man Utd, Liverpool players on first name terms, but would order Town players around by their squad numbers. Which is not something he'd ever experienced as a pro footballer before.

And there was a definite decision making bias towards the big clubs, and against the smaller ones.A town player tackling a Man utd player was always more likely to be spoken to, booked and awarded a free kick against them, than if the roles were reversed.

VAR -4 on 10:42 - Oct 29 with 1825 views

Dennyx4

VAR -4 on 12:11 - Oct 28 by Marshalls_Mullet
At the start of the season they applied the 'clear and obvious error' rule. ....a few weeks in and they seem to have thrown that in the bin. It worked quite well early on.

Not sure that it did work well early on.

Two VAR decisions in game week two for us v Manchester City?

If neither given or both given, you could make a claim for working well.

VAR -4 on 16:51 - Nov 3 with 1278 views

Dennyx4

This is now -5

On top of this, on field decisions appear to be going against us too.

Think it is something the club could raise again at the next Premier League meeting.

Forum index | Previous Thread | Next thread