Top 10 most controversial VAR decisions
We look back at the Premier League season so far and highlight the top 10 most talked about VAR incidents.
Top 10 Very Awful Rileyisms .
Its just ruining football
- Thread starter Sheffields Finest
- Start date
Top 10 Very Awful Rileyisms .
Is there a better angle for the Watford no-penalty? Doesn't look like VAR got it wrong from that angle?
I thought the LIV-MUN one was a foul at the time, but I can understand why VAR isn't giving it.
Don't see the controversy over the Brighton penalty, or the foul against Arsenal, nor the Liverpool vs City 'handball'.
Also the Virgil header is more of a referee error than a VAR one IMO.
I thought the LIV-MUN one was a foul at the time, but I can understand why VAR isn't giving it.
Don't see the controversy over the Brighton penalty, or the foul against Arsenal, nor the Liverpool vs City 'handball'.
Also the Virgil header is more of a referee error than a VAR one IMO.
the biggest give away that the watford penalty is a pen (and it absolutely is) is vertonghan gesturing to the keeper to take the goal kick quickly to bypass the VAR review and get the ball back into play
socal lurker
RefChat Addict
Part of me wants to agree with you, but the perception of the random nature of VAR makes me think that you can't infer that. Wanting there not to be a VAR review doesn't necessarily mean the player thinks it was a foul but the player doesn't want to risk that VAR will think there was a foul. It's a smart play, whatever likelihood the player thinks it was a foul.
Tbh VAR is here to stay. In April the Premiership clubs will meet to see what they are going to do going forward but I can't see it being scrapped. Rugby's TMO had a problematic introduction and it's a real shame football hadn't learnt some things and refined it better before launch.
One thing that HAS to be changed is the in-stadium experience. It ain't great
One thing that HAS to be changed is the in-stadium experience. It ain't great
You're right, of course, but it's still a stonewaller nonetheless!
Tbh VAR is here to stay. In April the Premiership clubs will meet to see what they are going to do going forward but I can't see it being scrapped. Rugby's TMO had a problematic introduction and it's a real shame football hadn't learnt some things and refined it better before launch.
One thing that HAS to be changed is the in-stadium experience. It ain't great
It's 100% here to stay, and I fully expect the pitch side monitor will be used more next season.
There's a clamour for consistency in refereeing decisions, and I've always said you won't get that for all decisions as different referees view things differently, have different tolerance levels, allow less or more physical contact, etc. You can only really expect each referee to be fully consistent with their own decisions, and that falls apart if someone else is making those decisions for them. Take the Sterling challenge for that at the weekend, I suspect Mike Dean, who isn't afraid of making big decisions, would have changed to red had he watched it on the screen, but he wasn't given the chance.
Can you explain feeling that for all our Championship members please!!Tbh VAR is here to stay. In April the Premiership clubs will meet to see what they are going to do going forward but I can't see it being scrapped. Rugby's TMO had a problematic introduction and it's a real shame football hadn't learnt some things and refined it better before launch.
One thing that HAS to be changed is the in-stadium experience. It ain't great
Can you explain feeling that for all our Championship members please!!
You aren't a Championship member. You are a referee member, who you support is pretty much irrelevant to this forum.
Peter Grove
RefChat Addict
One fairly minor point - but it irks me slightly every time I see it, is the way they announce a non-overturn on the stadium screens, especially for penalties not given when there's a potential foul. The screen says, for example: "No penalty. No foul."
That's inaccurate - and again, contrary to what the VAR protocol says. To paraphrase slightly, the VAR is not deciding, "Was it a foul?" but "Was it a clear and obvious error to give/not give the foul?"
As I say, it's a somewhat minor point but it does shift the considerations and the conversations about VAR outcomes. You quite often hear the pundits saying something like, "That was (or wasn't) a foul - I can't believe the VAR didn't see that." Which is to misconstrue what the VAR is actually deciding on.
I understand it might be a little tricky to find a neat, concise form of wording to put up on the screen but the way they just baldly state "No foul," when that is not what the VAR is saying, is just causing and/or perpetuating misconceptions about the whole process.
That's inaccurate - and again, contrary to what the VAR protocol says. To paraphrase slightly, the VAR is not deciding, "Was it a foul?" but "Was it a clear and obvious error to give/not give the foul?"
As I say, it's a somewhat minor point but it does shift the considerations and the conversations about VAR outcomes. You quite often hear the pundits saying something like, "That was (or wasn't) a foul - I can't believe the VAR didn't see that." Which is to misconstrue what the VAR is actually deciding on.
I understand it might be a little tricky to find a neat, concise form of wording to put up on the screen but the way they just baldly state "No foul," when that is not what the VAR is saying, is just causing and/or perpetuating misconceptions about the whole process.
Last edited:
socal lurker
RefChat Addict
Totally agree. The media is the only way most people know the rules that apply to VAR. So the ref team gets blamed for following the rules.
