VAR at a new low

Fabiopaim

Well-known member
Shocking decisions, both for Liverpool's Salah goal, and the 'offside' goal that Wolves scored. The rules just don't make sense.
 
Shocking decisions, both for Liverpool's Salah goal, and the 'offside' goal that Wolves scored. The rules just don't make sense.

Salah's goal is onside according to the laws of the game and Wolves 3rd goal was given offside (corner taker) by the linesman with no definite camera angle to prove it wrong using the technology.

So not entirely sure what any of that had to to with VAR?
 
As above. Salah was on side. On the Wolves disallowed goal, the lines person was in line with the corner taker when the ball was returned to him after taking the corner. He gave him offside and I haven’t seen anything to say he was wrong?
 
As above. Salah was on side. On the Wolves disallowed goal, the lines person was in line with the corner taker when the ball was returned to him after taking the corner. He gave him offside and I haven’t seen anything to say he was wrong?

From what I've seen Alexander-Arnold plays the corner taker onside, but that's based on the top of the corner taker head popping up at the bottom of the camera angle, nowhere near enough for VAR to overturn.
 
Shocking decisions, both for Liverpool's Salah goal, and the 'offside' goal that Wolves scored. The rules just don't make sense.
It’s a complete shambles
And dives that con refs into giving yellow cards not even looked at with cheating corrosive in the game. All their priorities are wrong
 
Liverpool's goal should have been disallowed.

They've done so repeatedly this season for similar situations.

That's a refereeing and VAR failure.
 
Liverpool's goal should have been disallowed.

They've done so repeatedly this season for similar situations.

That's a refereeing and VAR failure.

It's the rules that need changing, nothing to do with VAR.

According to the rules, that was a deliberate attempt to play the ball meaning Salah was onside.

I don't agree with that rule because Salah's position makes him play the ball, but nevertheless, it's the current rules and nothing to do with VAR.
 
It's the rules that need changing, nothing to do with VAR.

According to the rules, that was a deliberate attempt to play the ball meaning Salah was onside.

I don't agree with that rule because Salah's position makes him play the ball, but nevertheless, it's the current rules and nothing to do with VAR.

That shouldn't have been a factor because Salah was interfering with play in an offside position.

The exact same reason was used to disallow France's late equaliser against Tunisia at the World Cup.

You don't have to touch the ball to be commiting an offside offence.

The referees got it wrong.
 
That shouldn't have been a factor because Salah was interfering with play in an offside position.

The exact same reason was used to disallow France's late equaliser against Tunisia at the World Cup.

You don't have to touch the ball to be commiting an offside offence.

The referees got it wrong.

That interpretation is not the rules though, the rules are clear, as soon as Toti made a deliberate attempt to play the ball, Salah became onside.

The rule is wrong and ridiculous but the officials got it right according to the rules.

Your frustration is in the wrong place.
 
That interpretation is not the rules though, the rules are clear, as soon as Toti made a deliberate attempt to play the ball, Salah became onside.

The rule is wrong and ridiculous but the officials got it right according to the rules.

Your frustration is in the wrong place.

  • making an obvious action which clearly impacts on the ability of an opponent to play the ball
Standing right behind him in an offside position was clearly impacting the ability of Toti to play the ball.

Salah isn't there, he probably doesn't head it, Salah doesn't score.

Either way, it's something that IFAB need to address.
It's been a ridiculous loophole for too long, even when we've benefited from it.
 
  • making an obvious action which clearly impacts on the ability of an opponent to play the ball
Standing right behind him in an offside position was clearly impacting the ability of Toti to play the ball.

Salah isn't there, he probably doesn't head it, Salah doesn't score.

Either way, it's something that IFAB need to address.
It's been a ridiculous loophole for too long, even when we've benefited from it.

"A player in an offside position receiving the ball from an opponent who deliberately plays the ball, including by deliberate handball, is not considered to have gained an advantage, unless it was a deliberate save by any opponent.

No change to Law 11 is necessary but, to reflect football’s expectation, the guidelines for distinguishing between ‘deliberate play’ and ‘deflection’ are clarified as follows:

‘Deliberate play’ is when a player has control of the ball with the possibility of:

  • passing the ball to a team-mate; or
  • gaining possession of the ball; or
  • clearing the ball (e.g. by kicking or heading it).


If the pass, attempt to gain possession or clearance by the player in control of the ball is inaccurate or unsuccessful, this does not negate the fact that the player ‘deliberately played’ the ball.

The following criteria should be used, as appropriate, as indicators that a player was in control of the ball and, as a result, ‘deliberately played’ the ball:

  • The ball travelled from distance and the player had a clear view of it
  • The ball was not moving quickly
  • The direction of the ball was not unexpected
  • The player had time to coordinate their body movement, i.e. it was not a case of instinctive stretching or jumping, or a movement that achieved limited contact/control
  • A ball moving on the ground is easier to play than a ball in the air"
The rules around Salah's goal are clear, it doesn’t matter where he is stood, Toti made a deliberate attempt to play the ball.

The France goal was disallowed because the defender who played the ball done so under pressure from the attacker, therefore was not determined to be deliberate.
 
‘Deliberate play’ is when a player has control of the ball with the possibility of:

  • passing the ball to a team-mate; or
  • gaining possession of the ball; or
  • clearing the ball (e.g. by kicking or heading it).
Just had a quick look at the highlights on the BBC and I don't think I've ever seen a decision like that given before. To address those points.

1. He isn't passing the ball to a teammate
2. He does not gain possession of the ball
3. He does not clear the ball

Compare that to the first Wolves goal where Allison passes the ball to a Wolves player clearly in an offside position.

The following criteria should be used, as appropriate, as indicators that a player was in control of the ball and, as a result, ‘deliberately played’ the ball:

  • The ball travelled from distance and the player had a clear view of it
  • The ball was not moving quickly
  • The direction of the ball was not unexpected
  • The player had time to coordinate their body movement, i.e. it was not a case of instinctive stretching or jumping, or a movement that achieved limited contact/control
  • A ball moving on the ground is easier to play than a ball in the air"
Toti was never in control of the ball. I'd say on 4 of those 5 criteria (excepting the first - he has a clear view of it) the ball was moving quickly, he had to react to a ball coming quickly he only had time to jump and make partial contact with the ball which was in the air.

Absolute garbage decision.

And I'm struggling to see how the Wolves third is ruled off?

Good old VAR what a pile of shight it really is.
 
Just had a quick look at the highlights on the BBC and I don't think I've ever seen a decision like that given before. To address those points.

1. He isn't passing the ball to a teammate
2. He does not gain possession of the ball
3. He does not clear the ball

Compare that to the first Wolves goal where Allison passes the ball to a Wolves player clearly in an offside position.


Toti was never in control of the ball. I'd say on 4 of those 5 criteria (excepting the first - he has a clear view of it) the ball was moving quickly, he had to react to a ball coming quickly he only had time to jump and make partial contact with the ball which was in the air.

Absolute garbage decision.

And I'm struggling to see how the Wolves third is ruled off?

Good old VAR what a pile of shight it really is.

Why split up the rules I quoted? It removes the context.

A clear, uninterrupted, attempt at a clearance either by foot or head is deemed in control. The fact it was misplaced is irrelevant to the rules.

Toti had a clear view and time to react to make a play at the ball, according to the rules it is onside. I Don't agree with it, but those are the rules which means the linesman that never raised his flag and VAR for not overturning it, got it right.

Allison's pass is completely different and not even close to being relevant, for one a Liverpool player slide tackled a pass back to him and even then no Wolves player was offside?? I have no idea what you're trying to compare here, standing around with the ball at your feet is not what determines being in "control" of the ball.

VAR is not perfect by any stretch but it's pointless blaming VAR when it's the rules that are in dispute. VAR doesn’t exist to change the rules.
 
Last edited:
Am I missing something in the olden days the moment the ball leaves the boot of Liverpool player in the direction of Salah the flag is raised for offside, the wolves player touching the ball is an irrelevance because the infringement has already occured. Now I know this isn't the correct interpretation now but changing the law has not only confused fans and players but made officiating grass roots football almost impossible. Why change the law
 
Why split up the rules I quoted? It removes the context.
Because it describes a two stage process. How can you describe the actions of Toti as "deliberate play"? Helpfully explained as "when a player has control of the ball with the possibility of; passing the ball to a team-mate; or gaining possession of the ball; or clearing the ball - he doesn't pass the ball to a teammate, he doesn't have possession of the ball and he doesn't clear the ball!

The five guidelines afterwards are to explain how you assess the actions of the player. Ignoring VAR for the moment I cannot understand how the referee has interpreted Toti's action as "deliberate play"? The only one of the guidelines of how to assess "deliberate play" that might possibly apply is the fact that he has a clear view of the ball in flight. Literal interpretation of that law would mean that any defender attempting to intercept a ball played towards a player in an offside position runs the risk of playing that player onside and I don't think that is the intention of the rule? If the ball had struck Toti on his arrse and gone through to Salah would it have been offside?

So, IMO, that is the referee making a bad decision. The role of VAR as it was sold to us was to correct glaring refereeing errors. Therefore VAR once again has made a nonsense of the game. The Wolves "third" is one where I suppose you have to say that that was a possible error by linesman which VAR couldn't overrule?

What a complete bag of shight VAR is. And to make it worse no one in the stadium would have had a clue what was going on because in the FA cup nothing is shown on the big telly by way of explanation.
 
Because it describes a two stage process. How can you describe the actions of Toti as "deliberate play"? Helpfully explained as "when a player has control of the ball with the possibility of; passing the ball to a team-mate; or gaining possession of the ball; or clearing the ball - he doesn't pass the ball to a teammate, he doesn't have possession of the ball and he doesn't clear the ball!

The five guidelines afterwards are to explain how you assess the actions of the player. Ignoring VAR for the moment I cannot understand how the referee has interpreted Toti's action as "deliberate play"? The only one of the guidelines of how to assess "deliberate play" that might possibly apply is the fact that he has a clear view of the ball in flight. Literal interpretation of that law would mean that any defender attempting to intercept a ball played towards a player in an offside position runs the risk of playing that player onside and I don't think that is the intention of the rule? If the ball had struck Toti on his arrse and gone through to Salah would it have been offside?

So, IMO, that is the referee making a bad decision. The role of VAR as it was sold to us was to correct glaring refereeing errors. Therefore VAR once again has made a nonsense of the game. The Wolves "third" is one where I suppose you have to say that that was a possible error by linesman which VAR couldn't overrule?

What a complete bag of shight VAR is. And to make it worse no one in the stadium would have had a clue what was going on because in the FA cup nothing is shown on the big telly by way of explanation.

Toti moved into the path of a cross that came in from a distance, he chose to jump and make a clearance with his head. That headed attempt came of the top of his dipped head as he tried to redirect the ball to his left (to the player that slipped?). He could've headed back where it came from or to his right.

Toti fluffed whatever clearance he was trying to make (no doubt influenced by Salah's position) and got underneath the ball, either way what he did was a deliberate act to play the ball and he was under control in his attempt at doing it, that fact he got it wrong doesn't mean he wasn't in control.

Control of the ball does not mean the ball at your feet with time, otherwise every single header or volley would be determined as not in control. Control is an unimpeded act to play the ball, getting that wrong does not equal lack of control.

The interpretation of the rules in this instance is correct, whether or not the rules are fair in this instance is another debate entirely and has nothing to do with VAR or the officials that this game.

 
Back
Top