| Forest. 17:23 - Aug 21 with 16853 views | ted_hendrix |
WTF is happening up there? I know It's early doors in the season and all that but they have a huge playing squad and zero points.
|  |
| My Father had a profound influence on me, he was a lunatic. |
| |  |
| Forest. on 13:10 - May 30 with 1537 views | Superhoop83 |
| Forest. on 13:06 - May 30 by Northernr |
The commentators have the referee's audio feed in their ear and said it wasn't even discussed. Absolutely incredible. |
Anyone want a bet on whether Liverpool or Man United would be awarded penalties against Forest for identical incidents?
Appalling decisions. |  |
| |
| Forest. on 13:12 - May 30 with 1529 views | BklynRanger |
| Forest. on 11:40 - May 30 by Antti_Heinola |
I think as fans we can stop that from happening if we mobilise.
It is ruining football, i don't want it anywhere near our league. |
i'd be more than prepared to sit out a certain number of games as a protest if VAR was introduced.
Whatever it was it would need to be large and effective - one of the tangible benefits of being in the Championship is not having to deal with that shit. |  | | |
| Forest. on 13:19 - May 30 with 1458 views | terryb |
| Forest. on 13:06 - May 30 by Northernr |
The commentators have the referee's audio feed in their ear and said it wasn't even discussed. Absolutely incredible. |
Would that be Moss or Tierney at fault? Or possibly both!
I thought the VAR man was meant to review all penalty area activity, but I'm now leaning towards that he has to be asked to by the match referee. |  | | |
| Forest. on 13:20 - May 30 with 1450 views | stowmarketrange |
| Forest. on 13:12 - May 30 by BklynRanger |
i'd be more than prepared to sit out a certain number of games as a protest if VAR was introduced.
Whatever it was it would need to be large and effective - one of the tangible benefits of being in the Championship is not having to deal with that shit. |
But the downside is that we get Keith Stroud unchecked.Unless he’s been move up to the premier league to help Bournemouth avoid relegation? |  | | |
| Forest. on 13:21 - May 30 with 1443 views | switchingcode |
| Forest. on 11:40 - May 30 by Antti_Heinola |
I think as fans we can stop that from happening if we mobilise.
It is ruining football, i don't want it anywhere near our league. |
Top of the what not to like list of being in the Premier League | | | |
| Forest. on 13:25 - May 30 with 1427 views | Match82 |
| Forest. on 10:59 - May 30 by Lblock |
This stinks.
VAR is a pointless exercise as far as I can see.
We’ve replaced controversy of refs missing things (ie being human and/or rubbish) with even greater controversy and the on pitch delays plus cost of the whole thing.
The game just gets more and more rotten |
Agreed. I'm not against it in principle, there's a way it could avoid being too disruptive, like you should have 30 seconds to see something which changes your mind and if it's not THAT obvious then stick with the on field decision.
But what we've actually got? It's a fcking disgrace. Literally the worst of BOTH worlds |  | | |
| Forest. on 13:25 - May 30 with 1418 views | Northernr |
| Forest. on 13:20 - May 30 by stowmarketrange |
But the downside is that we get Keith Stroud unchecked.Unless he’s been move up to the premier league to help Bournemouth avoid relegation? |
As Pinner keeps rightly saying though, it's only Keith Stroud or the equivalent operating it, so like yesterday you get all the same perverse and incorrect decisions only with greater delay and less excuse for getting it wrong. I've seen no evidence whatsoever that VAR either improves the football experience, or improves the error rate on the decisions. You get just as many mistakes with it, as yesterday showed very starkly. |  | | |
| Forest. on 13:38 - May 30 with 1348 views | BklynRanger |
We could always try to avoid VAR for health and safety reasons on the basis that our concourses couldn't handle it.
The number of people saying "Fcuk this" and getting up to queue for a drink, instead of waiting for the latest cliffhanger decision, would be greatly increased and dangerously massive. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Forest. on 13:41 - May 30 with 1339 views | CliveWilsonSaid |
| Forest. on 13:25 - May 30 by Northernr |
As Pinner keeps rightly saying though, it's only Keith Stroud or the equivalent operating it, so like yesterday you get all the same perverse and incorrect decisions only with greater delay and less excuse for getting it wrong. I've seen no evidence whatsoever that VAR either improves the football experience, or improves the error rate on the decisions. You get just as many mistakes with it, as yesterday showed very starkly. |
The other thing is that the lower down the league VAR goes, the less scrutiny the decisions will receive. If they get their way it will be used for Rotherham v Blackpool on a Tuesday night in November in front of 8000 people. How bad is it going to be then, If they can’t be bothered to get it right when the world is watching. |  |
| |
| Forest. on 13:46 - May 30 with 1301 views | PinnerPaul |
| Forest. on 11:44 - May 30 by davman |
Sorry, matey, but either you are being a huge apologist for your colleagues or the laws of the game are shot, because both of those are absolutely stonewall. I usually put things down to differences of opinion, but it is so clear to me and I am fuming even though it should have no interest.
Please explain why the first one can be interpreted as not being a pen and why you still seem to indicate that there is any semblance of doubt on the second one. I would genuinely love to be educated and learn something here because, on the face of things, you are talking nonsense to me and I can't believe that really is the case... |
2nd one first - just think its like most penalty shouts, there IS an element of doubt - but I did think it was a pen.
1st one - the contact is minimal and its not 100% clear who instigated it. Don't think its a yellow for simulation either btw, but really can't see how that is 'stonewall'.
We debate penalties and other calls all day long on here, way after the match and after watching something over and over and we still never all agree. More tellingly its the same on RefChat - all qualified referees with years of experience and no 'fan' interest in the incident being discussed.
Rather than were these two pens, I think the bigger problem is everyone's perception of VAR - no 'wrong' decisions - IMHO with most penalty shouts there IS no 'right' and 'wrong' - just opinions - all valid , like yours, but that doesn't mean our opinions will always be the same as the on field referee or the VAR.
Which is why I think there are more downsides than upsides to VAR, hence why I am against it. | | | |
| Forest. on 13:46 - May 30 with 1302 views | bosh67 |
Having watched the game yesterday I can only think that someone having their legs taken away is not a penalty. The fact the first one went to review and still wasn't a penalty was compounded by the second one not even being reviewed. First is mistimed and the second is clumsy. Both were penalties. Still, only 170 million quid riding on it! |  |
| |
| Forest. on 13:49 - May 30 with 1275 views | PinnerPaul |
| Forest. on 11:13 - May 30 by rrrspricey |
Both decisions yesterday were blatant enough to make a decision on the first replay. It was a very clear and very obvious mistake to not give the pen and in the first incident book Tofolo for diving.
Offside decisions need to change too, if you can't tell without drawing lines all over the screen, it's not an error |
Re the 2nd paragraph I agree and we now have the added annoyance of even the most obvious offsides, that even I would spot, not being flagged immediately. | | | |
| Forest. on 13:50 - May 30 with 1273 views | Northernr |
| Forest. on 13:41 - May 30 by CliveWilsonSaid |
The other thing is that the lower down the league VAR goes, the less scrutiny the decisions will receive. If they get their way it will be used for Rotherham v Blackpool on a Tuesday night in November in front of 8000 people. How bad is it going to be then, If they can’t be bothered to get it right when the world is watching. |
I'd love to know who all these referees are that are going to be operating it for 22 fixtures each weekend. The Championship is a living breathing example of how few good, young, promising referees there are coming through. We've already discussed you've got the super fast Premier league games being refereed by 50-year-old men. How would they staff it? One bloke doing all the Championship, and you have to ring in and go on hold while he deals with another incident? Thankyou for calling Stockley Park, your penalty appeal is very important to us... | | | |
| Forest. on 13:51 - May 30 with 1266 views | PinnerPaul |
| Forest. on 13:19 - May 30 by terryb |
Would that be Moss or Tierney at fault? Or possibly both!
I thought the VAR man was meant to review all penalty area activity, but I'm now leaning towards that he has to be asked to by the match referee. |
I think they review possible clear and obvious errors, who decides that I don't know, but guess the VAR.
In hockey it IS only reviewed on referee's say so - that would be better I think, abolishing the thing would be better still! | | | |
| Forest. on 13:55 - May 30 with 1248 views | PinnerPaul |
| Forest. on 12:06 - May 30 by Northernr |
I don't see how either isn't a clear and obvious error. The first one he's booked him for diving, one replay shows you Colback kicks his leg into his other leg. Dreadful decision, but maybe with one look you can excuse it, that's what the VAR is there for. Second one is even worse. It's a blatant foul, and he hasn't seen it, because as usual his positioning is appalling.
Really easy ones to get right, both completely wrong. |
Fair enough.
Just didn't see the first one like that at all, not in real time or the highlights on Quest at any rate. Agree its not enough to call it simulation though.
2nd one I agree, its a pen and then we are just into the stupid semantics of VAR protocol.
We DO agree though, that VAR isn't going to stop us arguing about pens and there being so called 'wrong' decisions, so like you, I would much rather do without! | | | |
| Forest. on 13:56 - May 30 with 1244 views | SuffolkHoop |
VAR has a bit of the electric cars about it. Not that good in reality but if you say so you're a dinosaur. |  | | |
| Forest. on 13:56 - May 30 with 1243 views | PinnerPaul |
| Forest. on 13:25 - May 30 by Northernr |
As Pinner keeps rightly saying though, it's only Keith Stroud or the equivalent operating it, so like yesterday you get all the same perverse and incorrect decisions only with greater delay and less excuse for getting it wrong. I've seen no evidence whatsoever that VAR either improves the football experience, or improves the error rate on the decisions. You get just as many mistakes with it, as yesterday showed very starkly. |
Yep! | | | |
| Forest. on 13:57 - May 30 with 1230 views | PinnerPaul |
| Forest. on 13:50 - May 30 by Northernr |
I'd love to know who all these referees are that are going to be operating it for 22 fixtures each weekend. The Championship is a living breathing example of how few good, young, promising referees there are coming through. We've already discussed you've got the super fast Premier league games being refereed by 50-year-old men. How would they staff it? One bloke doing all the Championship, and you have to ring in and go on hold while he deals with another incident? Thankyou for calling Stockley Park, your penalty appeal is very important to us... |
As discussed before, its a problem all the way down the pyramid. | | | |
| Forest. on 14:03 - May 30 with 1192 views | Northernr |
| Forest. on 13:55 - May 30 by PinnerPaul |
Fair enough.
Just didn't see the first one like that at all, not in real time or the highlights on Quest at any rate. Agree its not enough to call it simulation though.
2nd one I agree, its a pen and then we are just into the stupid semantics of VAR protocol.
We DO agree though, that VAR isn't going to stop us arguing about pens and there being so called 'wrong' decisions, so like you, I would much rather do without! |
On the subject of 'protocols', this is one of the 2 million things I hate about it.
Every Monday a bloke called Dale Johnson from ESPN UK does a Twitter feed often stretching on dozens of posts where he goes through the VAR decisions from the weekend that everybody thought were nonsense (because they were nonsense) and then in granular detail tells you that in fact if you'd just taken the time to read P356 par53 subsection2 adendum3.8 of the VAR Protocol, as he has (of course), actually the whole thing operated perfectly, the decision is correct and you're just idiot scum who don't understand.
Has the guy tripped him up? Then it's a penalty. That's it. The bloke in the VAR suite either thinks he's tripped him up or he doesn't. All this protocol about who can call for a review, when it can get involved, when it can overrule, when you come over to the screen... twaddle. Complete and utter twaddle. It wants setting alight.
If Jon Moss had given the penalty for the first incident yesterday, VAR Paul Tierney would have looked at it, and the decision would have stood. Instead, Moss said it was a dive, Tierney looked at it, and the decision stands. So the VAR system can produce a penalty or a dive verdict from the same incident, same Tierney looking at it, because of the protocol. That's bollox, pure and simple. It cannot be both, it's one or the other.
It was always going to be a sht system, because contrary to lazily trotted out sweeping statements it's also a sht system in rugby and elsewhere, but bringing it in with a telephone book of protocol just makes it even worse. | | | |
| Forest. on 14:09 - May 30 with 1166 views | Snipper |
It’s been discussed before, but I’d like the review system they have in cricket.
You get one review each half, and you keep your review if you’re right.
It would obviously be for penalty appeals only though, as offsides are done with the lines system, and possible red cards are done by the VAR ref anyway. |  | | |
| Forest. on 14:26 - May 30 with 1106 views | CLAREMAN1995 |
Shame this important game was decided by calls / non calls its cruel to players who gave their all in a brutal season VAR was supposed to right the wrongs its failing badly
Can anybody simply explain how Real Madrid's first goal was not allowed There were players behind Benzema when he banged it in plus it hit a Liverpool player to arrive at his feet the second time I thought he was offside on the original ball over the top Thanks |  | | |
| Forest. on 14:35 - May 30 with 1060 views | QPR_John |
| Forest. on 13:55 - May 30 by PinnerPaul |
Fair enough.
Just didn't see the first one like that at all, not in real time or the highlights on Quest at any rate. Agree its not enough to call it simulation though.
2nd one I agree, its a pen and then we are just into the stupid semantics of VAR protocol.
We DO agree though, that VAR isn't going to stop us arguing about pens and there being so called 'wrong' decisions, so like you, I would much rather do without! |
Why does VAR have a protocol? The answer is simple it’s designed so that any decision made by the referee or VAR can be justified by reference to this protocol to show it is the right decision | | | |
| Forest. on 15:10 - May 30 with 966 views | Northernr |
| Forest. on 14:35 - May 30 by QPR_John |
Why does VAR have a protocol? The answer is simple it’s designed so that any decision made by the referee or VAR can be justified by reference to this protocol to show it is the right decision |
Like I say, when you read Dale Johnson's weekly smarm-a-thon it's difficult to shake this impression.
So, let's address the Raphina incident first. You, as an idiot scum football fan, can see him on the floor in the penalty box bleeding there, after Ben White has bludgeoned him about the head with the massive fairground hammer you saw him bring onto the pitch after half time and is still holding now, and as an idiot scum football fan you probably think that's enough for VAR to overturn John Moss' initial verdict of "play on" delivered from the centre circle while looking the other way, but under the VAR protocol you're wrong. THREAD 1/43.
....
So, you see, it's actually all fine. VAR was good this weekend. 43/43. | | | |
| Forest. on 15:27 - May 30 with 894 views | Northernr |
Pinner if you're still reading I did actually have another thing about yesterday's game.
Samba, as he always does, shthousing at the end, ends up being substituted on a drop ball. I didn't think you could? New keeper came on and Moss dropped the ball at his feet to restart. | | | |
| Forest. on 15:34 - May 30 with 869 views | PinnerPaul |
| Forest. on 15:27 - May 30 by Northernr |
Pinner if you're still reading I did actually have another thing about yesterday's game.
Samba, as he always does, shthousing at the end, ends up being substituted on a drop ball. I didn't think you could? New keeper came on and Moss dropped the ball at his feet to restart. |
I thought the play was stopped because he was 'injured'. Therefore as the game was stopped, you can make the sub. IF game stopped with the ball in the penalty area, which it was, then its always a drop ball to the keeper.
Anything I've missed there? | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
