VAR Inconsistency

[jacapus]

Watching the Manure game.There's just been a handball review for a Vile penalty.If anyone saw it, can they explain the difference between that (which was dismissed) & the recent one given against Kieran Clark.Both incidents seemingly had hands in an 'unnatural' position.Once again the bias towards a top 6 club would seem to emerge.

[toptoon]

Var isn’t the problem, the rules of the game are. All close decisions should be made by the VAR (not the on pitch) ref and rules like handball need to be defined and applied strictly, no matter whether it’s Man U or Bolton.

[jacapus]

Var isn’t the problem, the rules of the game are. All close decisions should be made by the VAR (not the on pitch) ref and rules like handball need to be defined and applied strictly, no matter whether it’s Man U or Bolton.

Both instances were reviewed by VAR & interpreted differently.In my opinion there was absolutely no difference.I cant get my head around it.I thought VAR was meant to do away with inconsistencies not create them !

[toptoon]

True but the problem is the interpretation of the law. The rule needs to remove any doubt about ball to hand or hand to ball, whether accidental or on purpose.
For example, if it touches the hand/arm in the box, it’s a penalty no matter what. This may seem unfair sometimes but it would be absolutely the same for every team, and that’s good enough for me.

[jacapus]

My point was ..... what's the difference between the two ? Did you see both ? If so can you explain the difference.

[Ragatino]

Var isn’t the problem, the rules of the game are. All close decisions should be made by the VAR (not the on pitch) ref and rules like handball need to be defined and applied strictly, no matter whether it’s Man U or Bolton.

It's all this interpretation BS that is the problem.

Before VAR the dude on the pitch made the decisions as you said. Now it's removed responsibility to a faceless unseen guy or group in Stockley Park there is no consistency.

What needs to happen is definites. However human error is ubiquitous with judging sports. VAR needs to be, like goal line tech, scaled back and focused on things like dangerous play and cheating.

The off-site rules are garbage.

Handballs - incidental ball to hand issues should in NO WAY be considered a handball. It's a joke.

However yes the interpretation of the rules always sides for the assumed successful teams like MU.

The day that the rules are fair and even for all teams, the competition gets tougher for the top teams the better.

[toptoon]

My point was ..... what's the difference between the two ? Did you see both ? If so can you explain the difference.

The only difference was a different ref on a different day. It’ BS. If it’s so hard to get consistent decision making then the rules need changing so it isn’t.

[jacapus]

If the rule is simply the interpretation as to whether the arms or hands are in an 'unnatural' position then both penalties are valid.However I find it hard to see how a player is supposed to jump without outstretched arms for leverage.Its a joke & as Ragatino says, it should be scrapped in favour of only deliberate hand to ball instances.

[toptoon]

If the rule is simply the interpretation as to whether the arms or hands are in an 'unnatural' position then both penalties are valid.However I find it hard to see how a player is supposed to jump without outstretched arms for leverage.Its a joke & as Ragatino says, it should be scrapped in favour of only deliberate hand to ball instances.

My point is that we need to remove all ‘interpretation’. Where there is interpretation involved, there is inconsistency in decision making. If a ref has to decide whether a handball was intentional or not, then there will always be problems.
For example, if every defender handball in the box was a penalty then (even though it would be unfair sometimes because it was completely unintentional) it would be the same rule for everyone and, therefore, remove inconsistency.
I’m mostly happy with var on offsides. It is entirely fair and there is no interpretation. The only thing they need to do is step up the technology so that the decision is very fast (this disallowing of goals, even 10 seconds later is really hurting the best part of the game for the supporters).

[Ragatino]

My point is that we need to remove all ‘interpretation’. Where there is interpretation involved, there is inconsistency in decision making. If a ref has to decide whether a handball was intentional or not, then there will always be problems.
For example, if every defender handball in the box was a penalty then (even though it would be unfair sometimes because it was completely unintentional) it would be the same rule for everyone and, therefore, remove inconsistency.
I’m mostly happy with var on offsides. It is entirely fair and there is no interpretation. The only thing they need to do is step up the technology so that the decision is very fast (this disallowing of goals, even 10 seconds later is really hurting the best part of the game for the supporters).

Exactly the point I was trying to make.

The whole purpose of VAR was to remove any 'interpretation' from critical decisions. All we've done is shifted the responsibility from 1 guy accountable on the pitch to the muppets at Stockley Park who are not accountable for their 'interpretations'.

SO, we need rules that are clear cut & the removal of the fraud called 'interpretation'.