Fifa Women's World Cup

[Mikey1874]

32 minutes ago, Maroon Sailor said:

 

If Scotland qualify then I hope Nigeria do as well after that.

 

Scuppered by VAR twice. That pen should only have been retaken if the goalie saved it imo and even that would still have been harsh.

 

Nigeria have a decent chance too

[Nookie Bear]

Sitting in a stadium, wondering what the feck is going on while a referee checks VAR every ten minutes for penalties and no big screen for the fans to know what the issue is and 8 minutes injury time?

 

No ta. 

[Hackney Hearts]

32 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

The penalty decision  benefits Scotland. 

 

And was therefore correct.

 

 

 

No but seriously - FFS. 

[Nookie Bear]

It's getting a bit tedious now, reducing the game to a succession of tv replays fussing over small details.

 

For me, i just want to know if the ball has crossed the line, because that is the main point of the game. Everything else is incidental and may OR MAY NOT lead to a goal.

Perhaps, at most, if the referee has missed an obvious foul then the VAR guys can highlight it. But how far back do you go? The game is fluid so every incident leads to another and an innocuous foul in the middle of the pitch can leave a defender out of position and, eventually, to a goal.

 

^^^ waffling nonsense - apologies ^^^

 

All i want is consistency. I want referees managed properly so they are assessed on their fairness so that they give decisions based on what they see, not what they want to see (or the reputation of the player). The appeal system needs sorted and we need to move away from this attitude that reviewing a decision is a criticism of a referee, because we all know how impossible the job is.

[Maroon Sailor]

VAR in it's present set up is farcical

 

We might as well do away with the onfield referee as everything can be reviewed by VAR in a studio.

[Mikey1874]

3 minutes ago, Maroon Sailor said:

VAR in it's present set up is farcical

 

We might as well do away with the onfield referee as everything can be reviewed by VAR in a studio.

 

Marginal fouls, offsides or hand balls are being punished. Will change how players play. Balance between attack and defence is a bit uncertain. 

[Hackney Hearts]

2 hours ago, Nookie Bear said:

Sitting in a stadium, wondering what the feck is going on while a referee checks VAR every ten minutes for penalties and no big screen for the fans to know what the issue is and 8 minutes injury time?

 

No ta. 

 

And to compound matters - having a match in the same tournament where crucial penalty decisions are NOT referred to VAR (Scotland v Japan).

[FJT]

5 minutes ago, Hackney Hearts said:

 

And to compound matters - having a match in the same tournament where crucial penalty decisions are NOT referred to VAR (Scotland v Japan).

Correct. I’m still raging about that one, even though I know it’s pointless ?. 

Im generally in favour of VAR but the inconsistency of its use is infuriating. Has to be sorted out ?‍♀️

[Hackney Hearts]

Maybe restrict VAR to each team having the right to challenge, as in tennis (maybe 2 challenges, rather than 3?). You'd be reluctant to waste a challenge if it wasn't a blatant injustice.

 

 

[FJT]

Yeah I think that approach has some potential. And you only lose your challenge if it’s unsuccessful?

[Ferryjambo99]

Regarding the encroaching. At least one Nigerian player is also encroaching, I might be wrong but I think in that case the goal stands 

[RudiHMFC]

5 minutes ago, Ferryjambo99 said:

Regarding the encroaching. At least one Nigerian player is also encroaching, I might be wrong but I think in that case the goal stands 

 

So encroaching is fine as long as everyone does it?

[Hackney Hearts]

4 minutes ago, smartinmaroon said:

Yeah I think that approach has some potential. And you only lose your challenge if it’s unsuccessful?

 

Exactly.

 

Would have been interesting to see if France would have had the gall/Gaul to appeal for the goalkeeper being inches off her line. Would have been even more embarrassing if they had.

[Justin Z]

14 hours ago, Ferryjambo99 said:

 

No, they must keep at least one foot on the line. New rules are actually more lenient on keepers than the current ones

 

Yeah, the rule itself is more lenient, with the tradeoff that they're going to be extremely harsh on calling it (where they used to give a lot of leeway). We're seeing the results of this new arrangement and I for one don't like it at all.

 

11 minutes ago, Hackney Hearts said:

Maybe restrict VAR to each team having the right to challenge, as in tennis (maybe 2 challenges, rather than 3?). You'd be reluctant to waste a challenge if it wasn't a blatant injustice.

 

Based on how it's gone (a penalty that took seven minutes in the case of Nigeria-France) I'd go completely the other way--only use VAR when the referee asks for its help.

[Hackney Hearts]

13 minutes ago, smartinmaroon said:

even though I know it’s pointless 

 

Like Scotland are, thanks to VAR and non-VAR.

[Justin Z]

9 minutes ago, Ferryjambo99 said:

Regarding the encroaching. At least one Nigerian player is also encroaching, I might be wrong but I think in that case the goal stands 

 

I forget the exact encroachments rules but something tells me this isn't right--I think if both teams encroach it's a retake regardless of the result of the kick. I could be wrong though.

 

Also important to note is that VAR is not allowed to be used in this tournament to review whether players encroached in the area, which means if the referee doesn't call it on the field, that's that. Why the difference between that and keeper position on the line for VAR? No idea.

[Mikey1874]

1 minute ago, Justin Z said:

 

I forget the exact encroachments rules but something tells me this isn't right--I think if both teams encroach it's a retake regardless of the result of the kick. I could be wrong though.

 

Also important to note is that VAR is not allowed to be used in this tournament to review whether players encroached in the area, which means if the referee doesn't call it on the field, that's that. Why the difference between that and keeper position on the line for VAR? No idea.

 

Good explanation, cheers.

 

So is there a process to decide how VAR is used for each tournament? Who decides? 

 

Not expecting anyone has answers but it could be used differently. 

[Hackney Hearts]

2 minutes ago, Justin Z said:

Based on how it's gone (a penalty that took seven minutes in the case of Nigeria-France) I'd go completely the other way--only use VAR when the referee asks for its help.

 

Could still take 7 minutes if it's a referee asking for help!

 

But surely a crucial benefit of VAR is that it can clear up an issue that everyone else on the pitch has seen, but the referee somehow hasn't picked up on. A 2-challenge system would seem to allow for this, but would also restrict the likelihood of having to stop play every 5 minutes.

[Justin Z]

1 minute ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

Good explanation, cheers.

 

So is there a process to decide how VAR is used for each tournament? Who decides? 

 

Not expecting anyone has answers but it could be used differently. 

 

Pretty sure every competition gets to decide their protocol for how they use VAR (if they do at all). In the case of the WWC I think I was reading that there was a panel of eight people, zero of whom had ever played or refereed the game professionally.

[FJT]

6 minutes ago, Hackney Hearts said:

 

Like Scotland are, thanks to VAR and non-VAR.

?

need scotland to do the unimaginable (at least in terms of the guys team!) and manage to beat Argentina ??

[Justin Z]

1 minute ago, Hackney Hearts said:

 

Could still take 7 minutes if it's a referee asking for help!

 

But surely a crucial benefit of VAR is that it can clear up an issue that everyone else on the pitch has seen, but the referee somehow hasn't picked up on. A 2-challenge system would seem to allow for this, but would also restrict the likelihood of having to stop play every 5 minutes.

 

Yeah, I definitely don't disagree that's a potential benefit, and I agree it could take seven minutes even if asked for. But we keep seeing stuff like this that fundamentally changes the game, both from a playing standpoint and a time aspect. They kept telling us before it was introduced that VAR wouldn't change the game, it would just make it more accurately refereed. Well, especially in a sport like football, is pure millimetre accuracy (outside of the ball going over the goal line, obviously) really what we want? Do we want such draconian sanctions for extremely minor, and in this case, completely irrelevant infringements that are a matter of inches and timing (which, any keeper will tell you, can be messed with by a simple stutter by the kick-taker, which is why they have already done away with feinting)?

[FJT]

11 minutes ago, Hackney Hearts said:

 

Exactly.

 

Would have been interesting to see if France would have had the gall/Gaul to appeal for the goalkeeper being inches off her line. Would have been even more embarrassing if they had.

Je t’aime what you did there... 

?

[Hackney Hearts]

3 minutes ago, Justin Z said:

...is pure millimetre accuracy (outside of the ball going over the goal line, obviously) really what we want?

Do we want such draconian sanctions for extremely minor, and in this case, completely irrelevant infringements that are a matter of inches and timing ...?

 

No, and no.

Nor do we want a situation where England get the type of penalty they did against Scotland, and yet Scotland are denied a certain penalty (probably two) against Japan. Everyone hates inconsistency, and VAR was touted as a way to help. So far, it hasn't.

[Justin Z]

Just now, Hackney Hearts said:

 

No, and no.

Nor do we want a situation where England get the type of penalty they did against Scotland, and yet Scotland are denied a certain penalty (probably two) against Japan. Everyone hates inconsistency, and VAR was touted as a way to help. So far, it hasn't.

 

Yeah. That's the other issue. At the end of the day, it's still humans making decisions. Using more technology doesn't necessarily do a thing to curb inconsistency and unfairness.

[Hackney Hearts]

3 minutes ago, Justin Z said:

At the end of the day, it's still humans making decisions. Using more technology doesn't necessarily do a thing to curb inconsistency and unfairness.

 

True. Although the problem in the Jap/Sco game was that nobody was forced to make a decision - I feel a challenge system would at least eliminate that problem. Effectively saying "watch that back and tell us it's not a penalty".

[Justin Z]

Just now, Hackney Hearts said:

 

True. Although the problem in the Jap/Sco game was that nobody was forced to make a decision - I feel a challenge system would at least eliminate that problem. Effectively saying "watch that back and tell us it's not a penalty".

 

For sure--it's definitely yet another aspect/problem in a system that is rife with them, and finding the best balance between all of these issues seems, at this point at least, like an impossible ask.

[RudiHMFC]

2 minutes ago, Hackney Hearts said:

 

True. Although the problem in the Jap/Sco game was that nobody was forced to make a decision - I feel a challenge system would at least eliminate that problem. Effectively saying "watch that back and tell us it's not a penalty".

 

They are watching everything and if the folk behind the screens think it's a pen or even worth a look they flag it up to the ref, I wonder if VAR was actually working in that Japan v Scotland game.

[Hackney Hearts]

2 minutes ago, RudiHMFC said:

They are watching everything and if the folk behind the screens think it's a pen or even worth a look they flag it up to the ref, I wonder if VAR was actually working in that Japan v Scotland game.

 

Or if the screen team were on a tea break. Or saki break, whatever.

[FJT]

4 minutes ago, RudiHMFC said:

 

They are watching everything and if the folk behind the screens think it's a pen or even worth a look they flag it up to the ref, I wonder if VAR was actually working in that Japan v Scotland game.

Yes. When you consider some of the penalties that have been awarded, it was strange to say the least that the referee didn’t even have a look at it 

[FJT]

Totally different I know, but reminds me of a certain basketball move by Barry Ferguson before he scored against us many years ago ?

i need to get better at letting things go ?

[Hackney Hearts]

3 minutes ago, smartinmaroon said:

i need to get better at letting things go ?

 

No no no no no, it's the most crucial part of football

[FJT]

Just now, Hackney Hearts said:

 

No no no no no, it's the most crucial part of football

? bearing a grudge- makes winning all the sweeter ?

[graygo]

Having a challenge system is all well and good but if you've had your allocated challenges there is scope for some absolutely horrendous decisions being made and var then becomes redundant which defeats the purpose.

[FJT]

Just now, graygo said:

Having a challenge system is all well and good but if you've had your allocated challenges there is scope for some absolutely horrendous decisions being made and var then becomes redundant which defeats the purpose.

Hmm, that’s true too. Given the number of howlers one ref can have in one single match, you’ve maybe got a point 

[Mikey1874]

Italy v Brazil is decent 

[RobbofordGHC]

[Bazzas right boot]

8 hours ago, graygo said:

Having a challenge system is all well and good but if you've had your allocated challenges there is scope for some absolutely horrendous decisions being made and var then becomes redundant which defeats the purpose.

 

 

No, if you challenge and you are correct you still have three. 

 

You only lose a challenge when you are wrong. 

 

So if an opponent scores a goal and you challenge for offside, but it wasn't you go to two. 

 

If it was offside, you still have 3.

 

It's to save you challenging everything and being frivolous with them. 

 

I have used tennis as an example. 

 

Whether it's 2/ half. 3/5 challenges I don't know, the number isn't the point. That can be adapated. 

 

Could be that every goal is revised by var no matter and you have 2/ half additional chances  on top of any goals to challenge. 

That would be more suitable for football, maybe. 

 

Edited June 18, 2019 by Olly Lee's left boot

[All roads lead to Gorgie]

Shaw the Jamaican couldn't hit a coo's erse with a banjo 

[JackLadd]

Never a penalty that. 

[Taffin]

What a bullshit penalty that was.

[Fozzyonthefence]

How the **** is that a penalty to Brazil?! The refereeing and VAR / non VAR decisions in this tournament have been a joke.

[Fozzyonthefence]

Equally bad is the co commentator, whoever she is, who doesn’t seem to have the knowledge or guts to call out that shite decision.  It’s like all the pundits don’t have a mandate to say anything negative, it must be talked up at all costs.  Reminds me when I read 1984 at school.

[The White Cockade]

The co commentator is absolutely rubbish

Keeps going on about players “jumping in” when ref gives comedy free kicks 

Penalty was a joke

Looks like Scotland are the only team not allowed to get a penalty even when we had a couple of obvious ones  

Think some of these women need to realise that it takes more than getting a hideous tattoo to make them footballers 

[Mikey1874]

Italy still win group and Brazil qualify with 6 points in 3rd.

[Mikey1874]

2 3rd place teams confirmed 

 

2 more places available = Scotland 

[Mikey1874]

41 minutes ago, Fozzyonthefence said:

How the **** is that a penalty to Brazil?! The refereeing and VAR / non VAR decisions in this tournament have been a joke.

 

Girls in studio said penalties get given in women's football for that sort of contact but shouldn't. 

[Fozzyonthefence]

5 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

Girls in studio said penalties get given in women's football for that sort of contact but shouldn't. 

 

They seem uncomfortable pointing out refereeing mistakes.  The co commentator seemed happy to accept it was a penalty. 

[Mikey1874]

4 minutes ago, Fozzyonthefence said:

 

They seem uncomfortable pointing out refereeing mistakes.  The co commentator seemed happy to accept it was a penalty. 

 

She was an embarrassment. The women in studio Casey Storey and Hope Solo I think are really switched on. The co-commentator didn't know the basics.  An ex player too. 

Edited June 18, 2019 by Mikey1874

[John Findlay]

I see Scotland getting shafted by VAR again this evening. Seems to be a trait for the tournament.

[RudiHMFC]

How can they give that when they have VAR? Something isn't right in this tournament imo, very strange goings on regarding decisions.