REPORT: Vardy and VAR deny the Clarets

This Forum is the main messageboard to discuss all things Claret and Blue and beyond
Post Reply
ClaretTony
Posts: 67422
Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2015 3:07 pm
Been Liked: 32237 times
Has Liked: 5253 times
Location: Burnley
Contact:

REPORT: Vardy and VAR deny the Clarets

Post by ClaretTony » Sun Sep 26, 2021 1:46 pm

Leicester v Burnley report

See link
https://www.uptheclarets.com/vardy-and- ... he-clarets
These 3 users liked this post: kazza tiger76 KateR

dsr
Posts: 15132
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:47 pm
Been Liked: 4548 times
Has Liked: 2241 times

Re: REPORT: Vardy and VAR deny the Clarets

Post by dsr » Sun Sep 26, 2021 3:23 pm

I think there is an argument about VAR, but it's an argument that has never been made at official level so far as I know. There should be an argument about whether it's right to have different laws for VAR games as for other games. At any game where VAR isn't operating, Wood's goal is legal because he is level. Where VAR is operating, it is no longer possible to be level.

The law was changed 30 years ago to allow level players to be onside, specifically because they wanted more goals and wanted to give the forward a bit more distance. Are VAR correct in trying to overturn that law change, or at least water it down to only half strength?

Excellent report as usual. Thanks.
This user liked this post: IanMcL

Hipper
Posts: 5681
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 1:33 pm
Been Liked: 1175 times
Has Liked: 918 times

Re: REPORT: Vardy and VAR deny the Clarets

Post by Hipper » Sun Sep 26, 2021 3:29 pm

A player is in an offside position if:

+any part of the head, body or feet is in the opponents’ half (excluding the halfway line) and
+any part of the head, body or feet is nearer to the opponents’ goal line than both the ball and the second-last opponent.

The hands and arms of all players, including the goalkeepers, are not considered. For the purposes of determining offside, the upper boundary of the arm is in line with the bottom of the armpit.

https://www.thefa.com/football-rules-go ... ---offside

This Law applies to all football matches, with VAR or not.

I assume the interpretation was that Wood's foot was nearer the goal.

dsr
Posts: 15132
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:47 pm
Been Liked: 4548 times
Has Liked: 2241 times

Re: REPORT: Vardy and VAR deny the Clarets

Post by dsr » Sun Sep 26, 2021 3:35 pm

Hipper wrote:
Sun Sep 26, 2021 3:29 pm
This Law applies to all football matches, with VAR or not.
The law applies differently to non-VAR matches. Are you seriously saying that linesmen in lower league matches genuinely give their decisions on the basis that Wood's toe is an inch further forward than the defender's armpit? I am certain that a linesman seeing that incident would never try and give the decision based on where the Leicester man's armpit was. He would say they were level.

Hipper
Posts: 5681
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 1:33 pm
Been Liked: 1175 times
Has Liked: 918 times

Re: REPORT: Vardy and VAR deny the Clarets

Post by Hipper » Sun Sep 26, 2021 3:42 pm

An assistant referee will give his decision the best he can, as will referees that don't have the benefit of assistants, or at least reliable ones such as in park football. Of course he can't be as accurate as VAR. It's the accuracy that's the difference. In any case without VAR and television there should be no arguments although of course there are!

On MotD it gave the impression that as Cornet pulled up with his hamstring injury, the Leicester fans were cheering. I hope that's not how it was.

Quickenthetempo
Posts: 17913
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:35 am
Been Liked: 3841 times
Has Liked: 2065 times

Re: REPORT: Vardy and VAR deny the Clarets

Post by Quickenthetempo » Sun Sep 26, 2021 3:44 pm

Hipper wrote:
Sun Sep 26, 2021 3:29 pm
A player is in an offside position if:

+any part of the head, body or feet is in the opponents’ half (excluding the halfway line) and
+any part of the head, body or feet is nearer to the opponents’ goal line than both the ball and the second-last opponent.

The hands and arms of all players, including the goalkeepers, are not considered. For the purposes of determining offside, the upper boundary of the arm is in line with the bottom of the armpit.

https://www.thefa.com/football-rules-go ... ---offside

This Law applies to all football matches, with VAR or not.

I assume the interpretation was that Wood's foot was nearer the goal.
Not something I have ever thought about but are you saying a GKs arms aren't included in any offside call? Or just as an attacking player?

If a keeper came out and punched the ball from a cross, with a defender going on the line to cover, the ball comes back in and it's between the forward and keeper for the offside decision. The keepers arms must be included as he can use them?
This user liked this post: dsr

dsr
Posts: 15132
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:47 pm
Been Liked: 4548 times
Has Liked: 2241 times

Re: REPORT: Vardy and VAR deny the Clarets

Post by dsr » Sun Sep 26, 2021 3:55 pm

Hipper wrote:
Sun Sep 26, 2021 3:42 pm
An assistant referee will give his decision the best he can, as will referees that don't have the benefit of assistants, or at least reliable ones such as in park football. Of course he can't be as accurate as VAR. It's the accuracy that's the difference. In any case without VAR and television there should be no arguments although of course there are!

On MotD it gave the impression that as Cornet pulled up with his hamstring injury, the Leicester fans were cheering. I hope that's not how it was.
But the point is that referees' guidance thirty years ago was that offside is to be judged by the human eye, and if a player looks to be level to the human eye, then he is level. They specifically excluded the odd toe or foot. VAR has changed that for top level football, and it needs to be discussed whether it was right to do so.

It would certainly help if the lawmakers gave a definition of level. Do they, as VAR believes, mean literally level to a millimetre or less, and that a linesman at any level who gives Wood onside is plain wrong?

simonclaret
Posts: 1161
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 7:59 am
Been Liked: 264 times
Has Liked: 3596 times
Location: North Yorkshire

Re: REPORT: Vardy and VAR deny the Clarets

Post by simonclaret » Sun Sep 26, 2021 3:58 pm

Hipper wrote:
Sun Sep 26, 2021 3:42 pm
On MotD it gave the impression that as Cornet pulled up with his hamstring injury, the Leicester fans were cheering. I hope that's not how it was.
That’s exactly how it was. No different to any other fans though.

Local cricketer
Posts: 2347
Joined: Mon May 13, 2019 5:46 pm
Been Liked: 412 times
Has Liked: 87 times

Re: REPORT: Vardy and VAR deny the Clarets

Post by Local cricketer » Sun Sep 26, 2021 4:00 pm

Lowton asked the assistant if the goal was fine and he got a positive reply back

IanMcL
Posts: 30123
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 5:27 pm
Been Liked: 6340 times
Has Liked: 8651 times

Re: REPORT: Vardy and VAR deny the Clarets

Post by IanMcL » Sun Sep 26, 2021 4:18 pm

The rules of the Premier League must always be honoured.

If it had been a Leicester goal, then it would be onside, as they are a more favoured team. As it is Burnley - not seen as a revenue generator for the Premier, then VAR must be used to assist the right outcome, which is to favour Leicester.
These 3 users liked this post: Woodleyclaret SalisburyClaret clitheroeclaret3

IanMcL
Posts: 30123
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 5:27 pm
Been Liked: 6340 times
Has Liked: 8651 times

Re: REPORT: Vardy and VAR deny the Clarets

Post by IanMcL » Sun Sep 26, 2021 4:19 pm

As for feet and a nose etc being the dinner, I thought their new 'thicker line' eradicated that.

Football needs goals.

Hipper
Posts: 5681
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 1:33 pm
Been Liked: 1175 times
Has Liked: 918 times

Re: REPORT: Vardy and VAR deny the Clarets

Post by Hipper » Sun Sep 26, 2021 4:19 pm

Quickenthetempo wrote:
Sun Sep 26, 2021 3:44 pm
Not something I have ever thought about but are you saying a GKs arms aren't included in any offside call? Or just as an attacking player?

If a keeper came out and punched the ball from a cross, with a defender going on the line to cover, the ball comes back in and it's between the forward and keeper for the offside decision. The keepers arms must be included as he can use them?
Firstly it's the Laws of the game that are saying this (not me).

'The hands and arms of all players, including the goalkeepers, are not considered'. I presume 'all players' means exactly that, both attackers and defenders.

Therefore my interpretation of this Law means the keeper's arms are not included to determine if the forward is in an offside position. We need a current referee to tell us what they would do (or have done) in that situation (I haven't refereed for years).

When presented with any unusual situation we were taught to ask ourselves 'what do the Laws say?'. Here the Law seems clear.

Hipper
Posts: 5681
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 1:33 pm
Been Liked: 1175 times
Has Liked: 918 times

Re: REPORT: Vardy and VAR deny the Clarets

Post by Hipper » Sun Sep 26, 2021 4:30 pm

dsr wrote:
Sun Sep 26, 2021 3:55 pm
But the point is that referees' guidance thirty years ago was that offside is to be judged by the human eye, and if a player looks to be level to the human eye, then he is level. They specifically excluded the odd toe or foot. VAR has changed that for top level football, and it needs to be discussed whether it was right to do so.

It would certainly help if the lawmakers gave a definition of level. Do they, as VAR believes, mean literally level to a millimetre or less, and that a linesman at any level who gives Wood onside is plain wrong?
What has changed the Laws is televised football.

We (fans, players, press) always knew referees and their teams got it wrong sometime but since television has become so dominant at the top levels it's been made obvious to millions of viewers too. The result is the demand for consistency and accuracy and this has led to professional referees and technology. The Laws have had to evolve to deal with this and continue to do so.

In previous version of the Laws there was the phrase 'in the opinion of the referee'. This would end all arguments. In the modern era this concept is no longer acceptable, at least at the top.

claretblue
Posts: 6410
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2016 3:36 pm
Been Liked: 1831 times
Has Liked: 961 times
Location: cloud 9 since Dyche appointed

Re: REPORT: Vardy and VAR deny the Clarets

Post by claretblue » Sun Sep 26, 2021 4:36 pm

'...That’s ten points lost in those circumstances now and add those to the two we’ve got and how comfortable would we be looking..'

we'd be 5th on 12 points!

and if we had also beaten Arsenal we would be top of the league! :D

UTC

martin_p
Posts: 10368
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 3:40 pm
Been Liked: 3764 times
Has Liked: 696 times

Re: REPORT: Vardy and VAR deny the Clarets

Post by martin_p » Sun Sep 26, 2021 4:52 pm

I have to say I’m very confused by the VAR interpretation of offside, particularly in relation to the image shown on MOTD last night. I understood the thicker lines used were in order to give the striker the benefit of the doubt. Woods foot is on but not over the thick line level with the Leicester defenders foot so surely he should have the benefit of the doubt (you have to ignore the extra pixels that are clearly not part of Wood’s foot but mysteriously extend it across the line).
44F9CCE4-257A-42C2-823C-98B17EB67B94.jpeg
44F9CCE4-257A-42C2-823C-98B17EB67B94.jpeg (105.81 KiB) Viewed 2575 times

ClaretTony
Posts: 67422
Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2015 3:07 pm
Been Liked: 32237 times
Has Liked: 5253 times
Location: Burnley
Contact:

Re: REPORT: Vardy and VAR deny the Clarets

Post by ClaretTony » Sun Sep 26, 2021 4:59 pm

Hipper wrote:
Sun Sep 26, 2021 3:42 pm
On MotD it gave the impression that as Cornet pulled up with his hamstring injury, the Leicester fans were cheering. I hope that's not how it was.
That’s exactly what happened and I’ve seen photographs showing the abuse he was receiving as he walked round. Used to be a decent visit there but they are so arrogant since winning the league.

Not sure why this thread should have turned into a VAR debate. I was almost in line and didn’t even celebrate. When you see the pictures he’s offside.
This user liked this post: KateR

ClaretTony
Posts: 67422
Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2015 3:07 pm
Been Liked: 32237 times
Has Liked: 5253 times
Location: Burnley
Contact:

Re: REPORT: Vardy and VAR deny the Clarets

Post by ClaretTony » Sun Sep 26, 2021 5:00 pm

claretblue wrote:
Sun Sep 26, 2021 4:36 pm
'...That’s ten points lost in those circumstances now and add those to the two we’ve got and how comfortable would we be looking..'

we'd be 5th on 12 points!

and if we had also beaten Arsenal we would be top of the league! :D

UTC
The point being that dropping so many points from winning positions is of great concern following on from last season.
This user liked this post: KateR

Rileybobs
Posts: 16681
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:37 pm
Been Liked: 6891 times
Has Liked: 1471 times
Location: Leeds

Re: REPORT: Vardy and VAR deny the Clarets

Post by Rileybobs » Sun Sep 26, 2021 5:17 pm

martin_p wrote:
Sun Sep 26, 2021 4:52 pm
I have to say I’m very confused by the VAR interpretation of offside, particularly in relation to the image shown on MOTD last night. I understood the thicker lines used were in order to give the striker the benefit of the doubt. Woods foot is on but not over the thick line level with the Leicester defenders foot so surely he should have the benefit of the doubt (you have to ignore the extra pixels that are clearly not part of Wood’s foot but mysteriously extend it across the line).

44F9CCE4-257A-42C2-823C-98B17EB67B94.jpeg
It seems to me that the screenshot you've posted is MOTD's own graphic rather than the official VAR graphic, which for some reason doesn't seem to have been made available (or I've not seen it at least(.

But the way I understand things the two lines drawn by the VAR are thicker, and an incident will only be offside if the two lines don't overlap, so this wouldn't have anything to do with Wood's foot overlapping the line on your screenshot.

Spijed
Posts: 17112
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2016 12:33 pm
Been Liked: 2892 times
Has Liked: 1294 times

Re: REPORT: Vardy and VAR deny the Clarets

Post by Spijed » Sun Sep 26, 2021 6:22 pm

ClaretTony wrote:
Sun Sep 26, 2021 5:00 pm
The point being that dropping so many points from winning positions is of great concern following on from last season.
And it's a concern that at the moment we seem powerless to stop it.

chekhov
Posts: 2925
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 7:54 am
Been Liked: 804 times
Has Liked: 1513 times
Location: France

Re: REPORT: Vardy and VAR deny the Clarets

Post by chekhov » Sun Sep 26, 2021 6:25 pm

IanMcL wrote:
Sun Sep 26, 2021 4:18 pm
The rules of the Premier League must always be honoured.

If it had been a Leicester goal, then it would be onside, as they are a more favoured team. As it is Burnley - not seen as a revenue generator for the Premier, then VAR must be used to assist the right outcome, which is to favour Leicester.
What a lot of nonsense. It was offside. End of story.
These 2 users liked this post: simonclaret KateR

ClaretTony
Posts: 67422
Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2015 3:07 pm
Been Liked: 32237 times
Has Liked: 5253 times
Location: Burnley
Contact:

Re: REPORT: Vardy and VAR deny the Clarets

Post by ClaretTony » Sun Sep 26, 2021 6:32 pm

IanMcL wrote:
Sun Sep 26, 2021 4:18 pm
The rules of the Premier League must always be honoured.

If it had been a Leicester goal, then it would be onside, as they are a more favoured team. As it is Burnley - not seen as a revenue generator for the Premier, then VAR must be used to assist the right outcome, which is to favour Leicester.
If you honestly believe that rather than look with your eyes then you might as well pack in going.

ottclaret
Posts: 55
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2016 1:16 pm
Been Liked: 19 times
Has Liked: 10 times
Location: OSM, Devon

Re: REPORT: Vardy and VAR deny the Clarets

Post by ottclaret » Sun Sep 26, 2021 6:34 pm

For their second goal, should VAR not check the 'attacking phase of play' for any infringements ?

As this started when JBG was wrestled to the ground, could SD/Mee not ask for VAR to look at it (assuming they didn't)?

ottclaret
Posts: 55
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2016 1:16 pm
Been Liked: 19 times
Has Liked: 10 times
Location: OSM, Devon

Re: REPORT: Vardy and VAR deny the Clarets

Post by ottclaret » Sun Sep 26, 2021 6:45 pm

For their second goal, should VAR not check the 'attacking phase of play' for any infringements ?

As this started when JBG was wrestled to the ground, could SD/Mee not ask for VAR to look at it (assuming they didn't) - or was it reviewed?

Steve-Harpers-perm
Posts: 5744
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 10:52 am
Been Liked: 1868 times
Has Liked: 835 times

Re: REPORT: Vardy and VAR deny the Clarets

Post by Steve-Harpers-perm » Sun Sep 26, 2021 6:53 pm

ClaretTony wrote:
Sun Sep 26, 2021 5:00 pm
The point being that dropping so many points from winning positions is of great concern following on from last season.
Very concerning although we looked a different team with Vydra and Cornet for the first half to suggest we can turn this around. Fingers crossed they both stay fit for the majority of the season.

tiger76
Posts: 25697
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2017 9:43 pm
Been Liked: 4644 times
Has Liked: 9849 times
Location: Glasgow

Re: REPORT: Vardy and VAR deny the Clarets

Post by tiger76 » Sun Sep 26, 2021 7:03 pm

We can bleat all we want about VAR, but if we'd taken our chances, Wood early in the 2nd half especially, then that game would have been done and dusted long before Vardy's late leveller.

And this is the story of our season, playing well for long periods of matches, but not converting those good spells into goals.

Leicester doesn't seem to be the happiest hunting ground for us either, Brady got a bad injury there, and Cornet & Vydra both went off yesterday, hopefully only with minor niggles, as both were superb in the opening 45 minutes, and already there is signs of them forming a good understanding.

Alongside the injury woes, VAR doesn't appear to do us any favours at the KP, Wood denied yesterday, as he was a couple of seasons ago late on for the supposed foul on Evans, and there is certainly grounds to question why Leicester's 2nd was allowed to stand after the apparent foul on JBG.

Surely we'll get a VAR decision going in our favour soon, next week would be the ideal game for that to happen.

Playing well and not winning is a concern, but compared to a year ago our overall performances are miles better, so we just need to keep plugging away, and the results will come.

And despite the disappointment of losing the lead late on, holding Leicester to a draw should give the squad belief that even visiting the better sides in this league we can be competitive, and crucially pick up points.

IanMcL
Posts: 30123
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 5:27 pm
Been Liked: 6340 times
Has Liked: 8651 times

Re: REPORT: Vardy and VAR deny the Clarets

Post by IanMcL » Sun Sep 26, 2021 7:31 pm

ClaretTony wrote:
Sun Sep 26, 2021 6:32 pm
If you honestly believe that rather than look with your eyes then you might as well pack in going.
All that tie end stuff was supposed to have been eliminated and yet we lose a goal through it. A lino could never spot a big toe, so yes I do believe there is one rule for some and another for others.

If you have not seen enough to conclude that there are some very peculiar decisions, then perhaps that same question could be asked of you!

boatshed bill
Posts: 15107
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:47 am
Been Liked: 3137 times
Has Liked: 6682 times

Re: REPORT: Vardy and VAR deny the Clarets

Post by boatshed bill » Sun Sep 26, 2021 7:45 pm

IanMcL wrote:
Sun Sep 26, 2021 7:31 pm
All that tie end stuff was supposed to have been eliminated and yet we lose a goal through it. A lino could never spot a big toe, so yes I do believe there is one rule for some and another for others.

If you have not seen enough to conclude that there are some very peculiar decisions, then perhaps that same question could be asked of you!
There may be odd decisions, but that wasn't one of them.
Clear offside.

IanMcL
Posts: 30123
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 5:27 pm
Been Liked: 6340 times
Has Liked: 8651 times

Re: REPORT: Vardy and VAR deny the Clarets

Post by IanMcL » Sun Sep 26, 2021 7:46 pm

Not according to the foot picture.

boatshed bill
Posts: 15107
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:47 am
Been Liked: 3137 times
Has Liked: 6682 times

Re: REPORT: Vardy and VAR deny the Clarets

Post by boatshed bill » Sun Sep 26, 2021 7:49 pm

IanMcL wrote:
Sun Sep 26, 2021 7:46 pm
Not according to the foot picture.
The highlights are available, check them out.

martin_p
Posts: 10368
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 3:40 pm
Been Liked: 3764 times
Has Liked: 696 times

Re: REPORT: Vardy and VAR deny the Clarets

Post by martin_p » Sun Sep 26, 2021 7:53 pm

Rileybobs wrote:
Sun Sep 26, 2021 5:17 pm
It seems to me that the screenshot you've posted is MOTD's own graphic rather than the official VAR graphic, which for some reason doesn't seem to have been made available (or I've not seen it at least(.

But the way I understand things the two lines drawn by the VAR are thicker, and an incident will only be offside if the two lines don't overlap, so this wouldn't have anything to do with Wood's foot overlapping the line on your screenshot.
But if Wood’s foot overlaps the line then so would another line drawn parallel to the end of his foot.

IanMcL
Posts: 30123
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 5:27 pm
Been Liked: 6340 times
Has Liked: 8651 times

Re: REPORT: Vardy and VAR deny the Clarets

Post by IanMcL » Sun Sep 26, 2021 7:57 pm

If we are messing with a foot end, then something remains wrong with VAR and the Premier League.

Rileybobs
Posts: 16681
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:37 pm
Been Liked: 6891 times
Has Liked: 1471 times
Location: Leeds

Re: REPORT: Vardy and VAR deny the Clarets

Post by Rileybobs » Sun Sep 26, 2021 8:08 pm

martin_p wrote:
Sun Sep 26, 2021 7:53 pm
But if Wood’s foot overlaps the line then so would another line drawn parallel to the end of his foot.
Surely that depends on how fat the other line is?!

warksclaret
Posts: 6594
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2016 7:13 pm
Been Liked: 1676 times
Has Liked: 754 times

Re: REPORT: Vardy and VAR deny the Clarets

Post by warksclaret » Sun Sep 26, 2021 8:09 pm

Ignoring all the intricacies of OFFSIDE and VAR, I thought yesterday we rediscovered the art of defending. Some of the blocks and tackles, particularly Lowton & Tarks were outstanding. Westwood and Brownhill must have covered some ground, and particularly in the first half we gave the Leicester team no time to settle and play. Leicester had more chances to score but they were lucky not to lose 3 points at the end
These 2 users liked this post: Steve-Harpers-perm tiger76

martin_p
Posts: 10368
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 3:40 pm
Been Liked: 3764 times
Has Liked: 696 times

Re: REPORT: Vardy and VAR deny the Clarets

Post by martin_p » Sun Sep 26, 2021 8:16 pm

Rileybobs wrote:
Sun Sep 26, 2021 8:08 pm
Surely that depends on how fat the other line is?!
It can be as thin or as fat as it likes, the end of Wood’s foot is on the line not over it.

Rileybobs
Posts: 16681
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:37 pm
Been Liked: 6891 times
Has Liked: 1471 times
Location: Leeds

Re: REPORT: Vardy and VAR deny the Clarets

Post by Rileybobs » Sun Sep 26, 2021 8:30 pm

martin_p wrote:
Sun Sep 26, 2021 8:16 pm
It can be as thin or as fat as it likes, the end of Wood’s foot is on the line not over it.
I’m not being facetious here, and it does highlight how daft VAR can be, but this also depends on how thick the blue line is. As I believe the one you’ve shown to be MOTD’s graphic - both lines drawn by VAR may be much thinner.

Post Reply