The Wwc, Scotland, and Var

[WoodStein]

In the opening game against England, the girls have an incredibly soft penalty awarded against them, about 3 minutes after "it" happened, because the 'new rule' apparently determines that any form of handball in the box, including accidental, is now a pen.

In today's game, a Japanese defender puts her arm between Cuthbert & the ball, and plays the ball away from goal....the ref is looking right at the incident & shows no reaction.....halfway up the pitch, the ref signals that a VAR review is taking place....and nothing happens. 

Really obvious in the highlights....  https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/48569698

Other than making life hard for themselves with a few insanely suicidal decisions (eg, CH turning her back on a soft head-height shot from edge of the box, and the other CH putting her hand on the shoulder of a striker who is then 'sniper-shot' to win a pen), it's hard to see VAR as a model of 'consistency', and to not think there's a very clear officiating bias in this tournament towards the 'big' countries. 

To her credit, Kerr refused to blame soft decisions in the first game, but I can't imagine she's going to be too happy about that denied penalty claim today.

Another good second half performance, dominating possession (& a terrific strike from Clelland for her goal, and couple of great saves from Alexander .....but they need to start this before they're 2-0 down. Certainly an element of deja vu in this, considering our mens teams earlier WC finals (for those of us old enough to remember those). 

[WeighorstsWang]

Said it before, I'll say it again. It's a massive waste of time and money. 

Edited 15 June 2019 by WeighorstsWang

[WoodStein]

1 hour ago, WeighorstsWang said:

Said it before, I'll say it again. It's a massive waste of time and money. 

Certainly been more than enough inconsistent consequences already, to support that, WW.

[barkblue]

At the risk of being rude, I wish they'd just leave the game the f**k alone. 

[WoodStein]

1 hour ago, barkblue said:

At the risk of being rude, I wish they'd just leave the game the f**k alone. 

It was interesting to read the interview with Kenny Clark (retired ref), who thinks the change in the handball law/guideline will cause a lot of controversy....the change that resulted in the penalty for England v Scotland, which no English player claimed...the ref had to stop the game 2 minutes later, to get the VAR decision, check it & then explain to both sets of players why she was giving a penalty.

"It's all very subjective and that's going to be the difficulty of it. A lot of it will come down to the interpretation of the match officials [& VAR officials if used] so it's going to be controversial."

As a few (non-Scots) pundits pointed out, when a full-back tries to cut out a cross by putting their leg out, their arms have to provide their balance, which was exactly what happened in that match. To avoid that, defenders are going to need to be coached in the Python team's 'Ministry of Funny Walks'.

So, they introduce a video review system to help refs decide on hard-to-see incidents....and the following year, they make the most subjective of those incidents (accidental/close-up handball) even more subjective. Great idea. Next step, stop the clock when the ball's out of play, let managers call timeouts....then they might as well change the shape of the ball.

[barkblue]

9 minutes ago, WoodStein said:

It was interesting to read the interview with Kenny Clark (retired ref), who thinks the change in the handball law/guideline will cause a lot of controversy....the change that resulted in the penalty for England v Scotland, which no English player claimed...the ref had to stop the game 2 minutes later, to get the VAR decision, check it & then explain to both sets of players why she was giving a penalty.

"It's all very subjective and that's going to be the difficulty of it. A lot of it will come down to the interpretation of the match officials [& VAR officials if used] so it's going to be controversial."

As a few (non-Scots) pundits pointed out, when a full-back tries to cut out a cross by putting their leg out, their arms have to provide their balance, which was exactly what happened in that match. To avoid that, defenders are going to need to be coached in the Python team's 'Ministry of Funny Walks'.

So, they introduce a video review system to help refs decide on hard-to-see incidents....and the following year, they make the most subjective of those incidents (accidental/close-up handball) even more subjective. Great idea. Next step, stop the clock when the ball's out of play, let managers call timeouts....then they might as well change the shape of the ball.

This is certainly how I feel towards it all.

I know that nearly all high profile games are televised live now and all the major tournaments are. However, we've basically decided to make the game a TV experience over everything else.

Do we want all of the decisions to be correct? I'd say that yes, of course we do. But if we get to a stage where we have stoppages and decisions made that you end up, in the ground, having zero idea why it's happening, then what's the point of going to the game in the first place? Then add in laws being laid down that go against everything natural about actually playing the damn thing, then what's left? 

[Gedee]

On 15/06/2019 at 17:42, WeighorstsWang said:

Said it before, I'll say it again. It's a massive waste of time and money. 

After watching only the two Scottish Games on TV, I've managed to turn a full circle on this Wood .... I was all in favour of VAR before.

It's early days yet & it may improve (it certainly cannae get much worse) But on the basis of what I've seen (dithering) It's NO now for me

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/48568921

(Link above is to Erin Crawford's New Column for BBC .... No mind-blowing stuff (mair a gentle blether, which suits my unsophisticated mind)

I notice, she mentioned the word "gallus" in the article. If anyone watched the game onTV, one of the commentators, described Erin, as a "gallus

player" ... His (English) associate said... "Yes she certainly is" The scottish guy said.... "Dae ye ken whit eh mean?" The english guy said... "No, not

really, but I lke the sound of it"... "Anyway what does it mean" Scots guy responded by saying...  "I'm no sure?"  (The subtitles on the TV, which I've

on nearly all the time (deefish) went all over the place during this exchange And  (aboot 3 minutes efter) decided the word was... "GALLANT"

NO A DIG AT THE ENGLISH. I GUESS EH JIST FIND SOME LOCAL WORDS/PHRASES FUNNY)....All together noo 3 cheers for the wifies

[dblair]

On 15/06/2019 at 17:42, WeighorstsWang said:

Said it before, I'll say it again. It's a massive waste of time and money. 

VAR? Or wummins fitba?

[BCram]

VAR Rules! goalie off the line and France get a second chance to score at a penalty. Let's just hope that ALL goalies are given the same treatment. Who is in charge of the VAR? Is it a member of the team of ref and assistants, 4th official and a VAR official? Seems to me that there's a lot more to running VAR in football and the laws of the game will need to be changed. Scottish penalty decisions seemed inconsistent. Still the same old problem the big teams get the decisions and the wee teams suffer.

[Double Blue]

VAR against Scotland again twice tonight BUT 3-0 up we should never have got into that position tonight.

[WeighorstsWang]

On 18/06/2019 at 14:23, BCram said:

VAR Rules! goalie off the line and France get a second chance to score at a penalty. Let's just hope that ALL goalies are given the same treatment. 

Certainly worked tonight against Scotland. 

Stonewall penalty missed, then 2 minutes later we go to a screen to take a further 2 minutes to decide to actually give the stonewall penalty as had to decide if someone is offside about 4 touches before the tackle. 

So may I just repeat :

On 15/06/2019 at 17:42, WeighorstsWang said:

Said it before, I'll say it again. It's a massive waste of time and money. 

 

[Cobra]

3-0 up with 15 minutes to play and then level in the fourth minute of stoppage time. That was a first-rate bottle job the men would be proud of.