17/18 Other A-League Games

[Wombat]

If you think that is a punch you didnt grow up in inner city England/Ireland or inner city Sydney or your Dad was the local Vicar! The point is the VAR was a joke yet again and got involved when they shouldn;t have and again it looks like a Bias towards Sydney as usual.

 

[Pirate Pete]

Pirate Pete - again - I didn't see it as a punch in real time and it is unclear on the replays I saw. Did you see a punch in real time or in non slow motion replays?

My point was about the VAR - not whether Roy punched him or not.

I've just had another look at the video I posted.
You can't see the punch as the players are too far away. In the replays it's obvious.
The ref and AR are nearer.

You did say in your first post......I'm still not sure that Roy hit him or even meant to him
but now you're saying your post was about the VAR.
I've no problem with the VAR looking at it in slow motion and seeing a punch.

 

[Pirate Pete]

If you think that is a punch you didnt grow up in Luton or your Dad was the local Vicar! The point is the VAR was a joke yet again and got involved when they shouldn;t have and again it looks like a Bias towards Sydney as usual.

No I didn't grow up in Luton. Been there though. Crap away end and a few scraps back in the 80's.
That's what the VAR is for, as we've seen at the Mariners this year.

 

[Wombat]

No I didn't grow up in Luton. Been there though. Crap away end and a few scraps back in the 80's.
That's what the VAR is for, as we've seen at the Mariners this year.

Crap ground all round Pete and a beautiful area around the ground as well.....lol.
Who did you support?

Why dont they just call it the Sydney VAR?

 

[Wombat]

This is the posh entrance for the boxes LOL.

 

[Pirate Pete]

Luton Town away end for those not familiar.

I support Bristol Rovers, Wombat.
Still a shareholder.

 

[Wombat]

Locals were always very willing.
I so nearly copped a brick in the head when Man U played there as the Northern Monkeys were bricking all the local windows as everyone was Pakistani so apparently didnt deserve glass. I wasn't pleased but too young to do much about it.

 

[pjennings]

I've just had another look at the video I posted.
You can't see the punch as the players are too far away. In the replays it's obvious.
The ref and AR are nearer.

You did say in your first post......I'm still not sure that Roy hit him or even meant to him
but now you're saying your post was about the VAR. Maybe I wasn't clear but the intro said I'm not going to get into the argument about Roy and the whole of the second paragraph was about the VAR.

I've no problem with the VAR looking at it in slow motion and seeing a punch.

That's what the MRP should be for. If you need slow motion replays it is not a clear and obvious error.

 

[Wombat]

Rovers were no choir boys at all....no wonder you had a few scraps there. I was born in Eastville...which resembles Luton!!!

 

[Pirate Pete]

That's what the MRP should be for. If you need slow motion replays it is not a clear and obvious error.

He'd been booked therefore it was dealt with on the pitch.
This is where the MRP is lacking. It should be able to look at things even if they were dealt with on the pitch.

 

[MagpieMariner]

MRP can look at this though, I think, as it's a straight red.

 

[Scotty]

Reddy got sent off for Perth. He'll be missing for next week.

 

[Wombat]

Luton Town away end for those not familiar.

I support Bristol Rovers, Wombat.
Still a shareholder.

And that is why watching the Mariners at CCS with a beer enjoying the backdrop of the palm trees and Brisbane Water TRULY is one of the best things in my life.
It is a joy and not to be taken lightly and not to be sullied by MC.

 

[Capn Gus Bloodbeard]

I'm not going to get into the argument about Roy. However, my first thought was obstruction from Bujis. After video replays I'm still not sure that Roy hit him or even meant to him. The replays I saw seemed to indicate that he was trying to step inside Bujis and his arm went around him. I saw no clear punch or attempted punch though given his lengthy experience I'm sure that a sneaky one was a possibility.

If we are going to use VAR then it needs to be used by viewing all angles once only at normal speed. No repeated replays, no slow motion, no frame-by-frame. If these techniques are the ones used to make a decision then it is not a 'clear and obvious error'. For me that was not a red card in that even after the replays I saw I'm not sure of the offence.

For one, if you try to throw your arm around somebody and somehow manage to hit them in the face that's still a valid case for a red card!
You can even see his fist is clenched. If he was trying to grab him the hand would be open. There's also the fact that you don't swing the arm horizontally at face height to grab somebody - it's either horizontally at torso height, or coming down over the shoulder. There's no way on earth that this wasn't a punch - and it's a positive thing for the game that we're now setting the bar quite low on when a punch warrants a red card. Anybody who thinks 'yeah, it's a punch, but not much of one, it's all good' should be watching a different sport (not you, you just don't think it was at all. Which I find more confusing )

As for obstruction from Bujis - my view on that is that Roy wasn't actually obstructed. Bujis meant to, yes - but Roy got in first and punched him before his run was actually affected. And attempted or intended obstruction isn't a foul.
Worst case, both happened at the same time - in which case it's still a red card and a FK to SFC (more serious foul). That could well justify a card for Bujis - but a card's justified by his disgraceful acting anyway. Although that could provide a good excuse for the ref to card him...

As for your point about the VAR, that doesn't make sense to me. We only use something like 4 cameras at a game, and none of them are even high speed cameras. That can create problems with viewing things - as we can see here when the arm is a bit blurry due to the technical limitations of our cameras.

I think you're misinterpreting the idea of 'clear and obvious error'
IMO it doesn't mean it's an error that's easy to spot on video – but that once you've seen it on video replay, you couldn't really make a reasonable argument in favour of the ref's original decision.

Look at offside as an example of the misunderstanding. We've seen VAR overrule offside when there's been a matter of inches in it....but in those instances it's quite clear what the right decision is, and people are saying 'but it's not obvious if it's that tight'. Or trying to argue that 'obvious' means you expect the AR to have gotten it right in the first instance, when if it's that tight you wouldn't expect that, which I think is a complete misunderstanding.

Perhaps it needs to stick with 'clear error'.

Also, your approach could be inviting wrong decisions as well - sometimes something looks like a foul at full speed, but when you slow it right down you see that the studs weren't near the leg, or the ball hit the chest and not the arm, or that sort of thing. Watching it multiple times at different speeds can sometimes exonerate a player, especially as things can look completely different at different angles.

 

[Tevor]

Reddy got sent off for Perth. He'll be missing for next week.

I would prefer he was playing as some other keeper will now come in and have a blinder, seems to always happen against us and when we want a player to do the same back to their previous team etc they play crap. Hoole for example, no MOM against the Jets in the second game we played them given his suspension for round 1.

 

[Wombat]

For one, if you try to throw your arm around somebody and somehow manage to hit them in the face that's still a valid case for a red card!
You can even see his fist is clenched. If he was trying to grab him the hand would be open. There's also the fact that you don't swing the arm horizontally at face height to grab somebody - it's either horizontally at torso height, or coming down over the shoulder. There's no way on earth that this wasn't a punch - and it's a positive thing for the game that we're now setting the bar quite low on when a punch warrants a red card. Anybody who thinks 'yeah, it's a punch, but not much of one, it's all good' should be watching a different sport (not you, you just don't think it was at all. Which I find more confusing )

As for obstruction from Bujis - my view on that is that Roy wasn't actually obstructed. Bujis meant to, yes - but Roy got in first and punched him before his run was actually affected. And attempted or intended obstruction isn't a foul.
Worst case, both happened at the same time - in which case it's still a red card and a FK to SFC (more serious foul). That could well justify a card for Bujis - but a card's justified by his disgraceful acting anyway. Although that could provide a good excuse for the ref to card him...

As for your point about the VAR, that doesn't make sense to me. We only use something like 4 cameras at a game, and none of them are even high speed cameras. That can create problems with viewing things - as we can see here when the arm is a bit blurry due to the technical limitations of our cameras.

I think you're misinterpreting the idea of 'clear and obvious error'
IMO it doesn't mean it's an error that's easy to spot on video – but that once you've seen it on video replay, you couldn't really make a reasonable argument in favour of the ref's original decision.

Look at offside as an example of the misunderstanding. We've seen VAR overrule offside when there's been a matter of inches in it....but in those instances it's quite clear what the right decision is, and people are saying 'but it's not obvious if it's that tight'. Or trying to argue that 'obvious' means you expect the AR to have gotten it right in the first instance, when if it's that tight you wouldn't expect that, which I think is a complete misunderstanding.

Perhaps it needs to stick with 'clear error'.

Also, your approach could be inviting wrong decisions as well - sometimes something looks like a foul at full speed, but when you slow it right down you see that the studs weren't near the leg, or the ball hit the chest and not the arm, or that sort of thing. Watching it multiple times at different speeds can sometimes exonerate a player, especially as things can look completely different at different angles.

I had a look at the Sydney Forum and most thought it wasn't a Red card and were embarrased by Bujis, they did however think the penalty was a get square by the ref for the soft Red card.

 

[MagpieMariner]

Thanks to Western Sydney Wankers for keeping us safe from the spoon for another week.

 

[sydmariner]

Apperently david carney has left the sfc game and gone home

 

[sydmariner]

Fab on four sfc

 

[Capn Gus Bloodbeard]

Apperently david carney has left the sfc game and gone home

VAR made a decision against SFC.

Up is down. black is white. That actually gives me more hope for tomorrow's game than anything else does

EDIT: Actually, Brosque spat at the referee and stayed on. I guess FFAFC isn't disputed after all.

Looks like we're still getting done 5-zip tomorrow.