2018 FIFA World Cup Final: France v Croatia, 15th July, 4pm(GMT)

Railway Blue

Well-Known Member
Messages
1,675
Likes
174
Location
Newton
Supports
Chester FC
#92
so why didn't the ref give it in the first instance ? as I said peviously....

'Var couldn't decide and sent it back to the ref to make a second decision. What is the point of VAR if it doesn't make the decision ? '
VAR means that players don't get away with something the referee has missed (on this occasion anyway). Not perfect (yet).
 

Bilo

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,936
Likes
907
Supports
COPE - Citizens for Objective Public Education
#95
Congrats to our friendly neighbours from France.

And now I am happy that this shite tournament is over /s
No offense but it's been a fantastic tournament :lol:
 

Fompous Part

Erstwhile Scumbag
Messages
88
Likes
64
Location
Britain
Supports
Fulchester
#97
Further proof, if it were needed, that referees can make incompetent decisions and ruin a game even when they have the luxury of stopping the game for 3-4 minutes and watching an incident 27 times in slow motion. Criminal to give a penalty for that. Poor Croatia.
 

Leo

To be a rock and not to roll.
Site Supporter
Messages
3,541
Likes
1,237
Location
Stairway To Heaven
Supports
a wife and now 2 cats
#99
VAR means that players don't get away with something the referee has missed (on this occasion anyway). Not perfect (yet).
So there are three opportunities for a decision to be made ? Ref....VAR....then back to the Ref ? Again....what the fuck is VAR there for if it is referring incidents back to the ref that the ref has already declined? VAR has the facility to view/review incidents so if it cannot decide why not simply go by the ref's initial decision ? And if that is the case what the fuck is it there for ?
 

Renegade

Show me what you got.
Messages
1,916
Likes
1,122
Location
Belfast
Supports
Trad Bricks
So there are three opportunities for a decision to be made ? Ref....VAR....then back to the Ref ? Again....what the fuck is VAR there for if it is referring incidents back to the ref that the ref has already declined? VAR has the facility to view/review incidents so if it cannot decide why not simply go by the ref's initial decision ? And if that is the case what the fuck is it there for ?
The referee has the final decision, no matter what the VAR officials tell him. He has to review it and ultimately make a decision himself. VAR gives the referee the option to look at the incident again in slow motion from a different angle.

It gives the referee another team's perspective and another chance to look at it. Pretty obvious what the benefits are.
 

Leo

To be a rock and not to roll.
Site Supporter
Messages
3,541
Likes
1,237
Location
Stairway To Heaven
Supports
a wife and now 2 cats
That is the point, isn't it? They flag it for the referee to go and double check?
No it isn't.....Ref gives a decision and (if there is any controversy) the....VIDEO ASSISTANT REF is there to decide (as far as I am aware and I presume that is very obvious) whether the ref's decision is correct or not & for VAR to make a decision. Passing the decision back to the ref for a 3rd bite at the cherry is outrageous in the extreme imo!
 

Leo

To be a rock and not to roll.
Site Supporter
Messages
3,541
Likes
1,237
Location
Stairway To Heaven
Supports
a wife and now 2 cats
The referee has the final decision, no matter what the VAR officials tell him. He has to review it and ultimately make a decision himself. VAR gives the referee the option to look at the incident again in slow motion from a different angle.
No he doesn't....how often have you seen VAR decisions given without the ref running to the sidelines?
 

Renegade

Show me what you got.
Messages
1,916
Likes
1,122
Location
Belfast
Supports
Trad Bricks
No he doesn't....how often have you seen VAR decisions given without the ref running to the sidelines?
What are you talking about? The VAR team will tell the referee that he should have another look at an incident (implying a mistake has been made or that something is worth having a second look at), then it is up to him to decide whether or not a different decision should be made after he looks at the incident again. The on field referee has the final decision.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/42635899
 
Last edited:

Super_horns

Well-Known Member
Moderator
Messages
5,930
Likes
458
Supports
WATFORD
No it isn't.....Ref gives a decision and (if there is any controversy) the....VIDEO ASSISTANT REF is there to decide (as far as I am aware and I presume that is very obvious) whether the ref's decision is correct or not & for VAR to make a decision. o!
VAR doesn't rule for the on pitch match official - can just advise which I guess is another debate as what one ref will think is a foul/handball might be viewed differently by another.
 

Leo

To be a rock and not to roll.
Site Supporter
Messages
3,541
Likes
1,237
Location
Stairway To Heaven
Supports
a wife and now 2 cats
What are you talking about? The VAR team will tell the referee that he should have another look at an incident (implying a mistake has been made or that something is worth having a second look at), then it is up to him to decide whether or not a different decision should be made after he looks at the incident again. The on field referee has the final decision.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/42635899
Apologies...I was certain that VAR had the power to overrule the refs. I'm still sure (?) that decisions have been made by VAR without the ref reviewing on the sidelines. However I will say....what is the point of VAR if 'IT' cannot make a decision based upon the numerous replays it has access to without sending the ref to review his original decision ?

VAR doesn't rule for the on pitch match official - can just advise which I guess is another debate as what one ref will think is a foul/handball might be viewed differently by another.
Exactly.
 

Super_horns

Well-Known Member
Moderator
Messages
5,930
Likes
458
Supports
WATFORD
I think its really only supposed to be used if the ref has made a total mess of something or maybe missed an incident but it has been used quite a bit for as 50/50 decisions where had the ref kept with his original decision no-one would have complained.
 

Renegade

Show me what you got.
Messages
1,916
Likes
1,122
Location
Belfast
Supports
Trad Bricks
Apologies...I was certain that VAR had the power to overrule the refs. I'm still sure (?) that decisions have been made by VAR without the ref reviewing on the sidelines. However I will say....what is the point of VAR if 'IT' cannot make a decision based upon the numerous replays it has access to without sending the ref to review his original decision ?
I haven't seen any decisions made by VAR without the referee reviewing the footage again and making the final decision. VAR has its place when the referee makes an obvious mistake, but yes, unless the VAR team believes the referee made an obvious error, the incident probably shouldn't be reviewed again.

However, it definitely has its uses and the vast majority of decisions impacted by VAR at this World Cup were correct. It has improved the percentage of correct calls in football, despite being an imperfect system that still has some tweaks to iron out. It's unfortunate that it got the call wrong in the biggest match of them all, but statistically it's improving the accuracy of decision making. Just because it's fallible doesn't mean it should be discarded, the previous system is even more imperfect. More correct calls should equate to fairer results.
 
Last edited:

dedwardp

Well-Known Member
Messages
1,285
Likes
334
Supports
Colchester United
Definitely hasn't been any decisions made without the referee consulting the monitors on the side of the pitch.

However I will say....what is the point of VAR if 'IT' cannot make a decision based upon the numerous replays it has access to without sending the ref to review his original decision ?
You are right on that one, at least - all the time spent faffing around with the referee running over to view videos should be cut out and the guy in the video room should be able to just tell him what the correct decision is. The Portugal v Iran game was an absolute farce and it wouldn't have been if this was the case.
 

SALTIRE

Slàinte mhath!
Staff member
Moderator
Messages
13,973
Likes
2,965
Location
Speyside
Supports
A guid dram
It wasn't a 'ridiculous decision' coming from smug Shearer; there was room for debate on it, and the ref called it. No biggie for me.

Well done to France though, despite the useless keeper Hugo Lloris, doing his best to fuck it up for you. Delighted for Mbappe, seems a great lad. Only seems like yesterday for France's first World Cup in '98 (alas, the last time Scotland actually qualified!). Congratulations on your second trophy. Best team in the tournament without a doubt.
 
Messages
53
Likes
8
Location
Wallsend
Supports
Newcastle
You have to feel for Croatia, they’ve played out of their skins but in the end France have been the best team in this World Cup all things considered.

Feel for Lovren losing two finals in the span of two months.
Croatia have been the better team throughout.
But they can't beat France AND the crap ref
 
Messages
53
Likes
8
Location
Wallsend
Supports
Newcastle
It wasn't a 'ridiculous decision' coming from smug Shearer; there was room for debate on it, and the ref called it. No biggie for me.

Well done to France though, despite the useless keeper Hugo Lloris, doing his best to fuck it up for you. Delighted for Mbappe, seems a great lad. Only seems like yesterday for France's first World Cup in '98 (alas, the last time Scotland actually qualified!). Congratulations on your second trophy. Best team in the tournament without a doubt.
Shearer was absolutely correct
It WAS a "ridiculous decision" as it doesn't even go by the games laws
It was NOT "deliberate"
 

Renegade

Show me what you got.
Messages
1,916
Likes
1,122
Location
Belfast
Supports
Trad Bricks
Let's be honest, how often are handballs "deliberate"? Yet they are given up and down the country every week during the season despite clearly not being deliberate. That the rule can be open to such interpretation is pretty ridiculous. The hand being in an unnatural position is not in the rulebook, yet it is often factored into the decision.

I have seen many penalties given for handballs like today's, which suggests referees don't seem to agree on what constitutes a deliberate handball. Might explain why the VAR team or the referee today thought that was a foul.
 

valefan16

Well-Known Member
Messages
4,560
Likes
425
Supports
Port Vale
Felt for Croatia as they were superb today and just came up against France being clinical and some questionable officiating.

In terms of VAR it is meant to be a clear and obvious error... the referee reviewed it multiple times before deciding which suggests it wasn't clear and obvious.. simple as that.

The Free kick was a dive too so France got the luck but punished Croatia for the short period they went to sleep in the second half to kill the game off.

Perisic is a class player.

Mbappe is unreal... hes 19 now but anyone who watched the Champions League ties the season before last with Man City and Monaco will know just how good he was then at 17! This young lad could be the greatest in the world in the years to come.

Fair play to France, they've been fairly average in most games but got the job done tactically and efficiently. They could be a force for the next few tournaments like Spain were a decade ago.
 

JJ1532

Well-Known Member
Moderator
Messages
2,362
Likes
643
Location
Crewe
Supports
Crewe Alex
Thread starter #116
I doubt anyone will be missing one. They'll have made more than enough to have spares. They give them out to players, management, support staff etc. Question is, who is she and why does she A. want one for herself or B. want one for Putin. Why would he want one, such an odd trinket to desire.
 

Renegade

Show me what you got.
Messages
1,916
Likes
1,122
Location
Belfast
Supports
Trad Bricks

Gassy

Well-Known Member
Messages
1,307
Likes
477
Location
Bratislava, Slovakia
Supports
Bristol Rovers
Absolutely gutted. Organised with the gf (Croatian) to watch the game with about 10 other Croats. I think the problem is, we didn't really expect Croatia to play so well, which makes it all that much harder to take. So close, yet so far away.

Again refereeing decisions come into it. For me, its a penalty - but just. The Croatian group was very 50/50 over it - one did say though that if the referee is taking that long to look at it, surely it cannot be a penalty? Surely you have to be 100% sure? Which is a decent point.

My bigger problem is the freekick for the own goal. Griezman was already falling on the floor before anyone came near him.

I'd love to see what some posters (St Juste) have to say about Croatia now. After saying they're a poor team (because they lost to Scotland in 2013 :lol: ). Croatia were excellent yesterday and will go home with their heads held very high.

Oh also St Juste, you're right - as you said, Modric is really hated in Croatia :lol: He's being celebrated as their national hero you mug :lol:

1531724525842.png
 
Last edited:

Forum statistics

Threads
13,222
Messages
779,298
Members
4,412
Latest member
Chronic