DivAFC

Gooner 🔴⚪ | Victoria Concordia Crescit | Intern Doctor at NRSMCH, Kolkata

[DivAFC @radioact_div]

Arsenal preparing for the initial psg attack fest. A very defensively solid back four to be replaced by fresher legs to take on a tired psg in the second half. Come on you Gunners!! #UCL #ChampionsKiCharcha

[DivAFC @radioact_div]

@ShamanicFallout @GoonerTaIk Man is built like a Toyota.. keeps on running

[DivAFC @radioact_div]

@MarshallKarim0 @centregoals 2-0

[Hazel @YashViratstan]

If u r a diehard cinema lover or sports enthusiast then u have seen his reviews on Youtube Currently he is battling for his life for more information plz refer to the 2nd pic She is working at that hospital

GET WELL SOON RANTMAN❤️🙏

#Kannada #Tamil #Telugu #Malayalam #Bollywood

[DivAFC @radioact_div]

@R24AFC Mind games?

[DivAFC @radioact_div]

@premierleague Starboy 🌟

[DivAFC @radioact_div]

@OneeshghOsh @PLforIndia @Arsenal

[The Swedish Rumble 🔰 @SwedishRumble]

This gives us an insight into what is wrong with VAR and how its a systematical issue rather than incompetent individuals running it that really is creating anger amongst the fans.

In this sequence, VAR concludes that (1) he sees two arms on the back of Gabriel but (2) that it is not sufficiently clear that the push is forceful enough to send Gabriel flying. In other words -- this VAR ref puts the bar high for a foul, its not enough with two arms to the back and a pushing motion, you must be able to tell that it's a forceful push and not a softer push combined with a dive. Lets call the fact that both 1 and 2 are required here as "Option 1".

Meanwhile in for example the Manchester derby, Michael Oliver deems that Hojlund's pull on Rodri is a penalty despite not being called by the on field ref. Can you conclude (1) that his arm is on Rodri's body? Yes. And (2) that Hojlund's is pulling Rodri hard enough to impede his movements? No, not even remotely. Its in addition very clear that Rodri exaggerates and dives when he feels the hand on his body. But Oliver seems to reason that since Hojlund's hand is at a place it shouldn't be -- its on his risk that the player sells it, only "(1)" is required, not "(2)". Right? Lets call this "Option 2". Applied to the Joelinton situation, the effect is 100% that the goal is disallowed, or vice versa if Option 1 is applied on the Manchester derby situation -- the effect is 100% that its not a penalty.

This has -- nothing -- to do whatsoever with the rules being open for interpretation/subjective -- which is an argument often made for why fans shouldn't expect VAR to be consistent.

It is instead an aspect that comes into play -- every single time -- VAR reviews a potential foul for a penalty, disallowed goal and so forth. On one play you give the player committing the foul the benefit of the doubt and on the other play you give the player subject to the foul the benefit of the doubt. Either, there are clear guidelines here -- which means that either Michael Oliver or Andy Madley made a huge blunder or there is -- not -- any clear guideline for how VAR shall act in these situations in which case Howard Webb should face some very very serious questions.

VAR in the PL seems to be designed for preventing refs from being made to look bad rather than for the benefit of the fans and the game. Listen to Howard Webb talk when he was appointed head of PGMOL. Its only about what he would have wanted when he was a ref and so forth -- what the fans want isn't even a consideration. This is why VAR is designed the way it is, the more freedom the ref gets the less risk there is that someone will claim that he committed an mistake. If there is no right or wrong you can't make the wrong call, its as simple as that.

Take a situation where a forward skips past a defender with the ball, and while doing so his foot hits the defenders leg and the forward goes to the ground. Very common situation in football. If a call is not made by the ref on the pitch, most of the time, VAR will require more than a touch + a player going to the ground, i.e. like "Option 1" above, both (1) + (2). Hence, it drives fans mad when all of a sudden VAR jumps in and award a penalty when there obviously is a touch -- but it's far from obvious that the touch was enough to send the player to the ground. Or in other situation does -- not -- award a penalty when there actually both is (1) a touch on the player that (2) clearly send the player to the ground.

Sure, if you sort these things out, everything wouldn't be perfect and everyone wouldn't live happily ever after. But I can guarantee that it would lead to less frustration over the referees in the PL because nothing frustrates a fan more when VAR steps in and kills your team on Saturday and then on Sunday when your rival play -- something completely different applies according to VAR.

[DivAFC @radioact_div]

@premierleague @SpursOfficial Atrocious from the ref

[DivAFC @radioact_div]

@premierleague Don't force a rivalry

[DivAFC @radioact_div]

@PLforIndia @Arsenal PremL propaganda for us

[DivAFC @radioact_div]

@premierleague Arsenal on top!

[DivAFC @radioact_div]

@Arsenal What happened to our corner routines?

[DivAFC @radioact_div]

@NikkiClarkejb @ArsenalAnoop Such a shit goal to concede

[DivAFC @radioact_div]

@NikkiClarkejb @ArsenalAnoop Not anymore

[DivAFC @radioact_div]

@FCB_ACEE @TrollFootball Yeah Arsenal wanted to go down to 10 men 🤡

[DivAFC @radioact_div]

Tomiyasu's first yellow wasn't even a yellow

[DivAFC @radioact_div]

@Arsenal Not a red

[DivAFC @radioact_div]

@ST_YZED @EduardoHagn £105m for a winner*

[DivAFC @radioact_div]

@adidasfootball @_DeclanRice @Arsenal @SaveVideoBot