Dogawful Officiating

[Bimpy474]

Deliberate and accidental, intentional need to be removed from the laws imo. They should be replaced with gaining an advantage or preventing an opportunity, something along those lines. That'll open more cans of worms, but still Refs call basically, as it is now really. Obviously factoring, deflections, arm close to the body, no chance of getting out of the way, etc. 

 

Some examples, Tino against PSG, the deflected ball should have been no penalty. And Big Joe against Tottenham for the hand being by his side, the caveat being we gained an advantage from it, that'll open more cans of worms.

 

Whatever happens, in whatever guise, it'll never satisfy everyone, that's the nature of a handball offence. It can be a different call to different watchers, and refs. Hence whatever law and wording is used, more cans of worms will be opened.

 

 

Edited February 24 by Bimpy474

[AyeDubbleYoo]

I just can’t see how it can ever be fair if it’s based on good or bad luck. Intention has to be the key factor. 

[Bimpy474]

3 minutes ago, AyeDubbleYoo said:

I just can’t see how it can ever be fair if it’s based on good or bad luck. Intention has to be the key factor. 

 

That's the thing mate though mate, most aren't intentional, speaking about the ones that are generally outside the box.  It kind of makes intentional void, if you give a free kick to a ball blootered from close range at a player, normally ones not given in the box.

 

As i said though, whatever wording you use opens up another conversation, others won't be happy with. It'll just never make everyone happy, never will imo, we just have to get the best worst option, if you know what I mean.

[Erikse]

I remember when Serie A tried giving penalty as long as the ball hit the arm, no matter how it happened. Attackers started practicing how to make the ball connect with the opponents arm, and it happened all the time. Amount of penalties given went from 122 in 18/19 to 187 in 19/20, crushing the former record. They always find ways of abusing the rules as much as they can, and all rules has to be made in a way that will protect against being abused in such ways.

 

 

Edited February 24 by Erikse

[Pilko]

Just bumping this as I'm sure we'll need it in about an hour's time.

[Cf]

I don't get the controversy of the handball penalty. 

 

Did he blatantly stick his hand out and swipe at the ball "deliberately"? No. 

 

Did he do an unnecessary pirouette in the air which put his arm in the way of where a ball from distance was travelling? Absolutely. 

 

Handball is rarely "deliberate". The same way most fouls aren't "deliberate" but that doesn't make them not fouls. Your aren't allowed to handle the ball in football. As a player that means you have a certain responsibility to make sure you don't. If you want to start spinning in the air with your arms out and the ball hits them then that's on you. 

[joeyt]

Keepers next year only get 8 seconds to release the ball otherwise the ref gives the opposition a corner

[Stifler]

It’s actually a 2 second increase in time from the current rules. If they enforced the current rules, then they would have avoided all of this.

[Ronson333]

9 minutes for an offside on the Bournemouth/wolves game 

[Lush Vlad]

5 minutes ago, Ronson333 said:

9 minutes for an offside on the Bournemouth/wolves game 

I read semi-automated wasn’t working. So they had to go back to drawing the lines  

 

Farcical. 

[80]

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2025/feb/28/grassroots-clubs-hold-key-as-norway-prepares-for-historic-vote-to-scrap-var

 

What is it about VAR that makes authorities so determined to force it on the game?

[huss9]

3 hours ago, Ronson333 said:

9 minutes for an offside on the Bournemouth/wolves game 

shaould be a rule that if you cant make a decision within 30 seconds it should go with the onfield decision as its not clear and obvious.

[Groundhog63]

1 minute ago, huss9 said:

shaould be a rule that if you cant make a decision within 30 seconds it should go with the onfield decision as its not clear and obvious.

8 seconds then, if they can't decide, both teams get a corner 😜

[Kaizero]

3 hours ago, 80 said:

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2025/feb/28/grassroots-clubs-hold-key-as-norway-prepares-for-historic-vote-to-scrap-var

 

What is it about VAR that makes authorities so determined to force it on the game?

 

VAR to remain won the vote by over two thirds of the vote. We've had some very loud idiots people make noise about VAR "ruining" the experience as a fan watching matches, where (as is most often the case) the majority of people who's not against something have kept silent because they don't have anything to shout about.

 

In the end, the idiots people against VAR managed to shout loudly enough to get this vote to happen. There, as was always the case, their uninformed and unreasoned arguments against VAR got voted down by the majority, because the majority of Norwegians (for now, at least) aren't idiots people with shit views.

 

VAR makes the game fairer than without VAR, as an Englishman, there should be a natural instinct within your very being that triggers an intense support of VAR whenever you're shown the below image:

 

 

The main argument of the idiots people that oppose VAR is that it, somehow, removes the joy of "immediate celebration" after a goal. VAR has been a thing for years now, people haven't stopped celebrating goals the second the ball looks like it's crossed the line. On average, a VAR check doesn't take much longer than 20 seconds when compared to ref-team discussions regarding potentially disallowing a goal or overturning a yellow/red card, or any other on-field decisions by the main referee that upon closer inspection should've/could've been overturned. Not to mention the fact the argument falls apart already at the first hurdle given the fact offside flags exist, and that they've had a tendency to be lifted after the ball has entered the goal.

 

The opposition to VAR only exist because idiots people in general vehemently oppose "change" as a concept, even when it's objectively improving what it's changed. The very same idiots people are the kind of idiots people that will complain if anything they're familiar with changes.

[joeyt]

1 minute ago, Kaizero said:

 

 VAR has been a thing for years now, people haven't stopped celebrating goals the second the ball looks like it's crossed the line.

 

This absolutely isn't true

[Kaizero]

Just now, joeyt said:

This absolutely isn't true

 

There's been untold amounts of polling done among matchgoing fans in multiple nations that say it is, though. That it may not be the case for a select few individuals may very well be the case, but it's not the case for the majority. 

 

[El Prontonise]

VAR is absolutely shite, the sooner it's gone the better.

[joeyt]

Just now, Kaizero said:

 

There's been untold amounts of polling done among matchgoing fans in multiple nations that say it is, though. That it may not be the case for a select few individuals may very well be the case, but it's not the case for the majority. 

 

 

Got a link to the polls?

[El Prontonise]

Just now, Kaizero said:

 

There's been untold amounts of polling done among matchgoing fans in multiple nations that say it is, though. That it may not be the case for a select few individuals may very well be the case, but it's not the case for the majority. 

 

 

Where is this polling?

[Kaizero]

19 minutes ago, joeyt said:

Got a link to the polls?

 

19 minutes ago, El Prontonise said:

Where is this polling?

 

Read your FA's annual VAR report, as well as other nations annual VAR reports. I'm not going to spend time looking up each individual reference to this. 

 

I'm, instead, going to explain by use of example how anyone "no longer celebrating goals like they used to" needs to check themselves before they wreck theirselves:

 

• 1246 goals were scored across 380 Premier League games in the 2023/24 season
• 50 goals were overturned by VAR

This means that there was a 96.14% probability that a goal scored, is a goal scored, and that on average you'd have to celebrate 25 goals before experiencing celebrating "in vain" due to VAR interference. 

 

• 82 goals were scored across 38 Premier League games by NUFC in the 2023/24 season
• 2 goals were overturned by VAR

This means that there was a 97.61% probability that a goal scored, is a goal scored, and that on average you'd have to celebrate 42 goals before experiencing celebrating "in vain" due to VAR interference. 

 

Opposing VAR and saying it "ruins" the experience for fans celebrating goals has always been, and will always be, completely idiotic and without reason or logic. When the ball crosses the goalline, you can assume it's a goal and celebrate like it's a goal – until  a time when you're being told it wasn't, just as was the case when "goals" were overturned using the eyes of a linesman placed, at best, 28.5 metres away from the goal line – or the eyes of a referee trying to see it happen in action (including any infractions committed by players) – without the use of precise video technology.

 

If anything, from a statistical standpoint, withholding goal celebrations made more sense before VAR was ever introduced.

 

 

 

Edited Saturday at 20:18 by Kaizero

[joeyt]

of course the FA are going to say it isn't ruining goal celebrations (if that's what they've said that is).

 

You said there's a huge amount of evidence saying it hasn't ruined football celebrations but haven't provided even one but had time to do all that maths. I bet if you asked the majority of people on here they'd say VAR has impacted their celebrations negatively

 

[Kaizero]

15 minutes ago, joeyt said:

of course the FA are going to say it isn't ruining goal celebrations (if that's what they've said that is).

 

You said there's a huge amount of evidence saying it hasn't ruined football celebrations but haven't provided even one but had time to do all that maths. I bet if you asked the majority of people on here they'd say VAR has impacted their celebrations negatively

 

 

And I showed empirical statistical evidence why those people are certified idiots that doesn't understand that whatever is impacting their celebrations negatively is 100% their own fault, as there is no basis for it other than their own opinions.

 

And yes, looking up the VAR stats on ESPN for the 23/24 season one the one dedicated page and then doing four quick calculations on a calculator app takes considerably less time than looking up annual FA VAR reports from multiple FA's across and then finding that specific section in the 100+ pages just to directly link you to it. Especially when the Norwegian VAR vote today was an opinion poll in itself, as the clubs at the FA meeting voted on behalf of their members. I'd say most members of a club would be considered probable match-going supporters, and these in turn voted during their club's annual meeting on whether or not to support VAR; 72% voted in favor of VAR. 

 

The result was met by rambunctious applause when announced. Coaches, referees, players, supporter alliance leaders and pundits have praised Norwegian football supporters for their now proven ability to "use common sense". 

 

Here's a link to that: https://www.vg.no/sport/i/Pp20p6/klaveness-med-melding-til-fotball-norge-gjoer-meg-bekymret 

 

If people just owned up to the fact they're being contrarian for the sake of being contrarian, for the sake have something to moan and complain about or because they can't cope with change – I'd at least respect them. The fucking "can't celebrate like I used to" argument is so incomprehensibly idiotic it's almost reaching Ashley-ownership levels when it comes to something putting me off football as a whole. 

 

 

Edited Saturday at 20:38 by Kaizero

[joeyt]

You can't make a claim that there's "untold amounts of polling done among matchgoing fans in multiple nations that say it is" and not provide a single scrap of that evidence. You're telling me you've previously read all nations annual reports and that's how you know it? But can't find one now? Or anything else?

 

Here's some opinion polls for you:

 

https://yougov.co.uk/sport/articles/49627-9-out-of-10-premier-league-viewers-want-changes-to-var-or-for-it-to-be-scrapped-altogether

 

 

Edited Saturday at 20:39 by joeyt

[joeyt]

[Kaizero]

All that said, the only thing that genuinely matter when it comes to whether or not VAR should be used or not is this; do the referees want it? 

 

Given that the answer to that question is a pretty much universel "yes", everyone else should shut the fuck up about it as it doesn't have any effect on their jobs and is making an already incredibly stressful and unthankful job done by other people, better. The name of this thread is a perfect example of how unthankful the job of being a professional referee is.