Dogawful Officiating

[Figures 1-0 Football]

That's based on something that they THINK will happen with VAR, not what is actually in place for VAR. You hear it time and time again about these situations, but it's canny clear like. If there's any contentious grey area whatsoever, then VAR isn't used. It has to be absolutely clear cut that an error has been made.

 

In practice that's absolutely fine, but I don't think it'll work because they won't use it properly and people will continue to not understand its use.

 

But VAR will be used where there is doubt with a penalty. How many people disagreed over the penalty that Chelsea got at Arsenal? Quite a few did on here.

 

So that decision would have been reviewed by VAR and it would still be a contentious decision.

 

The referee wont say ‘sorry lads, I cant review that one cos it looks a bit dodgy’.

 

No it won't. Or it shouldn't anyway.

 

Why wouldn’t it? The referee would definitely review it as the Arsenal players would claim a dive and the Chelsea players would be totally the opposite.

 

The referee would go into it looking for issues around whether or not there was contact, when he’d then get sucked into whether or not the contact was sufficient for the player to go down - which is perception rather than clear cut.

 

Why wouldn’t the referee review it? Who or what would stop them?

 

For exactly the reason that I mentioned in the previous post - If there's any contentious grey area whatsoever, then VAR isn't used. It has to be absolutely clear cut that an error has been made. If the referee checks then it should be that they have serious doubts, or it should be because the VAR panel know that an obviously erroneous decision has been made. VAR isn't there for the reasons that you've mentioned, but it seems to be a misconception that everyone including pundits seems to have.

 

I just don’t believe that a referee will be able to ascertain what is a clear cut decision in the split second they need to, to decide whether or not to review it.

 

Afterall, if they could do that - they wouldn’t need VAR in the first place.

 

As I explained in the example, the referee would go into it expecting to only need to decide on contact (which would be clear cut) only to then get drawn into a debate about whether or not that contact was sufficient.

 

We’ll have to wait and see

[Guest neesy111]

I was for VAR, but after seeing it in action that while in its current form it's a disaster and shouldn't be used.

[Pata]

Hate that article. Incompetent reffing shouldn't be a factor in results, romanticizing it is just weird.

[Pata]

It’s also worth saying that VAR will not be available to the amateur game, obviously. Thus what for over 160 years was one game officiated the same from Hackney Marshes to Old Trafford, will have become two different games. Do we really want that?

 

Does someone really care about this?

[Dave]

Blatantly will evolve into more decisions though, the same arguments about it only being used for factual things were made when the use of technology was first proposed for goal line decisions and yet here we are.

 

I don't watch much rugby league but when I do, basically every try is reviewed by the video ref. It's ridiculous, the refs are either terrified of getting it wrong or just can't be arsed making a decision because they know they don't have to.

[Dave]

It’s also worth saying that VAR will not be available to the amateur game, obviously. Thus what for over 160 years was one game officiated the same from Hackney Marshes to Old Trafford, will have become two different games. Do we really want that?

 

Does someone really care about this?

 

Er, yeah.

[Guest neesy111]

It’s also worth saying that VAR will not be available to the amateur game, obviously. Thus what for over 160 years was one game officiated the same from Hackney Marshes to Old Trafford, will have become two different games. Do we really want that?

 

Does someone really care about this?

 

Nope.  Referee's are allowed to overturn decisions at all levels of the game, this is just a tool to help them to do it.

[Guest firetotheworks]

That's based on something that they THINK will happen with VAR, not what is actually in place for VAR. You hear it time and time again about these situations, but it's canny clear like. If there's any contentious grey area whatsoever, then VAR isn't used. It has to be absolutely clear cut that an error has been made.

 

In practice that's absolutely fine, but I don't think it'll work because they won't use it properly and people will continue to not understand its use.

 

But VAR will be used where there is doubt with a penalty. How many people disagreed over the penalty that Chelsea got at Arsenal? Quite a few did on here.

 

So that decision would have been reviewed by VAR and it would still be a contentious decision.

 

The referee wont say ‘sorry lads, I cant review that one cos it looks a bit dodgy’.

 

No it won't. Or it shouldn't anyway.

 

Why wouldn’t it? The referee would definitely review it as the Arsenal players would claim a dive and the Chelsea players would be totally the opposite.

 

The referee would go into it looking for issues around whether or not there was contact, when he’d then get sucked into whether or not the contact was sufficient for the player to go down - which is perception rather than clear cut.

 

Why wouldn’t the referee review it? Who or what would stop them?

 

For exactly the reason that I mentioned in the previous post - If there's any contentious grey area whatsoever, then VAR isn't used. It has to be absolutely clear cut that an error has been made. If the referee checks then it should be that they have serious doubts, or it should be because the VAR panel know that an obviously erroneous decision has been made. VAR isn't there for the reasons that you've mentioned, but it seems to be a misconception that everyone including pundits seems to have.

 

I just don’t believe that a referee will be able to ascertain what is a clear cut decision in the split second they need to, to decide whether or not to review it.

 

Afterall, if they could do that - they wouldn’t need VAR in the first place.

 

As I explained in the example, the referee would go into it expecting to only need to decide on contact (which would be clear cut) only to then get drawn into a debate about whether or not that contact was sufficient.

 

We’ll have to wait and see

 

Yeah, I know what you mean, but if they start doing that (which tbf, is fairly likely) then it'll be a disaster. If it's used how it should be used and works correctly then I'm all for it. It's the way that it's been so horribly implemented and the lack of understanding across the board over what it should be used for that'll be its failure imo. Hope it works though.

[Away Day Gadgie]

Personally i'm all for VAR.  I'm sick to death of complaining about incompetant refs who, probably just as often as not, either spoil the game or change the course of the result.  The technology has been there for ages and it should have been used well before now.

 

  Unfortunately there will be a lot of snags to iron out in the next few years, which will see a lot of people in the game and media bitching on about how it's spoiled the game.  I think eventually though we'll come across a good system that ticks all of the boxes (ie - helps the referee, gets the critical decisions correct, doesn't slow the game down or spoil the spectacle, possibly even increases it)

[Guest firetotheworks]

Blatantly will evolve into more decisions though, the same arguments about it only being used for factual things were made when the use of technology was first proposed for goal line decisions and yet here we are.

 

In a way that's kind of the point though. VAR should only be used for factual decisions too, and goal line technology has been a universal success.

[Pata]

Blatantly will evolve into more decisions though, the same arguments about it only being used for factual things were made when the use of technology was first proposed for goal line decisions and yet here we are.

 

In a way that's kind of the point though. VAR should only be used for factual decisions too, and goal line technology has been a universal success.

 

Nah mate, it's hated in the Sunday league.

[Dave]

Blatantly will evolve into more decisions though, the same arguments about it only being used for factual things were made when the use of technology was first proposed for goal line decisions and yet here we are.

 

In a way that's kind of the point though. VAR should only be used for factual decisions too, and goal line technology has been a universal success.

 

But it won't, that's the whole point of that article. You've even said it's fairly likely yourself.

[Guest firetotheworks]

Blatantly will evolve into more decisions though, the same arguments about it only being used for factual things were made when the use of technology was first proposed for goal line decisions and yet here we are.

 

In a way that's kind of the point though. VAR should only be used for factual decisions too, and goal line technology has been a universal success.

 

But it won't, that's the whole point of that article. You've even said it's fairly likely yourself.

 

It's a bit if, but if they're confident that it's used in the way that it should be, then that can only be a good thing. Goal line technology has only really been an advert for implementing the same systems elsewhere. I can see why they're doing it, and providing it's used correctly then I'm all for it. I just assume that they'll fuck the whole thing up though.

[xLiaaamx]

I'd like it to be used on offside decisions for definite. Thats as far as I want to take it, as they are pretty clear cut.

[Wullie]

That's based on something that they THINK will happen with VAR, not what is actually in place for VAR. You hear it time and time again about these situations, but it's canny clear like. If there's any contentious grey area whatsoever, then VAR isn't used. It has to be absolutely clear cut that an error has been made.

 

In practice that's absolutely fine, but I don't think it'll work because they won't use it properly and people will continue to not understand its use.

 

But VAR will be used where there is doubt with a penalty. How many people disagreed over the penalty that Chelsea got at Arsenal? Quite a few did on here.

 

So that decision would have been reviewed by VAR and it would still be a contentious decision.

 

The referee wont say ‘sorry lads, I cant review that one cos it looks a bit dodgy’.

 

No it won't. Or it shouldn't anyway.

 

Why wouldn’t it? The referee would definitely review it as the Arsenal players would claim a dive and the Chelsea players would be totally the opposite.

 

The referee would go into it looking for issues around whether or not there was contact, when he’d then get sucked into whether or not the contact was sufficient for the player to go down - which is perception rather than clear cut.

 

Why wouldn’t the referee review it? Who or what would stop them?

 

For exactly the reason that I mentioned in the previous post - If there's any contentious grey area whatsoever, then VAR isn't used. It has to be absolutely clear cut that an error has been made. If the referee checks then it should be that they have serious doubts, or it should be because the VAR panel know that an obviously erroneous decision has been made. VAR isn't there for the reasons that you've mentioned, but it seems to be a misconception that everyone including pundits seems to have.

 

This is completely contrary to how it has been implemented in Italy and Germany, maybe that's how they've arrived at this "misconception". It's not only used for obvious decisions which is why it's deeply unpopular.

 

It's also been common for them to go way back from the incident, and disallow goals or penalties because of things that happened at the other end of the field a minute ago.

 

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-5246317/amp/England-excited-VAR-Germany-sick-it.html

[Guest firetotheworks]

That's based on something that they THINK will happen with VAR, not what is actually in place for VAR. You hear it time and time again about these situations, but it's canny clear like. If there's any contentious grey area whatsoever, then VAR isn't used. It has to be absolutely clear cut that an error has been made.

 

In practice that's absolutely fine, but I don't think it'll work because they won't use it properly and people will continue to not understand its use.

 

But VAR will be used where there is doubt with a penalty. How many people disagreed over the penalty that Chelsea got at Arsenal? Quite a few did on here.

 

So that decision would have been reviewed by VAR and it would still be a contentious decision.

 

The referee wont say ‘sorry lads, I cant review that one cos it looks a bit dodgy’.

 

No it won't. Or it shouldn't anyway.

 

Why wouldn’t it? The referee would definitely review it as the Arsenal players would claim a dive and the Chelsea players would be totally the opposite.

 

The referee would go into it looking for issues around whether or not there was contact, when he’d then get sucked into whether or not the contact was sufficient for the player to go down - which is perception rather than clear cut.

 

Why wouldn’t the referee review it? Who or what would stop them?

 

For exactly the reason that I mentioned in the previous post - If there's any contentious grey area whatsoever, then VAR isn't used. It has to be absolutely clear cut that an error has been made. If the referee checks then it should be that they have serious doubts, or it should be because the VAR panel know that an obviously erroneous decision has been made. VAR isn't there for the reasons that you've mentioned, but it seems to be a misconception that everyone including pundits seems to have.

 

This is completely contrary to how it has been implemented in Italy and Germany, maybe that's how they've arrived at this "misconception". It's not only used for obvious decisions which is why it's deeply unpopular.

 

It's also been common for them to go way back from the incident, and disallow goals or penalties because of things that happened at the other end of the field a minute ago.

 

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-5246317/amp/England-excited-VAR-Germany-sick-it.html

 

It's definitely the implementation that's wrong, like. The misconception with how it's supposed to be used is exactly the problem and if VAR was used as it should be then it would be fine, but obviously the use of it has been shit across the board, and in the Euros especially.

[Guest firetotheworks]

FWIW, I would do away with the referee having any powers to check anything and that it should only be the VAR panel that can inform the ref when a decision has been missed, in exactly the same way that the assistant ref or fourth official would.

[Kaizero]

FWIW, I would do away with the referee having any powers to check anything and that it should only be the VAR panel that can inform the ref when a decision has been missed, in exactly the same way that the assistant ref or fourth official would.

 

 

Would mean less break in play as well.

[Tisd09]

Haven't read too much about this VAR but would it be used in a situation similar to Tiote's strike against Man City that was disallowed. The fury in me at that was insane and the officials would have had a split second to see the scenario. I can't imagine my anger if they had VAR and still ruled the goal offside

[Guest firetotheworks]

Haven't read too much about this VAR but would it be used in a situation similar to Tiote's strike against Man City that was disallowed. The fury in me at that was insane and the officials would have had a split second to see the scenario. I can't imagine my anger if they had VAR and still ruled the goal offside

 

Yeah, that's exactly the sort of situation where it would be used. The problem is that at the Euros, in situations like that they still ended up getting decisions similar to that completely wrong.

[timeEd32]

FWIW, I would do away with the referee having any powers to check anything and that it should only be the VAR panel that can inform the ref when a decision has been missed, in exactly the same way that the assistant ref or fourth official would.

 

 

Would mean less break in play as well.

 

This is exactly how it should be used. It should basically be a fifth official who has the benefit of multiple angles and replay.

 

That article from a couple pages back is garbage. There may be some fumbling about as this gets implemented but I'm fairly certain the end result is going to be a nearly identical game of football with a few less wrong decisions, especially egregious ones. Considering the financial stakes of games these days it's insane for one (or three) people to rule on everything in real time.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

Personally I would rather everyone just sucked it up and accepted that referees aren't perfect, but I know this will never happen.

[Dave]

[JH]

Wonder why it took so long? It usually takes seconds for a clip to be brought up on TV.

[Dave]

So wasn't VAR supposed to be for correcting clear mistakes? That offside was a matter of inches. Are they saying that linesman made a massive mistake giving that one offside in real time? The majority of offside calls are loads easier than that, but is every single close decision going to be checked? Where do we draw the line, if a couple of inches justifies a review?

 

I heard someone say that the officials have been told to make decisions as though VAR isn't there, but how can anyone say that linesman won't be affected by such a tight decision being overturned and making him look daft? Next time he'll just keep his flag down, if it's offside it'll be overturned anyway, right? What if his flag causes the players to stop playing, how do you go back? Play to the whistle, right? So that just increases the pressure on the linesman to NOT flag.

 

Corners will be checked next, in fact it happened tonight. Disputed corners and throw-ins happen constantly. A quick or long throw-in can easily lead to a goalscoring situation, best check them too.