Video Assistant Referees (VAR)

[mrmojorisin75]

They should call it VARmite, because you either love it or hate it. Am I right folks? ?

 

I've reviewed it with the team and the decision is you're a c***

 

 

 

 

:wink:

Who's on your team buddy?

 

The VAR Boyz

 

[morla84]

Destined to be 'Toon VARmy' headlines when it wins us some points ? might try sell that one to Lee Ryder as well

[Wullie]

 

Sounds class. Must be even better when the game isn’t even on TV.

 

But the point isn't what works on or off TV. The point is that decisions are corrected.

 

If it's a problem in ground, which I'm sure it is, they need to solve that with some commentary or whatever.

 

The box has been opened, there's no going back. You can't now wish for less accuracy it's mental.

 

Do you think every single thing that happens on the pitch should be reviewed? Every throw in, every coming together in the centre circle?

 

I do not.

 

That's mental by your own admission - "less accuracy"

[mrmojorisin75]

 

Sounds class. Must be even better when the game isn’t even on TV.

 

But the point isn't what works on or off TV. The point is that decisions are corrected.

 

If it's a problem in ground, which I'm sure it is, they need to solve that with some commentary or whatever.

 

The box has been opened, there's no going back. You can't now wish for less accuracy it's mental.

 

Do you think every single thing that happens on the pitch should be reviewed? Every throw in, every coming together in the centre circle?

 

I do not.

 

That's mental by your own admission - "less accuracy"

 

Pathetic argument. There's no sport on the planet where they review every play regardless of impact or intent etc.

 

Honestly that's fucking tragic from a Titan of NO like you

[Andy]

 

Sounds class. Must be even better when the game isn’t even on TV.

 

But the point isn't what works on or off TV. The point is that decisions are corrected.

 

If it's a problem in ground, which I'm sure it is, they need to solve that with some commentary or whatever.

 

The box has been opened, there's no going back. You can't now wish for less accuracy it's mental.

 

Surely it depends on your personal view as to whether inaccuracy was ever really a problem? When VAR was used in the world cup a few years ago it was sold to the world under the impression that it would be used to correct "clear and obvious errors", and to-date that tournament has been the only good use of the system that I've seen. It's gone way beyond the clear and obvious now. Those offsides in the city game today were mental, there's no way it's an obvious error from the linesman if different frames of the ball being kicked show different results... If they have to analyse things frame-by-frame and still need a computer display to figure out whether it was actually offside then it's definitely gone too far. If they want to get those decisions perfect then why bother having people there to review it anyway? In this day and age you could probably just whack a GPS on every player and every ball and have it work as efficiently as goal line tech anyway; I'd rather wait for a solution along those lines if we're aiming for perfection, because at least the decision would be instantaneous rather than the shambles it is now.

 

Something in the way VAR's used needs to change like. Almost every time a goal goes in now we're just waiting to see if it'll actually count, that just isn't right IMO. It's a bad enough experience on the tele with the commentators telling you what's going on, it must be a complete mess for match-goers.

[mrmojorisin75]

 

Sounds class. Must be even better when the game isn’t even on TV.

 

But the point isn't what works on or off TV. The point is that decisions are corrected.

 

If it's a problem in ground, which I'm sure it is, they need to solve that with some commentary or whatever.

 

The box has been opened, there's no going back. You can't now wish for less accuracy it's mental.

 

Surely it depends on your personal view as to whether inaccuracy was ever really a problem? When VAR was used in the world cup a few years ago it was sold to the world under the impression that it would be used to correct "clear and obvious errors", and to-date that tournament has been the only good use of the system that I've seen. It's gone way beyond the clear and obvious now. Those offsides in the city game today were mental, there's no way it's an obvious error from the linesman if different frames of the ball being kicked show different results... If they have to analyse things frame-by-frame and still need a computer display to figure out whether it was actually offside then it's definitely gone too far. If they want to get those decisions perfect then why bother having people there to review it anyway? In this day and age you could probably just whack a GPS on every player and every ball and have it work as efficiently as goal line tech anyway; I'd rather wait for a solution along those lines if we're aiming for perfection, because at least the decision would be instantaneous rather than the shambles it is now.

 

Something in the way VAR's used needs to change like. Almost every time a goal goes in now we're just waiting to see if it'll actually count, that just isn't right IMO. It's a bad enough experience on the tele with the commentators telling you what's going on, it must be a complete mess for match-goers.

 

My point on VAR would be they've tried to make it fit existing rules and it won't. They need to amend the rules to fit the technology. Then we can move on.

[Wullie]

 

Sounds class. Must be even better when the game isn’t even on TV.

 

But the point isn't what works on or off TV. The point is that decisions are corrected.

 

If it's a problem in ground, which I'm sure it is, they need to solve that with some commentary or whatever.

 

The box has been opened, there's no going back. You can't now wish for less accuracy it's mental.

 

Do you think every single thing that happens on the pitch should be reviewed? Every throw in, every coming together in the centre circle?

 

I do not.

 

That's mental by your own admission - "less accuracy"

 

Pathetic argument. There's no sport on the planet where they review every play regardless of impact or intent etc.

 

Honestly that's fucking tragic from a Titan of NO like you

 

It's not pathetic at all, it's literally what you said, that it's mental to want less accuracy, which you do, because you don't want every decision reviewed. Cricket and tennis, at the levels the technology exists, are both under review for every single thing that happens are they not?

 

Every decision on a football match is crucial depending on what's happened afterwards. A throw-in the wrong way which leads to a goal a minute later is just as important a factor on the match result as a penalty, football's very different to cricket and tennis in that sense. It's highly contradictory to be pro-VAR and not want every decision reviewed. Yes, that would obviously be mental but I think the whole thing is fucking insane to start with.

 

John Nicholson puts it much better than me:

 

Once you insist on VAR, you come up against a big problem: you cannot separate any moment in a football game from the last. It is an interrelated network of events each influenced and geared by the previous. So a wrongly awarded throw that leads to a goal 28 passes down the line is, in this authoritarian universe, an affront to fairness. Such a goal should be checked and disallowed, but right now it wouldn’t be. Yet VAR is nothing if it is not an absolutist religion. To restrict its use is to compromise the premise upon which its existence relies: the desire to get decisions right. So once you welcome VAR, how can you argue against the expansion of it? You can’t. It’s not a sustainable position to take because you’re going against your very own reasons for adopting VAR in the first place.

 

When a goal is ruled out for offside by VAR but another goal is allowed because the contravention of a law happened in a phase not checked by VAR, the game’s result is actually distorted more by the technology, not made more correct. It is, in effect, an inherently contradictory model unless it is used for all decisions wherever and whenever they happen on the pitch or in the game, just to make sure they are right because any mistakes at all will affect the game. It cannot be otherwise.

[Andy]

 

Sounds class. Must be even better when the game isn’t even on TV.

 

But the point isn't what works on or off TV. The point is that decisions are corrected.

 

If it's a problem in ground, which I'm sure it is, they need to solve that with some commentary or whatever.

 

The box has been opened, there's no going back. You can't now wish for less accuracy it's mental.

 

Surely it depends on your personal view as to whether inaccuracy was ever really a problem? When VAR was used in the world cup a few years ago it was sold to the world under the impression that it would be used to correct "clear and obvious errors", and to-date that tournament has been the only good use of the system that I've seen. It's gone way beyond the clear and obvious now. Those offsides in the city game today were mental, there's no way it's an obvious error from the linesman if different frames of the ball being kicked show different results... If they have to analyse things frame-by-frame and still need a computer display to figure out whether it was actually offside then it's definitely gone too far. If they want to get those decisions perfect then why bother having people there to review it anyway? In this day and age you could probably just whack a GPS on every player and every ball and have it work as efficiently as goal line tech anyway; I'd rather wait for a solution along those lines if we're aiming for perfection, because at least the decision would be instantaneous rather than the shambles it is now.

 

Something in the way VAR's used needs to change like. Almost every time a goal goes in now we're just waiting to see if it'll actually count, that just isn't right IMO. It's a bad enough experience on the tele with the commentators telling you what's going on, it must be a complete mess for match-goers.

 

My point on VAR would be they've tried to make it fit existing rules and it won't. They need to amend the rules to fit the technology. Then we can move on.

 

I agree with that, but this should have all been in place before it came into the premier league.

[Wullie]

The obvious solution to the offside mess, short of the best solution of throwing the whole thing out the window or making it so if any part of the body is onside then you're onside, is surely an "umpire's call" type of thing, with the benefit going to the attacker. If the margin is less than 'x'cm then the on-field decision stands.

[jackyboy]

They should run VAR AFTER the games then penalise, give goals, take goals away, suspend the divers and deliberate fouls.  Suspend people like Colback for trying to impersonate a footballer. It would make for good viewing and a longer period of excitement  as you wouldn't know the actual result until well after the game

[tgarve]

Would actually make for great viewing

[AyeDubbleYoo]

The obvious solution to the offside mess, short of the best solution of throwing the whole thing out the window or making it so if any part of the body is onside then you're onside, is surely an "umpire's call" type of thing, with the benefit going to the attacker. If the margin is less than 'x'cm then the on-field decision stands.

 

I guess they don’t believe they need that because the line the computer draws is perfect?

 

FWIW I agree with that John Nicholson quote above, I’ve said the same thing before. Seems odd that some decisions are corrected and others don’t matter.

[WarrenBartonCentrePartin]

 

Sounds class. Must be even better when the game isn’t even on TV.

 

I'm guessing we've not put a second screen up? Be totally odd for anyone in the East Stand especially, who can't see what it says.

[jdckelly]

 

Sounds class. Must be even better when the game isn’t even on TV.

 

But the point isn't what works on or off TV. The point is that decisions are corrected.

 

If it's a problem in ground, which I'm sure it is, they need to solve that with some commentary or whatever.

 

The box has been opened, there's no going back. You can't now wish for less accuracy it's mental.

 

Surely it depends on your personal view as to whether inaccuracy was ever really a problem? When VAR was used in the world cup a few years ago it was sold to the world under the impression that it would be used to correct "clear and obvious errors", and to-date that tournament has been the only good use of the system that I've seen. It's gone way beyond the clear and obvious now. Those offsides in the city game today were mental, there's no way it's an obvious error from the linesman if different frames of the ball being kicked show different results... If they have to analyse things frame-by-frame and still need a computer display to figure out whether it was actually offside then it's definitely gone too far. If they want to get those decisions perfect then why bother having people there to review it anyway? In this day and age you could probably just whack a GPS on every player and every ball and have it work as efficiently as goal line tech anyway; I'd rather wait for a solution along those lines if we're aiming for perfection, because at least the decision would be instantaneous rather than the shambles it is now.

 

Something in the way VAR's used needs to change like. Almost every time a goal goes in now we're just waiting to see if it'll actually count, that just isn't right IMO. It's a bad enough experience on the tele with the commentators telling you what's going on, it must be a complete mess for match-goers.

 

My point on VAR would be they've tried to make it fit existing rules and it won't. They need to amend the rules to fit the technology. Then we can move on.

or we could just go back to the old rules which worked just fine and throw var in the bin rather than try and mutilate the rules so var fits.

[Rod]

Or just get the correct decision.  Which VAR does.

[David Edgar]

Does it though?

 

 

Read the thread.

[thomas]

IMO it's really not about correct or incorrect. I see the VAR brouhaha as a proxy war between the romantics of a more grassroots, non-commercialized era of football and the ruthless corporatization of it by those who also want to protect their investment.

 

Truthfully I think the war is over and the latter have already won. Granted I do also support VAR but not because I worry about the "multimillion dollar pound decisions at stake".

[mrmojorisin75]

 

Sounds class. Must be even better when the game isn’t even on TV.

 

But the point isn't what works on or off TV. The point is that decisions are corrected.

 

If it's a problem in ground, which I'm sure it is, they need to solve that with some commentary or whatever.

 

The box has been opened, there's no going back. You can't now wish for less accuracy it's mental.

 

Surely it depends on your personal view as to whether inaccuracy was ever really a problem? When VAR was used in the world cup a few years ago it was sold to the world under the impression that it would be used to correct "clear and obvious errors", and to-date that tournament has been the only good use of the system that I've seen. It's gone way beyond the clear and obvious now. Those offsides in the city game today were mental, there's no way it's an obvious error from the linesman if different frames of the ball being kicked show different results... If they have to analyse things frame-by-frame and still need a computer display to figure out whether it was actually offside then it's definitely gone too far. If they want to get those decisions perfect then why bother having people there to review it anyway? In this day and age you could probably just whack a GPS on every player and every ball and have it work as efficiently as goal line tech anyway; I'd rather wait for a solution along those lines if we're aiming for perfection, because at least the decision would be instantaneous rather than the shambles it is now.

 

Something in the way VAR's used needs to change like. Almost every time a goal goes in now we're just waiting to see if it'll actually count, that just isn't right IMO. It's a bad enough experience on the tele with the commentators telling you what's going on, it must be a complete mess for match-goers.

 

My point on VAR would be they've tried to make it fit existing rules and it won't. They need to amend the rules to fit the technology. Then we can move on.

or we could just go back to the old rules which worked just fine and throw var in the bin rather than try and mutilate the rules so var fits.

 

Which ones, they've been changed countless times in small ways over the years like. Look at offside, has gone from daylight to the width of a fingernail man.

 

Rules don't have to be changed wholesale like, they just have to make sense with VAR.

 

So of the 4 things they're saying it's used for, as an example:

 

Offside: needs to be a practical advantage taken by the attacker, this mm bullshit is nonsense. Make it daylight again which var can easily capture with very little controversy. Advantage goes to the defender if it's in doubt, imo.

 

Red card incidents: is there an issue with it for this? I guess the main one would be you can't review things like 2nd yellows right? Not sure anything needs to change there

 

Mistaken identity: again any issue?

 

Penalties: main one is surely this f***ing nonsense about the hand being in an unnatural position or whatever it is. They need to adjust the rules so every f***ing ball kicked at a defender won't result in a penalty

 

As regards the overall point about something happening 28 passes ago that led to a goal, it's going too far imo. Off the top of my head make it active in areas or something, so if there's a foul in the final third of the pitch prior to a goal then it's eligible for var review and the goal can be chalked off.

 

I get that a foul could be committed next to your own box to win the ball then you go up and score right away. You'd feel aggrieved but at the end of the day if you take the ball 90 yards and score the other team has had ample opportunity to stop you doing it and haven't.

[Wullie]

Am I right in thinking a dive on the edge of the box to win a free kick would not currently be reviewed but a dive in the box for a penalty would be? An incident like the free kick that Liverpool beat us with at the death last season?

[morla84]

Wonder whether this will cause VARnage at the match today...or whether everything will be wonderVAR, as the germans say ?

[Colos Short and Curlies]

 

Sounds class. Must be even better when the game isn’t even on TV.

 

But the point isn't what works on or off TV. The point is that decisions are corrected.

 

If it's a problem in ground, which I'm sure it is, they need to solve that with some commentary or whatever.

 

The box has been opened, there's no going back. You can't now wish for less accuracy it's mental.

 

Surely it depends on your personal view as to whether inaccuracy was ever really a problem? When VAR was used in the world cup a few years ago it was sold to the world under the impression that it would be used to correct "clear and obvious errors", and to-date that tournament has been the only good use of the system that I've seen. It's gone way beyond the clear and obvious now. Those offsides in the city game today were mental, there's no way it's an obvious error from the linesman if different frames of the ball being kicked show different results... If they have to analyse things frame-by-frame and still need a computer display to figure out whether it was actually offside then it's definitely gone too far. If they want to get those decisions perfect then why bother having people there to review it anyway? In this day and age you could probably just whack a GPS on every player and every ball and have it work as efficiently as goal line tech anyway; I'd rather wait for a solution along those lines if we're aiming for perfection, because at least the decision would be instantaneous rather than the shambles it is now.

 

Something in the way VAR's used needs to change like. Almost every time a goal goes in now we're just waiting to see if it'll actually count, that just isn't right IMO. It's a bad enough experience on the tele with the commentators telling you what's going on, it must be a complete mess for match-goers.

 

My point on VAR would be they've tried to make it fit existing rules and it won't. They need to amend the rules to fit the technology. Then we can move on.

or we could just go back to the old rules which worked just fine and throw var in the bin rather than try and mutilate the rules so var fits.

 

Which ones, they've been changed countless times in small ways over the years like. Look at offside, has gone from daylight to the width of a fingernail man.

 

Rules don't have to be changed wholesale like, they just have to make sense with VAR.

 

So of the 4 things they're saying it's used for, as an example:

 

Offside: needs to be a practical advantage taken by the attacker, this mm bullshit is nonsense. Make it daylight again which var can easily capture with very little controversy. Advantage goes to the defender if it's in doubt, imo.

 

Red card incidents: is there an issue with it for this? I guess the main one would be you can't review things like 2nd yellows right? Not sure anything needs to change there

 

Mistaken identity: again any issue?

 

Penalties: main one is surely this f***ing nonsense about the hand being in an unnatural position or whatever it is. They need to adjust the rules so every f***ing ball kicked at a defender won't result in a penalty

 

As regards the overall point about something happening 28 passes ago that led to a goal, it's going too far imo. Off the top of my head make it active in areas or something, so if there's a foul in the final third of the pitch prior to a goal then it's eligible for var review and the goal can be chalked off.

 

I get that a foul could be committed next to your own box to win the ball then you go up and score right away. You'd feel aggrieved but at the end of the day if you take the ball 90 yards and score the other team has had ample opportunity to stop you doing it and haven't.

 

Go back a couple of seasons, Everton at home when we lost to a last minute header from a corner that should have been a goal kick.

 

So literally 3 touches after a wrong call, VAR rule that one out?

 

I'm actually curious, I haven't read up enough on what it is to be used for.

[Pilko]

I loved the idea of VAR after seeing us get conned out of obvious penalties each week and no opposition red card for 140-odd PL games or whatever it was.

 

In my head I had some kind of cricket or tennis style system where the manager or coaching staff would have access to a dugout screen and could challenge 1 or 2 calls a game each, to eliminate blatant offsides or obvious pen shouts going unnoticed. Even then, the game is stopped for a little bit but at least you don't get stupid goals given like the Azpilicueta one at Cardiff last year.

 

The current thing is a mess and that Sterling offside yesterday made me very sad (and not cos he's my FF captain and missed an assist) as it was basically impossible to tell. VAR was only pushed for because the standard of refereeing in this country is fucking shit and wildly inconsistent and there are ludicrous calls made all the time. The referee and linesmen now can effectively do the same shit job, just now another shit referee with a video system miles away can do it for them and competely knack the momentum and atmosphere of a game by spending a few minutes looking at a blade of grass in relation to someone's shoulder blades.

 

Hawk Eye is class and one of the best additions we've ever had IMO, they should only have implemented VAR if the speed of decision was the same i.e. a few seconds.

[mrmojorisin75]

 

Sounds class. Must be even better when the game isn’t even on TV.

 

But the point isn't what works on or off TV. The point is that decisions are corrected.

 

If it's a problem in ground, which I'm sure it is, they need to solve that with some commentary or whatever.

 

The box has been opened, there's no going back. You can't now wish for less accuracy it's mental.

 

Surely it depends on your personal view as to whether inaccuracy was ever really a problem? When VAR was used in the world cup a few years ago it was sold to the world under the impression that it would be used to correct "clear and obvious errors", and to-date that tournament has been the only good use of the system that I've seen. It's gone way beyond the clear and obvious now. Those offsides in the city game today were mental, there's no way it's an obvious error from the linesman if different frames of the ball being kicked show different results... If they have to analyse things frame-by-frame and still need a computer display to figure out whether it was actually offside then it's definitely gone too far. If they want to get those decisions perfect then why bother having people there to review it anyway? In this day and age you could probably just whack a GPS on every player and every ball and have it work as efficiently as goal line tech anyway; I'd rather wait for a solution along those lines if we're aiming for perfection, because at least the decision would be instantaneous rather than the shambles it is now.

 

Something in the way VAR's used needs to change like. Almost every time a goal goes in now we're just waiting to see if it'll actually count, that just isn't right IMO. It's a bad enough experience on the tele with the commentators telling you what's going on, it must be a complete mess for match-goers.

 

My point on VAR would be they've tried to make it fit existing rules and it won't. They need to amend the rules to fit the technology. Then we can move on.

or we could just go back to the old rules which worked just fine and throw var in the bin rather than try and mutilate the rules so var fits.

 

Which ones, they've been changed countless times in small ways over the years like. Look at offside, has gone from daylight to the width of a fingernail man.

 

Rules don't have to be changed wholesale like, they just have to make sense with VAR.

 

So of the 4 things they're saying it's used for, as an example:

 

Offside: needs to be a practical advantage taken by the attacker, this mm bullshit is nonsense. Make it daylight again which var can easily capture with very little controversy. Advantage goes to the defender if it's in doubt, imo.

 

Red card incidents: is there an issue with it for this? I guess the main one would be you can't review things like 2nd yellows right? Not sure anything needs to change there

 

Mistaken identity: again any issue?

 

Penalties: main one is surely this f***ing nonsense about the hand being in an unnatural position or whatever it is. They need to adjust the rules so every f***ing ball kicked at a defender won't result in a penalty

 

As regards the overall point about something happening 28 passes ago that led to a goal, it's going too far imo. Off the top of my head make it active in areas or something, so if there's a foul in the final third of the pitch prior to a goal then it's eligible for var review and the goal can be chalked off.

 

I get that a foul could be committed next to your own box to win the ball then you go up and score right away. You'd feel aggrieved but at the end of the day if you take the ball 90 yards and score the other team has had ample opportunity to stop you doing it and haven't.

 

Go back a couple of seasons, Everton at home when we lost to a last minute header from a corner that should have been a goal kick.

 

So literally 3 touches after a wrong call, VAR rule that one out?

 

I'm actually curious, I haven't read up enough on what it is to be used for.

 

I've not read the intricacies of it if I'm being honest, just on about the bits I've seen and read and what I would do.

 

I think there has to be balance to the cost (time) and benefit like anything else. So in the example you give, for me, if the wrong call leads to a direct free it should be reviewable, however if it gives a corner or indirect free kick then no as you have the opportunity to defend what's coming as a team. I think they should allow some kind of challenge system as well, maybe 1 per half on key calls.

 

That kind of balance, to do otherwise leads down the path Wullies quote was on about.

[Sima]

I think one of the worst things as a fan of a club is that VAR will strip away the excitement and adrenaline rush of your team scoring a goal.

 

The joy that comes with a last minute winner?  Don’t bother anymore because even if the officials on the field give it, your joy might be pulled back and even if it is given you’ve got to hang around while it is confirmed to celebrate which won’t feel instinctive.

[loki679]

I think it's a half measure tbh and I hate the stopping of the game all the time.  We have the technology to automate offside calls and goal line decisions so they should be out of the referees hands.  The rest just leave up to the referee imo.

 

Get rid of VAR and implement a player and ball tracking system which needs no unnecessary stoppages, instant decision and accurate.