Still not worthy of a thread

[80]

9 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

Fair enough. But the world has changed a bit in 150 years... we couldn't go back... so what's the answer going forward?

Edited my previous post a bit, which partially answers your question.

 

Couldn't go back to what? No VAR? We easily could. Alternatively a competitor association might come along one day, though a different game altogether feels more likely. Extrapolating things out over decades and decades, I can see association football becoming an increasingly niche, boutique sport which is increasingly dependent on old legacy customers spending ever larger amounts of their disposable income on it. Like modern professional wrestling. Think back to the Spurs-Chelsea match - what on earth would a 9 year old think of that? Over time they'll switch off.

 

 

Edited November 16, 2023 by 80

[Groundhog63]

17 minutes ago, 80 said:

Edited my previous post a bit, which partially answers your question.

 

Couldn't go back to what? No VAR? We easily could. Alternatively a competitor association might come along one day, though a different game altogether feels more likely. Extrapolating things out over decades and decades, I can see association football becoming an increasingly niche, boutique sport which is increasingly dependent on old legacy customers spending ever larger amounts of their disposable income on it. Like modern professional wrestling. Think back to the Spurs-Chelsea match - what on earth would a 9 year old think of that? Over time they'll switch off.

 

 

 

 

Rollerball

[Yorkie]

38 minutes ago, 80 said:

Edited my previous post a bit, which partially answers your question.

 

Couldn't go back to what? No VAR? We easily could. Alternatively a competitor association might come along one day, though a different game altogether feels more likely. Extrapolating things out over decades and decades, I can see association football becoming an increasingly niche, boutique sport which is increasingly dependent on old legacy customers spending ever larger amounts of their disposable income on it. Like modern professional wrestling. Think back to the Spurs-Chelsea match - what on earth would a 9 year old think of that? Over time they'll switch off.

 

There's definitely a threat to the game's popularity as its spontaneity becomes eroded and the magnitude of incidents becomes reduced by the imposition of lengthy digital arbitration.

 

The most concerning thing Webb said in that breakdown of the Diaz cock-up was that they "focus on efficiency but never at the expense of accuracy!" Ergo, you get your four-minute delays to green-light a correct decision that has already been made on the field. 

 

I actually missed the Arsenal game live but I've absolutely no doubt in my mind that the goal would've been added to the growing list of those which I didn't/couldn't celebrate.

[FloydianMag]

Aramco

 

 

[Stifler]

?????

[Nobody]

1 hour ago, Yorkie said:

 

I actually missed the Arsenal game live but I've absolutely no doubt in my mind that the goal would've been added to the growing list of those which I didn't/couldn't celebrate.

[Disco]

Was wild in the stadium like. 

[Yorkie]

1 minute ago, Disco said:

Was wild in the stadium like. 

 

Yeah, should specify as a TV watcher. Less obvious in the stadium that there's a number of supposedly contentious issues to consider. 

[Froggy]

17 hours ago, The College Dropout said:

I don't think it did. We just have bad memories.

 

Aguero scored a goal against us from an indirect freekick where he was stood in an offside position the entire time. It wasn't even close. We lost the game 1-0 and City didn't create much else. We were then relegated by 1 point.

 

Nobody remembers that because it was a routine mistake. People would have a fit and demand a rematch if this happened with VAR:

 

 

 

Drogba offside goal. Lost the game 2-1, and the league title by 1 point. 

 

I'd still scrap VAR tomorrow.

[The College Dropout]

43 minutes ago, Froggy said:

 

 

Drogba offside goal. Lost the game 2-1, and the league title by 1 point. 

 

I'd still scrap VAR tomorrow.

Why ?

 

Id like us to try it for a season.  People going apeshit at the regularity of incorrect offside calls.  

[MrRaspberryJam]

18 hours ago, The College Dropout said:

I don't think it did. We just have bad memories.

 

Aguero scored a goal against us from an indirect freekick where he was stood in an offside position the entire time. It wasn't even close. We lost the game 1-0 and City didn't create much else. We were then relegated by 1 point.

 

Nobody remembers that because it was a routine mistake. People would have a fit and demand a rematch if this happened with VAR:

 

Was this not the game we drew 1-1 with Anita equalising?

[Froggy]

4 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

Why ?

 

Id like us to try it for a season.  People going apeshit at the regularity of incorrect offside calls.  

 

I just preferred the way it was. I wanted VAR initially, but feel it's taken the excitement out of large parts of the game. I'd say I don't even celebrate 50% of goals anymore, and in a lot of situations by the time the goal is given that initial eurphoria (which is one of the greatest things about football) is gone.

 

The Drogba goal still comes up in conversation from time to time. Human error was just part of the game. Even with VAR now human error is still happening, so what's the point?

[The College Dropout]

4 minutes ago, Froggy said:

 

I just preferred the way it was. I wanted VAR initially, but feel it's taken the excitement out of large parts of the game. I'd say I don't even celebrate 50% of goals anymore, and in a lot of situations by the time the goal is given that initial eurphoria (which is one of the greatest things about football) is gone.

 

The Drogba goal still comes up in conversation from time to time. Human error was just part of the game. Even with VAR now human error is still happening, so what's the point?

Well.. it’s less human error.  In the professional world if you had something that reduced human error by 95% it would be widely celebrated. 
 

That Drogba goal was just one of those things that happened all the time. The Aguero goal was from a set piece where Aguero was standing in an offside position the ENTIRE time. It was the obvious thing to look for and it was still missed. 
 

 

I understand the enjoyment angle.  But I’d still rather take the greater accuracy.  I think Burns goal was initially marked as offside against PSG and I knew it wasn’t. So when the flag went up I was jumping around the house in giddy anticipation shouting ‘HES ON HES ON ITS A GOAL HES DEFFO ON ITS A GOAL’.  That for me was exciting. Being 90% confident a goal wrongly rules off would be given.  

[The College Dropout]

I would change how it’s communicated in the stadium though.  It’s such a weird and eery experience.

 

 

And I would keep the bar high to reduce the amount of checks and increase the speed. 

[Froggy]

10 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

Well.. it’s less human error.  In the professional world if you had something that reduced human error by 95% it would be widely celebrated. 
 

That Drogba goal was just one of those things that happened all the time. The Aguero goal was from a set piece where Aguero was standing in an offside position the ENTIRE time. It was the obvious thing to look for and it was still missed. 
 

 

I understand the enjoyment angle.  But I’d still rather take the greater accuracy.  I think Burns goal was initially marked as offside against PSG and I knew it wasn’t. So when the flag went up I was jumping around the house in giddy anticipation shouting ‘HES ON HES ON ITS A GOAL HES DEFFO ON ITS A GOAL’.  That for me was exciting. Being 90% confident a goal wrongly rules off would be given.  

 

It's the tiny nitpicking of fouls as well that I can't stand and the massive inconsistencies. It's ruining a contact sport. It was meant to be for clear and obvious errors and they're stopping play for the most minuscule of fouls. 

 

Imagine this being given as a foul in the 90's:

 

 

If that's a foul now, then fair enough, but why wasn't this a penalty:

 

 

Just give the onfield ref the power again. If they get it wrong they get it wrong. I'd rather costly mistakes by referees than the mind-numbing, fine tooth comb approach to fouls that we have now.

[Geordie Ahmed]

I do find the calls for wanting to scrap VAR is way higher for those that support "bigger" clubs

 

Don't have any data to support it and it would be almost impossible to get that data but those clubs would get far more decisions in their favour, not saying it was obvious corruption but unconscious bias can play a huge part 

 

VAR isn't perfect but it was never meant to be. I think the mistake some people have made is assuming it would eliminate mistakes entirely but it's a system that's dealing with subjective decisions so you'll never get that full accuracy but I find it's way better than before as big mistakes have been reduced 

[KDT]

Villa pretty much stayed up because of goal line technology failure.

[The College Dropout]

50 minutes ago, Froggy said:

 

It's the tiny nitpicking of fouls as well that I can't stand and the massive inconsistencies. It's ruining a contact sport. It was meant to be for clear and obvious errors and they're stopping play for the most minuscule of fouls. 

 

Imagine this being given as a foul in the 90's:

 

 

If that's a foul now, then fair enough, but why wasn't this a penalty:

 

 

Just give the onfield ref the power again. If they get it wrong they get it wrong. I'd rather costly mistakes by referees than the mind-numbing, fine tooth comb approach to fouls that we have now.

Both of these... it was the onfield decision that was the final decision, right? If so, what's your problem?

 

I agree on the nit-picking so we are on the same page. Offsides, blatant errors, whatever the handball rule is... fine. Anything else go with the onfield decision. By blatant I mean - was that a dive? Did the ref miss a definite trip (not a little bit of contact)?

[The College Dropout]

36 minutes ago, KDT said:

Villa pretty much stayed up because of goal line technology failure.

Would we have Howe if not for that? And would he be the same manager he is today?

 

 

Edited November 17, 2023 by The College Dropout

[Froggy]

2 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

Both of these... it was the onfield decision that was the final decision, right? If so, what's your problem?

 

 

I believe the game played on for 20-30 seconds and then play was stopped and Tierney was called to the monitor. The onfield decision was no penalty.

 

No review for the foul on Hojlund, even though it was worse.

 

It's the inconsistency that kills you.

[brummie]

56 minutes ago, KDT said:

Villa pretty much stayed up because of goal line technology failure.

 

See, proof that technology CAN work properly in football.

[The College Dropout]

3 minutes ago, Froggy said:

 

 

I believe the game played on for 20-30 seconds and then play was stopped and Tierney was called to the monitor. The onfield decision was no penalty.

 

No review for the foul on Hojlund, even though it was worse.

 

It's the inconsistency that kills you.

Fair enough, and I agree they should've probably gone with the onfield decision for both.

 

There is one significant difference, though - the Hojlund one - Hojlund was on the ball, and the ref definitely saw it and decided it wasn't a penalty. That's fair. The City one was off the ball, and there's a chance the referee didn't see it at all. Therefore, it would be worth VAR asking, "Did you see the tug by Man U 11 on the City player? That might be a penalty."

 

If the ref and linesman saw it and said - "yep- saw a minor tug.. not enough for a penalty", they should 100% move on. If no on-field ref saw it... it is worth a conversation/review IMO. Caveat: I don't remember the incident to know if it was a proper penalty or not.

So it's not a like-for-like example, so consistency here doesn't apply - the use case is different. You're never going to get consis

 

Again, I think audio should be shared in real-time so everyone can understand the process. I'm assuming all of the above; we don't actually know.

[The College Dropout]

3 minutes ago, Froggy said:

 

 

I believe the game played on for 20-30 seconds and then play was stopped and Tierney was called to the monitor. The onfield decision was no penalty.

 

No review for the foul on Hojlund, even though it was worse.

 

It's the inconsistency that kills you.

Fair enough, and I agree they should've probably gone with the onfield decision for both.

 

There is one significant difference, though - the Hojlund one - Hojlund was on the ball, and the ref definitely saw it and decided it wasn't a penalty. That's fair. The City one was off the ball, and there's a chance the referee didn't see it at all. Therefore, it would be worth VAR asking, "Did you see the tug by Man U 11 on the City player? That might be a penalty."

 

If the ref and linesman saw it and said - "yep- saw a minor tug.. not enough for a penalty", they should 100% move on. If no on-field ref saw it... it is worth a conversation/review IMO. Caveat: I don't remember the incident to know if it was a proper penalty or not.

So it's not a like-for-like example, so consistency here doesn't apply - the use case is different. You're never going to get consis

 

Again, I think audio should be shared in real-time so everyone can understand the process. I'm assuming all of the above; we don't actually know.

[Erikse]

I can see them getting better technology in the future for offsides and ball out of play. Things like hawkeye and semi automated offside technology. That should make it more effective and accurate, maybe with time VAR can confirm or change these decidions in an instant. We could just scrap the subjective decisions from VAR? Maybe apart from the most obvious ones. Don't feel like we need to scrap the entire thing.

 

 

Edited November 17, 2023 by Erikse

[timnufc22]

I’d scrap VAR in general and try two officials behind each goal instead. Anything that happens in the box, they have a close up view and the ref can consult with them and go off their opinion if he’s unsure. It would bring extra help to the ref, get more decisions correct while also keeping the flow of the game, removing the wait while a video it being checked over and over. 

As a compromise I’d maybe keep VAR for offside on the condition that a leeway is introduced and can be programmed into the technology, say 15cm. This is to preserve the whole point of the rule, that was to stop attackers having a clear advantage while preventing goals being ruled offside when they’re such a tiny fraction ahead it has no tangible advantage. 

 

Either way, no matter how much VAR is getting right (which is probably most the time), it is changing the culture of the game aswell as the flow of the game, which underpinned why loved football in the first place. If something is preventing you from celebrating a goal - the supposed peak of supporting a team - then you know whatever ‘benefit’ it’s for is at too greater cost.