Jump to content
Note to existing users - password reset is required Read more... ×
Sign in to follow this  
Feedthewolf

Money where your mouth is: VAR action at Bournemouth match?

Recommended Posts

Fans should take whistles to games and collectively blow them during the drawn out VAR examinations. 

I have to admit I always thought, clearly wrongly, that offsides were judged on a players torso not shoulder or foot. 

Surely those chest things which constantly send data could instantly tell a computer whether one was ahead of the other? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What about missing first 5 minutes of a game a televised game would be best perhaps Liverpool that would send a message.  I can't see a total boycott having any agreement with supporters especially as 22k season ticket holders .  Will also send the Board a message.  Cannot see getting anything from Liverpool going for an invincible season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Ramrod said:

Surely those chest things which constantly send data could instantly tell a computer whether one was ahead of the other? 

That's not a bad idea. If you have to pick an arbitrary point, choose one that already exists and is equipped to do the job. You'd still need some way of accurately deciding when the ball was kicked though  (which is my biggest gripe, it's all very well showing lines drawn across the pitch, but is it at the right moment in time?).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can’t see the club would overly object anymore, just would clearly have to distance themselves due to VAR contract. I base this around Farke’s comments after the last 2 games, those against Spurs well publicised, and yesterday he said how can something be used when it is not proved as accurate and the authorities won’t say what the room for error is.

Jose rude to an official yesterday will probably be charged for that, yet Farke and Coady not charged for far more serious breaches of conduct. 
My feelings after yesterday are even more so. The world says that was onside, why are they not talking about which frame is used in all these situations. Once again the Villa goal that wasn’t they changed their own made VAR rules.

Maybe I am wrong but yesterday it seemed all the clubs ( except us ) that had an axe to grind all got a positive decision yesterday. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Miss Demeanor said:

West Ham's most popular forum is Knees up mother brown, it's the go to forum.

Thanks 🙂

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Nuff Said said:

That's not a bad idea. If you have to pick an arbitrary point, choose one that already exists and is equipped to do the job. You'd still need some way of accurately deciding when the ball was kicked though  (which is my biggest gripe, it's all very well showing lines drawn across the pitch, but is it at the right moment in time?).

Good points.

VAR is intended to be used for 'clear and obvious errors.' 

Instead, it is becoming a forensic examination which takes minutes and stalls the game in multiple aspects. 

The pitch referee and assistant referees were always credited with only having one chance to make a decision in the heat of the moment. If it was an honest decision it should have been accepted whether right or occasionally wrong. 

Unfortunately, TV pundits, managers and players called on TV technology when it suited them and made fools of officials and so the officials wanted a level playing field, hence VAR. 

Lesson 1 is to be careful what you wish for and football has shot itself in the foot. 

The real victims are the people who actually attend the games. 

So, you are a VAR referee. You know your decision will be scrutinised and this time using the same platform. You cannot say you only had one look, it is robotic and dehumanising. And so you will analyse fully because an error is impossible to excuse. 

But the yardstick should be 'clear and obvious' and this should mean you are allowed to accept error because there is no forensic analysis, just a brief assessment for a real clanger. But if a VAR ref does this in a league lead by huge sums of money, sponsorship and online betting he or she will be held up as knowingly letting an error go. 

We then arrive back at the same place which is an honest decision. 

Football has brought VAR on itself. Respect referees and go back to the instant judgement. Players invariably know whether or not they are offside etc. In the case of Pukki's goal the ball was in the air so long he deserved any instinctive consideration, the defenders had all the time they needed, Pukki's skill won and that is the essence of the game. 

VAR has made a rod for official's backs in a nuanced game. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Ramrod said:

Good points.

VAR is intended to be used for 'clear and obvious errors.' 

Instead, it is becoming a forensic examination which takes minutes and stalls the game in multiple aspects. 

The pitch referee and assistant referees were always credited with only having one chance to make a decision in the heat of the moment. If it was an honest decision it should have been accepted whether right or occasionally wrong. 

Unfortunately, TV pundits, managers and players called on TV technology when it suited them and made fools of officials and so the officials wanted a level playing field, hence VAR. 

Lesson 1 is to be careful what you wish for and football has shot itself in the foot. 

The real victims are the people who actually attend the games. 

So, you are a VAR referee. You know your decision will be scrutinised and this time using the same platform. You cannot say you only had one look, it is robotic and dehumanising. And so you will analyse fully because an error is impossible to excuse. 

But the yardstick should be 'clear and obvious' and this should mean you are allowed to accept error because there is no forensic analysis, just a brief assessment for a real clanger. But if a VAR ref does this in a league lead by huge sums of money, sponsorship and online betting he or she will be held up as knowingly letting an error go. 

We then arrive back at the same place which is an honest decision. 

Football has brought VAR on itself. Respect referees and go back to the instant judgement. Players invariably know whether or not they are offside etc. In the case of Pukki's goal the ball was in the air so long he deserved any instinctive consideration, the defenders had all the time they needed, Pukki's skill won and that is the essence of the game. 

VAR has made a rod for official's backs in a nuanced game. 

Can't argue with any of that. Good sum up. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You have actually summed up the problems ramrod, as stated as well by Farke they are looking through frames until they find one giving the result they wanted. Had they used the similar frame to yesterday in the Pukki goal he was onside by a yard, had they used the Pukki incident timing of the frame he was offside yesterday as was Pukki. One way or another one of the decisions were wrong. With the Villa one yesterday it was second phase, the decision to disallow went against their own rules. Bet if you look at the likes of Liverpool’s VAR decisions the most favourable frame is used. It is probably not corrupt but the use of whatever they want is certainly making it look corrupt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×