Jump to content

Recommended Posts

22 minutes ago, Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man said:

VAR is there for four things: goals, penalties, red cards and mistaken identity. 

I get your point that it was a check for a penalty and it showed that it should've been a free kick, but ultimately, VAR is not there to give free kicks so it can't award one. If you do start doing that, you'll have to check all free kicks, because the anti-VAR brigade will claim a few weeks later that 'VAR gave Man City a free kick'.

Appreciate the rule,

 

But how rediculous that they watch an incident for 3 minutes, observe a foul, confirm a foul and restart with a throw in.

 

Especially as referees are encouraged to let play go on, as 'VAR will sort it'

Edited by CDMullins

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, canarydan23 said:

Just say football fans.

Well, in some cases, VAR is needed. Lots of people nitpick about the things that VAR get wrong, but I saw this video the other day and seeing incidents like the ones with Vokes, Nani and Oxlade-Chamberlain make you realise why VAR was brought in. 

https://youtu.be/x5kajRbUMEI

 

5 minutes ago, Well b back said:

Here’s a serious question, at the game did you realise that their player had been sent off ?.

I genuinely don't understand the question. 

 

2 minutes ago, CDMullins said:

Appreciate the rule,

 

But how rediculous that they watch an incident for 3 minutes, observe a foul, confirm a foul and restart with a throw in.

 

Especially as referees are encouraged to let play go on, as 'VAR will sort it'

But like I said, there are some people who criticise everything VAR does, and those people would use the incident as an anti-VAR weapon for weeks.

'Man City were given a free kick, why weren't we?'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I genuinely don't understand the question. 
 

Until after the game we did not realise Watford received a red card, not just me but all I was with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man said:

Well, in some cases, VAR is needed. Lots of people nitpick about the things that VAR get wrong, but I saw this video the other day and seeing incidents like the ones with Vokes, Nani and Oxlade-Chamberlain make you realise why VAR was brought in. 

https://youtu.be/x5kajRbUMEI

 

I genuinely don't understand the question. 

 

But like I said, there are some people who criticise everything VAR does, and those people would use the incident as an anti-VAR weapon for weeks.

'Man City were given a free kick, why weren't we?'

VAR is needed, but not in it's current format, it causes more issues than it resolves. The first thing that needs to happen is to take it out of the hands of the people whose competence is so low that we do need it. A separate body of officials should be VAR administrators. And it should be triggered by the players or coaches, a la cricket or NFL.

At the moment, the blind are leading the blind, so it doesn't matter if they get to see incidents again in that regard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man said:

Well, in some cases, VAR is needed. Lots of people nitpick about the things that VAR get wrong, but I saw this video the other day and seeing incidents like the ones with Vokes, Nani and Oxlade-Chamberlain make you realise why VAR was brought in. 

https://youtu.be/x5kajRbUMEI

 

I genuinely don't understand the question. 

 

But like I said, there are some people who criticise everything VAR does, and those people would use the incident as an anti-VAR weapon for weeks.

'Man City were given a free kick, why weren't we?'

I mean, 

I get there are anti-VAR'ers.

But restarting the game wrongly, is just beyond belief.

Share this post


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

The line goes where I want it to go David…

Loads of people here not looking at the whole pie, Jenny 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still don’t think the technology works well enough to be relied on to the detail it is currently - can we get it exact when it leaves the passer’s foot? can we take a 2d image and get the angles right (no idea if VAR actually uses 3D imaging and we just see the 2d?) etc.?

For me, change the rule to something like clear day light between defender and attacker. That would get rid of the vast majority of the issues, give the benefit of doubt to the attacker resulting in more goals, and result in fewer games decided on debatable lines. You’d still get a handful of very tight calls, but not many.

The point of the rule isn’t to stop people’s big toe being half a millimetre further ahead of a defender’s heel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man said:

Indeed, I didn't celebrate the first goal properly because I was half-expecting it to be brought back for a foul by Pukki. Similarly, I stopped celebrating the second goal when I saw the still of the replay, because Rashica looked marginally off to the naked eye, similar to Cavani yesterday. 

That's probably the worst thing about VAR, that you can't celebrate goals properly any more.

100000000% agree 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Liverpool's second goal given despite clear evidence that Firmino was offside and 100% interfering with play... It's 100% corrupt and suiting the big teams.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, The Great Mass Debater said:

Image

We'll, this appears to be very much true judging by the nonsense that has just happened at Selhurst Park 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Makes you sick that decision, VAR has well and truly ****ed this game over a barrel in regards to how it's casting so much doubt when goals are scored, offsides are being allowed to play on risking players injured for no reason.   Then they favour cheaters.

On top of that it's being used by absolute twats, and they're adjusting the rules of the sport to allow for it - honestly, just get rid if they're too afraid of calling out these cheating ****wits.

Clip here if no-one seen it: https://mixture.gg/v/61ed783382c37

Edited by Google Bot

Share this post


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

Makes you sick that decision, VAR has well and truly ****ed this game over a barrel in regards to how it's casting so much doubt when goals are scored, offsides are being allowed to play on risking players injured for no reason.   Then they favour cheaters.

On top of that it's being used by absolute twats, and they're adjusting the rules of the sport to allow for it - honestly, just get rid if they're too afraid of calling out these cheating ****wits.

https://mixture.gg/v/61ed783382c37

He looks at the goalkeeper and BLATANTLY  hanged direction to deliberately hit him

its as simple a case of simulation you can see, yet the VAR ref and actual ref give a penalty

corruption, it can’t stay secret forever. Hopefully it tanks this league when it does hit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's very simple. A large part of decision-making in football refereeing is opinion. Was he interfering in play? Was there enough contact for a foul? Was it deliberate? etc etc. All VAR does is move from the opinion of the on-field referee to the opinion of a man in front of a TV screen. It's never going to get rid of controversy. Just get rid of it.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shocking decision. This one feels like the VAR person looking to find a reason to give a penalty rather than the stated idea of looking to see if there is a clear and obvious error.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Google Bot said:

Makes you sick that decision, VAR has well and truly ****ed this game over a barrel in regards to how it's casting so much doubt when goals are scored, offsides are being allowed to play on risking players injured for no reason.   Then they favour cheaters.

On top of that it's being used by absolute twats, and they're adjusting the rules of the sport to allow for it - honestly, just get rid if they're too afraid of calling out these cheating ****wits.

Clip here if no-one seen it: https://mixture.gg/v/61ed783382c37

Blatantly wrong and corrupt. Pathetic. Just an effing circus.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Robert N. LiM said:

All VAR does is move from the opinion of the on-field referee to the opinion of a man in front of a TV screen. It's never going to get rid of controversy. Just get rid of it.

It's the "Clear and obvious" element to VAR that winds me up most, Instead of being the parachute for incorrect decisions, it's actually front and centre of the entire game, dictating rules and dominating how and when official calls are made.

It'll never be got rid of now though, the people who decide that decision would also be lowering the blade on jobs in that sector - and potentially their own management positions.  Money also wins out.

20 years of "Professional" referring, and here is where we are - ridiculous.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One day they will realise football is not played in slow motion and get a true reflection of replayed incidents by only looking at them in true time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've always said it ... get rid of VAR

1. It was 'the beautiful game' BEFORE VAR was invented ...... Pele, Maradona, Best, Batistuta and Huckerby didn't have it / need it - why do we now?

2. It categorically doesn't strip away the human element of adjudicating - thus - it remains as a subjective process ... hence CERTAIN clubs getting decisions that others wouldn't (which has been shown time and time and time again). There's no conspiracy at work and there's no corruption BUT subconsciously the geeks behind the screens are FAR more likely to alert the ref if Ronaldo tumbles in the box when he feels a hand brush his shoulder rather than if Pukki gets a shove in the penalty area at Old Trafford and the ref hasn't seen it himself. That can't be denied.

3. VAR wouldn't have been allowed into (an ALREADY awesomely effective and successful sport) if people had known the form that it has quickly ended up taking. It was ONLY introduced (like goal line tech) to blow the whistle on CLEAR AND OBVIOUS referee errors but because they 'can' measure an offside by a millimetre or freeze frame a tackle or handball we seem to 'have' to wheel it out ... often despite neither players nor fans appealing against an error by the ref!!!

4. If you put it to a vote I GUARANTEE the fans and players would vote to ditch it by 75% at least.

5. Finally, did any of us mourn the absence of VAR last season when we dipped back out of it and into the Championship .... OR .... was the spectacle (and sport itself) EVEN BETTER without it?

Football is poetry, organic and chaotic .... not a science, robotic and sterile. 

Unplug VAR at the mains.

Edited by Cantiaci Canary
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's never a foul by Kane, not even bothered with by VAR 🙄

Seriously just bin the crap now! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Ken Hairy said:

That's never a foul by Kane, not even bothered with by VAR 🙄

Seriously just bin the crap now! 

Chelsea payed more

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, CDMullins said:

But they confirmed there was a foul...

Why are we allowing wrong decisions even after VAR has been checked?

It's really not hard.

Referees and linesmen are being told not to give decisions unless they are sure, because VAR will sort it 

But instead of getting a free kick on edge of the box, Man City got a throw in.

You're basically arguing for VAR to micromanage every single decision in that case. That's really not something we should be pushing for.

VAR can be used to give a penalty. It can't be used to give a free kick. Hence, no free kick was awarded and play continued.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, king canary said:

Shocking decision. This one feels like the VAR person looking to find a reason to give a penalty rather than the stated idea of looking to see if there is a clear and obvious error.

Agreed. 606 just said (Chris Sutton) that if it takes 3 minutes to try and reach a decision looking at it from all angles and then hand the responsibility back to the ref. it most certainly was NOT a 'clear and obvious' error originally.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate VAR because it makes the referees even worse, knowing that they have that insurance to ensure they don't make an error. The "clear and obvious error" thing is completely subjective and it just means we get two d15kheads making decisions rather than one. One of them has to basically say - "you got that wrong" and they aren't likely to do that when the decision means 60,000 scousers/mancs or cockerneys are going to shout at them. It may well be subconscious, but it's there.

It should only be used for offsides if it's retained, never fouls, penalties or red cards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thing is I, as a fan, called for video evidence for years. I remember doing a pamphlet on it in GCSE English (so at least 24 years ago). I never imagined anything as awful as the VAR we have today

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Yellow Wal said:

One day they will realise football is not played in slow motion and get a true reflection of replayed incidents by only looking at them in true time.

That's it. That's the ultimate problem with refereeing via VAR. I've had a fair few discussions here regarding judging malice in tackles where the argument for malice in the tackle is literally one freeze-frame capture of the foul showing the impact. I accept that there will be occasions where freeze-frame refereeing is needed, but mainly for gauging if a player has just got to a ball first before catching a player, or indeed vice versa. Same with balls being in or out of play in the tightest of cases.

Another problem with VAR that doesn't get mentioned much is the imbalance between leagues with it and grassroots football. Since its advent, I maintain as a former grassroots / junior referee that the offside rule in particular is completely unworkable for local level officials simply as you're not guaranteed assistant referees at every game for starters. It's hard enough playing the old dictum of favouring the attack in case of doubt. Did that in one game - Bromley Cross vs. Hindley at U13s or U14s one year. It ended 9-6 and I got more sh-i-te in that game than in most others. At local level, you'll find it's far easier if in doubt for referees to favour the defence on both sides.

Simplifying the offside rule back to the old days would make it easier. Don't bother with "interfering with play". Yes, the idea is nice in that it tries to give the attackers a better chance, but you make it unworkable at these speeds. As Brian Clough used to say, "if he's not interfering with play, what's he doing on the pitch?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, The Great Mass Debater said:

I never imagined anything as awful as the VAR we have today

I think it will eventually lead to the game changing in quite a strong way, because now we're becoming accustomed to stopping after play I think they will actually start to pause the clock on checks.  Almost how American sports work, with the argument that it's good to allow players to always be at their peak.

It wouldn't surprise me whereby in the future that extends to teams being able to bring on set piece players in the interval as more checks are standard procedure, either.

The prem league to me, has a very NFL 'first down' feel to it, whereby players get as high up the pitch as possible, take a touch and then trip over the opponents leg to allow them to regroup as a team.  The pattern is ridiculously common.

VAR is also allowing this exploiting of the rules continually also - because the top players can technically win a foul by the rules of the game without any intent from the fouling player.   It's quite embarrassing to watch and it makes me feel robbed.  Perhaps the younger generation perhaps buy into it a little more as they know no different and maybe see that as a skill of the game, but for me, I'm so dismayed with it all. 

You just have to accept it though, it's a bulldozer of an industry.  It's annoying that we always seem to wave the flag of morality as a club though, when it's clearly a massive part of being a success at this level.

Edited by Google Bot

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

×
×
  • Create New...