VAR

[Richard]

12 hours ago, Super_horns said:

Is there a danger it will be over-used and officials become too reliant on VAR?

 

If they bring it in every week you can just see it being used for one incident one week and then not so the next which will lead to managers and players complaining much as they do now or appealing for it to be used.

 

I do think it can work and of course there will be issues early on but you are going to have to ground rules as to what exactly VAR can and cannot be used for.

Absolutely. Now there is video technology there’s an expectation that every single decision has to be ‘correct’ - I use inverted commas here because often there is no objective correct decision. 

 

Referees are are under even more pressure to get everything right and as such if there’s even .1% doubt in their mind they’ll consult VAR, it’s definitely been used for more types of decisions than it should have done already

[Far Post Gerry]

14 minutes ago, Richard said:

Absolutely. Now there is video technology there’s an expectation that every single decision has to be ‘correct’ - I use inverted commas here because often there is no objective correct decision. 

 

Referees are are under even more pressure to get everything right and as such if there’s even .1% doubt in their mind they’ll consult VAR, it’s definitely been used for more types of decisions than it should have done already

Exactly. And not only that, VAR will give a foul for any slight contact, push or pull (like the Llorente one last night). Everything looks worse in slow motion.

 

So not only will every decision have to be 100% "correct", checked and verified, every innocuous incident will become a foul.

 

 

[ScouseFox]

cannot wait for the world cup. pretty sure the majority of refs will never have used it, the players, refs and fans have no idea how it’s used and it’s going to decide the world cup final. belter. 

[m4DD0gg]

Not sure what any one has got to complain about last night. 

 

You are not allowed to take staggered runs ups.....correct decision.

 

Llorente clearly pulled the Rochdale players shirt in the goal build up so a foul.

[Mrfox452]

9 minutes ago, m4DD0gg said:

Not sure what any one has got to complain about last night. 

 

You are not allowed to take staggered runs ups.....correct decision.

 

Llorente clearly pulled the Rochdale players shirt in the goal build up so a foul.

Fair enough....but do we really need Var to see that? Staggered run ups have been going on for years. Why ain't the ref picking up something simple as that?

 

Personally that's var being incredibly picky and trying to prove a point. Also the big question for me is what happens next time this happens? It's a matter of consistency.

[m4DD0gg]

1 minute ago, Mrfox452 said:

Fair enough....but do we really need Var to see that? Staggered run ups have been going on for years. Why ain't the ref picking up something simple as that?

 

Personally that's var being incredibly picky and trying to prove a point. Also the big question for me is what happens next time this happens? It's a matter of consistency.

because its the rules.

 

cant have one with and one without and its high time things like this were enforced as well as shirt pulling.

[AKCJ]

I thought VAR was used to rectify "clear and obvious errors".

 

If it's taking 2/3 minutes to work it out with every camera angle imaginable then how the **** can it be a clear and obvious error?

 

A clear and obvious error should be able to be sorted in 10/15 seconds max. Just needs someone with a set of stones to make the call. Someone who can come out after the game and explain.

 

They should also have referee microphones (match referee and video referee) on loud speaker so that you don't have thousands of people wondering what the **** is happening.

 

1 hour ago, Mrfox452 said:

 

Fair enough....but do we really need Var to see that? Staggered run ups have been going on for years. Why ain't the ref picking up something simple as that?

 

Personally that's var being incredibly picky and trying to prove a point. Also the big question for me is what happens next time this happens? It's a matter of consistency.

They didn't need VAR to review that. The referee made that decision instantly.

 

It was the actual awarding of the penalty that took time.

[RowlattsFox]

I want to like VAR but I have my doubts. Football is just too open to interpretation and there is too much grey area sometimes. The shit referees who have used it so far, I'm looking at you Moss, Pawson and Tierney have just taken away their responsibilities and waiting to be told if someone is ok or not.

 

How will it work if it was rolled out for every game? VAR ref at each game? one VAR ref watching all games in a studio? Surely there's not enough refs to have 10 sitting in an office watching games.

 

If its only clear and obvious errors then it should just be the fourth official, and the ref has a look on a video to see if he's wrong.

 

 

Edited 1 March 2018 by RowlattsFox

[Richard]

To me if it were to be implemented it should be solely at the referees discretion. If a referee or linesman aren’t 100% sure of something for example offiside or contact in the box, they can refer the decision to the 4th official who could have access to a tv/iPad/whatever, have a quick look and then feedback to the referee. It should be another ‘tool’ the referee uses (like spray and Hawkeye) to try and get the right decision. 

 

No appeals process open to manipulation, no mystery omnipotent person hidden away in some studio, it just gives the referee a chance to ‘check’ if they are aren’t sure like the ref wanted to in the Liverpool v Tottenham few weeks back. 

 

And referees should be given the chance to give a statement after the game if they’ve made a mistake. 

[yorkie1999]

6 hours ago, ScouseFox said:

cannot wait for the world cup. pretty sure the majority of refs will never have used it, the players, refs and fans have no idea how it’s used and it’s going to decide the world cup final. belter. 

For the sake of the game the refs need to use it, and at every possible opportunity, just to show us (or the powers that be) how crap football could become. It should only be used for diving and simulation as, to me, this is the area that is really open for cheating and conning the officials. 

Edited 1 March 2018 by yorkie1999

[Soar Fox]

6 hours ago, m4DD0gg said:

Not sure what any one has got to complain about last night. 

 

You are not allowed to take staggered runs ups.....correct decision.

 

Llorente clearly pulled the Rochdale players shirt in the goal build up so a foul.

Hopefully if they are stopping that they will review when goalkeepers come off their lines when facing a penalty. 

[m4DD0gg]

37 minutes ago, Steve_Walsh5 said:

Hopefully if they are stopping that they will review when goalkeepers come off their lines when facing a penalty. 

Yup should do. Always amazes me that laws are in place but seldom followed. 

[Richard]

1 hour ago, Steve_Walsh5 said:

Hopefully if they are stopping that they will review when goalkeepers come off their lines when facing a penalty. 

Kasper’s one of the worst for this

[StanSP]

35 minutes ago, Richard said:

Kasper’s one of the worst for this

Adrian at West Ham is the worst. 

[Soar Fox]

28 minutes ago, StanSP said:

Adrian at West Ham is the worst. 

Ridiculous how far he was off his line when Ulloa scored that penalty. 

[TheUltimateWinner]

Good insight from Clattenburg in The Times on how VAR can be improved, can't say I disagree.

Quote

 

We need VAR, 100 per cent, but it should be used ten times a season not ten times in a single game, as it felt like it was at Wembley on Wednesday night. We should be correcting those absolutely scandalous decisions, where everybody agrees “that’s wrong”, not overturning judgment calls or reviewing every single piece of information. We must be transparent and we have to be careful about not losing the emotion of football.

The system is here to stay so we had better get used to it, but it’s still in the experimental stage and it has teething problems. I’m sure it’ll get better the more we use it, but at the moment it feels as though every decision, every foul, is being looked at, that the VAR is actually refereeing matches, which isn’t right. They’re getting involved in situations that they simply don’t need to be involved with.

 

I’ve watched Tottenham Hotspur’s FA Cup victory over Rochdale and listened to the responses of managers and players. From my perspective, there are a few points to make and the first is that we have the quickest football in the world and we don’t want a stop-start game. Six minutes of added time after the first-half was a long time — too long — and we have to look at speeding up the decision-making.

 

The worst possible finish to a tennis match is when it’s match point, the ball goes out and a player challenges the call. What should be a moment of jubilation becomes an anticlimax. When Spurs scored the other night, it felt similar; players used to look across to the assistant referee to check that there was no flag, now they’d be scared to celebrate in case they made a fool of themselves and the goal was overturned. There was no excitement about scoring.

That’s the emotional side of it, but VAR is also in danger of taking authority away from our referees. Érik Lamela’s early “goal” for Spurs was ruled out after a lengthy discussion between Paul Tierney, the referee, and Graham Scott, his VAR, because of a foul by Fernando Llorente, but I didn’t think that was a clear and obvious error. It was a judgment call by the referee.

 

In that instance, Tierney should be left to make that decision. VAR should not be advising on what I’d term a “soft foul”. Was it a foul or not? People are still arguing about it. The referee had already made his decision on the pitch and he didn’t think it was a foul. You may think it was, one of my colleagues may think the same, but it’s not one you can clear up with VAR. So it should stay on the pitch — that’s football.

 

I saw Swansea City beat Sheffield Wednesday the night before and that was the same. There was nothing of note, but both times Swansea scored, Stuart Attwell, the referee, was putting his finger to his ear to check they were good goals. They were clearly good goals. There was no discussion, no appeal. If the officials can’t make those decisions and have confidence in them, they shouldn’t be on the field.

That loss of authority reminds me a bit of what happened in rugby league, where it was almost as though the referees became frightened of making a mistake, particularly if they didn’t consult the video assistant, so they ended up using VAR for everything. So we need to have clearer guidelines on what referees can and cannot do, but we shouldn’t be re-refereeing the game. The referee makes the decisions.

 

For goals you have something between one minute and 90 seconds until the restart and that should allow the VAR to do a “silent check”; make sure there was no offside, no blatant foul in the build-up, that the ball was still in play. It should only take 15 seconds. The goalscoring team can still be celebrating in the corner, the defenders talking about whose fault it was and the referee making his way to the halfway line.

In any case, we should be using VAR to overturn travesties: Thierry Henry’s handball goal for France against Ireland and, if you look over the course of this season, Abdoulaye Doucouré punching in a late equaliser for Watford — a clear act of attempting to deceive the referee — that obvious offside when Miguel Britos made it 3-3 for Watford against Liverpool. That is what the system is made for.

 

We have to be clearer with supporters, too. When you point your finger to your ear, nobody knows what’s going on or is being said. Referees could open up their microphones, not so they’re heard all the time, but at the right moment.

They could say: “I want this incident checked because of this reason.” It would give fans an understanding. Referees are under so much scrutiny, but once you let people know what’s going on, they’ll be far more accepting.

 

 

[SpacedX]

For me VAR needs to return a verdict within a time limit - maybe 60 seconds. If a decision cannot be arrived upon within that specified time then the ref who should have already consulted with his assistants should base his decision upon the information provided by match officials and failing that his own judgement. What happened during the Spurs v Rochdale replay was farcical. I heard Danny Rose interviewed by Talk Sport after the game and his frustration and anger was understandable. I fully understand how annoying the confusion and lack of clarification can be for both players and attendees notwithstanding the risk of injury from the lapse in play. 

 

Related to that, why does no one, players, managers, pundits and fans alike start calling out feigned injuries. I'm not referring to diving, that's a separate issue, more the ridiculous exaggerated reactions to tackles. Case in point, Clucas and that dreadful high challenge from Diabate. Nasty tackle and from the outcome viewed from the stands, I thought it was a leg breaker. Watching it back on TV that night, fortunately there was only the slightest contact but the player was on the floor for several minutes - other leg twitching, face contorted and crying out in mock agony. Thirty seconds after he's back on his feet having affected a limp for the first ten steps, he's haring around again after a three minute stoppage. Last night against Arsenal, Aguero was brought down near the touchline. The pitches are so well 'mic'-ed up these days that you could hear his fake cry when he hurled himself to the ground as though he's been hit by a sniper. Replay revealed that it was just a brush but it didn't stop him writhing on the floor for a minute. Man City again, versus Cardiff- and I do concede that the tackle by Bennett on Sane was shocking, but in the opening minutes of the game Gundogan was launched skyward in a very shit challenge outside the box. Hit the deck immediately started punching the turf rolling side to side (Demarai Gray is very prone to this) then raised his hand to the bench which to me indicates that there's a serious problem (think Mccarthy's recent leg break at Everton). Four minutes of stoppage time ensued for wasted mock treatment ... back on his feet and he was running around again within ten seconds. 

 

I do understand that this sort of shit can be tactical and that there is advantage to be gained by miking a hard tackle. But almost invariably the replay shows barely any contact made. Why is this bollocks tolerated and consistently ignored during highlights coverage? It should be singled out and ridiculed. If you attempted this shit on a rugby field or in the NFL you'd be laughed out of the ground and your career would be tarnished for life. It has become part of the game - engendered at grass roots and reinforced at the highest levels - so it's just accepted. For me, it almost makes football unwatchable. Perhaps in addition to venting spleen at the disruptive nature of VAR we should also be exposing stoppages due to simulation which are now at such high levels that practically every match is marred by it.

[RowlattsFox]

Agree with Clattenburg on the 'silent' check', they can check every goal without making a big scene about it and then only if it is 'clearly' wrong should they overturn.

 

The VAR ref would have to be on the ball to quickly watch a replay (how long does it take for them to get footage of an incident?). Problems would be when something is not given on the pitch and play continues.

[The Quick Brown Fox]

How about a system where only players can call for reviews, if they call for something like a penalty and they are priced wrong a booking is given. This would (you'd hope) result in VAR only being called when a player is sure a wrong decision has been made. An example would be, a penalty has been awarded but the defender is adamant he didn't touch/foul the opposite player. He calls for VAR and if correct the opposite gets booked for diving and play continues with freekick. If the review shows it was a foul and is a pen then the player calling for review is booked for time wasting. 

[fuchsntf]

Before people get on their negative,Posting,Know-all, high horses.

Lets Pull Back a Bit,give all the variants and ideas within var to be aired,wait to See how

It actually developes. 

It was always going to be blatently obvious,that It would Bring Up issues,questions.

 

At present the 2 Major Points seem to be time taken,and User Up.

And Information being relaxed,outwards to the Fans..

 

These 2 Problems,over a Short time,by the end of this season,can be resolved. 

The Improvement also on technology,and kmprovement poor Handling of user,

Will get better each week.

Plus a group of Set of Ground  Rules flexable enough to Update,at least every month,

Every 6 Months,every season,depending on Situation.

Opinioned Bad Fouls,or unseen unfair Play,can still be Dealt with,after the Game.

Lets wait to See what the ,variants ,controversial- moments,expected-moments,and comparables,

it begins to Show.

Even If WE decide its,only for the Handball Re Henry,or Lampards-disallowed Wcup goal,Moments.

ITS still a Help.

Diving,or penalties,will still be contentious.

Offsidec couldbe easy to decide,by tweeking 

For example..how much of the attackers-body,is allowed to be in Front of the Defender..

A Meter,half a Meter,or None. Personally I feel when ITS a Leg or an arm/head etc, die

It shouldn't be considered Offside,with Var and Techno,Set Up accordingly,one can

Immediately See and have Programmed..25% 60%,75%,..95% of Body or only anything

Within a Meter is onside. Then little time would be needed,to decide.

Penalties..need a definitiv  rule,No contact on Ball any contact on Player,or after follow through,

Peno. Then decide Whats considered a natural-coming together,where Players collide on each Other..

We still See where both players have feet/studs Up,but ref gives Yellow/red to only one.. 

 

 

 

[Super_horns]

Looks like the Premier league teams are going to reject it..

 

But no doubt when an error is made next season the manager whose team the decision goes against will say "Now if we had VAR..."

[Guest worth_the_wait]

This article on the BBC today puts it pretty well, in my opinion:

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/43278167

 

Let's be honest, VAR (video assistant referees) has been a disaster. Quite what business the Football Association, which hosts the oldest club competition in the world, is doing experimenting with such a high-profile property beggars belief.

 

For over 100 years the referee's 'opinion' has been final. With the aid of technology the FA and now Fifa, from what I understand, are about to bow to science, and an element of public pressure, and spit on the game's roots and most sacrosanct tradition by introducing this technological

evil.

 

I know I will be labelled a luddite but before you condemn me let's consider what is at stake here.

 

The game has, for generations, respected the view of the referee. The technocrats in the game told us that goal-line technology was essential and without it the game was being starved of natural justice. I could have lived without goal-line technology but I see the logic. However, what VAR is attempting to do is reduce the referee to a mere traffic warden.

 

Every conceivable angle is covered in a Premier League fixture and quite rightly so. The public pay though the nose to see live football and therefore should get value for money. But the game itself should be assessed on the values it has always set itself and that is the referee's 'view' must be the final arbiter and must be respected.

 

Referees have never had eyes at the back of their heads, and neither should they, but that is what VAR is proposing. What VAR is about to do is challenge every decision based on the letter of the law.

 

Well, if you did that you could arguably find an infringement in every challenge regardless of which team you supported. The match would eventually grind to a halt.

 

The game has always been about opinions and on the field of play there is only one opinion that counts and that is the referee. He can only give what he sees. VAR sees everything and will only serve to complicate matters. It will not make the game better.

 

It is the lack of respect for referees that is in danger of killing the game and allowed VAR to take centre stage. And I must say it is doing it very badly.