VAR yes or no ..... Discuss

[st albans fox]

Reported yesterday that contrary to European football, in the PL next season, lino’s will always raise their flags to indicate offside but players will be encouraged to pay to the whilstle and not the flag (so refs will not blow if they feel the decision is tight) 

 

now I was thinking about the reasoning for this as at first glance, it appears to be a recipe for chaos 

 

the only thing that occurs to me is that we will have the flag raised so that fans will assume that despite the goal being scored, it is likely to be chalked off. The VAR review could then award the goal. This, I assume is considered a better option than flags being kept down in tight situations and goals being disallowed thereafter. 

[StanSP]

10 hours ago, st albans fox said:

Reported yesterday that contrary to European football, in the PL next season, lino’s will always raise their flags to indicate offside but players will be encouraged to pay to the whilstle and not the flag (so refs will not blow if they feel the decision is tight) 

 

now I was thinking about the reasoning for this as at first glance, it appears to be a recipe for chaos 

 

the only thing that occurs to me is that we will have the flag raised so that fans will assume that despite the goal being scored, it is likely to be chalked off. The VAR review could then award the goal. This, I assume is considered a better option than flags being kept down in tight situations and goals being disallowed thereafter. 

Not a fan of that. Yes play to the whistle but it'll be engrained in players (defenders and attackers) to stop when they see the distraction of the flag. 

 

Why not just keep it as don't raise the flag if it's tight and leave it to VAR to determine after the goal has been scored, if so?

[st albans fox]

12 minutes ago, StanSP said:

Not a fan of that. Yes play to the whistle but it'll be engrained in players (defenders and attackers) to stop when they see the distraction of the flag. 

 

Why not just keep it as don't raise the flag if it's tight and leave it to VAR to determine after the goal has been scored, if so?

That’s what we all thought but I wonder if the thought is that it’s better to award a goal you aren’t expecting to be given than to disallow one you think is genuine (re crowd control - maybe they still don’t trust some to be mature enough to accept stuff). 

[yorkie1999]

3 hours ago, StanSP said:

Not a fan of that. Yes play to the whistle but it'll be engrained in players (defenders and attackers) to stop when they see the distraction of the flag. 

 

Why not just keep it as don't raise the flag if it's tight and leave it to VAR to determine after the goal has been scored, if so?

I'm not sure about that. When i played football, you didn't take any notice of the lino until the ref signaled the offside, then you went and beat the lino up.

[Matt]

Yes, forget losing the controversy, discussion, the loss of banter when talking to opposition fans, I want correct decisions.

 

However even with VAR we have controversy, wrong decision, discussion and there are still debates to be had - VAR is in it's early days and hopefully, it will become better - with less wrong decisions made.

 

I hope the introduction results in a 'leveller' and it ends the big team bias although I have my doubts as ultimately it's still based on opinion which could be influenced, unfortunately I don't see any way around that, it's the way it is. Therefore you have to question will it make any difference whatsoever - VAR whilst being bought in to improve the game, get the right decisions could possibly make the game even worse in the way that the decisions are being reviewed yet certain teams still get favoured, it remains to be seen.

[Corky]

On 21/04/2019 at 09:09, Cardiff_Fox said:

I’ve come to the conclusion now it should only be used for closed yes or no decisions. 

 

Its use on handballs has just led to different interpretations 

It isn't some super-intelligent robot, it is another human looking at the decision.

 

You will always have interpretive decisions. There is no defined law in the book about how much contact is needed for a foul, for example. And as you say the handball issue will be chaos.

 

VAR will help with some decisions being overturned or confirmed but anyone thinking it will eradicate debate and discussion is wrong.

[fuchsntf]

4 hours ago, Corky said:

It isn't some super-intelligent robot, it is another human looking at the decision.

 

You will always have interpretive decisions. There is no defined law in the book about how much contact is needed for a foul, for example. And as you say the handball issue will be chaos.

 

VAR will help with some decisions being overturned or confirmed but anyone thinking it will eradicate debate and discussion is wrong.

Plus...a good technical idea,is going to be ****ed up by the authorities....not the refs,not the linesman,but too much functionaire intervention off the field,

abusing the obvious,and common sense..

[Winchesterfox]

VAR doesn't have to be perfect.  It just has to be better than what we have now.  If it stops the howlers and makes players think twice before diving - which is really hard to spot live - it has to be worth a go.

[ozleicester]

VAR is already ruining the game.

[Nick]

In principle it’s a yes to VAR all the way.

 

In practice - it’s just not ready yet to be rolled out on the big stage in its current format.

[davieG]

It's not VAR ruining the game it's whoever is responsible for the continuing tweaking of the rules and the refs, based on the WWC are making it worst by spending to much time setting up free kicks, penalties and checking VAR.

 

The seemingly standard 7 mins add on is only a fraction of the time wasted for free kicks and penalties.

[KrefelderFox666]

2 hours ago, davieG said:

It's not VAR ruining the game it's whoever is responsible for the continuing tweaking of the rules and the refs, based on the WWC are making it worst by spending to much time setting up free kicks, penalties and checking VAR.

 

The seemingly standard 7 mins add on is only a fraction of the time wasted for free kicks and penalties.

Exactly this, VAR is part of the game's development. The issue is the timing and speed of it, that really needs improving and possibly clearer rules around fouls/handball/offside etc.

 

An example, when a ball is played through to a player who goes 1 on 1 (suspected offside), someone in the VAR room reviews this as soon as the pass is made, if it looks suspiciously offside, notify the linesperson to flag at the end of the action (especially if a goal is scored). This is better than thinking you have scored for 30 seconds, only for something to then be reviewed.

[Dan LCFC]

I've seen enough and for me it's a no. It will kill so much of the euphoria.

[DennisNedry]

With VAR you basically can't celebrate a goal until it's been reviewed for offsides, fouls in build up etc. Takes the raw emotion out of the game for me.

 

It's already gone beyond it's original purpose of eliminating 'clear and obvious' errors, to ruling out goals for marginal offsides such as the England v USA goal, and awarding dodgy handballs as well.

[oxford blue]

On 05/07/2019 at 16:06, DennisNedry said:

It's already gone beyond it's original purpose of eliminating 'clear and obvious' errors, to ruling out goals for marginal offsides such as the England v USA goal, and awarding dodgy handballs as well.

I agree. Unless VAR goes back to its original purpose of ending the obvious errors, it will become just as controversial as incorrect decisions are now. I struggle to understand why White's 'handball' goal v USA was disallowed; she was being robustly challenged and if the ball did brush a hand it was with no intent to gain an advantage having bounced from her body. With regards to extreme marginal offsides, how can we be certain the angle of the cameras is sifficient to determine if someone's foot is a few millimetres offside. (Even Hawkeye at Wimbledon has a margin of error - I note Wozniacki was critical over 3 decisions that went against her - and this system must be more accurate than judging very marginal offsides.

 

If a decision is reviewed. I also question why the VAR should not make the decision.  This happens in both codes of rugby and would speed the decision, saving the referee running to the touchline to check the decision. It is unnecessary and further halts the flow of the game - if it corrects a clear error, then a final decsioon by the referee on the pitch should not be necessary. 

 

VAR does have a place in helping correct decisions being made, but a balance needs to be struck between the use of VAR and accepting the decision of the referee on the pitch. It is clear that the controversy caused by VAR decisions at the Women's World Cup - and the time taken to review decisions - that it is not correct. I hope it improves for the PL ina few eeks time. (The use of large screens should help - so the referee can make the decision himself and fans can see what is being reviewed - it is not always evident to the spectators.)

 

[davieG]

33 minutes ago, oxford blue said:

I agree. Unless VAR goes back to its original purpose of ending the obvious errors, it will become just as controversial as incorrect decisions are now. I struggle to understand why White's 'handball' goal v USA was disallowed; she was being robustly challenged and if the ball did brush a hand it was with no intent to gain an advantage having bounced from her body. With regards to extreme marginal offsides, how can we be certain the angle of the cameras is sifficient to determine if someone's foot is a few millimetres offside. (Even Hawkeye at Wimbledon has a margin of error - I note Wozniacki was critical over 3 decisions that went against her - and this system must be more accurate than judging very marginal offsides.

 

If a decision is reviewed. I also question why the VAR should not make the decision.  This happens in both codes of rugby and would speed the decision, saving the referee running to the touchline to check the decision. It is unnecessary and further halts the flow of the game - if it corrects a clear error, then a final decsioon by the referee on the pitch should not be necessary. 

 

VAR does have a place in helping correct decisions being made, but a balance needs to be struck between the use of VAR and accepting the decision of the referee on the pitch. It is clear that the controversy caused by VAR decisions at the Women's World Cup - and the time taken to review decisions - that it is not correct. I hope it improves for the PL ina few eeks time. (The use of large screens should help - so the referee can make the decision himself and fans can see what is being reviewed - it is not always evident to the spectators.)

 

Agree with that, if it's on the big screen I'm sure we'll be hearing plenty of renditions of You don't know what you're doing, so no change there.

[Super_horns]

Every handball will probably be looked at so defenders beware!

[Kopfkino]

I think it will be a lot more sensible in the PL and be genuinely for 'clear and obvious', as it has been when I've seen it used in other domestic leagues. This is what Mike Riley has basically said according to The Times. 

[Kopfkino]

7 hours ago, oxford blue said:

I agree. Unless VAR goes back to its original purpose of ending the obvious errors, it will become just as controversial as incorrect decisions are now. I struggle to understand why White's 'handball' goal v USA was disallowed; she was being robustly challenged and if the ball did brush a hand it was with no intent to gain an advantage having bounced from her body. With regards to extreme marginal offsides, how can we be certain the angle of the cameras is sifficient to determine if someone's foot is a few millimetres offside. (Even Hawkeye at Wimbledon has a margin of error - I note Wozniacki was critical over 3 decisions that went against her - and this system must be more accurate than judging very marginal offsides.

 

Because that's the rule now and they've made kt pretty black and white. If it hits your arm whether it's completely accidental or deliberate and you score, then the goal is disallowed. 

 

I think offside needs looking at but idk what they can do different beyond a rule change that would probably end up worse. 

[ozleicester]

"she is onside ...for the moment" ............was part of the commentary today. What a total joke, the game is being played for 30 seconds or more and the players, the ref, the assistants and THE FANS do not know if it is real.

 

Everyone involved knows that it could all be a waste of time, the injury, the foul, the sending offable offence could all be pointless because someone will call it offside 3 minutes later!

 

And people think money is ruining the game

[Dan LCFC]

The VAR use in the Copa America was an utter embarrassment.

 

When those watching TV can know for sure significantly before the referee does, that's laughable, and totally defeats the point.

[Lesta2014]

I don’t want it in the prem, I think it will be used poorly and il end up hating football because of it! 

[davieG]

Manchester City's Gabriel Jesus scored once, assisted another goal, was sent off and pushed over the VAR monitor as Brazil won a first Copa America title in 12 years, beating Peru 3-1.

 

The VAR monitor bore the brunt of Gabriel Jesus's anger when he was sent off

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/48897389

 

[Captain...]

VAR at the women’s World Cup has caused some concern but I do think it is a good thing they stopped reviewing the goalkeeper staying on the line at penalties. 

 

Really football needs to decide does it want to be a passionate crazy sport that divides opinion and causes debate or a clinical game of exact margins and games decided, correctly, on millimetres. 

 

Var can still be used without completely killing the game, but it needs to be used in a way that empowers the ref, without putting them under pressure. Every time the ref is told to look at the screen they are under pressure to change their decision and it takes fvcking ages. If 4 qualified officials in a van can’t decide if it is a foul then it is not a clear and obvious error. Trust the ref to read the game and manage it and help them out when there is something off the ball that the ref can’t see.

 

Offsides still need work, the rule is to prevent unfair advantage not a millimetre advantage. Football is a fast paced game and we want to see fast attacking play rewarded not cancelled out because of a big toe being offside.

[Suzie the Fox]

7 minutes ago, davieG said:

Manchester City's Gabriel Jesus scored once, assisted another goal, was sent off and pushed over the VAR monitor as Brazil won a first Copa America title in 12 years, beating Peru 3-1.

 

The VAR monitor bore the brunt of Gabriel Jesus's anger when he was sent off

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/48897389

 

Saw the video of this a few mins ago