VAR yes or no ..... Discuss

[Corky]

8 minutes ago, Trav Le Bleu said:

Personally, I'm fed up with players crowding the ref and begging him to look at VAR for practically every decision.

Yep. Ref should tell them to fvck off. Though the VAR refs and himself deciding the second penalty was deliberate handball means he loses some credit.

[Finnegan]

Getting really wound up with Shearer getting really wound up. 

 

He's been ranting frankly unprofessionally about var all tournament for no reason other than he's a ****ing changephobe, nearly all of his complaints aren't to do with var itself. 

 

In this instance, var isn't the problem, the ref is. The ref watched the handball again and gave it, the ref wanted to give the handball. 

 

That's **** all to do with having the technology, that's going to happen either way. 

 

Unless you want to programme a robot to referee games you're going to have human error whether they can watch replays or not. 

[Suzie the Fox]

Var yes or no.. Discuss!

 

Var YES!

 

HOWEVER .. Watching Portugal game just now then i think its damn right patheric. There was no way in hell that was a peno for Iran. Its a joke. 

 

[Finnegan]

Just now, Suzie the Fox said:

Var yes or no.. Discuss!

 

Var YES!

 

HOWEVER .. Watching Portugal game just now then i think its damn right patheric. There was no way in hell that was a peno for Iran. Its a joke. 

 

 

But we've had a huge net gain of correct decisions in this tournament and only one or two gone wrong. 

 

It's not going to be 100%

 

Drogba 

[Guest MattP]

The problem isn't VAR - it's referees appearing to not know the rules. If a professional official thinks that is handball then it's not the fault of a TV screen showing it him.

 

The Spain game showed it as it's best, goal wrongly disallowed and overturned.

[st albans fox]

ITS RIDICULOUS - THE OFFICIALS IN THE VAR STUDIO AND THE REFEREE ARE BOTH WRONG. WHATS THE POINT OF IT?

 

the var ref is supposed to help the referee. I hate it. Video evidence is supposed to but out the errors, not increase them. 

[Guest]

Just now, st albans fox said:

ITS RIDICULOUS - THE OFFICIALS IN THE VAR STUDIO AND THE REFEREE ARE BOTH WRONG. WHATS THE POINT OF IT?

 

the var ref is supposed to help the referee. I hate it. Video evidence is supposed to but out the errors, not increase them. 

It hasn't increased the number of refereeing errors at all though, has it?

[Lcfcbisto]

I’m not a VAR fan but it’s not the the VAR that’s the problem it’s the fukking idiots controlling it that think that’s a pen. We need high class well paid professionals doing the job not some guy that can see when a ball hits a hand. It will ruin football if we don’t sort it. 

[StanSP]

2 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

ITS RIDICULOUS - THE OFFICIALS IN THE VAR STUDIO AND THE REFEREE ARE BOTH WRONG. WHATS THE POINT OF IT?

 

the var ref is supposed to help the referee. I hate it. Video evidence is supposed to but out the errors, not increase them. 

it did - asked to review a controversial decision. Referee ended up making the wrong decision. 

 

Ergo, it's still human decision ultimately.  

[st albans fox]

6 minutes ago, Finnegan said:

 

But we've had a huge net gain of correct decisions in this tournament and only one or two gone wrong. 

 

It's not going to be 100%

 

Drogba 

I think the integrity of the game would be served better by the Spain goal staying disallowed (marginal) and th epenalty not being given. Especially as the ball went out for a goal kick before the Spain corner was given .......... that doesn’t go to var....

 

without var we excuse refs because they have to make a split second decision. Now we give them video relays and they make the wrong call - it’s just nuts. 

[st albans fox]

Just now, StanSP said:

it did - asked to review a controversial decision. Referee ended up making the wrong decision. 

 

Ergo, it's still human decision ultimately.  

Not right stan - they ask him to review the decision if they think he has made a clear and obvious error.  so the var refs think that is a pen. The ref then has to argue that he disagrees. It sucks

[StanSP]

Just now, st albans fox said:

Not right stan - they ask him to review the decision if they think he has made a clear and obvious error.  so the var refs think that is a pen. The ref then has to argue that he disagrees. It sucks

no. they think he should review the decision and check that he himself has made the right decision. The on-field referee ultimately still has the choice to stick with his original decision if he wanted to.

[st albans fox]

3 minutes ago, Guest said:

It hasn't increased the number of refereeing errors at all though, has it?

I haven’t counted. I have seen several pens given when they weren’t and the ref didn’t give them - correctly imo. I have only seen one reversed. 

 

i expect some pens that that have been waived away have been done so because the ref knows he will be called back if he is wrong. A ref would far rather be pulled up for missing a pen than for awarding one. He can have the excuse he didn’t see it but how can he justify seeing something that’s didn’t actually happen?????

 

i can live with using it for offsides and goals but I would rather it wasn’t used for penalties that aren’t given. Review ones that are if you want to. 

[Lcfcbisto]

The quality of ref there will not argue with what a var person thinks they don’t have the balls. 

There are no English refs there, professional refs that get paid big money to be pro refs and get crap week in week out. Yes we moan about them but they wouldn’t be swayed by the crap this lot are.

[st albans fox]

3 minutes ago, StanSP said:

no. they think he should review the decision and check that he himself has made the right decision. The on-field referee ultimately still has the choice to stick with his original decision if he wanted to.

It’s tough for him to argue with several of his peers in a studio who clearly feel he has made an error, it’s not a tool for having a look at controversial calls. It’s suppsoed to be used if the var ref thinks the on field official has made a clear and obvious error. 

 

Ill leave the discussion before i’m accused of being called a Luddite. This is potentially going to cause me to stop watching the game and worse still, attending, I feel that strongly about it. These are supposed to be the best officials in the world and they can’t use the system. What chance our useless officials. I prey that the premier league refuse to bring it in unless they can restrict it to matters of fact and not opinion. 

[Super_horns]

Handball always seems to be a debatable one unless its clear and oblivious enough that the ref should spot it.

 

I bet Alan Shearer would have been claiming handball for example had that been against England or Newcastle!

 

 

 

 

[Manwell Pablo]

38 minutes ago, Finnegan said:

Getting really wound up with Shearer getting really wound up. 

 

He's been ranting frankly unprofessionally about var all tournament for no reason other than he's a ****ing changephobe, nearly all of his complaints aren't to do with var itself. 

 

In this instance, var isn't the problem, the ref is. The ref watched the handball again and gave it, the ref wanted to give the handball. 

 

That's **** all to do with having the technology, that's going to happen either way. 

 

Unless you want to programme a robot to referee games you're going to have human error whether they can watch replays or not. 

 

The argument is, and as you know I am all for VAR, the fact it got refered puts him under pressure to review his original decision and change it. Which I think he did on all three occasions he went to the monitor, so that leads me to think when he’s asked to look at something he’s already thinking he’s original decision was wrong.

 

Mind you it looks to have played a big part in the Spain game and got that right.

 

was a bit of a farce the Portugal game, things took too long and weren’t given correctly, and one thing I’m really am not a fan of is a pen being waved away the game carrying on for 90 seconds than being retrospectively given. Certainly not the best advert for VAR this tournament. Unlike most of those against it I am able to keep an open mind.

Edited 25 June 2018 by Manwell Pablo

[Aus Fox]

Similar to the penalty Australia received against Denmark, the problem in both cases is not the VAR as such, it's referees interpretation of the rules.

Every time the ball hits the hand in the box it's not a penalty. There is nothing in the rule book about natural/unnatural position of the arms. It clearly states if a player handles the ball deliberately - in neither of these cases was it deliberate.

The introduction of the VAR in the A-League last season was a farce and ruined many good games and I was not a fan. However, it's been much better used in this World Cup and the only mistakes it has made, have been down to human error - and referees not fully understanding the laws of the game.

[Manwell Pablo]

1 minute ago, Aus Fox said:

Similar to the penalty Australia received against Denmark, the problem in both cases is not the VAR as such, it's referees interpretation of the rules.

Every time the ball hits the hand in the box it's not a penalty. There is nothing in the rule book about natural/unnatural position of the arms. It clearly states if a player handles the ball deliberately - in neither of these cases was it deliberate.

The introduction of the VAR in the A-League last season was a farce and ruined many good games and I was not a fan. However, it's been much better used in this World Cup and the only mistakes it has made, have been down to human error - and referees not fully understanding the laws of the game.

 

To clear this up the position of the arm is a contributing factor, the details however are found in the deliberate handball rule and not the rules of giving a penalty, they simply reference the deliberate handball rule.

 

you basically can’t stick your arm out in an area where you know you could easily block a cross or shot with your hand, that’s classed as deliberate handball. Not saying that’s the case in either of those instances but it’s not as simple as making a conscious decision to handle the ball.

[Guest MattP]

Just change the decision from upstairs, sending the ref to look at it again is ridiculous. 

 

If four refs tell you to check something you aren't going to go against the advice, that's obvious already.

[Aus Fox]

1 minute ago, Manwell Pablo said:

 

To clear this up the position of the arm is a contributing factor, the details however are found in the deliberate handball rule and not the rules of giving a penalty, they simply reference the deliberate handball rule.

 

you basically can’t stick your arm out in an area where you know you could easily block a cross or shot with your hand, that’s classed as deliberate handball. Not saying that’s the case in either of those instances but it’s not as simple as making a conscious decision to handle the ball.

Thanks Manwell, I think you've explained the law much better than I did. 

[Manwell Pablo]

2 minutes ago, MattP said:

Just change the decision from upstairs, sending the ref to look at it again is ridiculous. 

 

If four refs tell you to check something you aren't going to go against the advice, that's obvious already.

 

Christ people posting things I feel the need to reply to. ? 

 

I don’t know about that, I know it works in rugby cricket and tennis but things like pens are much less cut and dry and you have the whole what’s the point in the ref argument.....that said it feels like a bit of a halfway house with games like the Portugal one tonight where you have to say on at least one occasion the refs overturned a decision he got right the first time.

[Trav Le Bleu]

1 hour ago, Finnegan said:

Getting really wound up with Shearer getting really wound up. 

 

He's been ranting frankly unprofessionally about var all tournament for no reason other than he's a ****ing changephobe, nearly all of his complaints aren't to do with var itself. 

 

In this instance, var isn't the problem, the ref is. The ref watched the handball again and gave it, the ref wanted to give the handball. 

 

That's **** all to do with having the technology, that's going to happen either way. 

 

Unless you want to programme a robot to referee games you're going to have human error whether they can watch replays or not. 

So VAR is largely redundant, in as much as a poor referee will still be a poor referee?

 

Could go so far to say that it makes it exaggerates the effect of a poor referee?

 

Jon Moss or no.

[Finnegan]

8 minutes ago, Trav Le Bleu said:

So VAR is largely redundant, in as much as a poor referee will still be a poor referee?

 

Could go so far to say that it makes it exaggerates the effect of a poor referee?

 

Jon Moss or no.

 

It's obviously not really redundant it just still had an element of human error. 

 

Why are people coming out with such stupidly all or nothing arguments, like there's still some human error and there's still some mistakes so just **** the whole thing off? 

 

 

[The Doctor]

22 minutes ago, Trav Le Bleu said:

So VAR is largely redundant, in as much as a poor referee will still be a poor referee?

 

Could go so far to say that it makes it exaggerates the effect of a poor referee?

 

Jon Moss or no.

A referee will still make a human interpretation, until we've got skynet up and going it has to, doesn't make it useless. Is it going to get everything right? No, because with some decision there isn't a right one as such, and whether it's right or not comes down to who you want to win (since you bought him up, Moss sending off Vardy v West Ham is an example, since you could argue that was a foul, seen em given and all that). Is it going to mean referees will get better views and support, meaning objectively wrong decisions (the penalty vs Albrighton at Atletico) don't get made? Yes. Not sure how 'still has a referee making a decision' is an argument against it tbh

Edited 25 June 2018 by The Doctor