The VAR thread

[Super_horns]

Just now, justfoxes said:

It was sorry got my idiots wrong !!

Both bald, old and past it I think ?!

[justfoxes]

1 minute ago, Super_horns said:

Both bald, old and past it I think ?!

Not forgetting Blind & Technocrap !!

[Livid]

What really got me on Saturday was the Spurs goal that was given the referee stands near the centre circle awaiting the kick off, our disallowed goal he stands back near their penalty area chatting to a Spurs defender. 
 

It’s almost like he was preempting both decisions. 

[Tom12345]

4 hours ago, Buzzell said:

If anything Dier’s hand/arm is further out than Barnes. Disgrace of a decision.

Agree. And in terms of body position Barnes was clearly behind or in line. The benefit of any hairline doubt should be given to the attacking players - how could any sane ref ruled out that goal.

[SpacedX]

Just now, Tom12345 said:

The benefit of any hairline doubt should be given to the attacking players 

Agree entirely.

1 minute ago, Tom12345 said:

how could any sane ref ruled out that goal.

[st albans fox]

4 hours ago, FosseSpark said:

if you're foot is in mid air i don't think it should count as offside. He was on the way to being offside but his foot wasn't yet grounded. 

What happens with a header then ?  Are you saying that your head can be a foot ahead of the defender ? 
 

until we can get the semi automatic offsides in place which are quick, then we will have this crap ongoing ……

[st albans fox]

A few people have commented that the Barnes photo design have the correct perspective because we can’t see the vertical lines drawn down from the part of the body closest to the goal line which can score a goal 

so that’s Barnes toe, dier’s right arm t shirt line (right armoutside) and Davies’ right ear or right shoulder 

 

Iooking at the parallel nature of the lines drawn and the edge of the penalty area (which are not far away from each other), I simply cannot see how the lines drawn from dier’s t short line and Davies’ head fit with the back edge of the blue line 

[David Lowe]

I always knew that VAR would not solve subjective decisions but I expected it to work for offsides - but there were 3 major cock ups over the weekend. How can they not even draw the lines or draw them and then go against what it shows such as the Barnes decision.

[FosseSpark]

2 hours ago, st albans fox said:

What happens with a header then ?  Are you saying that your head can be a foot ahead of the defender ? 
 

until we can get the semi automatic offsides in place which are quick, then we will have this crap ongoing ……

I dont think a foot in mid air can be considered offside if the foot thats grounded is a yard onside. Thats a farce. 

I agree it is inconsistent with the fact your head can be off when your legs are onside though.

My view is you should only be able to be 'stood' offside. If youre stood onside but are diving or moving in the right direction it means youve outwitted the opponent, not that youve gained an advantage by being stood nearer to the goal than them. The rule was invented to stop people standing nearer to the goal than the defenders and so any other body part or direction you are leaning in shouldnt come in to it i dont think..

 

Unless its chilwell in the cup final

[tylesta]

I still go back and look at Johnson first goal for forest that looked offside to me from the funny angle it was at. Didn't even use the 2 lines 

[fox_favourite]

7 hours ago, Livid said:

What really got me on Saturday was the Spurs goal that was given the referee stands near the centre circle awaiting the kick off, our disallowed goal he stands back near their penalty area chatting to a Spurs defender. 
 

It’s almost like he was preempting both decisions. 

I’m glad someone else noticed that as well! We made comment at the time that seemed dodgy. VAR this weekend has been sooo bad. There needs to be a massive review in to referees and better training as they are all basic mistakes. 

[Les-TA-Jon]

14 hours ago, Livid said:

What really got me on Saturday was the Spurs goal that was given the referee stands near the centre circle awaiting the kick off, our disallowed goal he stands back near their penalty area chatting to a Spurs defender. 
 

It’s almost like he was preempting both decisions. 

 

7 hours ago, fox_favourite said:

I’m glad someone else noticed that as well! We made comment at the time that seemed dodgy. VAR this weekend has been sooo bad. There needs to be a massive review in to referees and better training as they are all basic mistakes. 

Don't think there was any big conspiracy here? They scored what looked like a perfectly good goal, which gave enough time for the teams to reset for our kickoff. Whereas our goal looked offside/tight as it happened live and if there was an offside it'd be a freekick for Spurs on the edge of their box. 

 

Seems quite simple to me? 

[Robo61]

13 hours ago, FosseSpark said:

I dont think a foot in mid air can be considered offside if the foot thats grounded is a yard onside. Thats a farce. 

I agree it is inconsistent with the fact your head can be off when your legs are onside though.

My view is you should only be able to be 'stood' offside. If youre stood onside but are diving or moving in the right direction it means youve outwitted the opponent, not that youve gained an advantage by being stood nearer to the goal than them. The rule was invented to stop people standing nearer to the goal than the defenders and so any other body part or direction you are leaning in shouldnt come in to it i dont think..

 

Unless its chilwell in the cup final

I'm struggling with this suggestion,  are you saying if the foot is in the air,  then that should't be used to determine offside.  What happens when both feet are in the air,  could players avoid offside altogether?  Also you would need multiple cameras at ground level to have the remotest of chances of determining whether a foot was off the ground.

 

Personally to make it simpler I would be making it the furtherest forward toe of both attacked and defender that detemines offside and increase the leaway to at least a foot.  Not sure the clear gap idea works any better than now,  as you would still need to draw lines between body parts. 

 

Ultimately though I would like VAR to be binned altogether,  as it spoils the LiV experience as it has not in the least bit made a difference to the perception that the big clubs get the best of referring decisions.  In fact I would argue that it may have made things worse,  it is human nature that when there is doub  decisions will be made to suit the narative that the big sides are the best sides.  Thus on the field refs will still give marginal decisions to the big sides, which thery always have done, and the subjective nature of the clear and obvious rule will also kick in the favour the big boys.  Double whammy. 

[boosmanana]

They should perhaps make it more like cricket and give each team a certain number of VAR referrals/referral available at the captains discretion. If you challenge a decision and the referee/linesman was correct then you lose a referral. If you challenge a decision and the officials were incorrect then you keep your referral. It’d stop every micro decision being investigated so much, limit number of stoppages and also make teams more careful in what they’re challenging the officials for. Just an idea.

[abc]

Have a tolerance to work within; Make the Red and Blue lines thicker, the equivalent of say 6" wide and if any part of the two lines overlap then it's "inline" and on side.

[st albans fox]

1 hour ago, boosmanana said:

They should perhaps make it more like cricket and give each team a certain number of VAR referrals/referral available at the captains discretion. If you challenge a decision and the referee/linesman was correct then you lose a referral. If you challenge a decision and the officials were incorrect then you keep your referral. It’d stop every micro decision being investigated so much, limit number of stoppages and also make teams more careful in what they’re challenging the officials for. Just an idea.

on the contrary, the game will stop after every possible major incident for the bench to decide whether to challenge 
 

3 minutes ago, abc said:

Have a tolerance to work within; Make the Red and Blue lines thicker, the equivalent of say 6" wide and if any part of the two lines overlap then it's "inline" and on side.

Have said this for ages - but with auto offside the end game on this, it’s going to become even more micro managed ….

[Pooley]

I would suggest that the assistant ref would mostly see only the torso of players during that split second, so I think that the VAR should be checking just the players' torsos. Also, does the var check every goal decision regardeless, or does the ref have to request thier involvement?

 

[st albans fox]

27 minutes ago, Pooley said:

I would suggest that the assistant ref would mostly see only the torso of players during that split second, so I think that the VAR should be checking just the players' torsos. Also, does the var check every goal decision regardeless, or does the ref have to request thier involvement?

 

Every goal is checked 

every incident in the penalty box is checked 

 

the ref doesn’t ask var to check anything - var asks the ref if he has seen an incident if they spot something they think he has missed. 

[Super_horns]

3 hours ago, boosmanana said:

They should perhaps make it more like cricket and give each team a certain number of VAR referrals/referral available at the captains discretion. If you challenge a decision and the referee/linesman was correct then you lose a referral. If you challenge a decision and the officials were incorrect then you keep your referral. It’d stop every micro decision being investigated so much, limit number of stoppages and also make teams more careful in what they’re challenging the officials for. Just an idea.

But would there be issues with subjective decisions which different refs will have a varied opinion on ?

 

A teams appeal will basically come down to another person opinion which we know creates so much debate .

 

Probably be ok for offsides which are black and white like LBW in cricket .

 

Well in theory !

This AI offside system might save the factor of refs not drawing lines or messing up when they do .

Edited 14 February 2023 by Super_horns

[fuchsntf]

Why not Suspend it for one season ..

 

Then parallel, under orange card.

Any player excess of complaining,or mirroring  a card sign.. 10minutes on the sidelines.plus no longer than 10-15 seconds,before players must retire from incident,and ball..

Ref and his team, openly wired to each other..

Over the next seasons,try to educate Refs & fans how ref communicates descision on offside/penalties..

And still having touchline monitor he alone can ask for...but no VAR monitor or box where ex-refs are..monitoring.

 

[DoveValleyFox]

I'm in the camp of taking as much away from the on field ref as possible.

A timer, which is displayed on the screens, stops immediately when there is any type of stoppage. This means all stoppages including throw ins and when a player just sits down to have their real (or imaginary) injury checked . The timer only starts again when the ball is kicked or the throw is taken. The game would stop at 90 minutes and that would be it with no exceptions, ie when the ref allows the final move to play out.

Var will still be there to inform the on field ref if they have screwed up. There will be no fourth official for the coaches to continuously moan, plead with or scream at. I'd even move the coach's technical area back to pretty much the bench. I'm sure that the players don't find the constant screaming and gesticulating helpful.

Var can still help with offsides. My choice would be that they go back to having the simplist system which is that any body part is included. The furthest body part forward is used whether it is a foot, a hand, someone's backside or even Mesut Ozils eyeballs.

[David Lowe]

6 hours ago, abc said:

Have a tolerance to work within; Make the Red and Blue lines thicker, the equivalent of say 6" wide and if any part of the two lines overlap then it's "inline" and on side.

It doesn’t matter what lines they use if they go against what the lines are showing such as the Barnes decision.

[foxpleasure]

10 hours ago, Les-TA-Jon said:

 

Don't think there was any big conspiracy here? They scored what looked like a perfectly good goal, which gave enough time for the teams to reset for our kickoff. Whereas our goal looked offside/tight as it happened live and if there was an offside it'd be a freekick for Spurs on the edge of their box. 

 

Seems quite simple to me? 

So you also think the ref was preempting the var decision 

[Legend_in_blue]

The lines used in VAR are as thick as the people deciphering what they show.

[Les-TA-Jon]

13 hours ago, foxpleasure said:

So you also think the ref was preempting the var decision 

Just wondering why you think 'preempting' = a conspiracy against us/the 'small' teams? 

 

The live, onfield action of their goal, looked like a perfectly good goal. This meant the ref and both teams reset for the kickoff. 

 

First goal by Barnes, looked tight as it happened live, so the ref stood on that spot, thinking there's a good chance of an offside being given here. 

 

What's the issue?