Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
DJ Barry Hammond

The VAR thread

What are your thoughts on VAR?  

679 members have voted

  1. 1. What are your thoughts on VAR?

    • Love it, all for it, fantastic introduction to football
      109
    • Hate it, games gone
      236
    • Somewhere in between
      334

This poll is closed to new votes

  • Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.
  • Poll closed on 17/05/20 at 19:00

Recommended Posts

The villa thing was farcical but had nothing to  do  with  VAR, just Friend's terrible reffing.

It would help if the scoreboard says exactly what VAR is checking and why.

If they'd put "play  stopped prior to  goal  being scored, VAR checking for penalty/simulation", it would be much  better.

 

That might stop people getting upset, then  again, maybe not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also posted this in the players rating thread:

 

The dreaded VAR showed yet again why it is pointless. Both Tielemans and the Bournemouth player (tackle on Evans - which seems to have gone unnoticed to the media) should have been sent off, and I was amazed Tielemans wasn't even booked! Both were significantly worse tackles than Choudhury's v Newcastle, who at least clearly won the ball. Neither got the ball, but both got their opponent directly on the shin. If VAR can't get those type of decisions right, why is it there?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, ThaiFox said:

I also posted this in the players rating thread:

 

The dreaded VAR showed yet again why it is pointless. Both Tielemans and the Bournemouth player (tackle on Evans - which seems to have gone unnoticed to the media) should have been sent off, and I was amazed Tielemans wasn't even booked! Both were significantly worse tackles than Choudhury's v Newcastle, who at least clearly won the ball. Neither got the ball, but both got their opponent directly on the shin. If VAR can't get those type of decisions right, why is it there?

Var can only do as its allowed to 

 

so it couldn’t advise a yellow for Youri - it’s red or nothing 

similarly, Lerma challenge is either red or nothing. If the ref has missed a yellow then var cannot advise to issue one. 

 

Re YT’s challenge - my opinion has changed..... initially I felt it wasn’t a red as he had no intention to stick his foot onto Wilson’s ankle - an accident. However, I now think he hasn’t taken care of an opponent as he should do when making that move - if he is going to put himself across the player and go over the ball in that way, then its his responsibility to ensure his foot doesn’t do what it did. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

Var can only do as its allowed to 

 

so it couldn’t advise a yellow for Youri - it’s red or nothing 

similarly, Lerma challenge is either red or nothing. If the ref has missed a yellow then var cannot advise to issue one. 

 

Re YT’s challenge - my opinion has changed..... initially I felt it wasn’t a red as he had no intention to stick his foot onto Wilson’s ankle - an accident. However, I now think he hasn’t taken care of an opponent as he should do when making that move - if he is going to put himself across the player and go over the ball in that way, then its his responsibility to ensure his foot doesn’t do what it did. 

Which again shows why VAR is a joke. Even if it wasn't a red card (it was), Tielemans should certainly have had a yellow.

 

Both Tielemand & Lerma's tackles were reckless, both missed the ball, both took out their opponents, both could have caused serious injury, and both get away with serious punishment.

 

I also think refs are bottling decisions now because they are either frightened of the after match VAR, or trying to reply on the VAR because they are frightened they are getting it wrong. It will actually reduce the quality of referees, when it's bad enough already. Or lets just get rid of referees and let all decisions be made by VAR. Having both is totally undermining the job of referees.

 

Mistakes by referees will always happen. There will be no difference with VAR, as we're already seeing.

 

Everytime a goal is scored now, there is no point in cheering until the other team kick off. By then the initial excitement has gone. It's damaging football, not helping it. I also hate it in cricket and tennis.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I'm the kind of person that thought it'd be great.

But I've changed my mind.

The decisions are no less arguable. But while making those arguable decisions it stops the game for ages.

It's wrecking football.

Just have goal line technology and accept that there will be officiating mistakes and that they actually add to the game.

Edited by Toddybad
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

VAR is needed.

 

But a challenge system would have been better in my opinion. One per half for each team perhaps.

 

That way teams would only challenge a decision if they were adamant it was wrong otherwise they risk losing the appeal. 

 

Rather than stopping everytime there's a goal, the game would flow much better.

Edited by TK95
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like anything new,peop!e Jump on their various chosen  boats...

 

#Lets criticise..because I dont like the idea...

#I want to be the "told you so". Pundit/fan

#Not a Person that allows,Any mistakes.

#Conveniently Points out 20-40% of the mistakes ,but Dont want to think of the positive 20/40/60% improved descisions/rulings

#Lets wait & see,if we see After introduction,if authorities can learn quickly then change & Adapter ASAP...

#Simply Accept ,that there is no Perfect ideology or system,but if we can cut out xxx% of frustrating / poor descisions then its worth it..

#VAR had to be thrown in,After years of pre-thought/Planning ,still knowing we still have to find out,where we NEED to Work &  tweek or agree that certain rulings,incident will neither be solved,by ref/officials nor VAR..!! So we can with patience see how and where & what we can definitely Refrain from and Drop ,and which areas if any is it worth holding on to!!

#Lets give it 1-2 seasons,at the highest level,then Analyse judge,if Technic has a role to Play and in  which/what areas of the pitch and ref/linesman descisions.

# Keep to the old ways,and learn nothing,or Discover that Technik is not worse or better,so then  decide  Keep to the simple Human factor..!!!!

 

So Chose which Single or group of gangplanks,you prefer to lead you to Board the ship,to join the fleet....Sink,swim,paddle,or Stay a landlubber,who Hates

getting wet..!!:trumpet:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, TK95 said:

VAR is needed.

 

But a challenge system would have been better in my opinion. One per half for each team perhaps.

 

That way teams would only challenge a decision if they were adamant it was wrong otherwise they risk losing the appeal. 

 

Rather than stopping everytime there's a goal, the game would flow much better.

I’ve thought this for a while. The challenge system makes a lot of sense. If you’ve used one incorrectly that’s on you. Players might even be more honest, because if your own manager gets conned by your diving they’ll be on your case. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Toddybad said:

I'm the kind of person that thought it'd be great.

But I've changed my mind.

The decisions are no less arguable. But while making those arguable decisions it stops the game for ages.

It's wrecking football.

Just have goal line technology and accept that there will be officiating mistakes and that they actually add to the game.

It's working out exactly as I thought it would.

 

Different mistakes, but creating just as many, or even more controversial decisions than before.

 

Plus it's actually hindering referee decisions, rather than helping.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, TK95 said:

VAR is needed.

 

But a challenge system would have been better in my opinion. One per half for each team perhaps.

 

That way teams would only challenge a decision if they were adamant it was wrong otherwise they risk losing the appeal. 

 

Rather than stopping everytime there's a goal, the game would flow much better.

VAR is just not needed.

 

And a challenge system would probably create even more controversy than before. Managers would moan at the end because the appeal they made was not judged correctly, or they could be used to waste time or stop the flow of the other team, especially towards the end of the match, just like substitutions are used.

 

Referees would bottle decisions because they would hope the manager would challenge. It's already happening with VAR.

 

Let referees referee. It's what they are paid for and why they are there. All these layers of officialdom are harming the game. It's passing the buck, rather than one person dealing with the situation.

 

In tennis, you see players challenging on points, or taking injury or toilet breaks. Many are done just to break up the rhythm of the other player. It's almost a form of cheating. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Super_horns said:

Interesting. Riley highlights 4 times that VAR was wrong he also highlights 6 times they got it right, which IMO is not nearly a good enough hit rate. Especially when you see the 6 ‘right’ decisions:

 

Six cases where VAR got the right decision

Sterling marginally offside before passing to Jesus to score v West Ham

Declan Rice encroachment for Aguero penalty (same game)

Boly handball before Dendoncker goal v Leicester

Laporte handball before Jesus goal v Spurs

Dan Burn offside for Trossard goal for Brighton v West Ham

Zouma goal for Chelsea disallowed for foul by Giroud on Krul v Norwich

 

Of which at least 3 (Sterling, Boly, Laporte) were so controversial they don’t really count as ‘right’. 

 

VAR is worthless in its current state.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Oxfordfox83 said:

Interesting. Riley highlights 4 times that VAR was wrong he also highlights 6 times they got it right, which IMO is not nearly a good enough hit rate. Especially when you see the 6 ‘right’ decisions:

 

Six cases where VAR got the right decision

Sterling marginally offside before passing to Jesus to score v West Ham

Declan Rice encroachment for Aguero penalty (same game)

Boly handball before Dendoncker goal v Leicester

Laporte handball before Jesus goal v Spurs

Dan Burn offside for Trossard goal for Brighton v West Ham

Zouma goal for Chelsea disallowed for foul by Giroud on Krul v Norwich

 

Of which at least 3 (Sterling, Boly, Laporte) were so controversial they don’t really count as ‘right’. 

 

VAR is worthless in its current state.

The Boly and Laporte weren't controversial due to VAR, VAR got them right in accordance with the new hand ball law.

 

The issue with those to is with the new law handball law not VAR

 

15 hours ago, Mike Oxlong said:

Celebrating a goal is a bit half cooked with VAR

Really didn't we have the same before sometimes, you celebrated and then realised the Lino had he's flag up or the referee had disallowed it?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, coolhandfox said:

The Boly and Laporte weren't controversial due to VAR, VAR got them right in accordance with the new hand ball law.

 

The issue with those to is with the new law handball law not VAR

 

Really didn't we have the same before sometimes, you celebrated and then realised the Lino had he's flag up or the referee had disallowed it?

 

 

yes, and sometimes Lino didn't actually flag until getting a nod from the ref who may have been better positioned closer to the play or not blindsided by a ruck of players etc. I do agree that sometimes VAR takes too long but already it seems to be getting quicker as I believe that they are applying the "clear and obvious" test for potential penalty claims etc. and only intervening where this is the case.  Kane penalty appeal for eg. Ref was well positioned and did not give. Contact yes, but in refs opinion not sufficient and VAR did not alter that decision as not clear and obvious error . there will always be subjectivity, but unless VAR sees something that the ref/lino has missed then it should not alter the decision. Offside and handball rules are slightly different as it is a black and white issue.

It is noticeable that players, even when flag raised are continuing to put the ball in the net as, in the case of Nachos goal in the cup last year (first ever goal given after VAR review for offside) VAR can work both ways.  It is also obvious that the Linos are not so quick to raise the flag these days unless it is obvious for all to see.

 

I am sure that, as the season progresses and players, officials and fans get used to the mechanics of this it will become much slicker and we will all be wondering what all the fuss was about.  If it does nothing else other than reduce all the shirt pulling and holding in the box at set pieces it will have been worthwhile.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't agree with a challenge system at all - it shifts responsibility for judging the game away from officials and onto managers/clubs.

 

For example: LCFC score a goal. But it's ruled out for offside. It looks close, so Brendan challenges it. VAR check says decision to rule out the goal was correct. Our challenge for that half is used up. Then ten minutes later Man Utd score a goal, which also looks close. It's given. We can't challenge it, but footage later shows it's offside. 

 

So we're punished for what? If they've got the VAR then there use it! 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Oxfordfox83 said:

Interesting. Riley highlights 4 times that VAR was wrong he also highlights 6 times they got it right, which IMO is not nearly a good enough hit rate.

There were 227 incidents involving goals, red card offences and actual and potential penalty decisions. 6 decisions were changed by VAR. Of the 227 incidents, four were decisions failed to be overturned by the Video Assistant Referee.

 

That's 4 incorrect decisions, and 223 correct decisions. That is a 98% success rate.

 

Of the four incorrect decisions, 50% would likely not have impacted the result of the game (Man City and West Ham won the games they should have been given a penalty in), whilst arguably we may not have won with 10 men against Bournemouth (Tielemans wouldn't have scored) and Newcastle should not have been level with Watford.

 

Without VAR's correct intervention (by the rules of the game), Wolves would have gained 3 points incorrectly (costing Leicester 2 points), Man City would have gained 3 points incorrectly (costing Spurs 2 points), and we couldn't really assess whether Brighton would have gone on to score again, but the outcome would have likely been affected.

 

We are trying to hard to put down something which has helped accuracy, and, has only really stopped play in two of our four matches so far (it was largely anonymous against Chelsea and Sheffield United, as it should be), resulting in a goal against us correctly ruled out, and our player incorrectly staying on the pitch, but if he had of gone, we would have had no complaint.

 

Let it settle down, and it will improve the game. Largely it won't even be noticeable that it's there.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Yes N'Didi said:

There were 227 incidents involving goals, red card offences and actual and potential penalty decisions. 6 decisions were changed by VAR. Of the 227 incidents, four were decisions failed to be overturned by the Video Assistant Referee.

 

That's 4 incorrect decisions, and 223 correct decisions. That is a 98% success rate.

 

Of the four incorrect decisions, 50% would likely not have impacted the result of the game (Man City and West Ham won the games they should have been given a penalty in), whilst arguably we may not have won with 10 men against Bournemouth (Tielemans wouldn't have scored) and Newcastle should not have been level with Watford.

 

Without VAR's correct intervention (by the rules of the game), Wolves would have gained 3 points incorrectly (costing Leicester 2 points), Man City would have gained 3 points incorrectly (costing Spurs 2 points), and we couldn't really assess whether Brighton would have gone on to score again, but the outcome would have likely been affected.

 

We are trying to hard to put down something which has helped accuracy, and, has only really stopped play in two of our four matches so far (it was largely anonymous against Chelsea and Sheffield United, as it should be), resulting in a goal against us correctly ruled out, and our player incorrectly staying on the pitch, but if he had of gone, we would have had no complaint.

 

Let it settle down, and it will improve the game. Largely it won't even be noticeable that it's there.

 

Tielemans had already scored before his red card challenge.

 

And the game should have ended with 10 men a piece with Lermas tackle just as bad on Evans....a tackle that wasn't even reviewed on VAR.

 

They have already established VAR could be as much as 14cms out.

 

And that's what is wrong with VAR. 

 

The referee should be in charge. Not some faceless wonders looking at a screen in a studio miles away. It's passing the buck. Layers of officialdom that are just not needed.

 

VAR will create just as many problems as before, maybe even more.

 

Let referees referee. It's what they are paid for.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, ThaiFox said:

Tielemans had already scored before his red card challenge.

 

And the game should have ended with 10 men a piece with Lermas tackle just as bad on Evans....a tackle that wasn't even reviewed on VAR.

 

They have already established VAR could be as much as 14cms out.

 

And that's what is wrong with VAR. 

 

The referee should be in charge. Not some faceless wonders looking at a screen in a studio miles away. It's passing the buck. Layers of officialdom that are just not needed.

 

VAR will create just as many problems as before, maybe even more.

 

Let referees referee. It's what they are paid for.

 

 

And they do 99.9% of the time, but they cannot do everything themselves. VAR is there to help in those tricky situations. It is there to help the game become fairer and has already been doing that everywhere it is used.

 

It absolutely needs to be fine tuned and sped up, but I think that will come with time. There have been many rule changes over the years and some have taken time to bed in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Radio today said the Teilemans issue wasn't dealt with but I'm sure I was in the ground and it came up on screen to most peoples surprise as it didn't look a bad tackle .It was reviewed.

He played well for Belgium but looked spent when taken off at 85 min

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, KrefelderFox666 said:

And they do 99.9% of the time, but they cannot do everything themselves. VAR is there to help in those tricky situations. It is there to help the game become fairer and has already been doing that everywhere it is used.

 

It absolutely needs to be fine tuned and sped up, but I think that will come with time. There have been many rule changes over the years and some have taken time to bed in.

Tell that to the teams penalized with many crazy (and wrong) decisions in the women's world cup! 

 

Give me a referee, making on the spot decisions, every day of the week, rather than someone watching a screen in a studio miles away, where nearly every single on the pitch referee decision could be reversed when you look at them in slow motion or many different angles. 

 

It's already been established VAR can be as much as 13 cms out on offside decisions. That makes every VAR marginal decision debatable, and no better than the current system, and it doesn't give the benefit of the doubt to the attacking side.

 

Of course referees will make mistakes.

 

VAR will make mistakes too. It already has, and far too many to show it's going to actually benefit the game. It's also far too slow and it's spoiling the continuity of the game.

 

And I think it will actually reduce the quality of referees in the long run, as they come to rely more and more on VAR to decide controversial points.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, TK95 said:

VAR is needed.

 

But a challenge system would have been better in my opinion. One per half for each team perhaps.

 

That way teams would only challenge a decision if they were adamant it was wrong otherwise they risk losing the appeal. 

 

Rather than stopping everytime there's a goal, the game would flow much better.

If there wasa challenge system  I think we would have lost v Wolves given no-one questioned their 'goal'

Edited by oxford blue
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...