The VAR thread

[cruzFOX]

I’m still not convinced barnes was offside unless my eyes are shot and I can’t tell one line from the next. What point exactly on the body now constitutes offside? Last season it was finger tips and toes. Now it’s what head, shoulders knees and …?

[Corky]

I think Barnes is just off, unfortunately, but doesn't gain a lot from it. Pre-VAR I don't think it's flagged or any fuss around it.

[Mr.Bingles]

If Man City win the league and the referees have acknowledged that they’d made a mistake during the Arsenal v Brentford game, should they over turn the goal in the same way red cards can be over turned after the game? 

[st albans fox]

6 minutes ago, Mr.Bingles said:

If Man City win the league and the referees have acknowledged that they’d made a mistake during the Arsenal v Brentford game, should they over turn the goal in the same way red cards can be over turned after the game? 

Is this a serious question? 

[Otis]

2 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

Is this a serious question? 

I hope not 🤣

[Mr.Bingles]

6 minutes ago, Otis said:

I hope not 🤣

What if it happened to us? 

[Mr.Bingles]

12 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

Is this a serious question? 

Why is it not a valid hypothetical question?  The thread is titled VAR thoughts. And forums are places for discussion. 

Edited 16 February 2023 by Mr.Bingles

[Foxdiamond]

4 minutes ago, Mr.Bingles said:

Why is it not a valid hypothetical question?  The thread is titled VAR thoughts. And forums are places for discussion. 

Would not and could not happen. Mistake made. Annoying but cannot change results. 

[st albans fox]

4 minutes ago, Mr.Bingles said:

Why is it not a valid hypothetical question?  The thread is titled VAR thoughts. And forums are places for discussion. 

I wonder what would happen if Brentford offered to replay the game ?  The PL would refuse to allow it 

 

years ago arsenal played sheff u and scored a goal which was outside the spirit of the game - arsenal offered to replay the game and the fa agreed.  The PL would not agree because the precedent would be bad for the game.  Where would it end ???

 

 

[Otis]

9 minutes ago, Mr.Bingles said:

What if it happened to us? 

Still no. It would open a massive can of worms.

[Super_horns]

Brentford  fans will say they had a goal harshly ruled out in the very same game.

Now I guess there is a difference in that is subjective decision making where not drawing lines or looking for long enough is a basic error/misuse of the system but whose to say Arsenal would have won for certain.
 

[Mr.Bingles]

15 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

I wonder what would happen if Brentford offered to replay the game ?  The PL would refuse to allow it 

 

years ago arsenal played sheff u and scored a goal which was outside the spirit of the game - arsenal offered to replay the game and the fa agreed.  The PL would not agree because the precedent would be bad for the game.  Where would it end ???

 

 

I didn’t know that. When was that? 
 

It simply wouldn’t happen now you’re right. 

[Foxdiamond]

27 minutes ago, Otis said:

Still no. It would open a massive can of worms.

If it did I want a reply of the 1949 cup final as we had good goal ruled out for offside. Also Rod Fern had a goal disallowed wrongly at Arsenal in 6th round. 

[Foxdiamond]

1 minute ago, Foxdiamond said:

If it did I want a reply of the 1949 cup final as we had good goal ruled out for offside. Also Rod Fern had a goal disallowed wrongly at Arsenal in 6th round. 

 

1 minute ago, Foxdiamond said:

If it did I want a reply of the 1949 cup final as we had good goal ruled out for offside. Also Rod Fern had a goal disallowed wrongly at Arsenal in 6th round in 1971

 

[Fox forever]

11 minutes ago, Mr.Bingles said:

I didn’t know that. When was that? 
 

It simply wouldn’t happen now you’re right. 

I never understand this “lost points argument”. In this instance there was 15 mins plus injury time to go. If the goal was disallowed the game would restart with a free kick not the kick off. Therefore the remaining minutes would be complete different to what took place on Saturday. Brentford could have scored 2 and won match. The decision is harsh for arsenal but doesn’t mean they would have won the game if it was changed. 

[Super_horns]

22 minutes ago, Fox forever said:

I never understand this “lost points argument”. In this instance there was 15 mins plus injury time to go. If the goal was disallowed the game would restart with a free kick not the kick off. Therefore the remaining minutes would be complete different to what took place on Saturday. Brentford could have scored 2 and won match. The decision is harsh for arsenal but doesn’t mean they would have won the game if it was changed. 

Spot on.

 

Unless it’s literally with the last kick  or play of the game no result can be said as certain would have happened if a decision had gone another way .

[Aus Fox]

2 hours ago, Mr.Bingles said:

If Man City win the league and the referees have acknowledged that they’d made a mistake during the Arsenal v Brentford game, should they over turn the goal in the same way red cards can be over turned after the game? 

That simply cannot happen, a goal fundamentally changes the whole game. If a goal is scored or not scored it changes both teams approach to the game.

This is why I hate those league tables without VAR.

If Brentford are 1-0, they may attack more in the last 10, Arsenal might sit back, there is no guarantee that the equaliser doesn’t come at another point. Whilst the game is 1-1, Brentford might be happy with a point and not chase more… 

You can not, unless a goal is scored with the last kick of the game, say that the game wouldn’t have changed beyond that point if a decision has/hadn’t been made.

[Guest Col city fan]

Football is now apparently the only sport whereby the main aim ( to score goals) is thwarted by the rules.

If you look at it that way, it’s ridiculous. Points arise from scoring goals, enjoyment is derided from goals being scored, yet VAR chalks off far more goals than it facilitates.

Fundamentally, that’s got to be wrong surely. 
Offsides are the biggest culprit. I still maintain, what with tech being able to absolutely pinpoint measurements, that a limit to the attacking player being ‘offside’ should be imposed. Eg. 5 inches.

If VAR detects the attacking player being offside, then they are allowed a small margin whereby the goal will stand. This would rule out those decisions whereby a goal is disallowed (thus NOT fulfilling the main aim in football) due to the offside being the width of a pubic hair.

Some will say that arguments will then rage over 5 inches… (just a figure I’ve plucked out) but this will absolutely result in more goals being given.

[Vlad the Fox]

People say that it’s the people operating it not the technology is all well and good but when it comes to checking for fouls for penalties and disallowing or allowing goals it’s always going to be the opinions of the people operating vs the onfield referee. However a referee having one look in a split second during the heat of a match making a mistake is far easier to accept than someone sat miles away analysing it to death and still making a mistake. It’ll never work because these decisions are subjective. 

It’s not going anywhere though. I accept the offsides though, because they are black and white, and it’s the same for all teams, no bias. Though what someone suggested earlier in this thread about going with the onfield decision in tight calls like Barnes has merit if officials aren’t letting to play go and relying on var.

 

I also wonder if they should have three var refs looking at it.  No discussion, each give their decision and go with the majority.  

 

[ozleicester]

8 hours ago, leicsmac said:

The romantic ideal of what football is that drives this particular sentence, that is then somehow being "ruined" by technology - as if there was a statistically significant difference in "purity" before and now and as if that wasn't completely subjective - is what isn't true IMO.

The 5 minute wait to celebrate a goal has ruined a part of the game.

Societys obsession with perfection and measuring everything has spoilt part of what makes football great.
 

[ozleicester]

It has not and does not provide what we were told its aims were.

Goal line technology is great... But VAR is just moving the errors from the onfield ref to an off field ref, but leaving us with the same questions and disputes, removed enjoyment and extended game time... and more meaningless post match drivel

Edited 17 February 2023 by ozleicester

[leicsmac]

4 minutes ago, ozleicester said:

The 5 minute wait to celebrate a goal has ruined a part of the game.

Societys obsession with perfection and measuring everything has spoilt part of what makes football great.
 

Nah, Oz, I'm not getting there mate. You and I see eye to eye on a lot of societal issues but the application of technology in helping with them is clearly not one of them.

 

Human mistakes don't make football great IMO.

[ozleicester]

2 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Nah, Oz, I'm not getting there mate. You and I see eye to eye on a lot of societal issues but the application of technology in helping with them is clearly not one of them.

 

Human mistakes don't make football great IMO.

But VAR obviously does not (as evidenced by this thread) remove those mistakes...instead it destroys the flow of the game and in reality makes NO difference, we are still arguing if some one was offiside, if it really was handball.. etc.

[leicsmac]

1 minute ago, ozleicester said:

But VAR obviously does not (as evidenced by this thread) remove those mistakes...instead it destroys the flow of the game and in reality makes NO difference, we are still arguing if some one was offiside, if it really was handball.. etc.

It reduces those mistakes - that's a matter of empirical evidence that I could show if you wanted me to. Ihenachos goal - the very first to be awarded by VAR - was clearly onside yet flagged as off.

 

There is an argument to be made regarding the flow of the game, but again I would state that's a reason for the tech to be improved, not thrown out entirely.

 

 

[Dan]

9 hours ago, leicsmac said:

The romantic ideal of what football is that drives this particular sentence, that is then somehow being "ruined" by technology - as if there was a statistically significant difference in "purity" before and now and as if that wasn't completely subjective - is what isn't true IMO.

Standing around waiting for a goal is absolutely awful. I remember right back to that very first day we had it in the Premier League against Wolves, where they had their goal disallowed. I think it had hit about 20 seconds in and I'd lost interest. I'd rather they just played on. But that for me is mental - I'm tribal, I want everything for us, yet there I am willing on a goal against us because of how surreal and silly the situation at the time feels?

 

I'm definitely not going to pretend it was perfect before VAR but it's brought very little good to the table whilst I think most of the negatives are barely disputable. I mean you only have to read the last few pages of this thread. It's so unbelievably boring. I'm not saying I even disagree with the outcome they came to but the whole process itself is just so dreary.

 

It's definitely not ready - they shouldn't have bothered until they had these semi-automated offsides, but the fact is it's been in this league for three and a half years now and we're still having the same debates. At some point we're going to have to admit it isn't right for the game.