The VAR thread

[st albans fox]

On 09/10/2019 at 23:55, ThaiFox said:

I'm a little surprised you hate it after some of your replies to my posts! I thought you were in favour of VAR! I must have missed some of your early posts. Sorry about that! Have enjoyed the debate though and you've put points over that have made me think.

 

Totally agree with those coloured lines for offsides. Totally agree about offenses missed during the build up to a goal. Totally agree with things being left to the on field officials.

 

The one bit I can't agree with is yet more officials!! Every extra official is sure to reach different conclusions and just add confusion to the game, so no better than VAR.

 

Totally agree that we must get the referees we have to the highest possible standards to officiate properly, and let them make all the on field decisions.

I like to put forward different opinions which aren’t necessarily my own - playing devils advocate if you like 

 

the ‘more officials’ bit relates to the fact that there are two half sides to the pitch which aren’t covered by the assistants so if you are putting the emphasis on the on field’ officials to make the call then give them the best chance to get it right - I still think there is room for a VAR ref to be there to catch the massive missed call (like Henry’s handball or Johnsen’s dive) but subjective decisions should be left as that and down to the ref. It’s already pretty obvious that the big clubs will get the soft pens and they won’t be overturned so why bother with the charade that we currently have. 

 

[ThaiFox]

9 hours ago, jmono84 said:

Absolutely!! I’ve had enough of this contact go down talk!! Mentioned it before on here, it’s out right cheating and something needs to be done... it happens in every game all over the pitch and refs must see a player going down after bullshit min contact but without hesitation give a free kick or peno... it’s by far the worst thing in today’s game and needs to be sorted.

I totally agree. I loathe this writhing in agony all over the pitch to gain an advantage, only to get up and run like a gazelle seconds later. Our players are just as guilty as any other teams. Maddison does it on almost every challenge.

 

It is totally the FA and referees fault this situation has developed. Referees rarely give free kicks, and especially penalties, unless the player goes down. Managers encourage players diving (according to Sean Dyche) because the risk of a yellow card is outweighed by the chance of a penalty.

 

The pathetic VAR system should have sorted this out but hasn't because they want to support the referees, as Andy Gray pointed out on the clip on the last page. I agree with Andy Gray it is a crazy situation that referees can't review the incident on a pitch side monitor. Three referees sitting in a studio miles away may always come to different conclusions. Take the Mane penalty, where former referees Keith Hackett said it wasn't, but Dermot Gallagher said it was a penalty.

 

And I go back to my point about retrospective action. VAR could impose some punishment, but what?

 

Ban the player? That does nothing to help the situation of the team who have been wrongly done by. In fact it may hurt them more because that player could miss playing against a team they are in direct competition with, maybe for relegation, or a European place. 

 

Deduct points? If retrospective action showed Mane dived do they deduct Liverpool 2 points and give us one? And how would that work if a penalty had been given in the first minute and Liverpool had won 5-0, or we had gone on to win 2-1?

 

Fine the club or player? At 2 million per league place, or survival in the P/L, or a Champions League place, the gamble of diving is worth the gamble of a fine.

 

The only answer is to improve our referees so they are the very highest quality. Plus they must make it clear that they will give free kicks and penalties if a player is fouled, without them having to dive. If we are going to continue with VAR there should be a pitch side monitor and the only person to confirm or change the decision is the on field referee.

 

In it's current format, VAR is a totally pointless addition to our game and is currently badly harming the game. I noticed a report this week that claims live attendances could soon start falling because of spectator dissatisfaction over VAR.

 

[jammie82uk]

4 hours ago, ThaiFox said:

If we are going to continue with VAR there should be a pitch side monitor and the only person to confirm or change the decision is the on field referee.

Majority of that is already being done There is already a pitch side monitor (it’s just not being used) and the onfield referee is currently the only person to confirm the decisions 

 

all that needs to happen in my opinion is for the VAR to voice more of an opinion and recognise that an incident like the mane one could divide opinions and encourage the onfield ref to look at a replay, if the onfield ref still think it’s a penalty then fair enough 

 

Sorry to pick a bit out but didn’t want to quote the whole post to reply to one line 

 

 

[Oxfordfox83]

B****ks to the on field ref.

 

Get a voice of God over the tannoy telling Mane to get up and stop being a whiny little bitch, and tell the ref to try harder next time.

 

Give Albrighton a free swing at Mane’s ankle to show him what an actual foul would have felt like.

 

Problem solved!

[ThaiFox]

17 hours ago, jammie82uk said:

Majority of that is already being done There is already a pitch side monitor (it’s just not being used) and the onfield referee is currently the only person to confirm the decisions 

 

all that needs to happen in my opinion is for the VAR to voice more of an opinion and recognise that an incident like the mane one could divide opinions and encourage the onfield ref to look at a replay, if the onfield ref still think it’s a penalty then fair enough 

 

Sorry to pick a bit out but didn’t want to quote the whole post to reply to one line 

 

 

Typical of the FA to install pitch side monitors, and then switch them off or instruct referees not to use them!!

 

Nearly all incidents involving a penalty lead to a debate of some kind, as we've seen again with the Mane penalty. The more officials that become involved the more debatable decisions become. 

 

The on field referee should be competent enough to make a proper decision. Obviously there will always be human errors, but the addition of VAR has just added to the confusion and debate. It has not improved the standard of refereeing, or the game in general. There are just as many, if not more, debatable decisions than there were before it was introduced.

If VAR is to continue, the pitch side monitor should be switched on and used ASAP. VAR officials sitting in a studio miles away should go.

 

If the can't do that, the FA, if they have any brains (unlikely), should abandon it. VAR just hasn't been thought through properly.

[st albans fox]

2 minutes ago, ThaiFox said:

Typical of the FA to install pitch side monitors, and then switch them off or instruct referees not to use them!!

 

Nearly all incidents involving a penalty lead to a debate of some kind, as we've seen again with the Mane penalty. The more officials that become involved the more debatable decisions become. 

 

The on field referee should be competent enough to make a proper decision. Obviously there will always be human errors, but the addition of VAR has just added to the confusion and debate. It has not improved the standard of refereeing, or the game in general. There are just as many, if not more, debatable decisions than there were before it was introduced.

If VAR is to continue, the pitch side monitor should be switched on and used ASAP. VAR officials sitting in a studio miles away should go.

 

If the can't do that, the FA, if they have any brains (unlikely), should abandon it. VAR just hasn't been thought through properly.

Would love some input from @FIF and others who are on the continent and have seen VAR for 2 years + now ..... how different is it used there ??

[foxinsocks]

Now the infrastructure is there we can tweak the rules about how it is used... if we don't change the operating rules it will become a feature that turns fans off

[jammie82uk]

2 hours ago, ThaiFox said:

Typical of the FA to install pitch side monitors, and then switch them off or instruct referees not to use them!!

they are switched on and available to use, the referee is choosing not to use it 

 

2 hours ago, ThaiFox said:

VAR just hasn't been thought through properly.

it seemingly works successfully in other countries and has for a couple of years 

[Leeds Fox]

2 minutes ago, jammie82uk said:

they are switched on and available to use, the referee is choosing not to use it 

 

Surely if the Ref on VAR sees that it ‘could’ be an error, they should advise that the referee takes another look at their original decision. 

 

No undermining of decision, less chance of a poor call and a more fair outcome. 

[jammie82uk]

33 minutes ago, Leeds Fox said:

 

Surely if the Ref on VAR sees that it ‘could’ be an error, they should advise that the referee takes another look at their original decision. 

 

No undermining of decision, less chance of a poor call and a more fair outcome. 

Yeah agreed that was the point I was trying to make a bit further up the page 

[Blarmy]

Been saying it for years, if a player appears to be in significant pain he has to leave the pitch for a mandatory 10 minutes for treatment and assessment. If he is then OK he can return to play. 

[Guest Fktf]

3 hours ago, jammie82uk said:

they are switched on and available to use, the referee is choosing not to use it 

 

it seemingly works successfully in other countries and has for a couple of years 

Yup - it is not just the 'top' European leagues like Italy either - Poland has had it for at least a year (I think even 2 or 3). I think the argument on not using the pitch-side screens in the Prem was along the lines: In other countries VAR involves stopping the game for the video ref, and then also for the on field ref to review the footage. It disrupts the flow of the game quite a bit, so we're going to speed the process up by only having the video ref make decisions.

 

I've still not heard an argument that makes me think we should drop VAR completely, but it does need quite a bit of work. I hope next season we 1) have the footage the video ref is looking at beamed onto screen in the stadiums, and also hear the conversation between them and the on field ref - like Rugby, so all fans can hear and see what is going on during the stoppage. 2) adapt the rules, as they were not written with VAR in mind - no more 1mm offside decisions please. 

[Leeds Fox]

2 hours ago, jammie82uk said:

Yeah agreed that was the point I was trying to make a bit further up the page 

 

Sorry mate must have missed it. It seems a fairly obvious solution, however what they seem to be doing is keeping the big team bias while hiding behind VAR and the people making the calls in Stockley Park. 

[ThaiFox]

6 hours ago, jammie82uk said:

they are switched on and available to use, the referee is choosing not to use it 

 

it seemingly works successfully in other countries and has for a couple of years 

Well, I find it even more amazing that monitors are there and switched on, but referees are choosing not to use them??!!! 

 

What the hell is the point of them being there, and why are the FA  not rollocking referees for not using every bit of help at their disposal? It's utterly mind boggling. 

 

As for other countries, I'm not really in the know so I can't comment. However, I'd love to read overseas foxes fans comments on here as to how it's working in other countries. It may help me make sense as to why VAR is needed. At the moment I cannot see any reason for having it.

 

In Italy, the games I watch are so slow anyway, I doubt anyone even knows VAR is being used!

[ThaiFox]

4 hours ago, Blarmy said:

Been saying it for years, if a player appears to be in significant pain he has to leave the pitch for a mandatory 10 minutes for treatment and assessment. If he is then OK he can return to play. 

Agree.

 

Also would add that if a player is caught cheating in a match he should be banned for playing in a fixture against that same team for three matches, or five matches if affects the result.

 

But again, it all comes down to our referees. If they continue to only give penalties if the player goes over, things will never change whatever the punishment, because gaining a penalty is worth the risk of a booking or even a suspension.

 

Referees encourage cheating and diving because it gives them someone else to blame.

[st albans fox]

6 hours ago, Leeds Fox said:

 

Surely if the Ref on VAR sees that it ‘could’ be an error, they should advise that the referee takes another look at their original decision. 

 

No undermining of decision, less chance of a poor call and a more fair outcome. 

 

6 hours ago, jammie82uk said:

Yeah agreed that was the point I was trying to make a bit further up the page 

Doesn’t the fact that the ref is asked to relook at a decision undermine his original call? 

 

the argument that he just blows his whistle and doesn’t actually give a decision at all but waits to see the monitor or asks the var ref for one is the alternative 

[jammie82uk]

21 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

Doesn’t the fact that the ref is asked to relook at a decision undermine his original call? 

Not in my opinion just because he looks at it again doesn’t mean he will change his mind 

 

25 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

the argument that he just blows his whistle and doesn’t actually give a decision at all but waits to see the monitor or asks the var ref for one is the alternative 

that’s no argument at all, unless the rules have a major overhaul that will never be the case as he has to give a decision before VAR can get involved 

[Leeds Fox]

2 hours ago, st albans fox said:

 

Doesn’t the fact that the ref is asked to relook at a decision undermine his original call? 

 

the argument that he just blows his whistle and doesn’t actually give a decision at all but waits to see the monitor or asks the var ref for one is the alternative 

 

Not if it’s borderline (so possibly not a clear and obvious error) but possibly the scenario didn’t occur as the referee originally thought. 

[st albans fox]

7 hours ago, jammie82uk said:

Not in my opinion just because he looks at it again doesn’t mean he will change his mind 

 

that’s no argument at all, unless the rules have a major overhaul that will never be the case as he has to give a decision before VAR can get involved 

To use VAR effectively perhaps they need to (although I can see the slippery slope argument with this approach)

[KingsX]

Which clubs have benefited, and/or suffered, from result-changing VAR incidents?  ESPN's Anti-VAR table strips them out.  It's supposed to be what the table would look like if VAR didn't exist.

 

 

Decisions, decisions, decisions ... In a shock turn of events over the past month, VAR has actually started giving goals to teams rather than taking them away. We've seen Bournemouth, Arsenal and Crystal Palace all awarded goals that last season would have been chalked off by the linesman's flag. That's a good thing, right? Well, don't let the football purists hear you say that.

 

So far 15 match-changing incidents have been overturned, with 11 goals disallowed. But what does this all mean for the Premier League table? Who would be much higher in the table without VAR, and who has VAR helped the most?

 

The Anti-VAR Index mirrors the Luck Index at the top of the table, with Liverpool's lead cut in half to four points. Jurgen Klopp's men lose two points because, without VAR, Chelsea would not have had a goal disallowed against them at Stamford Bridge, resulting in a draw. And Man City would have won at home to Tottenham earlier in the season. Man United can also have a good moan about VAR, as Arsenal gained an equaliser at Old Trafford when Pierre-Emmanuel Aubameyang had a disallowed goal ruled back in, costing the Red Devils two points.

 

The only team to suffer a greater points drop than the Manchester clubs are Sheffield United. Chris Wilder's team have enjoyed a great start to life back in the Premier League, but just imagine if the goal disallowed for offside at home to Southampton, when the score was 0-0, had stood. The Anti-VAR Index say the Blades would have won rather than suffer a 1-0 defeat, shooting them into lofty heights of seventh. That climb of six places is the greatest in the list.

 

Meanwhile, Bournemouth and Tottenham have profited most from VAR decisions and would slide five places down the table to 14th and 15th, respectively, had original decisions stood. So things could be worse for troubled Spurs boss Mauricio Pochettino. Burnley don't fare much better, dropping four places into 11th, when you strip out VAR decisions.

 

While that trio of clubs might drop the most positions without VAR, it's Southampton who lose the most points. With two VAR decisions in their favour, they are docked three points, but as they are 17th they can only fall into 19th but one point off the foot of the table.

 

[Facecloth]

So we've seen blatant penalties and reds not overturned by of VAR because of the clear and obvious error rule, but today it overturns the Burnley goal,  on what I would say isn't a clear and obvious error. Just making it up as they go along.

 

Also, apparently Alli scored after handling the ball against Watford. Obviously not seen it yet, but Sky saying the replays confirm the ball hit his hand, yet it was allowed to stand. Considering the rule was that the ball hitting an attackers arm that leads to a goal, accidental or not would rule a goal out was declared at the start of the season, and that's what happened it's a joke. Would be the second time it's happened to Watford this season too.

Edited 19 October 2019 by Facecloth

[yorkie1999]

4 minutes ago, Facecloth said:

So we've seen blatant penalties and reds not overturned by of VAR because of the clear and obvious error rule, but today it overturns the Burnley goal,  on what I would say isn't a clear and obvious error. Just making it up as they go along.

 

Also, apparently Alli scored after handling the ball against Watford. Obviously not seen it yet, but Sky saying the replays confirm the ball hit his hand, yet it was allowed to stand. Considering the rule was that the ball hitting an attackers arm that leads to a goal, accidental or not would rule a goal out was declared at the start of the season, and that's what happened it's a joke. Would be the second time it's happened to Watford this season too.

It’s was handball by woods, that’s why he didn’t celebrate 

[Aus Fox]

5 minutes ago, Facecloth said:

So we've seen blatant penalties and reds not overturned by of VAR because of the clear and obvious error rule, but today it overturns the Burnley goal,  on what I would say isn't a clear and obvious error. Just making it up as they go along.

 

Also, apparently Alli scored after handling the ball against Watford. Obviously not seen it yet, but Sky saying the replays confirm the ball hit his hand, yet it was allowed to stand. Considering the rule was that the ball hitting an attackers arm that leads to a goal, accidental or not would rule a goal out was declared at the start of the season, and that's what happened it's a joke. Would be the second time it's happened to Watford this season too.

You need to see the stone wall penalty Watford should have had too. Absolutely disgusting decisions and one that was 100% a clear and obvious error.

[Facecloth]

1 minute ago, yorkie1999 said:

It’s was handball by woods, that’s why he didn’t celebrate 

I've not seen or heard anyone say it handball by Wood. Commentators said it was for the foul, every live update I've read says it was a foul.

 

And if it was handball, that makes the Wood goal being ruled out and the Alli goal standing even more ridiculous.

[Manwell Pablo]

As I’ve said elsewhere, and I’m a big advocate of VAR, the implementation in this league has been a disaster.