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

13 hours ago, jammie82uk said:

It seems the guy in charge at IFAB is not happy with how the premier league is doing offsides

 

For me The easiest way to solve offsides is the idea of getting rid of the lines and just checking if the player is clearly offside 

if you can’t tell then then they are onside and gets benefit of doubt like the rules already say the attacker should do   

 

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/premier-league-could-stripped-var-21196526.amp


“Clear and obvious still remains - it's an important principle. There should not be a lot of time spent to find something marginal," Brud told the PA news agency.

"If you spend multiple minutes trying to identify whether it is offside or not, then it's not clear and obvious and the original decision should stand," he said.


"If something is not clear on the first sight, then it's not obvious and it shouldn't be considered. Looking at one camera angle is one thing but looking at 15, trying to find something that was potentially not even there, this was not the idea of the VAR principle. It should be clear and obvious.


"What we really need to stress is that clear and obvious applies to every single situation that is being reviewed by the VAR or the referee," he added.


"In theory one millimetre offside is offside, but if a decision is taken that a player is not offside and the VAR is trying to identify through looking at five, six, seven, 10, 12 cameras whether or not it was offside, then the original decision should stand.

 

“This is the problem, people are trying to be too forensic. We are not looking to make a better decision, we are trying to get rid of the clear and obvious mistakes.

 

"If video evidence shows that a player was in an offside position, he was offside full stop. If it's not obvious, then the decision cannot be changed, you stay with the original decision.

Me and many others have been saying this for ages. Then you get the "if it's offside by a mm or a yard, it's offside" brigade. Well there we have it, international organisation who over see say we're doing it wrong and we shouldn't be looking at it so forensically.

 

Did anyone see the Wesley one yesterday? Basically because he raised his foot off the floor he was offside. What a ****ing joke that is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Facecloth said:

Me and many others have been saying this for ages. Then you get the "if it's offside by a mm or a yard, it's offside" brigade. Well there we have it, international organisation who over see say we're doing it wrong and we shouldn't be looking at it so forensically.

 

Did anyone see the Wesley one yesterday? Basically because he raised his foot off the floor he was offside. What a ****ing joke that is.

its the British way - interpret things to the nth degree and implement it all to the nth degree + 1

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only ways I can think of to improve VAR with offside decisions will only create the same arguments.

Either the offside rule is changed and there has to be clear daylight between defender and attacker or we adopt a similar approach to the cricket and if it's too close to call we stick with on field decisions.

 

But if we change the rule to a clear daylight rule then we'll have the same problems but in reverse where an attacker can be onside by half an inch instead of offside by a nose hair and if we adopt a similar approach to the cricket where we stick to Enfield decisions then we'll have goals given in one game but disallowed in another for exactly the same scenarios 

 

Therefore neither would actually improve the system we have now. Even taking VAR out of the equation will lead to the old problems we had. Not using it for offside decisions will result in age old arguments, take Man City at the weekend, their disallowed goal, correctly ruled out for offside yesterday, would have been given and the argument would have been to use VAR, but you can't use it for some and not others. It's either used or it's not and unfortunately I think its here to stay.

Edited by Jimbo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Jimbo said:

The only ways I can think of to improve VAR with offside decisions will only create the same arguments.

Either the offside rule is changed and there has to be clear daylight between defender and attacker or we adopt a similar approach to the cricket and if it's too close to call we stick with on field decisions.

 

But if we change the rule to a clear daylight rule then we'll have the same problems but in reverse where an attacker can be onside by half an inch instead of offside by a nose hair and if we adopt a similar approach to the cricket where we stick to Enfield decisions then we'll have goals given in one game but disallowed in another for exactly the same scenarios 

 

Therefore neither would actually improve the system we have now. Even taking VAR out of the equation will lead to the old problems we had. Not using it for offside decisions will result in age old arguments, take Man City at the weekend, their disallowed goal, correctly ruled out for offside yesterday, would have been given and the argument would have been to use VAR, but you can't use it for some and not others. It's either used or it's not and unfortunately I think its here to stay.

There's no need for rule changes. If you can't spot it without drawing lines on the screen then let the on field decision stand. Simple as that.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Facecloth said:

There's no need for rule changes. If you can't spot it without drawing lines on the screen then let the on field decision stand. Simple as that.

But like I said, that creates new arguments. In one game you'll have a goal given and in another you'll have one disallowed. Most likely on the same day.

 

Imagine being a Leicester fan and a goal is disallowed against Liverpool and the next week by a bigger margin in the same circumstance Liverpool have a goal that stands?? 

Or on the same day Man City score a goal in similar circumstance and we drop from 4th to 5th on the last day??

 

Unfortunately the lines have been drawn, no pun intended, and it started when Spurs goal was ruled out against us. From that moment on every single offside decision had to follow the same guidelines.

 

Don't get me wrong, I agree with you, but changing the rule to that will, undoubtedly, create more arguments. No one predicted the level of pettiness when it came to these offside calls and without doubt they are ridiculous decisions. Every single one of those decisions would have been given as a goal without VAR

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, whoareyaaa said:

all we needed was goal line technology, its starting to ruin the game and has given the officials even more of a headache.

 

we needed two things really proper technology for the offside rule and goal line, everything else is just ruining the game.

 

Maybe, the officials that are overseeing var who, i asume are being directed by the referees assocition, are purposely over scrutinising things in order to put the point accross that maybe it's not so bad with linesmen deciding if it's an offside or not. I mean, if we were to go back to the old system, theres not going to be many complaints from managers, players and fans about possible incorrect desicions is there. It's a bit "with hindsight, it wasn't such a bad system in the first place"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, yorkie1999 said:

Maybe, the officials that are overseeing var who, i asume are being directed by the referees assocition, are purposely over scrutinising things in order to put the point accross that maybe it's not so bad with linesmen deciding if it's an offside or not. I mean, if we were to go back to the old system, theres not going to be many complaints from managers, players and fans about possible incorrect desicions is there. It's a bit "with hindsight, it wasn't such a bad system in the first place"

I'm not sure about that we defiantly need technology for offside decisions we just don't simply have it and they are trying to use a replay system to judge something that really needs better tech in place.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, whoareyaaa said:

I'm not sure about that we defiantly need technology for offside decisions we just don't simply have it and they are trying to use a replay system to judge something that really needs better tech in place.

 

That's my main gripe with the system. We are looking at stills of a replay to judge whether a player is offside or not. The 2 main problems with that are

1) it's all about when the ball is released from the assisting player, which is ultimately down to opinion. A millisecond either way could result in a different outcome, we saw this early on in the season with West Ham V Man City

2) the pictures are just not clear enough. The Wolves goal against Liverpool was disallowed by the blurred pixels of the players boot were judged to be offside. Trouble is that the picture was that blurred when zoomed in that much I personally could see the red of a liverpool kit that would have meant he was onside. You couldn't see clearly enough where that red was coming from on the player. Could have been an arm could have been his shorts blowing in the wind. Either way it was way too close to call. 

 

I genuinely do think the only way to solve it is to stick with on field decisions, but, as I said, that brings a whole new set of arguments. Linos will flag sometimes but not for others, and in it's current state, those decisions will always be referred back to when analysing the game afterwards. We'll have goals given in one game but not in others and I guarantee the "big club bias" argument will be used more and more. 

 

The only other way I suppose is to have some sort of threshold in place. With the lines being drawn as they are in the replays we see, if both players are on the line then its onside, if any part of the attacking players body is over the line (a body part that can be used to score a goal of course) then he's offside :dunno:

So Wolves against Liverpool, Liverpool against Watford, Spurs V Us and Villa against Burnley as a few examples would have all stood??

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, whoareyaaa said:

I'm not sure about that we defiantly need technology for offside decisions we just don't simply have it and they are trying to use a replay system to judge something that really needs better tech in place.

 

I think the technology is spot on, the speed maybe an issue, but i'm sure that whoever's behind it will be looking to automate it or already have a system that automatically tracks the players for offside, to give an answer within a couple of seconds, the whole problem seems to be the common sense behind it as a tool to be used at a football match and i think that most people would agree that 1mm offside, or onside, is not a clear and obvious error which is the where the problems seem to be coming from. Maybe, whoever suggested using it in the first place realised we could end up taking 2 or 3 minutes to decide an offside and hence came up with the clear and obvious statement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, yorkie1999 said:

I think the technology is spot on, the speed maybe an issue, but i'm sure that whoever's behind it will be looking to automate it or already have a system that automatically tracks the players for offside, to give an answer within a couple of seconds, the whole problem seems to be the common sense behind it as a tool to be used at a football match and i think that most people would agree that 1mm offside, or onside, is not a clear and obvious error which is the where the problems seem to be coming from. Maybe, whoever suggested using it in the first place realised we could end up taking 2 or 3 minutes to decide an offside and hence came up with the clear and obvious statement.

I don't know how true this is but 'VAR can only decide whether a player is clearly offside by about 20cm - anything less and we are talking about margins which cannot be confirmed.' that's down to the technology in place not being capable enough so I don't think its spot on atm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, whoareyaaa said:

I don't know how true this is but 'VAR can only decide whether a player is clearly offside by about 20cm - anything less and we are talking about margins which cannot be confirmed.' that's down to the technology in place not being capable enough so I don't think its spot on atm.

Well it's not very good then is it, in fact, how can they dissallow goals for being a "claimed" mm or 10mm offside if the discrepency is the diameter of a football out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Would people be more understanding if they used the foot. you cant go on sight because the cameras not square on.

Linesman are now to afraid to flag in case their wrong.

See the everton non penalty and the man u penalty,both terrible decisions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It can do one. I barely celebrated praet goal as I thought it'd be disallowed, it's the third time this season I've not instinctively celebrated.  When I heard other people say this earlier in the season I thought what bollocks, how can you not, instinct will take over.

 

Unfortunately Var is killing that instinct, I think stats show that refs get about 95% right before var, we're going through all this cost and disruption to the game for what? another 2/3%. 

 

Will anyone in authority consider asking what the match going fans think? It's them that it's spoils the entertainment for the most. Or as with the tv scheduled matches, we are at the bottom of the list when it comes to consideration. 

Edited by Vlad the Fox
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
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...