The VAR thread

[Oxfordfox83]

17 hours ago, Les-TA-Jon said:

VAR isn't the problem.

 

The technology is working as intended, right? I.e within seconds all officials have access to all the footage and replays. (Villa handball aside, as suspicion is they looked at the wrong incident). 

 

The problem is the implementation. All it's done is highlight the dearth of experience and competence available among the officials. 

 

2 simple changes: 

• Get rid of the 'clear and obvious' approach - just simply make the right decision, based on the footage available, regardless of who makes it. 
• But also encourage use of monitor by on field referee, in those cases that are more subjective. 

No. (Edit: yes, the problem is human error and implementation, but the solution isn’t giving more power to the ref or changing more decisions)

 

The whole point of VAR is it ought to eliminate cock-ups. If the on-field referee and VAR are going to come to different conclusions then it should stay with the ref.

 

The issue is the guy in Stockley Park (the Video Assistant Referee) is consistently making the wrong decisions. Bin the monitors, forget the ref’s hurt feelings, and just get the VAR to overrule the ref whenever he gets it clearly wrong. And do it really quickly.

Edited 26 February 2020 by Oxfordfox83

[CUJimmy]

I am as angry as anyone else about VAR and the way we seem to be in a run at the moment where they are all going against us but let’s not forget that 2/3 years ago we were crying out for it saying that referees need more help.  Don’t throw the baby out with the bath water but look for ways to make it better.

 

Put final decision in the hands of the on field referee - if they are going to overturn their original decision they must go and look.  If they really don’t want to do that then separate on field refs from VAR refs, use ex-players, ex-referees, ex-mangers even.  Anything to break the ref’s Union.

 

I can live with offside, yes there are tight calls and we might want to shift the benefit of the doubt more towards the attacking team but offside is a yes/no decision unlike a foul which can be subjective.  Wolves away was clearly offside, most of the complaints were from people who don’t know the laws of the game.

 

Oh, and sack Mike Riley - goes without saying 👍🏻.

[The Quick Brown Fox]

17 hours ago, Les-TA-Jon said:

VAR isn't the problem.

 

The technology is working as intended, right? I.e within seconds all officials have access to all the footage and replays. (Villa handball aside, as suspicion is they looked at the wrong incident). 

 

The problem is the implementation. All it's done is highlight the dearth of experience and competence available among the officials. 

 

2 simple changes: 

• Get rid of the 'clear and obvious' approach - just simply make the right decision, based on the footage available, regardless of who makes it. 
• But also encourage use of monitor by on field referee, in those cases that are more subjective. 

With the monitor use, can't they have a phone strapped to their wrist so they don't have to go to a monitor but have a screen with them at all times to be able to review easily any decisions they feel they need to. Those of us that watch on our phones know that you can see just as clearly as on a TV. 

[Vlad the Fox]

Have 3 var officials, hopefully that will eliminate the error that one makes if the other two override him.

[TheUltimateWinner]

https://play.acast.com/s/The-Ornstein-and-Chapman-Podcast/b42e6226-142b-4502-85b2-e0642acb222f

 

Worth listening to if you want to learn what happened on Friday with the red card failure and subsequent statements. Also confirmed that Dermot Gallagher works for the PGMOL meaning whatever he says on ref watch is just propaganda! 

[RobHawk]

For years referees have had the excuse of it's easy for the viewer at home when they have slow Mo replays, but that have to give the decision they see on the pitch. 

 

All VAR has done is shown us just how inept our referees are as even with the slow Mo replays they continue to get it wrong.

 

What's worse is it seems like they are making up rules as they go along. Now, I'm no expert in the intricacies of the rules of the game but I think most people with an ounce of common sense could do a better job in that VAR room. 

[TheUltimateWinner]

I know Keys is a bit of a nob but he makes a lot of good points here. 

 

https://richardajkeys.com/index.php/blog/233-why-is-our-refereeing-so-bad

 

 

And also on another note, what a fantastic decision by head of refs in the MLS Howard Webb. They won't be using the inaccurate 3D shitty lines.

 

As it gears up for a new season starting next week, many fans will be relieved to know it again will refrain from using the virtual offside line that has been particularly controversial in the English Premier League (EPL) this season.

Many goals in the EPL have been ruled out due to the attacking player being offside by the tiniest of margins, and it is perhaps a blessing in disguise that MLS does not yet have enough cameras to implement a virtual offside line.

"For now, MLS will continue using the same process we used in 2019," MLS Professional Referee Organization general manager Howard Webb told Reuters in a telephone interview last week.

"We want to make sure absolutely we can place an accurate line on every single situation across all of our stadiums. When that's possible and we feel the technology is accurate, we'll look at whether it's something we want to implement.

"At the moment we're working to a system where the on-field decision is made by the assistant referee. That will be considered correct unless the VAR identifies a clear error when they look at the best video angle available."

Edited 26 February 2020 by TheUltimateWinner

[Always Next Year]

 

We can all rant and rave as much as we like but we won’t change a thing.

[Les-TA-Jon]

On 26/02/2020 at 08:05, Oxfordfox83 said:

The issue is the guy in Stockley Park (the Video Assistant Referee) is consistently making the wrong decisions. Bin the monitors, forget the ref’s hurt feelings, and just get the VAR to overrule the ref whenever he gets it clearly wrong. And do it really quickly.

Isn’t that an inherent contradiction? 
 

you’ve just said: the problem is the guys in Stockley Park. Give the guys in the Stockley Park more power/influence. 
 

unless I’m missing something? 

[funkyrobot]

On 16/02/2020 at 17:26, Clever Fox said:

Yes agreed, The problem is though someone can be offside by sticking out there arms or elbows for balance. Which is why I think the Feet is possibly the best marker to go by. It can be used in all levels of the game, Even though there would be no Var, Just the Referees opinion.

Whats coming I'd say is that the Pitch will be electronically graphed and the Camera's will be able to identify every players position on the pitch flagging up when someone is offside automatically.

But that's a while off yet. 

That’s wrong, you can only be offside by parts of the body that can legally score a goal. You can’t be offside from an arm or an elbow. 

[Sly]

I think we can all agree that some of the offsides have been a bit harsh. Football is meant to be an entertaining game. We want to see goals. 
 

The irritating ones for me are the obvious ones it gets wrong. 

 

With all this technology, why don’t they just state that if a ball strikes someone hand from over 3 meters away,  it’s handball. That gives them

time to get out of the way. 
 

As for some of the challenges leading / not leading to penalties and red cards. When 75% of people think the decision is incorrect, you’ve got an issue.

 

Major wrongs for me include:

 

* Tielemans should have been sent off against Bournemouth.

 

* Lo Celso should have seen red. It was far, far worse than the Bertrand challenge in our 9-0 victory against Southampton.

 

* KDB was a handball, every bit as Praet. 
 

* Mane fell over against us to win that late penalty,

 

* Duelfeno penalty against spurs.

 

...... the list goes on! 
 

 

[Oxfordfox83]

4 hours ago, Les-TA-Jon said:

Isn’t that an inherent contradiction? 
 

you’ve just said: the problem is the guys in Stockley Park. Give the guys in the Stockley Park more power/influence. 
 

unless I’m missing something? 

I get your point. Essentially my point was more “Stockley Park, it’s on you, and you have even less reason to get it wrong than the ref. So you’re in charge, get it right, or get in the electric chair”

[Vlad the Fox]

51 minutes ago, Sly said:

I think we can all agree that some of the offsides have been a bit harsh. Football is meant to be an entertaining game. We want to see goals. 
 

The irritating ones for me are the obvious ones it gets wrong. 

 

With all this technology, why don’t they just state that if a ball strikes someone hand from over 3 meters away,  it’s handball. That gives them

time to get out of the way. 
 

As for some of the challenges leading / not leading to penalties and red cards. When 75% of people think the decision is incorrect, you’ve got an issue.

 

Major wrongs for me include:

 

* Tielemans should have been sent off against Bournemouth.

 

* Lo Celso should have seen red. It was far, far worse than the Bertrand challenge in our 9-0 victory against Southampton.

 

* KDB was a handball, every bit as Praet. 
 

* Mane fell over against us to win that late penalty,

 

* Duelfeno penalty against spurs.

 

...... the list goes on! 
 

 

Just highlight their inconsistency/incompetence a couple of weeks after the Tielemans tackle it was included in a number of decisions they admitted to getting wrong. A few weeks back Stirling makes a similar tackle and stays on the pitch, it’s like they can’t learn from their mistakes. 

[fuchsntf]

On 25/02/2020 at 00:52, ozleicester said:

Ive re thought this... we need an INTERNATIONAL VAR.

The ref does their job on the park
Stockley Park reviews their decisions
Geneva VAR review the Stockley decisions,

 

You know, so weve got the experts working on it and... just to be sure. 

Will These Two do...my daughter is near Geneva...She is into Sports science,she has Two Great candidates,to put forward....

They understand,slides into oblivion,offside rule so easy, no Mountain left,free air must be offside  !!!,Penalties Switzerland is Full of them...

 

Oh and always willing & ready like all Good refs,to Listen to players discussions..when surrounded

 

 

Edited 27 February 2020 by fuchsntf

[ozleicester]

51 minutes ago, fuchsntf said:

Will These Two do...my daughter is near Geneva...She is into Sports science,she has Two Great candidates,to put forward....

They understand,slides into oblivion,offside rule so easy, no Mountain left,free air must be offside  !!!,Penalties Switzerland is Full of them...

 

Oh and always willing & ready like all Good refs,to Listen to players discussions..when surrounded

 

 

These guys dont look like they will take the job seriously

[dsr-burnley]

On 23/02/2020 at 12:25, CUJimmy said:

33cm according to Sky but that analysis only holds if the attacker is running at full tilt at the moment the ball is struck.  Yesterday he possibly was not far off that but most of the time they are not.

Let's be really technical here.  When a player is running at 33cm per hundredth of a second, his back foot is doing twice that speed; and probably more pertinently, the defender's back foot may be moving at that speed too.  Now we're getting to a combined speed of over a yard between frames.  Which is a lot when they think they can judge it to the inch.

[Leeds Fox]

4 hours ago, fuchsntf said:

Will These Two do...my daughter is near Geneva...She is into Sports science,she has Two Great candidates,to put forward....

They understand,slides into oblivion,offside rule so easy, no Mountain left,free air must be offside  !!!,Penalties Switzerland is Full of them...

 

Oh and always willing & ready like all Good refs,to Listen to players discussions..when surrounded

 

 

I enjoy your posts @fuchsntf but I think they’ve given me a speech impediment. 

[st albans fox]

6 hours ago, dsr-burnley said:

Let's be really technical here.  When a player is running at 33cm per hundredth of a second, his back foot is doing twice that speed; and probably more pertinently, the defender's back foot may be moving at that speed too.  Now we're getting to a combined speed of over a yard between frames.  Which is a lot when they think they can judge it to the inch.

Which is the basis for the shaded area (margin of error) currently being considered for next year. This will give the benefit of the doubt back to the attacker and should mean that genuine goals are not ruled out although some offside goals will be given within that context.  That’s the spirit of the law as it’s written. the current system most definitely is not. 

[fuchsntf]

10 hours ago, ozleicester said:

These guys dont look like they will take the job seriously

They understand Why the whistle,by no means take any arguing,bark orders at anything irrational,put you in your place in seconds.

Strong & stubborn,turn their Backs and Trot away when they have had enough,listening to others.!!! 

One weakness ( like refs) Partial to titbits...and protect each against strangers,even wider peer authority...

 

Oh and Another Thing,they can bite,better than Suarez.!!

[oxford blue]

On 25/02/2020 at 15:06, Les-TA-Jon said:

2 simple changes: 

• Get rid of the 'clear and obvious' approach - just simply make the right decision, based on the footage available, regardless of who makes it. 
• But also encourage use of monitor by on field referee, in those cases that are more subjective. 

It's easy to say just make the right decision but harder to implement. For example, was KDB a handball or not? It comes down to interpretation. Yes, a more subjective decision for the pitchside ref to make...but would this be the right decision which you say is necessary?

 

And the point by drs burnley   I have been saying since Sterling's goal for Man City was disallowed early in the season.

 

I have previously offered my view on operation of VAR; bu for me the most important aspect is that decisions are made quickly, say within 30-45 secs of ref viewing monitor and that this video is available to fans at games at games at same time

[Manwell Pablo]

On 26/02/2020 at 08:54, Vlad the Fox said:

Have 3 var officials, hopefully that will eliminate the error that one makes if the other two override him.

It works absolutely faultlessly in boxing so why not.

[funkyrobot]

13 hours ago, st albans fox said:

Which is the basis for the shaded area (margin of error) currently being considered for next year. This will give the benefit of the doubt back to the attacker and should mean that genuine goals are not ruled out although some offside goals will be given within that context.  That’s the spirit of the law as it’s written. the current system most definitely is not. 

Since when has the benefit of doubt gone to the attacker? Offside hasn’t changed. Level is level, offside is offside. There’s no spirit of the law for offside. It’s an is or isn’t decision.  

[st albans fox]

Just now, funkyrobot said:

Since when has the benefit of doubt gone to the attacker? Offside hasn’t changed. Level is level, offside is offside. There’s no spirit of the law for offside. It’s an is or isn’t decision.  

The law (before dotted lines) is that level is onside and if the assistant is unsure, that the benefit of any doubt goes to the attacker ...

[funkyrobot]

1 minute ago, st albans fox said:

The law (before dotted lines) is that level is onside and if the assistant is unsure, that the benefit of any doubt goes to the attacker ...

Yes and if the VAR assistant is unsure when he assesses it then he gives onside - like the Jesus goal against us. 

[st albans fox]

Just now, funkyrobot said:

Yes and if the VAR assistant is unsure when he assesses it then he gives onside - like the Jesus goal against us. 

There is no such thing as unsure now ?   Those lines really can’t be on top of each other 100% ....... Jesus was clearly onside when the lines were shown freeze framed ....