The VAR thread

[davieG]

7 minutes ago, Spudulike said:

Still as pee'd off as the rest of us it seems... 

 

It's been said that it was ruled offside because he was moving and therefore distracting the goalkeeper. However if you use this argument then it  means there have been plenty of offsides ruled out where the offending player could be seen to be moving and distracting the goalkeeper.

 

It's either relevant or not, you can't just pluck it out of the air and use it randomly to justify a ref being correct by fellow refs/ex refs.

 

Well obviously you can.

[justfoxes]

4 minutes ago, SouthStandUpperTier said:

Congratulations on breaking the record for FoxesTalk's longest written sentence.

Oh god I didn’t look before posting cheers Grammar police 👮‍♀️ 😉

[justfoxes]

5 minutes ago, SouthStandUpperTier said:

Congratulations on breaking the record for FoxesTalk's longest written sentence.

Sorted 😉😂

[Long Eaton Fox]

I think the VAR review only takes into account the handball/penalty incident as it is a major incident and does not look at the foul on Vestergaard as it is considered minor. Although we all know the two are directly related.

[jmono84]

1 hour ago, davieG said:

It's been said that it was ruled offside because he was moving and therefore distracting the goalkeeper. However if you use this argument then it  means there have been plenty of offsides ruled out where the offending player could be seen to be moving and distracting the goalkeeper.

 

It's either relevant or not, you can't just pluck it out of the air and use it randomly to justify a ref being correct by fellow refs/ex refs.

 

Well obviously you can.

It should be as simple as the rule states.

 

Was Barnes clearly blocking the sight of the ball in an offside position? On both occasions you can clearly see the goalkeepers has clear sight of the ball.

 

On the football forum some guy mentioned how he would prefer VAR not to change every decision, I agree but when you have a linesman who feels he can flag from a fair few yards away from a side angle what depth Barnes is according to the goalkeepers sight then VAR has to get involved. The linesman should not be flagging for instances like this, he has little clue where Barnes is actually stood.

 

Lets listen to a linesman who is guessing where Barnes is instead of looking at multiple, better, slowed down images of the incidents.

[TeamRocket]

What's the point in VAR?

[Spudulike]

Law 11, Offside... 

 

Offside offence

A player in an offside position at the moment the ball is played or touched* by a team-mate is only penalised on becoming involved in active play by:

• interfering with play by playing or touching a ball passed or touched by a team-mate or
• interfering with an opponent by:
• preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent’s line of vision or
• challenging an opponent for the ball or
• clearly attempting to play a ball which is close when this action impacts on an opponent or
• making an obvious action which clearly impacts on the ability of an opponent to play the ball

or

• gaining an advantage by playing the ball or interfering with an opponent when it has:
• rebounded or been deflected off the goalpost, crossbar or an opponent
• been deliberately saved by any opponent

https://www.thefa.com/football-rules-governance/lawsandrules/laws/football-11-11/law-11---offside

 

[st albans fox]

2 hours ago, Les-TA-Jon said:

 

This is the exact example I was going to bring up. 

I think that at the time, the PL interpretation was that the player needed to be more aware of what he was doing and the closeness of the contact ahead of the handball was taken into account. 
 

if that happened this season then it would be given by VAR (assuming. The var isn’t banks)

 

[st albans fox]

I’m beginning to wonder if VAR actually has sufficient camera angles available within the thirty seconds or so that they’re needed.  When you get to see VAR replays, they seem to be generally from one angle being replayed repeatedly. And that angle isn’t necessarily the best to view the incident.  Hence the assumption that they should see the things we get to on a tv feed is maybe flawed. We are told that PGMOL have their own cameras which are different to the tv companies. 
 

do they have the technical support to manage the replays they need to see across several games all at once?  you would have thought that  a Sunday afternoon when there are only two games ongoing wouldn't tax their capabilities.  
 

A journo should take on the task of investigating how we look after VAR (on a technical level) compared to the leagues across the continent.  Is there a difference? 

[filbertway]

1 hour ago, st albans fox said:

I’m beginning to wonder if VAR actually has sufficient camera angles available within the thirty seconds or so that they’re needed.  When you get to see VAR replays, they seem to be generally from one angle being replayed repeatedly. And that angle isn’t necessarily the best to view the incident.  Hence the assumption that they should see the things we get to on a tv feed is maybe flawed. We are told that PGMOL have their own cameras which are different to the tv companies. 
 

do they have the technical support to manage the replays they need to see across several games all at once?  you would have thought that  a Sunday afternoon when there are only two games ongoing wouldn't tax their capabilities.  
 

A journo should take on the task of investigating how we look after VAR (on a technical level) compared to the leagues across the continent.  Is there a difference? 

If you look at the office, they have 8-10 replays on smaller screens to choose from and they choose which ones to focus on the bigger screen. They make all the decisions on which videos the ref looks at.

[st albans fox]

22 minutes ago, filbertway said:

If you look at the office, they have 8-10 replays on smaller screens to choose from and they choose which ones to focus on the bigger screen. They make all the decisions on which videos the ref looks at.

That was the publicity they released and showed the journos on their tour

 

doesn’t mean that’s how it works when there is no one from outside watching !

 

taking away the cynicism, something fundamental isn’t working 

 

Why didn’t they have the right angle to check maupay’s hold on vester?  if they don’t consider that to be a clear and obvious foul then players should be told this so they know what they can do in future. 

and the angle on wilf’s header where it’s clear that Harvey isn’t in Sanchez’s eyeline - the side on image isn’t clear on that. 
 

if they only use the side on images for both incidents then it’s clear why they weren’t overturned …. 
 

As fans we need some clarity and openness so we can accept the calls as being ‘mistakes’. Otherwise you get the conspiracy theory nonsense in the vacuum that’s left.

[filbertway]

11 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

That was the publicity they released and showed the journos on their tour

 

doesn’t mean that’s how it works when there is no one from outside watching !

 

taking away the cynicism, something fundamental isn’t working 

 

Why didn’t they have the right angle to check maupay’s hold on vester?  if they don’t consider that to be a clear and obvious foul then players should be told this so they know what they can do in future. 

and the angle on wilf’s header where it’s clear that Harvey isn’t in Sanchez’s eyeline - the side on image isn’t clear on that. 
 

if they only use the side on images for both incidents then it’s clear why they weren’t overturned …. 
 

As fans we need some clarity and openness so we can accept the calls as being ‘mistakes’. Otherwise you get the conspiracy theory nonsense in the vacuum that’s left.

I honestly have no idea what they're doing. I'm 100% sure they'll have everything available immediately. Sky directors manage to find the best angles and the commentators 99% of the time spot the issue. 

 

I genuinely think that refs are people that never played football because they were too crap and see the game through the rule book rather than how it's actually played.

 

It's so annoying when they won't admit a mistake as well, people would still be annoyed, but there'd be more trust and respect for them in the long run.

[jmono84]

We should put Alan Shearer in the booth. I feel I agree with him on most things VAR related.

This has led to me thinking why we don’t see many ex-pros going into refereeing. Is the pay not that great?

Edited 22 September 2021 by jmono84

[davieG]

13 minutes ago, jmono84 said:

We should put Alan Shearer in the booth. I feel I agree with him on most things VAR related.

This has led to me thinking why we don’t see many ex-pros going into refereeing. Is the pay not that great?

Most pros praise cynical fouls, taking one for the team, taking a touch for a penalty etc. In my experience they are worse.

[jmono84]

Just now, davieG said:

Most pros praise cynical fouls, taking one for the team, taking a touch for a penalty etc. In my experience they are worse.

Yea good point I forgot he always used to say if you’ve felt the contact you deserve to do down brigade. Not heard him say it for a while tho but I’ve missed a fair few MOTD’s in recent years.

[jmono84]

2 minutes ago, davieG said:

Most pros praise cynical fouls, taking one for the team, taking a touch for a penalty etc. In my experience they are worse.

Only ex-pros who were CB’s then 😂😂😂

[davieG]

Just now, jmono84 said:

Only ex-pros who were CB’s then 😂😂😂

Not when it's a featherweight touch for a  penalty.

[Hack]

On 21/09/2021 at 02:51, Facecloth said:

And if VAR didn't exist, whilst we be annoyed, I think we would all accept they ate only human, and mistakes happen. With the assistance of VAR, its unacceptable those decisions were allowed to stand.

 

Also as Davie says above, they'd given a corner before VAR spotted the handball and gave a penalty.

Yes.  The whole point of VAR is to make sure the ruling on the field is verified.  If it can't get it right, then what does it do for the game.  This one game has truly put the use of VAR under extreme pressure.  I am amazed the FA have not made a statement the way the VAR was used.  If they want to say it is correct, then do so and explain why, if not please reprimand the Ref crew and advice other crews how to correct this sort of interpretation.  Saying doing nothing by the FA is a cope out.

[Jonezy]

Just sod the VAR thing. It made the whole football experience worse and we are still sat week after week baffled by weird decisions. Its impossible to defend it at this point. Thanks for the Chilwell offside in the FA Cup final, but please go away VAR. 

[Les-TA-Jon]

My main frustration with the current PL implementation of VAR is that we've now got this bastardised half way house that's more irritating. 

 

Pre-VAR the issue was that often everyone except the actual referee got access to replays, multiple angles and slo-mo to support in identifying the correct decision on crucial game changing moments: i.e goals, pens, cards. 

 

With the current VAR implementation the emphasis is placed in the wrong areas. Rather than making the correct decision, regardless of who makes it, it's about protecting the referee/game from being 're-referee'd'

 

Which means we can get into bizarre situations where an incident occurs, everyone (including the VAR room itself) can see what the correct decision is, but if it doesn't meet the 'clear and obvious' threshold then there's nothing that can be done about it. 

[Super_horns]

1 hour ago, jmono84 said:

We should put Alan Shearer in the booth. I feel I agree with him on most things VAR related.

This has led to me thinking why we don’t see many ex-pros going into refereeing. Is the pay not that great?

They’d have to do a lot of training as well.

 

Compared to working on the BBC/Sky it’s probably not worth the hassle for them .

 

But maybe some lesser ex pros or ones who don’t make it could have a go if they wanted ?

 

Happens in cricket particularly.

[st albans fox]

2 hours ago, Les-TA-Jon said:

My main frustration with the current PL implementation of VAR is that we've now got this bastardised half way house that's more irritating. 

 

Pre-VAR the issue was that often everyone except the actual referee got access to replays, multiple angles and slo-mo to support in identifying the correct decision on crucial game changing moments: i.e goals, pens, cards. 

 

With the current VAR implementation the emphasis is placed in the wrong areas. Rather than making the correct decision, regardless of who makes it, it's about protecting the referee/game from being 're-referee'd'

 

Which means we can get into bizarre situations where an incident occurs, everyone (including the VAR room itself) can see what the correct decision is, but if it doesn't meet the 'clear and obvious' threshold then there's nothing that can be done about it. 

Please no - re refereeing the game will take us down a huge rabbit hole !

 

games will last for hours …… 

[Carl the Llama]

1 hour ago, Super_horns said:

They’d have to do a lot of training as well.

 

Compared to working on the BBC/Sky it’s probably not worth the hassle for them .

 

But maybe some lesser ex pros or ones who don’t make it could have a go if they wanted ?

 

Happens in cricket particularly.

Could've fooled me

[Les-TA-Jon]

51 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

Please no - re refereeing the game will take us down a huge rabbit hole !

 

games will last for hours …… 

Huh? I wasn't advocating for that was I? 

 

Was simply saying that the current implementation is bonkers, because now you have can everyone, including a room full of referees seeing the footage and thinking the decision should be X, but if the referee decided Y, it's very hard to overturn him. 

 

My argument is that the big decisions should be referred to the monitor and it should be easier for the ref to change his mind (with the support of the monitor and VAR room discussion) and/or be overruled. 

Edited 22 September 2021 by Les-TA-Jon

[cruzFOX]

I don't see this predicament ever getting resolved unless its mandatory for the ref to visit the monitor after all parties including the linesmen/women and VAR panels have had a word in the refs ear. Then he can make the final judgement call. It will take longer but hopefully everyone will feel it was a decision made fairly. Right now there is serious mistrust of the people operating VAR and we continue to keep seeing examples every week that further solidify that mistrust. 

 

On a side note I had a brain fart yesterday and that was implementing AI technology to scan the video footage and highlight infractions. Surely the computer can recognize and highlight these issues faster than a human. The ref can still make the final call but he does'n have to go looking for waldo so to speak. Just an idea.

If we had this tech I'm 100% sure the vestergaard penalty would not have been given as the prior foul on him by moped would have been red flagged. simples.