Premier league clubs to vote on scrapping VAR

[RonnieTodger]

1 hour ago, Will1981 said:

Should have five separate booths with a referee in each one, they then all have one minute to decide any controversial decisions, then have 5 green or red lights under the score board in each ground and go with the majority decision for each incident 

 

1 hour ago, sylofox said:

Better training and common sense. Let's be honest when is a big toe over the line an advantage. Also when drawing that line they can't always see the ball being kicked in the same shot. Arms being offside? Only keepers can use arms and hands except for a throw in.

 

VAR is not the problem it's only showing you again what happened. It's the idiots using it that make the decisions.

 

Practically every goal goes to var and ruins the whole game for supporters celebrating.

 

One of the first games with var we played that I seen spuds and a big toe was offside. Yes I hate them and laughed but from that point I knew var was wrong.

 

Var the way it is used is a total joke and I for one won't be watching our games if they keep it. I'd already made my mind up Blackburn would be my last game. I watch us for the excitement not to wait five minutes to celebrate a goal.

No one doubts that cameras work. Goal-line technology is brilliant because it’s instantaneous and uses technology beyond human error (apart from Villa in 2020). 
 

As long as anything involving VAR is open to interpretation, it’s shit. 
 

We can’t suddenly bring in thousands of officials that aren’t idiots. 
 

Not only is it unfit for purpose, the trade-off is absolutely not worth it. I didn’t even feel aggrieved about bad decisions going against us this season. 

[Dan LCFC]

The laws are full of grey areas and interpretation. So you're still leaving it open to randomness and variance. Referees will watch a decision back and not be able to agree with each other - that's the nature of the rules.

 

Footballs rules aren't black and white enough for you to ever achieve 100% correct decisions. I don't think you're going to get it much more accurate than you have it now. But you've lost the spontaneous goal celebrations and whatnot. An absolutely enormous price to pay for something that isn't ever going to actually work out as we hope.

 

They will compromise this summer and go for reform - for the fifth summer running, and we'll be having these discussions again in a years time. I'm hopeful one day that we'll finally eradicate VAR after this but it won't be this time around. Time will do its thing. It's a stain on the game.

[Dan LCFC]

10 minutes ago, RonnieTodger said:

No one doubts that cameras work. Goal-line technology is brilliant because it’s instantaneous and uses technology beyond human error (apart from Villa in 2020). 
 

As long as anything involving VAR is open to interpretation, it’s shit. 
 

We can’t suddenly bring in thousands of officials that aren’t idiots. 
 

Not only is it unfit for purpose, the trade-off is absolutely not worth it. I didn’t even feel aggrieved about bad decisions going against us this season. 

Neither. I will still have the odd moan about them. VAR doesn't proof you from shit referees and whatnot. It's referees bias in games that still winds me up. But having seen how its played out with technology I shalln't be calling for it again.

 

Even semi-auto offsides - looks better than all the geometry we have to put up with on the replays but still doesn't look quite as instantaneous as I'd hope. I'm not fundamentally anti technology, but it has to be fit for purpose, has to not threaten the flow of the game, has to not take away from the enjoyment. Goal line technology for example - brilliant, people bring up one particular mistake with it but that sums up the success it has been, you can point to literally one failing. VAR is an absolute shambles every single week in the Premier League and those who think its good in Europe I can only assume just don't actually watch any European football.

 

If you could get offsides and whatnot instantaneously then I'd hear the case for it but surely those who are pro VAR must be pining for a seriously improved version of it rather than the absolute dog shit we've all had to endure *five* years of. Surely nobody is actually advocating for the current version of what we have.

[Koke]

 

 

[Chelmofox]

I would like to to move to a process where offsides are autonomous and instant (next season apparently). Once we see this and do away with the godforsaken lines I think we all accept offsides. Getting is done quickly and getting the image on the big screen is key.

 

For onfield decisions I would love it if we could move to a situation where we use 'referees call' as the baseline, and then use AI to do the checks. So for a handball if the ref doesn't give it, and AI determines that there is a > 70% probability it is handball, then the decision is overturned. Likewise if the the ref gives handball and AI determines < 30% probability its handball then the decision is also overturned.  

 

A bit like the LBW process in cricket. The on field officials still have to make a decision and the AI probability thresholds act as the 'clear and obvious error gauge'. 

 

We should have enough training data now to do this for handballs and fouls, and the AI should be able to review the necessary information quickly and the decisions can't be 'gamed' by the VAR officials. 

 

Although i do wonder what AI would make of a Maddison dive where he drags his back legs towards the defender  

[Dahnsouff]

Some things are blank and white, some are not. Black and white decisions can and should be automated, those that are not remain with the officials.
 

Maybe a third type related to disciplinary issues that can be applied after the fact/match.

Edited 17 May by Dahnsouff

[Corky]

Do away with slow motion replays and still images- give the ref five to ten real time replays from a couple of angles to decide. Give them more say at the monitor and encourage more on field decision making.

[Vlad the Fox]

42 minutes ago, Koke said:

 

 

This is not an argument to keep it though, yes we were all delighted it was disallowed, but had the linesman not had the fall back of var he may have flagged, he may not have,  had it stood we may or may not have gone on to win the game.
 

However whatever the decision would have been us or chelsea would have had to suck it up, we’d have gone home and got on with our lives, it wouldn’t have caused any real controversy as the call was so close.

[Dan LCFC]

Butterfly effect. If there's no VAR, the cup final is probably something totally different. If we're going up the hypotheticals route.

[Royston.]

8 hours ago, Vlad the Fox said:

This is not an argument to keep it though, yes we were all delighted it was disallowed, but had the linesman not had the fall back of var he may have flagged, he may not have,  had it stood we may or may not have gone on to win the game.
 

However whatever the decision would have been us or chelsea would have had to suck it up, we’d have gone home and got on with our lives, it wouldn’t have caused any real controversy as the call was so close.

Yes i wanted to add something like that, VAR was (and still is) part of the game at that level, like it or not.

 

Bit cuntish to begrudge anyone capitalizing on VAR  when they can just as easily get screwed by it.

[FrankieADZ]

id be all for that tbf

[Dahnsouff]

1 hour ago, FrankieADZ said:

id be all for that tbf

Agree, but the offside decisions have to be nigh on instant and not involve a muppet with a red crayola

[FLAN]

1 min to find 3 possible real time angles for on field ref to review. He has 1

min to review and decide 

[foxfanazer]

3 hours ago, FrankieADZ said:

id be all for that tbf

I'm glad we're getting the games biggest thinkers to have their say

Edited 18 May by foxfanazer

[pleatout]

On 15/05/2024 at 19:37, Chelmofox said:

The technology is the issue. There isn't a working system to make decisions instantly, especially for offsides. A system that requires the official to manually work out the 'frame' in which the ball was struck, and where the lines need to be drawn (they decide the frickin body part there and then) is a technology that isn't fit for purpose.

 

Furthermore, all VAR ads to handballs and fould is the abilty to slow motion. Anything around intent, and position of the arm etc is down to interpretation.

 

The tech doesn't work.

Ive argued this from day one.

 

 

"VAR uses cameras than run at 50 frames per second, with one picture taken every 0.02 seconds. When an offside decision is being deliberated, VAR must choose the frame which proves with certainty that the ball has been touched."

 

0.02 seconds is a long time when players are running.

 

For example a top level 100m sprinter goes from zero to top speed cover 100m in 10 seconds, 10 metres per second, 1 metre in 0.1 of a second, 10cm in 0.01.

or 

20cm per frame

 

Footballers from a moving start over shorter distances are going to be as quick.

 

Foot size

UK Size Conversion Table

Actual Foot Length (cm)	Internal Shoe Measurement	HLS UK Size
26.7 - 27.1	27.5 - 27.9	9 Adult
27.2 - 27.5	28.0 - 28.3	9.5 Adult
27.6 - 28.2	28.4 - 29.0	10 Adult
28.3 - 28.6	29.1 - 29.4	10.5 Adult

 

 

This business of toes being offside just isn't factually correct.  Anything less than the football boot is going to be prone to errors based on technology alone.

 

 

[LVFox]

Agree re:Offsides only.

 

However, bring in something similar to "umpires call" in cricket. Have a line for definitely onside, definitely offside and then a "linesmans call" middle ground. Would make it a really quick decision.

[pleatout]

7 minutes ago, LVFox said:

Agree re:Offsides only.

 

However, bring in something similar to "umpires call" in cricket. Have a line for definitely onside, definitely offside and then a "linesmans call" middle ground. Would make it a really quick decision.

This!!!

 

The problem though is that if the assistant flags, then play stops.  If the assistant flags after the goal has been scored, it opens up a whole new argument.

 

To borrow from American football (you have no idea how much that grates). I hate the term the the americans use "there's a flag on the play" when they drop their handkerchief,  but it does work.  If the  assistant sees something they think it is offside,  they press the buzzer on their flag registering that they think it was offside, but play carries on. If a goal is scored, the review is obviously on, obviously off or assistant call.

 

Controversy then only if the assistant accidentally presses or doesnt press the button.

 

[Free Falling Foxes]

Whatever happened to the suggestion that you were offside only if there was clear daylight between you and the last defender?

Seemed a good shout to me.

[Chelmofox]

11 minutes ago, Free Falling Foxes said:

Whatever happened to the suggestion that you were offside only if there was clear daylight between you and the last defender?

Seemed a good shout to me.

It doesnt solve the problem. 'Clear daylight' is still subjective on tight calls and under scrutiny is the same problem trying to determine if any body part is inline.  I also dont understand why the offside rule should change to appease bad technology anyway. 

 

Fully automated and fast conclusion is the only way forward. 

[MGLCFC]

It would be more fun if we just scrapped offsides altogether - nothing to disagree and feel aggrieved about then.

[rugbyblue]

3 minutes ago, MGLCFC said:

It would be more fun if we just scrapped offsides altogether - nothing to disagree and feel aggrieved about then.

Yeah I scored loads of goals at school goal hanging!!  

[Free Falling Foxes]

31 minutes ago, Chelmofox said:

It doesnt solve the problem. 'Clear daylight' is still subjective on tight calls and under scrutiny is the same problem trying to determine if any body part is inline.  I also dont understand why the offside rule should change to appease bad technology anyway. 

 

Fully automated and fast conclusion is the only way forward. 

I do think clear daylight would be easier to determine, especially if automated.

Surely with modern tech, multiple cameras could provide an eye level view (as opposed to the slightly elevated views) and technology 'removes' all but the players of interest.

If day light is visible, then offside.

[boots60]

The only way to solve this problem is simple.

 

Get rid of all the rules & adopt a Hallaton/Atherstone/Ashbourne situation 

 

Which is how football began.

 

Far more exciting.

[pleatout]

10 minutes ago, Free Falling Foxes said:

I do think clear daylight would be easier to determine, especially if automated.

Surely with modern tech, multiple cameras could provide an eye level view (as opposed to the slightly elevated views) and technology 'removes' all but the players of interest.

If day light is visible, then offside.

But again you are into the speed of the cameras.  An overlapping foot on one frame just before the ball is kicked and a gap between feet in the next frame where the ball has clearly been kicked.

I addition unless you've got a camera that covers the entire length of the pitch most pictures will be at an angle, making gaps/overlapping almost impossible to tell.

 

[Groby_Blue]

I think Arsene Wenger had the best idea for the offside rule, basically if any part of the attacker's body is level, he's onside (so the same as the 'clear daylight' theory). 

 

Interestingly, it's being considered for next season. 

 

https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/international/us/ifab-considering-offside-rule-change-that-arsne-wenger-recommended-what-is-the-rule-and-how-it-will-impact-football/articleshow/105318582.cms?from=mdr

 

The way VAR is dealing with offside is ridiculous. Remember when we were told it would lead to more goals being allowed? The exact opposite has happened and they are actively looking for a reason to rule goals out.