[Football] Can we talk about VAR?

[Lenny Rider]

Are we not trying to hide behind VAR and the Ref to avoid the real elephant in the room?

For the third big game, vs Croatia 2018, vs Italy 2021, the tactical naivety of Southgate has again been exposed?

As with the Euro 2021 final, the game was crying out for the creativity of Jack Grealish, but surely give him 30 minutes rather than 5?

 

[One Teddy Maybank]

Kane...I'm not a fan, and think he's a diving cheat.

But on this occasion, he was fouled.

He was, the foul started close to, if not on the line which, and the line is deemed inside the box, so thought it was a pen, myself.

I don’t like VAR and haven’t seen anything in this tournament to convince me it’s of value.

 

[One Teddy Maybank]

Are we not trying to hide behind VAR and the Ref to avoid the real elephant in the room?

For the third big game, vs Croatia 2018, vs Italy 2021, the tactical naivety of Southgate has again been exposed?

As with the Euro 2021 final, the game was crying out for the creativity of Jack Grealish, but surely give him 30 minutes rather than 5?

Yes and no.

Both apply for me, but, England did play well…..

Sterling coming on was just silly, given his form and the fact he’d only just flown back.

 

[Triggaaar]

I'm assuming that, if England won, the referee wouldn't have been a problem...

That's nonsense. When we (Brighton) won recently, it still didn't stop us calling out an awful ref. The ref yesterday was terrible. Foul on Saka, foul on Kane, foul on Mount - none given by the ref. Yet Mbappe dived in the first half (just stopped running, so he fell) and the ref bought it. He was so bad, that even the commentators were shocked, and they usually go out of their way to give the ref some leeway.

Plus we all know Kane has got previous in a Spuds shirt, the cheating and diving lump.

Yes, Kane is capable of diving. He's not as bad as people like Ronaldo though, and the fact is he was fouled.

 

[One Teddy Maybank]

There are issues with VAR, but I don't think it's made decisions like that one worse. We also correctly got the second penalty, thanks to VAR.

Timing wise it certainly did.

To be fair, although I don’t agree with it, and to a certain extent it is spoiling football, it’s the application of it that is the issue IMO.

 

[Triggaaar]

Are we not trying to hide behind VAR and the Ref to avoid the real elephant in the room?

For the third big game, vs Croatia 2018, vs Italy 2021, the tactical naivety of Southgate has again been exposed?

I'm not convinced by Southgate's tactical nous, but we played well enough yesterday. Their first goal was a great strike, but shouldn't have stood. Their second goal was a great cross and great finish, fair play. But with correct on-field decisions, we wouldn't have lost, and that's to the world champions. So criticism of Southgate on this occasion is misplaced.

 

[Triggaaar]

Timing wise it certainly did.

VAR is not responsible for the ref not giving the foul on Kane.

To be fair, although I don’t agree with it, and to a certain extent it is spoiling football, it’s the application of it that is the issue IMO.

Yes, I agree that it's not working particularly well. But if there was no VAR yesterday, everything would have been the same except we wouldn't have got the penalty for the assault on Mount, and then I'd feel even more cheated.

 

[nwgull]

The Kane one was defo a foul and the point of contact was clearly in the box.

The thing that’s most annoying though was that the ref allowed relentless fouling by the French, particularly on Saka. There was one in the second half on the edge of the box where he signalled a dive when a was a clear trip and then penalised England for trying to win the ball back.

 

[Greg Bobkin]

That's nonsense. When we (Brighton) won recently, it still didn't stop us calling out an awful ref. The ref yesterday was terrible. Foul on Saka, foul on Kane, foul on Mount - none given by the ref. Yet Mbappe dived in the first half (just stopped running, so he fell) and the ref bought it. He was so bad, that even the commentators were shocked, and they usually go out of their way to give the ref some leeway.


Yes, Kane is capable of diving. He's not as bad as people like Ronaldo though, and the fact is he was fouled.

OK, let me rephrase that. Fewer people would have blamed the referee for the scoreline.

And the English commentators were shocked, you say? Quelle surprise

 

[Acker79]

(disclaimer - I've not yet watched any of the world cup, so am not speaking specifically to any incidents from last night's game).

I think it's entirely predictable that VAR isn't a roaring success.

For whatever reason, not everyone wanted it and so will exaggerate the flaws, mistakes or controversy. Every discussion around an incident will be more evidence that they were right and it should just be binned off

Then those that wanted it weren't unified in how they wanted it applied. What is covered (reds, yellows, goals, corners, fouls outside the box), who reviews the footage (the assistant with the screen, the on field ref), when a call is made (automatically, manager's challenges). Every discussion has someone trying to argue that it 'isn't VAR that's bad, it's how it's implemented, if they just did it this way...' then suggest a waythat has it's own flaws that would lead to others making that same argument about their version.

On top of that, we shouldn't ever underestimate the ability of a football fan to question decisions that go against their team. It can be the clearest of decisions, but if it's one of your players on the wrong end there will always a 'yeah, but...' and 'It's may be technically correct, however...' The introduction of video reviews of any or all decisions was never going to stop that (despite all the "and of course, if everyone know that it's been looked at they won't question the decisions"). So it will be criticised in some quarters no matter what decision it makes.

Nor should we ignore that some rules always come down to one person's (specifically, the ref's) interpretration. Even when looking through the eyes of a neutral, or the not-as-common-as-we'd-all-like-to-claim fan being impartial on decisions involving their team, there would be the simple difference of human beings being individual and see things in their own way. Frequently leading to the claim that a decision is 'wrong' and VAR should have changed it, when the truth is that there there are often circumstances where there's more than one right decision and the ref's opinion is just different, not wrong. That isn't to say they don't get it wrong sometimes, of course they do, they are humans and there is no current way to remove human error from all calls in football - and even where there are attempts to do that, we're all now specialists in TV framerates and depths of field and the manipulation of perspectives through camera angles, etc. but a lot of supposedly 'wrong' calls are in truth just 'different'.

Further to that is the thing I've mentioned in another thread a while back - football authorities look at the rules with regard to the structure and framework of a competition. Media (journalists, TV broadcasters, pundits) are looking at it as entertainment. Fans tend to lean more toward entertainment, but also want to win (which leads to the earlier point of always finding a way to be wronged by whatever interpretation of the rules). So there is a natural disparity in how the rules are being interpreted.

And all this is taking place in a society that includes a 'controversy sells'/clickbaity news culture that will call a decision controversial when it is clear cut, that will feed into fan conspiracy theories (especially if they don't get the entertainment they want to drive engagement). It's a society that has an element of culture that is opposed to authority - we criticise speed cameras rather than drivers for speeding, we criticise the club for clamping down on ticket sharing to circumvent loyatly point systems (while complaining if we miss out on tickets), so there is always a desire to avoid rules, and/or criticise the people/systems that apply the rules.

All these things overlap and feed into each other - the fans complaining about decisions that go against them contributing to the national discussion via call ins that encourage people to question every call feeding off and into news coverage that analysis th controversy for those fans to feed off.



tl:dr Whether VAR results in the "right" calls or not, there is a culture and environment that means every call it makes will be questioned and torn apart by various sections of people in and around football - biased fans (even if they claim to not be), clickbaity media trying to create controversy for views and other people with their own agendas (whether opposed to VAR or opposed to the current way it is used), so it will never be perceived as a success. The most it can hope for is being part of the game (essentially like refs have been - always something to criticise, but there's no game without them).

 

[jessiejames]

The problem with VAR, is that its being used to disallow goals.
If a ref awards a goal and VAR looks at it, but see the scorers big toe is off side then they should not diss allow it. VAR was brought in in for clear and obvious mistakes, if it takes drawing a lot of lines to work out out if a player was on side or off, then that is not clear and obvious, they then should go with what the referees says. These decisions should only take 10 seconds to decide.

 

[Randy McNob]

Are we not trying to hide behind VAR and the Ref to avoid the real elephant in the room?

For the third big game, vs Croatia 2018, vs Italy 2021, the tactical naivety of Southgate has again been exposed?

As with the Euro 2021 final, the game was crying out for the creativity of Jack Grealish, but surely give him 30 minutes rather than 5?

No, because fans like you just don't like him irrespective of circumstances and revel in England losing just to be proved right because in the main you are spectacularly wrong about him to the point where you post on a thread nothing to do with Southgate. How many managers, like many of his failing predecessors wouldn't have played Bellingham? they would have played Grealish who has skill but is not economical with the ball, he concededes possesion and looks for cheap free kicks which the ref was not giving. Conclusion: Southgate reads the game well. You don't

 

[tronnogull]

Here's my (impractical) solution to the crock of shite that VAR has now become at the World Cup as well as in England (it wasn't too intrusive in 2018).

I was a fan in theory as it meant the really shocking mistakes would be overturned. Instead, as a 'jobsworth' mentality is the only way for referees to progress nowadays - common sense no longer allowed - we're stuck with a bunch of pedants building up their part, rather than fading into the background where they should be. So...

VAR should be a panel of 3 for penalty/red card decisions. No discussion allowed. They see the first couple of replays and each press a button, yay or nay, on whether the ref has cocked up. ONLY if all 3 agree, does VAR step in. Otherwise, almost all of the time, the game just cracks on. In those circumstances, you could even have an ex-pro included. Yes, it's more people but the fact they all have to agree instantly means the really subjective calls get filtered out.

Or we could all have a button each on our seats

I detest VAR as it sucks much of the joy out of the game and we seem to have as many incorrect decisions as without VAR. However, my version of what might be acceptable to the majority of fans is......

VAR ref can only view video at full speed, no slow motion or freeze frame. No drawing of lines on the pitch. If, after 10 seconds the VAR ref cannot say ' bloody hell , the ref / lino really blew that one ', then no VAR intervention. This would mean that egregious clear and obvious stuff would be called back with just a handfull of times per season.

 

[Bodian]

For whatever reason, not everyone wanted it and so will exaggerate the flaws, mistakes or controversy. Every discussion around an incident will be more evidence that they were right and it should just be binned off

Then those that wanted it weren't unified in how they wanted it applied.

Shouldn't this be in the Brexit thread?!

 

[BadFish]

Most of the time VAR is fine. This season seems to be better and most weeks it is not mentioned. Then something controversial happens and it's 'not fit for purpose' etc etc .

The question is (or should be): are we getting more or less decisions correct with it or without it?

Surely this data exists somewhere?

 

[trueblue]

Most of the time VAR is fine. This season seems to be better and most weeks it is not mentioned. Then something controversial happens and it's 'not fit for purpose' etc etc .

The question is (or should be): are we getting more or less decisions correct with it or without it?

Surely this data exists somewhere?

Nobody can really answer that question because so many of the decisions made are entirely subjective. If you get data, it will only be from the refs - who have a vested interest. I'd disagree that 'most of the time' it's fine. Decisions take far too long and the process is opaque, when it should really be transparent.

 

[BadFish]

Nobody can really answer that question because so many of the decisions made are entirely subjective. If you get data, it will only be from the refs - who have a vested interest. I'd disagree that 'most of the time' it's fine. Decisions take far too long and the process is opaque, when it should really be transparent.

To be fair I think we should be aiming for better than 'fine'. I agree with both suggestions for improvement.

I think the that one of the problems is the subjective decisions. People are never going to agree at the best of times. Couple this is clear bias towards ones own team and a severe lack of understanding of the rules of the game from many viewers, and pundits. What you end up with is a load of half back opinions. This was the same without VAR though and will never be successfully dealt with.

 

[Swansman]

Most of the time VAR is fine. This season seems to be better and most weeks it is not mentioned. Then something controversial happens and it's 'not fit for purpose' etc etc .

The question is (or should be): are we getting more or less decisions correct with it or without it?

Surely this data exists somewhere?

Probably more decisions are correct.

Question is if it is really worth it when it is difficult to celebrate most goals due to the existence of this system.

Personally I don't think its worth. Just keep it human instead, with all the flaws and flavours that comes with it.

Unfortunately too late now. In ten years I think the on-field ref will not make any decisions, it will all be down to a combination of AI and VAR.

 

[Tiptoe through the NSC]

I’d love to talk about VAR but with a clear distinction between two elements. There is the technology that allows incidents to be examined forensically and repeatedly until the facts are laid bare for all to see. Let’s call that VAR1.

Then there is the implementation of the technology. This involves the “toenail” offside calls which chalk off excellent goals, the four-minute delays, the lack of communication with the paying spectators and the haphazard selection process of when and when not to take advantage of it. Let’s call that VAR2.

Personally, I am a huge fan of VAR1 and think VAR2 is a joke. I am, however, optimistic that after a bedding in process, which may take a while, VAR2 will improve and the whole package will be of long-term benefit to the game.

 

[BadFish]

Probably more decisions are correct.

Question is if it is really worth it when it is difficult to celebrate most goals due to the existence of this system.

Personally I don't think its worth. Just keep it human instead, with all the flaws and flavours that comes with it.

Unfortunately too late now. In ten years I think the on-field ref will not make any decisions, it will all be down to a combination of AI and VAR.

I was very keen to get it implemented as I (foolishly) thought that it may solve some of problems of endlessly discussing refereeing mistakes and controversies. For a while there we were constantly discussing VAR. This seems to have settled down a bit for me as its implementation has improved.

I don't go to live premier League games but for the most part in the A league it doesn't both me that much.

Ultimately though, as you say, it isn't going anywhere so all we can do is improve its implementation.