[Football] FA defends use of VAR at only nine of 32 third-round Cup ties

[drew]

So no VAR at our match at The Hawthorns, even though as a former Prem club West Brom have all the tech installed.

It will be interesting if a non-Prem side get a home draw in the quarter-finals, with no VAR in operation and the potential shitstorm that might ensue.

What do you mean about having all the tech installed?

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

But it's the same competition. Two referees can make exactly the same mistake, but in the non-VAT match that mistake could be decisive.

A couple of seasons of VAR have shown us that ‘the same mistake’ is entirely subjective. Pundits are still arguing and fans are still seeing incidents entirely differently depending upon their allegiance. As the Burnley poster said, there are all sorts of factors that make different matches non equivalent. There is no holy grail of uniformity and personally I would have no interest in it if there were. Life’s unfair and unequal. Just got to get on with it.

 

[Pavilionaire]

A couple of seasons of VAR have shown us that ‘the same mistake’ is entirely subjective. Pundits are still arguing and fans are still seeing incidents entirely differently depending upon their allegiance. As the Burnley poster said, there are all sorts of factors that make different matches non equivalent. There is no holy grail of uniformity and personally I would have no interest in it if there were. Life’s unfair and unequal. Just got to get on with it.

1. That reads as though you're a supporter of getting rid of VAR.
2. Almost every other big sport has some form of VAR, be it rugby, cricket, tennis, American Football. They use it because it is proven to reduce errors and because correct decisions are important when you play professional sport at an elite level.
3. I don't mind normal life being unfair and unequal, but I prefer my sport to be officiated properly.

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

1. That reads as though you're a supporter of getting rid of VAR.
2. Almost every other big sport has some form of VAR, be it rugby, cricket, tennis, American Football. They use it because it is proven to reduce errors and because correct decisions are important when you play professional sport at an elite level.
3. I don't mind normal life being unfair and unequal, but I prefer my sport to be officiated properly.

No, not really. I was against its introduction as I like the randomness of weather and officiating mistakes etc. Don’t really care about ‘elite’ sportsmen and their rights to whatever decision they feel entitled to. I’ve spent many a happy time in the pub slagging off referees but that’s all a part of the game. However I wouldn’t go to the trouble of getting rid of VAR now. I just don’t think it makes much difference to decision quality as we now get a different set of subjective decisions made. Who cares ?
On your third point what’s your view on one cricket team being made to bat in the morning under a cloudy sky with dew on the grass and the other later in the day under blue skies and on a dry wicket ? Not much fairness there.

 

[blockhseagull]

But it's the same competition. Two referees can make exactly the same mistake, but in the non-VAT match that mistake could be decisive.

Same in every game, what’s a red card to one referee isn’t to another.

There is no consistency in games from ref’s anyway.

 

[dazzer6666]

I don't get the need to have an 'all or none' approach. VAR isn't perfect anyway, like the officials - as long as it's the same for any two teams contesting a game that is all that matters - decisions in a different game are irrelevant, however they are arrived at. .

 

[Pavilionaire]

No, not really. I was against its introduction as I like the randomness of weather and officiating mistakes etc. Don’t really care about ‘elite’ sportsmen and their rights to whatever decision they feel entitled to. I’ve spent many a happy time in the pub slagging off referees but that’s all a part of the game. However I wouldn’t go to the trouble of getting rid of VAR now. I just don’t think it makes much difference to decision quality as we now get a different set of subjective decisions made. Who cares ?
On your third point what’s your view on one cricket team being made to bat in the morning under a cloudy sky with dew on the grass and the other later in the day under blue skies and on a dry wicket ? Not much fairness there.

There's no doubt that there are less errors in the Prem since the introduction of VAR. This is undoubtably a good thing, however implementation has been problematic albeit getting better.

Re cricket - I have no problem with coin tosses. Varying weather conditions are part and parcel of outdoor sport. When watching sport in general I like my officiating to be as accurate as possible, provided it is done in a timely manner. Bad decisions detract from the spectacle, while good officiating adds to it. Some people may like to slag off referees but that is something I'd like to see the back of.

 

[Swansman]

I still dont like VAR. When Welbeck scored against Chelsea I cheered for half a second before getting reminded of some previous traumas and couldnt feel happyness or relief before Chelsea took their kickoff. Very often I also see players being moderate in their celebrations because of the odd chance that someone's soul or aura was offside or someone handled the ball in a training session two weeks ago. I really really dont like it and only think it should be used to punish violence on the pitch.

 

[nickbrighton]

i was against VAR being used unless it was used in all games in a particular round-until i read some of the comments above

What changed my mind was the argument that what happens in one game has no effect on others-unlike in a league. As long as VAR is used without big (or little) team bias then does it mater?

What would be wrong , and I believe has happened previously, is if in two legged matches one has VAR and the other doesnt, not sure if any of the rounds will have replays this time though