[Football] Football needs VAR but laws of the game aren't ready for it

[Kinky Gerbil]

I heard earlier the handball law has be re-written 14 times in 3 years because of VAR

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

I wouldn't say for or against. For if it finds a lost child or catches toads that have stuck some poor bloke's business up whilst terrifying him. Against if it is used as a 1984 style catch all to restrict freedom and justify binning off police on the ground. All technology has pros and cons, even the stuff I sell. Progress and change are desireable but, my word, it has to be the RIGHT technology.

Do I want a computer writing Mozart style symphonies, attempting to paint masterpieces or cooking my wagyu beef? Not on your nelly. Do I find youtube and spotify great for finding music or the internet useful for background on it, telling me when the gallery is open or what wine pairs best within a £15 price range? Absolutely. Science has its place and art has it's place. But, as I said, football is art.

I guess my biggest beef is what do you expect VAR to achieve. If the answer is "the right result" you've already lost me, You cannot legislate for what effect the stop in momentum cost us on Saturday. Irresepective of THAT decision the wind comes out of your sails, the crowd go silent and their herberts pipe up instead. The whole dimension of the game changes. Butterfly's wings and all that. Last season Trossard's first "goal" either would have stood, leaving probably less than 5% of the away end questioning it, or the flag would already have been up and we'd have accepted it, barely celebrated, and pushed on for the win.

VAR won't stop Liverpool or City winning the title this season. It won't stop Palace being a one man team coached by someone who looks like a senile lesbian. It won't stop Madrid and Barca being the big two in Spain, Celtic winning Monkey Tennis or England charging towards glorious failure in a semi final. It will not IMPROVE results but it will ruin my day out as a paying punter.

Anyway, we're not going to agree but if I can get my kids to let me downstairs at HT on Sat I will happily discuss this (or perhaps other stuff) over beer.

Very good reply.

So what do you want to happen? Several people have made suggestions about how to incorporate VAR into the game in a better way. Are you adamant that the only way forward is to get rid of VAR?

I can understand your arguments, and I am not a betting man but I would be prepared to put money on a VAR tweak not a binning.

I'll be with beardy brother on Saturday and will look out for you at HT. 'email' type conversations never work well, because of the 'my speech, your speech' aspect.

All the best

 

[Nobby]

Here’s the freeze frame they used to disallow our goal.
Is this taken when the ball is kicked or just after?
And if it was taken back one frame, my bet is that Burn would not have been offside. Even if he was, the ball was kicked before the frame they used to judge the offside.
The whole process is totally flawed

 

[Nobby]

I wouldn't say for or against. For if it finds a lost child or catches toads that have stuck some poor bloke's business up whilst terrifying him. Against if it is used as a 1984 style catch all to restrict freedom and justify binning off police on the ground. All technology has pros and cons, even the stuff I sell. Progress and change are desireable but, my word, it has to be the RIGHT technology.

Do I want a computer writing Mozart style symphonies, attempting to paint masterpieces or cooking my wagyu beef? Not on your nelly. Do I find youtube and spotify great for finding music or the internet useful for background on it, telling me when the gallery is open or what wine pairs best within a £15 price range? Absolutely. Science has its place and art has it's place. But, as I said, football is art.

I guess my biggest beef is what do you expect VAR to achieve. If the answer is "the right result" you've already lost me, You cannot legislate for what effect the stop in momentum cost us on Saturday. Irresepective of THAT decision the wind comes out of your sails, the crowd go silent and their herberts pipe up instead. The whole dimension of the game changes. Butterfly's wings and all that. Last season Trossard's first "goal" either would have stood, leaving probably less than 5% of the away end questioning it, or the flag would already have been up and we'd have accepted it, barely celebrated, and pushed on for the win.

VAR won't stop Liverpool or City winning the title this season. It won't stop Palace being a one man team coached by someone who looks like a senile lesbian. It won't stop Madrid and Barca being the big two in Spain, Celtic winning Monkey Tennis or England charging towards glorious failure in a semi final. It will not IMPROVE results but it will ruin my day out as a paying punter.

Anyway, we're not going to agree but if I can get my kids to let me downstairs at HT on Sat I will happily discuss this (or perhaps other stuff) over beer.

Top top stuff - well said that man

 

[Guinness Boy]

Very good reply.

So what do you want to happen? Several people have made suggestions about how to incorporate VAR into the game in a better way. Are you adamant that the only way forward is to get rid of VAR?

I can understand your arguments, and I am not a betting man but I would be prepared to put money on a VAR tweak not a binning.

I'll be with beardy brother on Saturday and will look out for you at HT. 'email' type conversations never work well, because of the 'my speech, your speech' aspect.

All the best

Firstly, keep goal line tech. That's "good" VAR / technology and indisputable and will give the "right" result.

But unless the rest of it can be tweaked to adjudicate on matters of fact, rather than opinion, then all you've got is another in the black, only watching a narrower angle on slow mo and drawing lines.

If you must have it then the technology has to be able to accurately, to the millimetre, decide on offside AND tell which phase of play the player was involved in and if he was interfering / going for the ball. It can't do that. I'm not sure it ever will. And no one seems to be able to decide on how it is to be used for penalties. We've seen VAR award penalties for shoves at corners that weren't given in the current round of games. We've seen the Women's World Cup see penalty chaos with retakes. Then we're told it won't be used like this in the EPL. Then there is a retaken penalty at West Ham / Citeh and everyone thinks it's because of the keeper's feet, but it's not, it's because an encroaching player cleared the ball. Again, technically the right decison, but last season everyone just accepts it's saved and City win 4-0 rather than 5-0. Or maybe they score from the throw in. Anyway, it could have been for the keeper's feet

So, matter of absolute fact - good technology. Anything that needs a flawed human in an airtight room in Heathrow - bad technology. IMHO like.

 

[Guinness Boy]

View attachment 114494

Here’s the freeze frame they used to disallow our goal.
Is this taken when the ball is kicked or just after?
And if it was taken back one frame, my bet is that Burn would not have been offside. Even if he was, the ball was kicked before the frame they used to judge the offside.
The whole process is totally flawed

Indeed. I can't remember if it was this thread or the other one I mentioned it on but the ball has already moved and the offside is marginal - one leg belonging to a very lanky geezer.

 

[Machiavelli]

Firstly, keep goal line tech. That's "good" VAR / technology and indisputable and will give the "right" result.

But unless the rest of it can be tweaked to adjudicate on matters of fact, rather than opinion, then all you've got is another in the black, only watching a narrower angle on slow mo and drawing lines.

If you must have it then the technology has to be able to accurately, to the millimetre, decide on offside AND tell which phase of play the player was involved in and if he was interfering / going for the ball. It can't do that. I'm not sure it ever will. And no one seems to be able to decide on how it is to be used for penalties. We've seen VAR award penalties for shoves at corners that weren't given in the current round of games. We've seen the Women's World Cup see penalty chaos with retakes. Then we're told it won't be used like this in the EPL. Then there is a retaken penalty at West Ham / Citeh and everyone thinks it's because of the keeper's feet, but it's not, it's because an encroaching player cleared the ball. Again, technically the right decison, but last season everyone just accepts it's saved and City win 4-0 rather than 5-0. Or maybe they score from the throw in. Anyway, it could have been for the keeper's feet

So, matter of absolute fact - good technology. Anything that needs a flawed human in an airtight room in Heathrow - bad technology. IMHO like.

I've already said this a few times on here, but I sit more or less in line with where the players were lined up, and noticed that Burn looked offside at the time. The VAR offside decision-making process is a matter of black and white, like goal line technology. It's the other aspects (eg Burn shirt pull) that the on-pitch ref has to make a clear and obvious error in order for the VAR official to overturn it.

 

[Springal]

Which is what VAR should be for.

Not 2mm off side

How do you quantify that? The laws of the game don’t have a 2mm tolerance!

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

How do you quantify that? The laws of the game don’t have a 2mm tolerance!

The system isn’t 100 percent accurate

They should be an umpires call level of tolerance.

 

[Guinness Boy]

I've already said this a few times on here, but I sit more or less in line with where the players were lined up, and noticed that Burn looked offside at the time. The VAR offside decision-making process is a matter of black and white, like goal line technology. It's the other aspects (eg Burn shirt pull) that the on-pitch ref has to make a clear and obvious error in order for the VAR official to overturn it.

Rubbish. In the post above your reply there's an example of the offside from our game where the still, with the lines drawn, has the ball as a blur rather than the foot striking it. Burn was "probably" offside. And by that I mean about 90% off / 10% on. But that's enough doubt for it to be pointless.

 

[Nobby]

Rubbish. In the post above your reply there's an example of the offside from our game where the still, with the lines drawn, has the ball as a blur rather than the foot striking it. Burn was "probably" offside. And by that I mean about 90% off / 10% on. But that's enough doubt for it to be pointless.

All dependant on how many frames presumably. May have been 60-40, 50-50 95-5.
Too much doubt, so it’s pointless unless they get it 100% correct

 

[Guinness Boy]

All dependant on how many frames presumably. May have been 60-40, 50-50 95-5.
Too much doubt, so it’s pointless unless they get it 100% correct

Agreed. The actual percentages are noise. The fact it's *not* 100% is the issue.

 

[Machiavelli]

Rubbish. In the post above your reply there's an example of the offside from our game where the still, with the lines drawn, has the ball as a blur rather than the foot striking it. Burn was "probably" offside. And by that I mean about 90% off / 10% on. But that's enough doubt for it to be pointless.

I'm referring to what I saw live with my eyes. I indicated to those either side of me that I thought it was offside before it was apparent that the protracted VAR delay was upon us.

 

[trueblue]

My support for VAR is certainly wavering having seen how long they spent tonight trying to work out whether there was an offside in the build-up to Wolves goal. In any traditional sense, the player that crossed it would have been deemed to be behind the ball before it was rolled back to him - but the crosshairs were out, scrutinising whether his eyebrow may have strayed offside. All it achieved was a delay to the restart and more uncertainty in the stadium.

They need to get back to the original intention somehow and find a way of limiting it to absolute howlers.

 

[Nobby]

My support for VAR is certainly wavering having seen how long they spent tonight trying to work out whether there was an offside in the build-up to Wolves goal. In any traditional sense, the player that crossed it would have been deemed to be behind the ball before it was rolled back to him - but the crosshairs were out, scrutinising whether his eyebrow may have strayed offside. All it achieved was a delay to the restart and more uncertainty in the stadium.

They need to get back to the original intention somehow and find a way of limiting it to absolute howlers.

It’s just a huge muddled mess

 

[portlock seagull]

Complete farce, no wonder it’s FIFAs brainchild.

 

[Triggaaar]

Not when I saw the reply and the VAR decision.

No you're probably right. It does seem that fans here would be happier if the rule was changed to 'offside by over 30cm' or something daft. Perhaps that's because we're the ones who lost out at the weekend, and Wet Sham fans are fine with it.

Is it really that all these goals up until this year have been scored by players who were an inch offside, and we were fine with it? Of course we had that idea that the benefit of doubt would be with the attacker, but how often did it really happen? Is making players stay onside really going to stop teams scoring much? Also, we should remember that the offside rule was changed not that long ago to help attackers, when they introduced the 'interfering with play' allowance, whereas in the past anyone in an offside position would have been flagged.

But MOTD is backing VAR....

I haven't watched MOTD yet, but GCCM doesn't think they're backing VAR:

MOTD had very mixed views on Saturday, with Danny Mills voicing direct opposition to it.

 

[Nobby]

Murphy And Cahill scathing on MOTD 2 and have picked up that fans at the games have lost that immediate emotional high

 

[Best Foot Forward]

Give the VAR team a time limit to make a decision from when the ball hits the net. If an error (e.g. offside) is not clear and obvious within say 15 seconds.....then there probably hasn't been a clear and obvious error by the lino / ref

 

[Sue1983]

Give the VAR team a time limit to make a decision from when the ball hits the net. If an error (e.g. offside) is not clear and obvious within say 15 seconds.....then there probably hasn't been a clear and obvious error by the lino / ref

This.