[Football] How to fix VAR ?

[WhingForPresident]

For anyone who watched, or didn't, last night's game Fulham v Wolves you may like to read ToL report of the game concentrating on the awful mess VAR and Michael Salisbury made of the game. For the officials to admit that at least 3 expensive (to Wolves) mistakes were made is just not acceptable to any football fan. When will they get it right?

Fulham vs Wolves: Gary O’Neil left to fume after more VAR trouble

Fulham 3 Wolverhampton Wanderers 2: Willian’s controversial stoppage-time penalty leaves visitors empty-handed despite goals from Hwang and Cunha

www.thetimes.co.uk

Didn't realise it was f***ing Salisbury at the heart of yet another officiating/VAR shitshow. How is that clown still in a job?

 

[ewe2]

How thick?

Thick enough to remove the minimum off sides due to eg elbow etc …

 

[PILTDOWN MAN]

I don't remember any issues with the offside technology during the World Cup, surely the same technology could be implemented in the Premier League?

You don't because you/we all accepted that the tech was able to determine when the ball was kicked, it can't. All it showed was at the exact moment the video stopped xyz where in that position on the pitch, again not actually fulfilling the laws of the ball that state being level is not offside. No one will ever be level again when VAR is used.

 

[PILTDOWN MAN]

There needs to be a thorough review of the laws of the game in the light of the new technology.

The laws for Offside and Penalties were written when the only technology available were two sets of eyes.
These laws were introduced and tweaked over the years, to prevent unfair advantages being gained.
VAR has changed the landscape completely. Unintended advantages/disadvantages are being exposed and ruining the game


There needs to be a sensible debate, between refs, administrators, fans, players and coaches.
Answering the question: "What do we want from these laws, now we have VAR".
The laws need to reflect the spirit of the original laws, not the capability of technology.

I would personally prefer a similar approach to Tennis and Cricket, where each team have the opportunity to invoke VAR calls.
Coaches would have 1 specific check per game available to them. They keep it if they are found to be correct, or lose it if not.
The refs need a clear guideline on what constitutes a "clear and obvious error."

Giving ownership of VAR checks to the coaches, takes the pressure off the refs and gets them to focus on standardising their decisions.

Laws of the game are for ALL football.

 

[A1X]

Automate offside (like used at Qatar 2022 World Cup)
Timebox all decisions to 60 seconds, else stick with on-field call
Replay video and audio in stadium and on TV

 

[albionalex]

Amazing how it seems to work OK in both cricket and rugby but is a shitstorm in football?

The rules of cricket are a lot more black/white than football.

 

[Uh_huh_him]

Didn't realise it was f***ing Salisbury at the heart of yet another officiating/VAR shitshow. How is that clown still in a job?

Salisbury and Attwell

 

[Easy 10]

The rules of cricket are a lot more black/white than football.

Very much this, there's far less margin for interpretation. And the stop-start nature of the game lends itself more easily to video reviews.

Added to the fact that for the most part, in cricket, players aren't looking to feign, cheat and con their way to getting favourable decisions. Its a completely different animal.

 

[Uh_huh_him]

Very much this, there's far less margin for interpretation. And the stop-start nature of the game lends itself more easily to video reviews.

Added to the fact that for the most part, in cricket, players aren't looking to feign, cheat and con their way to getting favourable decisions. Its a completely different animal.

And yet they allow an element of doubt in reviews of their most complicated rule.

 

[Brovion]

No it wouldn’t half of them are impossible

Stop subjective decisions? They are all subjective! The problem is exactly that, the application of rules to a game that is refereed entirely subjectively.

....

They're not though are they? The WHOLE of the ball has to cross the line before it's a goal (or out of play). And as much as we complain about the offsides we can admit that after lengthy and detailed analysis it can be proved that yes, his toenail was a fraction offside. (Although most of us think the trade-off with the reduction in spontaneity isn't worth it). Those decisions are all matter-of fact, binary, yes/no decisions. The subjective ones are the ones such as 'was that a penalty?' or 'was that a red card?' are the ones VAR shouldn't be involved with.

(Apart from that I agree with you)

 

[Deportivo Seagull]

That's just not true is it?

How about the England games? Three in two games, absolute clangers.

How about the disallowed Scottish goal v Spain?

Pretending it's just an English issue is ignoring the bigger picture.

'VAR has failed in more matches than it seems' - La Liga VAR provider Roures | All Football

m.allfootballapp.com

I deal with colleges from spain Germany and Italy. All are football mad and none of them have issues with VAR on the levels that we do in the uk. So as far as the leagues in those countries go it’s working well.
I was once asked if the idiot who worked Brexit is the same idiot running VAR in the England.

 

[Steve in Japan]

Sky Soccer Saturday were decrying the ludicrous time taken at Bournemouth (v Burnley) where it took over 5 minutes to decide if a player was offside. Nobody in the studio was saying 'Oooh what drama we have'.
VAR officials were actually arguing with each other.

VAR officials 'argue with one another' during latest Premier League farce

VAR almost had another blunder which ended with the officials clashing at Stockley Park as they looked to determine whether or not Burnley should be awarded a goal

www.mirror.co.uk

Sky yelling about how long VAR takes to ajudicate is just another desirable controversy for the broadcasters. It's just all part of the pantomime and indicates they're on the side of the supporters (they're not, they love VAR, warts and all).

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Sky yelling about how long VAR takes to ajudicate is just another desirable controversy for the broadcasters. It's just all part of the pantomime and indicates they're on the side of the supporters (they're not, they love VAR, warts and all).

I know what I heard, and it wasn't as you described.

 

[Nobby Nomates]

For offsides, make the lines they use much thicker. If the two lines overlap, not a clear and obvious error and stick with the on field decision.

 

[Kosh]

People will see this as dramatic but it was a key contributing factor to me stopping my season ticket after 21 years. Sometimes there is 1 goal in a game. A moment which should be sheer joy. Un-restricted happiness. We now have to hold ourselves back from celebrating the single moment of jubilation because we know it will more than likely be checked. People will say "i still celebrate" but all i do now is cheer and at the same time say either "i think that's ok" or "hmmmm, we might have been offside there". To me, that is massively disappointing and has taken away what I loved about being in the stadium.

The moment I can't FULLY enjoy a goal, football has lost a huge part of the live experience for me. I still watch completely legally (of course) on tv and i am delighted when we score, but the thing I was paying for, that in stadium experience, has been hugely diluted for me.

Again, that might just be me but I can only see it the way I do. I won't discourage others from going, but it did it for me.

Imagine the Aguero goal with VAR involvement.

That’s actually pretty heartbreaking, but spot on with it.

 

[happypig]

The rules of cricket are a lot more black/white than football.

Before the introduction of DRS and neutral umpires there were some shocking decisions against touring sides in India and Pakistan (Javid Miandad was never out LBW at home) from local umpires.

Back to VAR, it seems to have lead to some refs/linos abdicating responsibility for tricky decisions thinking "VAR will sort it out". Couple that with the perfectly natural desire not to be shown to be wrong and officials (whether on field or at Stockley) have a subconscious bias against making a contradictory ruling or recommendation.

How to improve it ?
Make ALL decisions the Referee's call. If he isn't sure of a goal or offside then ask VAR to check. If he misses a foul or red card, so what ? Might stop players going down looking for a penalty in the hope that "VAR might give it; there's no sanction if a player does this and is thought to have simulated.
Complete separation of PGMOL on-field officials and VAR; maybe have the VAR officials drawn from overseas refs and ex players ?
Offside, get rid of the lines and make it so a player has to be clearly in front. Not just a toe or eyebrow, the whole player. If VAR cannot say he's gaining an advantage by being in front, then on-field decision stands.
Referees have to give a post match interview like managers do.

 

[Steve in Japan]

I know what I heard, and it wasn't as you described.

Fair enough. Were they suggesting we get shot of VAR then?

 

[Muzzman]

Here's my solution:

 

[Kosh]

Here's my solution:

Ah; Mike judge… his finest moment ?

Hands down one of the best comedy’s of all time.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Fair enough. Were they suggesting we get shot of VAR then?

The general chat was the ridiculous amount of time and how it affected fans. Five minutes to reach a decision is wrong.