Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

[Football] "It's not VAR, it's the people running it"



Harry Wilson's tackle

Harry Wilson's Tackle
NSC Patron
Oct 8, 2003
56,146
Faversham
I'm also sure it won't be removed but that doesn't change my opinion that it should be removed.

I deal with reality.

Much of the time.

Ahem.
 




Herr Tubthumper

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Jul 11, 2003
62,706
The Fatherland
Whilst I accept that it was offside, I agree that there was no need for the ref to review it. The point was that you commit an offside offence is you are in an offside position and you play or attempt to play a ball near you. The video ref can clearly see Mwepu attempt to play the ball so no need for the pitch ref to have a look.

Attempting to play the ball alone isn’t an offence, this attempt needs to also interfere with the opponent.

“ clearly attempting to play a ball which is close when this action impacts on an opponent or
making an obvious action which clearly impacts on the ability of an opponent to play the ball”
 


Harry Wilson's tackle

Harry Wilson's Tackle
NSC Patron
Oct 8, 2003
56,146
Faversham
You can't just use science and tech if the people operating it are clueless. It makes things worse. You could write the best workflow system for insurance claims in the world but the insurer will be worse off if they give it to the tea lady and maintenance man with no training. And that's assuming it's bug free.

All that's happening now is more people disagreeing. It's the match official equivalent of when me and the boy have a long discussion about a handball call or yellow card having seen all the angles on the telly. We can't agree at times - but it seems having qualifications doesn't help :shrug:

I agree.

I guess we shall stay on opposite sides of the 'make it better' versus 'burn it down' hedge for the time being.

Great to see you today. What a time to be alive! :thumbsup:
 


Harry Wilson's tackle

Harry Wilson's Tackle
NSC Patron
Oct 8, 2003
56,146
Faversham
Ruling out a world class goal because some severly Aspergian muppet desperately had to find a hair or a nail being offside... thats the real "absolute joke".

Steady. We people on the spectrum are not all nit-picky ???

Well, OK, I am. Bang to rights :lolol:
 


Bodian

Well-known member
May 3, 2012
14,270
Cumbria
Not one Leicester player even thought of appealing so far as I can see. And players generally know. The overhead kick attempt had no actual influence on the headed clearance.

Frustrating to say the least.
 




Is it PotG?

Thrifty non-licker
Feb 20, 2017
25,472
Sussex by the Sea
Ridiculous football decision, may those responsible hold their heads in shame.
Screenshot_20220904-192413~2.png
 


southstandandy

WEST STAND ANDY
Jul 9, 2003
6,048
One of the main reasons refereeing standards (in my view) have declined in the last few years is because of VAR. They know they don't have to get everything right as VAR will pick them up on anything they miss.

Won't go on about VAR as it's been done to death. I always have been against VAR from the outset and still am today. I know it's not going to change but I'd like to see it's removal - the length of time to rule out Big Mac's goal today was a case in point - just over 4 mins to make that decision which ruins the continuity of any match and the curtailed celebrations of the supporters.

Oh, I just have!
 


Seasider78

Well-known member
Nov 14, 2004
6,011
For me it’s a goal prevention system they are looking for any reason however minor to rule out goals. It’s ruining the spectacle and feel for Mac today having what should have been one of those career worldy goals for some far from clear and obvious issue in the build up.

I also think these cancelled goals have an unfair impact on the game as they feel like a goal being conceded by the team losing out and give the other team a lift.

I was against it when it came in and have hated it ever since it’s for the armchair fans
 




Surrey Phil

Well-known member
Aug 3, 2010
1,531
There’s a bigger issue here. You go to a match for the live experience and yet no-one has a clue what’s going on during a VAR review, as they show nothing on the screens. But if you watching on Sky, you get to see and hear what’s going on. They just encouraging people to not go to football any more which is just so stupid & sad!
 


Easy 10

Brain dead MUG SHEEP
Jul 5, 2003
62,424
Location Location
Maybe...... but with only a couple of reviews, maybe even just one per team, main benefit is it would remove the VAR official bellend who is cocking up the game and over ruling good goals or putting pressure on refs to over rule sound decisions that are most certainly not (clear and obvious errors)

In cricket for instance, in Stokes mega Ashes innings at headingly, Australia couldve won the ashes as he was out plum LBW with a couple to go for the win, they used/wasted all their reviews, so tough titties.

If it was a limited amount, very small, maybe even one, you may get teams acting like chancers on the first goal scored or conceeded, but that will be their lot if they get a perfectly valid bad decision against them.

It would remove the VAR wannbe refs from ruining the games, which they are and would give the teams a very limited right of review..... right now it happens all the time, with every incident, one team waves arms around, shouts at ref and VAR reviews it.

By curtailing this to a limited number and binning off the VAR offical from interjecting at every decision, except when challenged once or twice per game versus onfield decision, I dont imagine that being worse that the random shitshow we so often get today.

Not that anything will change anyway!

Sorry, I just cannot be having it.

If a manager still has an "appeal" in his pocket, then you might as well give up celebrating a late or last minute goal. As we've seen today, the eager-beavers at Stockley Park are DESPERATELY searching for the slightest reason to chalk off a goal, its literally their mission in life now. Bung a Marsch into that, and you'll have 5-6 minutes of sitting on your hands as they wind it back to someone tripping over their own cock in the build-up.

The 4th officials are already having to deal with numbnuts in their ear every game. Actually giving them an official REMIT for it with an appeals system ? God no. Just no.

Football is a fundamentally different sport to cricket and tennis. Its not a series of plays, it flows. You cannot adopt the same appeals system. It would - I guarantee - be abused.
 


mike79

Active member
Sep 28, 2005
840
Bournemouth
Not one Leicester player even thought of appealing so far as I can see. And players generally know. The overhead kick attempt had no actual influence on the headed clearance.

Frustrating to say the least.

The opposition don’t need to appeal for offside and the overhead kick in the eye line of the Leicester player clearly impacts him. Coming back from an offside position to challenge for the ball has always been interference.
 




jonny.rainbow

Well-known member
Oct 29, 2005
6,846
The opposition don’t need to appeal for offside and the overhead kick in the eye line of the Leicester player clearly impacts him. Coming back from an offside position to challenge for the ball has always been interference.

How can Mwepu have impacted on his ability to play the ball if the player heads it clear?
 


Harry Wilson's tackle

Harry Wilson's Tackle
NSC Patron
Oct 8, 2003
56,146
Faversham
VAR is a bloody joke and a bad one at that , easy fix imho , use Ex players who know the game and can read a situation:shrug:

As long as it isn't Steve Mcmanananaman.

To be very honest.
 


Hugo Rune

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Feb 23, 2012
23,691
Brighton
"It's not VAR, it's the people running it"

As long as it isn't Steve Mcmanananaman.

To be very honest.

And that was the problem with that particular scouse streak of piss. Too many mans in the Mac.

Our Mac has only one man in the Mac and his name is Allister (separated) and we’re all the better for it! Long may he reign.
 




mike79

Active member
Sep 28, 2005
840
Bournemouth
The opposition don’t need to appeal for offside and the overhead kick in the eye line of the Leicester player clearly impacts him. Coming back from an offside position to challenge for the ball has always been interference.

Because he doesn’t need to stop him making a clearance, just impact on his ability. And the argument would be that he could make a better clearance with clear unobstructed sight of the ball.
 


Easy 10

Brain dead MUG SHEEP
Jul 5, 2003
62,424
Location Location
For me it’s a goal prevention system they are looking for any reason however minor to rule out goals. It’s ruining the spectacle and feel for Mac today having what should have been one of those career worldy goals for some far from clear and obvious issue in the build up.

I also think these cancelled goals have an unfair impact on the game as they feel like a goal being conceded by the team losing out and give the other team a lift.

I was against it when it came in and have hated it ever since it’s for the armchair fans

That is a very excellent term sir. And I wholeheartedly agree with gou.
 


Guinness Boy

Tofu eating wokerati
Helpful Moderator
NSC Patron
Jul 23, 2003
37,345
Up and Coming Sunny Portslade
I agree.

I guess we shall stay on opposite sides of the 'make it better' versus 'burn it down' hedge for the time being.

Great to see you today. What a time to be alive! :thumbsup:

Indeed matey. Great to see you too. I think we can both agree that "we're ****ing brilliant!".
 


Easy 10

Brain dead MUG SHEEP
Jul 5, 2003
62,424
Location Location
Because he doesn’t need to stop him making a clearance, just impact on his ability. And the argument would be that he could make a better clearance with clear unobstructed sight of the ball.

Are you not losing sight of what (ultimately) the offside law is all about ? It was brought in to prevent goalhanging. It was brought in to stop an attacker gaining an unfair advantage through being behind the last defender when the ball is played forward.

Did Mwepu achieve any of that before the defender cleared the ball, 2 seconds before Argie Mac larrupped it into the top corner from 25 yards ? Is THIS what we're paying to watch ?
 




Bold Seagull

strong and stable with me, or...
Mar 18, 2010
30,464
Hove
The opposition don’t need to appeal for offside and the overhead kick in the eye line of the Leicester player clearly impacts him. Coming back from an offside position to challenge for the ball has always been interference.

Clear and obvious is VAR’s remit. Given the time it took the one thing VAR could be 100% on is that it wasn’t clear and obvious.

That goal should have stood on whatever the onfield decision was, and had they flagged for offside, so be it. VAR after one look should have concluded there was no clear and obvious error on field. There was a judgement made that could go either way, but not a clear and obvious error.
 


A1X

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Sep 1, 2017
20,553
Deepest, darkest Sussex
Today just confirms what I’ve always said about VAR, it should be a 30 second time box and shown in the big screen. If it’s obvious then it will be within 30 seconds, if it’s not stuck with the officials and get on with it. Today was a shambles, the decision might have been correct but it took far, far too long to get there.
 


Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here