[Football] Large majority of UK fans oppose continued use of VAR......

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

In what way was it embarrassing? I watch a lot of FL on TV and non league in person and never noticed any issues with the lack of VAR.
I'd argue there are more embarrassing decisions in the PL with VAR than in the a championship,I certainly can't remember many howlers in the championship which is what it's there for

I saw lots of goals that would have been chalked off for offside, and handballs that were missed. Most of the time, because there was no VAR, the TV coverage didn't even bother with replays. The coverage mapped to the rhythm of the stadium and everyone lived in the moment. I personally found that outrageous. I was fuming. However, yes, it seemed that the majority watching thought it was terrific.

I'd compare a non VAR match with a Johnson speech. Exciting and entertaining, but if you check what was said, there were lies and lies and lies again, and the narrative was false. A majority of people would have loved it enough to vote for it. In the end, however, because analysis showed that it was wrong, Johnson had to go. It was embarrassing.

In the end we need fairness and accuracy, I think. A pantomime punctuated by exciting passages is simply not enough.

The irony is that while most posters on NSC appear to disagree with VAR, VAR is here to stay. Attempting to improve accuracy is the rubric. The era of panto and "bollocks to everything" is gone forever. So for me we simply have to polish the rubric, and polish again, so that VAR works better. It isn't even me saying this, it is what we have now, the reality.

If people wish to go on anti VAR marches, and hold anti VAR sit ins, good luck to them. Oddly though, despite the rancour, I don't see this happening. Neither do I see a mass exodus of fans from the EPL milieu and a rush to the lower leagues where football is still played au naturel.

 

[dsr-burnley]

Sorry, don't agree with that. The margin of error is not a 12 inches by any stretch of the imagination. Besides, you're backtracking because the law is you're not offside if you're level and you obviously thought that wasn't the case!!!

You don't think so? The average TV camera shoots at 26 frames per second. The average footballer sprints at faster than 1 foot per 1/26 seconds, and his back foot moves even faster so if the defender is running out to catch a forward offside then his back foot will move more like 2 feet in that time.

If you look at all the marginal offside decisions, the ones that they have to draw lines for and take minutes over, they are all goals that should have been given pre-VAR because the players were level. That's the point of VAR - to disallow half the goals that would have been given on the grounds that the players were level - ie. too close to call.

If someone had tried to sell VAR on the basis that it will disallow quite a lot of goals that would have been legal, that it will slow down goal celebrations because it takes so long to work out, and it will make linesmen delay flagging because they know their job is impossible - would it have had any takers? They need to go back to the old definition of level and judge offsides in VAR by eye. They can still correct the mistakes but if they can't tell whether it was a mistake by eye, then it wasn't a mistake.

 

[fly high]

As an aside, the Frau knows a 15 year old lad who is training to be a ref. This seems quite young. Is this normal?

When I was at school way back in the 70s a lad at our school trained to be a ref, officious little scroat so bet players gave him a hard time. Also my cousin's daughter started training at 14, by the time she was 18, with loads of experience, she was on a nice little earner officiating at kids tournaments at weekends.

 

[drew]

You don't think so? The average TV camera shoots at 26 frames per second. The average footballer sprints at faster than 1 foot per 1/26 seconds, and his back foot moves even faster so if the defender is running out to catch a forward offside then his back foot will move more like 2 feet in that time.

If you look at all the marginal offside decisions, the ones that they have to draw lines for and take minutes over, they are all goals that should have been given pre-VAR because the players were level. That's the point of VAR - to disallow half the goals that would have been given on the grounds that the players were level - ie. too close to call.

If someone had tried to sell VAR on the basis that it will disallow quite a lot of goals that would have been legal, that it will slow down goal celebrations because it takes so long to work out, and it will make linesmen delay flagging because they know their job is impossible - would it have had any takers? They need to go back to the old definition of level and judge offsides in VAR by eye. They can still correct the mistakes but if they can't tell whether it was a mistake by eye, then it wasn't a mistake.

Sorry.but you're just being silly. The vast majority of goals disallowed for offside do not involve the attacker at full sprint! I would also suggest that the same majority also don't involve the defender sprinting in the other direction. I would also suggest that it allows valid goals where they might have been given as offside by a linesman.

 

[brighton_tom]

I’m not against VAR entirely, we’d only moan if it wasn’t used & an obviously off side goal was given. But I am against the incompetent people who are using it as seen in the palace and spurs games.

 

[dsr-burnley]

Sorry.but you're just being silly. The vast majority of goals disallowed for offside do not involve the attacker at full sprint! I would also suggest that the same majority also don't involve the defender sprinting in the other direction. I would also suggest that it allows valid goals where they might have been given as offside by a linesman.

The margin for error should be based on any common scenario. I reckon the number of goals scored by (and offsides given against) forwards who are sprinting towards the opposition goal, is reasonably common.

Do you have an estimate of what the VAR offside margin for error might be?

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

You don't think so? The average TV camera shoots at 26 frames per second. The average footballer sprints at faster than 1 foot per 1/26 seconds, and his back foot moves even faster so if the defender is running out to catch a forward offside then his back foot will move more like 2 feet in that time.

This doesn’t happen very often though.

 

[CheeseRolls]

I think VAR is a useful tool poorly implemented. They need to look at it again, based on the evidence available and decide if it has created the outcomes intended. The things I would most like to see reviewed are;

1 If a referee thinks he/she has seen an infringement they blow the whostle and the game stops, regardless of whether they were wrong or right or a serial self abuser. So why then is the assistant running the line not given the same leeway? This implementation looks ridiculous when you have a keeper or forward rolling around in agony after a last ditch challenge, which was never going to be allowed anyway as the forward was clearly offside.

2 If you require mulitple camera angles and a best guess at the exact frame and angle compensation, where is the skill element in timing a run to perfection? If they want to be precise can we measure just the torso, neck to knee?

3 TV pundits love a handball in the area controversy. It gives them ample opportunity to spout expert excrement and provide their own unique intepretation. The game rarely needs a full autopsy.

4 The whole corner thing is a mess. Make them put the ball back inside the line and if there is a foul before the kick is taken, it is still a foul. VAR can inform the ref he has missed something. I admit the last bit is just so that I can squeeze in a rant about corners.

 

[Doonhamer7]

Still think we should copy cricket / tennis - captain gets 2 calls per game (if correct keeps the call)

 

[Red Side Of Sussex]

Genuinely think we would miss if it were gone now.

Too late to go back.

VAR has made a lot of bad decisions, but I think if we were to get rid of it we would be reminded how so many of the decisions were even worse.

Plot 9

 

[NorthstandRacoon]

I'm not against VAR. I'm against how VAR is being used in the Premier League.

If they just overruled clear and obvious mistakes, I'm sure most people wouldn't have a problem with it.

Offsides which aren't based on 2mm of your toe being in front of the defender.
Whether a foul is inside or outside the box.
Clear red cards for violent conduct.
Only the most blatent of handballs.
etc.

If there's any doubt, stick with the onfield decision.

This

 

[amexer]

I saw lots of goals that would have been chalked off for offside, and handballs that were missed. Most of the time, because there was no VAR, the TV coverage didn't even bother with replays. The coverage mapped to the rhythm of the stadium and everyone lived in the moment. I personally found that outrageous. I was fuming. However, yes, it seemed that the majority watching thought it was terrific.

I'd compare a non VAR match with a Johnson speech. Exciting and entertaining, but if you check what was said, there were lies and lies and lies again, and the narrative was false. A majority of people would have loved it enough to vote for it. In the end, however, because analysis showed that it was wrong, Johnson had to go. It was embarrassing.

In the end we need fairness and accuracy, I think. A pantomime punctuated by exciting passages is simply not enough.

The irony is that while most posters on NSC appear to disagree with VAR, VAR is here to stay. Attempting to improve accuracy is the rubric. The era of panto and "bollocks to everything" is gone forever. So for me we simply have to polish the rubric, and polish again, so that VAR works better. It isn't even me saying this, it is what we have now, the reality.

If people wish to go on anti VAR marches, and hold anti VAR sit ins, good luck to them. Oddly though, despite the rancour, I don't see this happening. Neither do I see a mass exodus of fans from the EPL milieu and a rush to the lower leagues where football is still played au naturel.

Thought VAR would be Boris fault

 

[papajaff]

VApoxyR takes the joy out of your team scoring a goal. Everyone now celebrates a goal with thoughts of VApoxyR in their heads.

 

[drew]

The margin for error should be based on any common scenario. I reckon the number of goals scored by (and offsides given against) forwards who are sprinting towards the opposition goal, is reasonably common.

Do you have an estimate of what the VAR offside margin for error might be?

No I don't, but do you have the margin of error just using the eyesight of a human who could be up to 100yrds away?

 

[dsr-burnley]

No I don't, but do you have the margin of error just using the eyesight of a human who could be up to 100yrds away?

That's the point. VAR would still check the linesman's opinion, but using a simple photo so that level still has the meaning it had before VAR. And it would give the linesman a sporting chance of getting it right.

 

[Taybha]

When you see a goal as pure and magnificent as Macallister's v Leicester then see it wiped out because someone was a toenail offside 40 yards away there's no reason on earth to want it anywhere near football,then for good measure some buffoon operating it loses his crayon so decides he'll guess Estupinan was offside v Palace I could bang on about how VAR helped us as well but it's not the bloody point, it's shit,the sooner it's binned the better.

 

[Nobby Cybergoat]

There is clearly no popular fan mandate for keeping VAR, in the same way as there was clearly no mandate for the ESL. It should be removed straight away

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

There is clearly no popular fan mandate for keeping VAR, in the same way as there was clearly no mandate for the ESL. It should be removed straight away

What have you got against the East Stand Lower?

Crypto fascist!

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

When you see a goal as pure and magnificent as Macallister's v Leicester then see it wiped out because someone was a toenail offside 40 yards away there's no reason on earth to want it anywhere near football,then for good measure some buffoon operating it loses his crayon so decides he'll guess Estupinan was offside v Palace I could bang on about how VAR helped us as well but it's not the bloody point, it's shit,the sooner it's binned the better.

Good strong argument.

So I wonder why it is that VAR absolutely won't be binned? Because it won't. And there will be no riots.

I suspect it is because on the whole we can see it makes it all more fair. And that it can be tweaked so the rubric is more pleasing.

In the long run, the printing presses are safe.

A little microcosm of the human condition here, I suspect.

 

[drew]

Good strong argument.

So I wonder why it is that VAR absolutely won't be binned? Because it won't. And there will be no riots.

I suspect it is because on the whole we can see it makes it all more fair. And that it can be tweaked so the rubric is more pleasing.

In the long run, the printing presses are safe.

A little microcosm of the human condition here, I suspect.

And of course Undav's goal at Villa wouldn't have counted as it was given offside by the lino.