[Football] No VAR

[birthofanorange]

It has for me, and most anyone I talk with about this...

May I ask you (as I have asked others) how you feel about goal-line tech?

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

I don't think there's anything that VAR haters 'can' do...other than boycott games, and that's not going to happen. The best outcome is to re-evaluate the power it wields and restrict it (as said previously) to a far reduced time-frame.
That way, surely only the most basic of errors will be spotted, rather than errant toenails, quiffs or a bit of protruding snot.

Yes but you are discussing how VAR can be improved. That's a conversation I am always happy to have. But what of the majority who want it binned (the main cheese of this thread - the improvers are just the tiny veins of blue in the cheese)? I think I'd like to see them mobilizing, rather than being, well, boring. Time for action chaps. Emoting is not enough. Anyone can say 'bin it' then open a can of beer and watch the football league highlights.

 

[birthofanorange]

Yes but you are discussing how VAR can be improved. That's a conversation I am always happy to have. But what of the majority who want it binned (the main cheese of this thread - the improvers are just the tiny veins of blue in the cheese)? I think I'd like to see them mobilizing, rather than being, well, boring. Time for action chaps. Emoting is not enough. Anyone can say 'bin it' then open a can of beer and watch the football league highlights.

I have no idea how 'they' can be persuaded to 'bin it' - it seems like it's here to stay, so the only thing that seems possible to do is to press for restrictions/time limits on its usage. Even that seems like an impossible task, but is more likely than ridding ourselves of it altogether (a move which would make me happy - but I try to be fairly realistic).

 

[nickjhs]

VAR would (well ok should have) overturned their incorrectly awarded penalty. That goal they got gifted could have turned out to be quite bad.
The ball clearly hits Dunk's shoulder before rolling up his arm and so is not a penalty.

Yes, this is what it was intended for, clear and obvious errors, if it takes multiple angles and a few minutes to decide its not a job for VAR. Although of course this in itself is subjective and would lead to arguments as to whether or not it was a clear and obvious error but that would be a small price to pay if it meant a lot less intervention if you need to draw lines to determine offside then that is clearly not an obvious error, so that should go immediately, it's not even in the spirit of the offside rule. When It was brought in the vast majority favored it. I am not sure which World Cup (South Africa?)it was but the fans and pundits alike were clamouring for it and Blatter refused. As has been said so many times VAR is not the issue, it is the implementation, unfortunately we have not been given what was being asked for, if you had told me how it was going to be implemented I would have removed my support and would have been thoroughly opposed

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

I have no idea how 'they' can be persuaded to 'bin it' - it seems like it's here to stay, so the only thing that seems possible to do is to press for restrictions/time limits on its usage. Even that seems like an impossible task, but is more likely than ridding ourselves of it altogether (a move which would make me happy - but I try to be fairly realistic).

As I said, I am aligned with your perspective. A 20 second rule (If VAR still can't decide go with on pitch decision). No 'play on' when an on pitch decision seems obvious, waiting for VAR (fouls, handballs in the penalty area). Blow the f***ing whistle - except for unclear offsides when a goal is scored. If unsure the flag must stay down because a false flag could stop a legitimate goal and VAR was introduced in part to stop that. And change the offside rule to clear blue daylight, and judge it in 20 seconds, and because this would be a close call the lino shouldn't flag.

There, VAR sorted.

Anyone still wanting VAR 'binned' could then be easily ignored. Till then, binning VAR to save the loss of spontaneity is still a reasonable perspective, @Guinness Boy, but I would expect a much more coherent and vigorous campaign to ban VAR if it really matters to you lot. Or I will have to put you on ignore. Well, the VAR threads (I can't put a moderator on ignore, and nor would I want to x)

 

[birthofanorange]

As I said, I am aligned with your perspective. A 20 second rule (If VAR still can't decide go with on pitch decision). No 'play on' when an on pitch decision seems obvious, waiting for VAR (fouls, handballs in the penalty area). Blow the f***ing whistle - except for unclear offsides when a goal is scored. If unsure the flag must stay down because a false flag could stop a legitimate goal and VAR was introduced in part to stop that. And change the offside rule to clear blue daylight, and judge it in 20 seconds, and because this would be a close call the lino shouldn't flag.

There, VAR sorted.

Anyone still wanting VAR 'binned' could then be easily ignored. Till then, binning VAR to save the loss of spontaneity is still a reasonable perspective, @Guinness Boy, but I would expect a much more coherent and vigorous campaign to ban VAR if it really matters to you lot. Or I will have to put you on ignore. Well, the VAR threads (I can't put a moderator on ignore, and nor would I want to x)

Indeed, and I can see no valid reason why such measures cannot be (at least) tried, which could possibly make it acceptable.
I note that no one has answered my question on the validity of goal-line tech. Are all the VAR haters against that, also?

 

[Nobby Cybergoat]

Indeed, and I can see no valid reason why such measures cannot be (at least) tried, which could possibly make it acceptable.
I note that no one has answered my question on the validity of goal-line tech. Are all the VAR haters against that, also?

I'm a "hater"

The goal line tech is fine to me. That's highly un-intrusive

 

[Lethargic]

People still celebrate goals. The delay is in the restart after the goal is scored and the celebration has died down (and that results in a secondary celebration after a nervy period - either from the ream that scored and had the goal confirmed, or the one that conceded to see it ruled out).

It doesn't stop them celebrating. It's something fans have said it does since it came in, but in truth it doesn't. Not to any meaningful degree. One or two drunk/angry fans may stay seated like a petulant child, but the masses still jump up and cheer. They've always done it even when a whistle has gone and play is stopped and the striker decides to just take the shot even though everyone has stopped, people still celebrated. They still celebrate even after previous VAR denials.

Most of the time people have a) grown accustomed to VAR checks, celebrate the goal while noting there was that close offside call, or it might have hit the hand, or they don't even think about it until there is a delay in the restart (and then they celebrate again when the referee signals for kick off).


(EDIT: To be clear, this isn't intended as a defence of VAR, this is simply about the idea that VAR has ruined goal celebrations. It hasn't).

For me it has, sucked all the fun out of the majority of goal celebrations

 

[birthofanorange]

I'm a "hater"

The goal line tech is fine to me. That's highly un-intrusive

Yet it some cases would still involve a delay in celebrating a 'goal', which is the main bug-bear of most VAR haters - myself included.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Indeed, and I can see no valid reason why such measures cannot be (at least) tried, which could possibly make it acceptable.
I note that no one has answered my question on the validity of goal-line tech. Are all the VAR haters against that, also?

The VAR haters have jogged on to watch the news and MOTD.

The trouble with tweaking VAR is that many of us can see how to do it, but we have the referees who are slow and resistant to change and who look at all suggestions in terms of whether the role of the on field referee would be undermined. The rubric for tweaking is therefore suboptimal. It is this that is the most frustrating (for me).

 

[Silverhatch]

Indeed, and I can see no valid reason why such measures cannot be (at least) tried, which could possibly make it acceptable.
I note that no one has answered my question on the validity of goal-line tech. Are all the VAR haters against that, also?

Absolutely no. Goal line technology is a dedicated, developed for purpose, real-time reporting piece of kit that is 99.9% accurate (Villa in lockdown excepted). No other part of VAR is anything other than re-refereeing using broadcast cameras and Heath-Robinson drawn lines and super-slo mos to TRY AND stop goals and send players off. It’s f***ing Shit in its current guise and is indefensible.

 

[curios]

Yet it some cases would still involve a delay in celebrating a 'goal', which is the main bug-bear of most VAR haters - myself included.

The experience of goal line tech is the same as that when it wasn’t there - you waited until the ref gave the goal as you probably had no idea if it was over yourself. With other goals you celebrate after seeing the ball hit the net and a quick check of the linesman - the VAR delay here is the spontaneity problem.

 

[birthofanorange]

The VAR haters have jogged on to watch the news and MOTD.

The trouble with tweaking VAR is that many of us can see how to do it, but we have the referees who are slow and resistant to change and who look at all suggestions in terms of whether the role of the on field referee would be undermined. The rubric for tweaking is therefore suboptimal. It is this that is the most frustrating (for me).e thing is,

Absolutely no. Goal line technology is a dedicated, developed for purpose, real-time reporting piece of kit that is 99.9% accurate (Villa in lockdown excepted). No other part of VAR is anything other than re-refereeing using broadcast cameras and Heath-Robinson drawn lines and super-slo mos to TRY AND stop goals and send players off. It’s f***ing Shit in its current guise and is indefensible.

@Harry Wilson's tackle - Surely restricting the limitations of VAR would do nothing but enhance the role of the on field referee, rather than diminish it? It would be in their own interests to consider it.
@Silverhatch - That's fine - so you don't mind delaying a 'goal' celebration in that instance, despite an inevitable delay? The same could work for VAR, if the decision process was time-limited, as suggested.

 

[AstroSloth]

Their penalty could have been overturned by VAR, and the foul on Ferguson in the box could also have been looked at - so to say that "decisions didn't go against us today" is not fully justified.

The ref gave the pen, never being overturned.

The Ferguson one was never a pen.

 

[Nobby Cybergoat]

Yet it some cases would still involve a delay in celebrating a 'goal', which is the main bug-bear of most VAR haters - myself included.

Not sure. The ref's watch goes off straight away (unless it's Villa). If it's close to being a goal the fans just glance at the ref for the signal. That's fine, just like glancing over at a Lino's flag for offside. Delaying my goal celebration for a fraction of a second is fine. It's delaying it for 4 minutes I object to

 

[Bodian]

Yet it some cases would still involve a delay in celebrating a 'goal', which is the main bug-bear of most VAR haters - myself included.

But it doesn't really - because it's only ever used when the question is so borderline that no-one celebrated it before anyway. It was always 'did that go over the line?' - more than 'yes - goal'. It's a positive in that it doesn't take anything away from the team scoring the goal. And to be fair, goal celebrations of dubious goals given by the linesman after consultation with the ref were always differently celebrated anyway.

Also - how often is it used. One game a week, one a month? VAR takes away something from almost every single goal.

 

[birthofanorange]

Not sure. The ref's watch goes off straight away (unless it's Villa). If it's close to being a goal the fans just glance at the ref for the signal. That's fine, just like glancing over at a Lino's flag for offside. Delaying my goal celebration for a fraction of a second is fine. It's delaying it for 4 minutes I object to

Yes, 4 mins it far too long, hence restricting VAR decisions to 30 secs or so, only for a quick look at anything blatantly obvious has been missed. No difference in checking whether a ball has crossed the line or not.

 

[Creaky]

Speaking to friends and acquaintances who never go to a live game but regularly watch football on TV at home, the consensus seems to be that VAR has actually added to the entertainment value.

I hate VAR in it's current form, mainly due to not knowing what the hell is going on whilst waiting for a decision and often not being any the wiser after a decision has been made.

Those watching on TV can see the replays of any incident whilst those in the stadium see a screen stating VAR is checking. . . .

Why can't we see exactly the same as those at home can on their television?

 

[Bodian]

Speaking to friends and acquaintances who never go to a live game but regularly watch football on TV at home, the consensus seems to be that VAR has actually added to the entertainment value.

Only if they are a neutral. Not for fans of the teams involved it doesn't.

 

[birthofanorange]

But it doesn't really - because it's only ever used when the question is so borderline that no-one celebrated it before anyway. It was always 'did that go over the line?' - more than 'yes - goal'. It's a positive in that it doesn't take anything away from the team scoring the goal. And to be fair, goal celebrations of dubious goals given by the linesman after consultation with the ref were always differently celebrated anyway.

Also - how often is it used. One game a week, one a month? VAR takes away something from almost every single goal.

Agreed - rarely used, but the principle is the same. The issue with VAR is mainly the ridiculous amount of time/angle/lines drawn it takes.
Limit it and it 'could' work - at least it's worth trying, considering that it's not going away.