[Football] Oh dear VAR with French officials

[LlcoolJ]

Even the ref looked embarrassed. Took so long it killed the atmosphere. We don't score a lot so imagine having to wait 3 mins everytime before a goal is confirmed !!! Enough time to nip out for a pie!

Or a pint. Hang on, this sounds ok!

 

[Guy Fawkes]

We have had a few Brighton games already where VAR has been in operation and in those games the goal celebrations were the same as for any other game despite every goal being checked by VAR, with no evidence of the delay for every goal which will kill the game and lead to muted celebrations that some people are suggesting

 

[beorhthelm]

I think most people accept errors that are really tight to call, or that can go either way. It's the injustices that are obvious that sting and need to be eliminated.

exactly. the powers that be think that we need/want each an every decision to be absolutely correct.

 

[mreprice]

After the first few matches they pretty much got it right in the World Cup (at least until the final). A quick look to see if the ref missed something or made an obvious error. If it wasn't quickly clear, go with the refs call. Don't try to get everything 100% right as we know that is impossible.

 

[Bry Nylon]

After the first few matches they pretty much got it right in the World Cup (at least until the final).

In the World Cup they had about 8 officials VAR-ing every game, each covering a specific angle / aspect of play. That won't be the case in the PL.

 

[darkwolf666]

What a mess in the Citeh game.

On a side note the close ups of the pitch, it looks awful, very patchy and long grass

This isn’t what people wanted... all the majority wanted was goal line technology to prevent travesties of justice like the Frank Lampard non goal against Germany. Let the officials get on with doing their job and just help out with the goal line stuff...

 

[Easy 10]

VAR next season = more reviews, more marginal calls, more delays, less goals.

The genie is out of the bottle. People wanted perfect decisions all the time, and it will correct some duff calls. But I never wanted to see goals being ruled out because part of someone's knee was a millimetre offside. Thats now where we are headed.

 

[hoveboyslim]

I think there should be a time limit on making a VAR decision. If it takes 3 or 4 minutes and needs to be slowed down in super slow-mo using multiple cameras then it is not in the spirit of the game.

The essence of 'umpire's call' used in cricket should be used, even if the resulting decision is could be considered incorrect following extensive reviews. It's a bit like the offside law and the argument you can't be a bit offside in the same way you can't be a bit pregnant; I think the laws need to change so you can be. It was not envisaged there would be this level of scrutiny by match officials. So what if your knee-cap is offside?

 

[mejonaNO12 aka riskit]

It's complete bollocks isn't it.

There's a reason it works in other sports. They are structured games of phases. Natural breaks. Also, the culture of those sports is when a key moment happens (a try or wicket), they celebrate but they don't go MAD. The crowd don't lose their marbles.

In football, a goal is SUCH a huge event in comparison. Creating doubt about every goal (which is what even having VAR does) instantly causes an issue.

You then have the fact that the VAR reviews in other sports are on technicalities. Rugby for example "did the ball go forward, was it grounded properly, Was the player in front of the kicker?" These are all binary things, yes or no. Football might be "Was there a foul on the keeper?" That's a matter of opinion. Completely open to managers getting angry that a decision has been reversed incorrectly.

Finally, the whole crowd gets involved. It's theatre. Perhaps go the NFL route, let the refs be mic'd up but ONLY to clearly announce what is being reviewed and to then announce the decision. Show it on the big screen. Why are the people who PAY to go to the games being given a worse show than those watching at home.

I'm just waiting for the moment a foul happens in the box (but is missed), the team go up the other end, score.....and then the ref looks at VAR and rules it out.....and then gives a penalty the other way. The ball can be up the other end of the pitch in a few seconds.

 

[Nixonator]

This isn’t what people wanted... all the majority wanted was goal line technology to prevent travesties of justice like the Frank Lampard non goal against Germany. Let the officials get on with doing their job and just help out with the goal line stuff...

I'd take the occasional travesty of justice if this is the price to pay, at least the current iteration.

 

[Sussex Nomad]

I don't think VAR will work as it will still be on human judgement and players will still contest VAR decisions. This is not goal line technology where there is no argument at all. Pundits still argue in studios with one seeing it differently to the other and that is after minutes of analysing. Not looking forward to its implementation one little bit. As said, it will take the spontaneity out of scoring, fans will be left in the dark if it isn't shown on big screens (Man Utd fans will have no idea even if it is on the big screen), I doubt the correct time will be added on for the stalling of the game, and as I said, the 'judges' will still make mistakes.

 

[sussex_guy2k2]

The biggest issue with VAR isn't the system, but the humans implementing it. Unfortunately, most of them don't know the rules and/or they're implementing it for subjective decisions. Goal line technology, for example, is a right or wrong decision and these decisions take roughly 20 seconds or less to check. VAR can be as efficient, we just need the rules sorting out and some clarity about when VAR will be used in game situations.

 

[Change at Barnham]

I wonder if referees assistants will be told to give the attacking players the benefit of the doubt when possibly offside and therefore not flagging and stopping play?

If they flag for offside and they are wrong they would be denying a goal scoring opportunity.
However if it's very marginal and the attacking team do go onto score, then the incorrect decision can always be corrected by VAR.

 

[Bry Nylon]

VAR can be as efficient, we just need the rules sorting out and some clarity about when VAR will be used in game situations.

But that is virtually impossible to define.

This season Albion scored a goal from a corner at Newcastle. It was a perfectly good goal, with no infringements, but TV replays showed that the ref had awarded us a corner when it should have been a goal kick to Newcastle. So how far back do you take it? Do you just consider the goal? Do you go back and consider the decision that led to the corner? Or do you go further back and check the phase of play in the build-up to the corner / goal kick, in case there had been an earlier foul or incorrect decision?

VAR will wreck football.

 

[Sussex Nomad]

Goal line technology, for example, is a right or wrong decision and these decisions take roughly 20 seconds or less to check.

It's instant.

 

[Super Steve Earle]

It's complete bollocks isn't it.

There's a reason it works in other sports. They are structured games of phases. Natural breaks. Also, the culture of those sports is when a key moment happens (a try or wicket), they celebrate but they don't go MAD. The crowd don't lose their marbles.

In football, a goal is SUCH a huge event in comparison. Creating doubt about every goal (which is what even having VAR does) instantly causes an issue.

You then have the fact that the VAR reviews in other sports are on technicalities. Rugby for example "did the ball go forward, was it grounded properly, Was the player in front of the kicker?" These are all binary things, yes or no. Football might be "Was there a foul on the keeper?" That's a matter of opinion. Completely open to managers getting angry that a decision has been reversed incorrectly.

Finally, the whole crowd gets involved. It's theatre. Perhaps go the NFL route, let the refs be mic'd up but ONLY to clearly announce what is being reviewed and to then announce the decision. Show it on the big screen. Why are the people who PAY to go to the games being given a worse show than those watching at home.

I'm just waiting for the moment a foul happens in the box (but is missed), the team go up the other end, score.....and then the ref looks at VAR and rules it out.....and then gives a penalty the other way. The ball can be up the other end of the pitch in a few seconds.

You mean like the Tarkowski handball followed by the Burnley penalty at the other end?

 

[sussex_guy2k2]

It's instant.

It's not instant to get to the referee though. The point is it's still quick.

 

[sussex_guy2k2]

But that is virtually impossible to define.

This season Albion scored a goal from a corner at Newcastle. It was a perfectly good goal, with no infringements, but TV replays showed that the ref had awarded us a corner when it should have been a goal kick to Newcastle. So how far back do you take it? Do you just consider the goal? Do you go back and consider the decision that led to the corner? Or do you go further back and check the phase of play in the build-up to the corner / goal kick, in case there had been an earlier foul or incorrect decision?

VAR will wreck football.

That's not for me to define, but ultimately all VAR is showing is that the refs don't know the rules nor do they know how to implement the technology in an appropriate way. VAR isn't the issue, humans are. And the complexities we've added to the game and the rules are making the implementation of it much harder than it needs to be. For example, you could go back 10 seconds from when the ball hits the net. You could have all handballs being handball (which they're basically doing next year). You can clear up the offside rule to take out the ridiculous decisions we've had with the recent Sterling and Kane goals. It can be done, but it's the human element we need to change, not the tech.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

What’s the point of going to your local, if it still exists, on a Saturday evening and arguing about the controversial points of a game when VAR has been used? The final nail, first driven into the coffin of football, by Sky and their multi angle replays. What are we supposed to talk about now, baking?

As far as I can see, the only true beneficiaries of VAR are the bookies.

Why would it benefit the bookies?

 

[Billy the Fish]

I think they need to change the offside law to favour the attacking team so that if any part of your body is onside then you're onside, or to put another way the whole body must be offside.

As others have said, ruling out goals widen the player is level to the human eye will ruin the game.