[Football] Right then. After that demonstration... VAR? Yes or No?

[BensGrandad]

I am all fgort VAR but thin k ther rules have got to be changed to account for it. Yesterday Man City were denied a win by a decision that wasdnt hand ball as Laporte didnt p,lay the ball , it just hit his hand withj no intention by him. So in the context of the existing law the dercision was wrong. I also feel that the offisde should be adjusted to either head or foot being offside for the decision to be given.

 

[The Wizard]

I am all fgort VAR but thin k ther rules have got to be changed to account for it. Yesterday Man City were denied a win by a decision that wasdnt hand ball as Laporte didnt p,lay the ball , it just hit his hand withj no intention by him. So in the context of the existing law the dercision was wrong. I also feel that the offisde should be adjusted to either head or foot being offside for the decision to be given.

I hate VAR but tbf the rules on handball and VAR are very clear, any handball accidental or not, that directly is involved in a goal will see the goal ruled out. And you can’t say it was an accident because nobody can prove either way if players mean to handle it or not.

 

[Seasider78]

I agree with most of your post (change the rules!) but not your conclusion. The genie is out of the bottle. It is like the invention of blood cholesterol testing. We can predict risk of heart attack and stroke very wel,l now, with these tests. Getting a bad test result is not what anyone wants, but it doesn't make sese to go back to the pretest days, when a fat lad could dismiss concerns about his weight and not make any lifestyke changes because afetr all, who knows? And 'I am just big boned'.

Actually a better analogy for VAR is genetic health testing, and here I will turn the argument on its head. We don't gene screen everyone for every health risk because of cost and ethics arguments: especially in the US, gene screening would result in vast numbers of people being unable to get health insurance. The issue is more nuanced here, but we do gene screen for some things, usually only when there is prior concerns (family history of life-changing illness, for example). But I can see a day when we are all gene screened before starting a family, and the embryo is gene screened in utero, with the option of termination based on the outcome. Obviously this will concern many, and outrage religious types who don't even believe in contraception (step forward, saviour of Brexit, Rees-Moggy and chums). But the arrow of progress has only one direction.

Bottom line, accept VAR, campaign for rule changes, be critical but FFS don't be a luddite and turn to religion and an unswerving devotion to the pope (and the VAR equivalent - blissful ignorance and an unbridled faith in the ref and linos - as bloody if!).

Some very weird analogies in there but anyway the basic premise is supporters of VAR are champions of ensuring that every decision is correct regardless of the impact it has on the game as a live spectacle. People opposing VAR are kicking off as the game that largely flowed is now disrupted with confusion and you sitting there wondering what the hell went on whilst simultaneously coming to terms with the huge deflation of a goal that was awarded, celebrated by fans and players being chalked off as the players take the restart.

So great for armchair fans shocking for the people in the stands. Unlike the well thought out and implemented goaline technology which delivered both eradication of error and no disruption to the game VAR is a step too far and is ruining the game as a live spectacle

 

[Bodian]

My points, made before VAR was introduced widely.

1. Match Officials make mistakes, whether VAR or not. Examples today, Man City penalty vs Tottenham and Bournemouth penalty vs Villa. Cast Iron but not given despite VAR. so we may as well not have VAR.

2. 30,000 spectators, plus players and staff today, had absolutely no idea there was an issue until Anthony Taylor stuck his finger in his ear. Watching at home, the armchair fan would have been aware that a review was happening.

I travelled round trip seven hours to watch yesterday and spent a lot of hard earned cash. I’m seriously considering not bothering next week even with a season ticket.

May as well save myself some money and become an armchair fan.

Officials are still crap and there’s no advantage given to people who actually go to games.

Nope - I wasn't. They were replaying the shot.

 

[Perkino]

Technology is used to improve everything in our society and it's only natural that we use it in sport. The decision to use VAR is a no brainier, we have to use it to improve fairness and award things as fairly as possible. How this gets used in a match scenario is something we haven't got right yet but it's the first season we've used it in the UK and its already evolved so much since the World Cup of 2018 and will continue to evolve over the next few years

 

[beorhthelm]

seeing the highligts again, the offside before the stuck-off goal was pretty clear. didnt need VAR, just competent linesman. begs the question whats the point of them now?

and the Man City disallowed goal is down to a stupid rule change on handball, VAR makes it possible to see glancing touches that the old rule would deem excusable. the rules are an arse now.

 

[Nixonator]

If anyone who wants to get rid of VAR never moaned once about the constant awful decisions made by referees and assistants then fair enough.

Absurd comment to make.

I've complained plenty, but that's the game and should be kept sacred.

If given the choice of re-living all those mistakes that have riled me again and again, I'd still take it over VAR.

I find it exasperating that anybody who enjoys going to games regularly would be in favour of this, it is absolutely horrendous for the actual fans in the stadiums. We celebrated, the players celebrated before moving back to the centre circle for kick-off. "Why haven't they kicked off yet?". Oh, the referee has his hand on one ear, surely not? Another minute passes and we get a VAR CHECK on the screens and 10 seconds later a NO GOAL message. Not only did we get a fantastic goal chalked off for an utterly insignificant offside (by a matter of inches) in the buildup, you could feel the enthusiasm being sucked out the stadium and sure as the ****ing wind blows we lose our momentum and they gain the impetus. Also, what happens to all the time since the free kick was taken some 5 minutes prior to some prick lighting up the NO GOAL message on the boards? Judging by the extra time added onto the first half it gets voided, Fantastic.

When you get players calling it 'very strange', managers calling it 'a passion killer' and I'm certain the majority of fans thinking it is utter horseshit, why the ******* **** is this being forced into the game? Well, I know the answer but it's infuriating.

How about making officiating a more lucrative career choice? Invest in that for **** sake.

 

[Pantani]

I agree with most of your post (change the rules!) but not your conclusion. The genie is out of the bottle. It is like the invention of blood cholesterol testing. We can predict risk of heart attack and stroke very wel,l now, with these tests. Getting a bad test result is not what anyone wants, but it doesn't make sese to go back to the pretest days, when a fat lad could dismiss concerns about his weight and not make any lifestyke changes because afetr all, who knows? And 'I am just big boned'.

Actually a better analogy for VAR is genetic health testing, and here I will turn the argument on its head. We don't gene screen everyone for every health risk because of cost and ethics arguments: especially in the US, gene screening would result in vast numbers of people being unable to get health insurance. The issue is more nuanced here, but we do gene screen for some things, usually only when there is prior concerns (family history of life-changing illness, for example). But I can see a day when we are all gene screened before starting a family, and the embryo is gene screened in utero, with the option of termination based on the outcome. Obviously this will concern many, and outrage religious types who don't even believe in contraception (step forward, saviour of Brexit, Rees-Moggy and chums). But the arrow of progress has only one direction.

Bottom line, accept VAR, campaign for rule changes, be critical but FFS don't be a luddite and turn to religion and an unswerving devotion to the pope (and the VAR equivalent - blissful ignorance and an unbridled faith in the ref and linos - as bloody if!).

Some shit analogies in there HWT, both of your examples are matters of life and death. Football is not that important. You also have not answered the actual conclusion of my post, and many, many others. Football without the joy of the goalscoring moment, is not football, as far as I am concerned. So it does not matter how well you jiggle the laws, how well the cameras work, or how fast and efficiently they manage to make the decisions it will still stop that moment that a large number of us fell in love with the game for.

Football has become, and remained, the most popular sport in the world because of it's viscerality. Take that away for a review, and it loses some of it's appeal.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Some shit analogies in there HWT, both of your examples are matters of life and death. Football is not that important. You also have not answered the actual conclusion of my post, and many, many others. Football without the joy of the goalscoring moment, is not football, as far as I am concerned. So it does not matter how well you jiggle the laws, how well the cameras work, or how fast and efficiently they manage to make the decisions it will still stop that moment that a large number of us fell in love with the game for.

Football has become, and remained, the most popular sport in the world because of it's viscerality. Take that away for a review, and it loses some of it's appeal.

You favour viscerality over correct decisions? We will have to differ then. Also about the life and death comment - football, as you would know if you're old enough, is more important than that.

 

[Uncle Spielberg]

Var is an abomination. It is almost worth getting relegated to the championship for. I know quite a few people who are re considering whether to go anymore if it stays. It will, has killed the game stone dead. There is no point in celebrating a goal amymore, might as well go an get a pint and come back and see if it has been allowed. It seems to me what we have here are basically traffic wardens sat in a room somewhere DESPERATE to find a reason to give a ticket/disallow a goal

I thought it went to var if there was a doubt, not every goal to be poured over with a microscope for a couple of minutes looking for something that happened in the minute leading to the goal to get it disallowed

It is utter shite !!!!!

 

[ManOfSussex]

Have you had a few too many? I was agreeing with your post btw!

Yes I had, but in the morning I am sober and I still don't like VAR.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Some very weird analogies in there but anyway the basic premise is supporters of VAR are champions of ensuring that every decision is correct regardless of the impact it has on the game as a live spectacle. People opposing VAR are kicking off as the game that largely flowed is now disrupted with confusion and you sitting there wondering what the hell went on whilst simultaneously coming to terms with the huge deflation of a goal that was awarded, celebrated by fans and players being chalked off as the players take the restart.

So great for armchair fans shocking for the people in the stands. Unlike the well thought out and implemented goaline technology which delivered both eradication of error and no disruption to the game VAR is a step too far and is ruining the game as a live spectacle

I find it odd that people have such a problem with analogies.

VAR is showing us things that we could not possibly see before VAR.

The question is what do you do with the information?

The answer is we have to change some of the laws.

That's it

 

[Bodian]

I hate VAR but tbf the rules on handball and VAR are very clear, any handball accidental or not, that directly is involved in a goal will see the goal ruled out. And you can’t say it was an accident because nobody can prove either way if players mean to handle it or not.

But is this actually the law? 'any handball accidental or not, that directly is involved in a goal will see the goal ruled out'. I'm not even sure the law was correctly applied to the Man City goal yesterday. The law itself (http://www.thefa.com/football-rules-governance/lawsandrules/laws/football-11-11/law-12---fouls-and-misconduct) says that it's an offence if a player (note, the law says 'player', not 'team'):

- gains possession/control of the ball after it has touched their hand/arm and then:
- scores in the opponents’ goal
- creates a goal-scoring opportunity
- scores in the opponents’ goal directly from their hand/arm, even if accidental

As far as I can see the City player didn't do any of these.

Firstly, he didn't gain possession or control of the ball, so the way the law is written (...'and then...') none of the rest should actually apply. But, even if it did apply, then secondly - he didn't score. Thirdly - I don't really think it can be said that he 'created a goal-scoring opportunity', as Jesus still had quite a lot to do.

 

[The Wizard]

seeing the highligts again, the offside before the stuck-off goal was pretty clear. didnt need VAR, just competent linesman. begs the question whats the point of them now?

and the Man City disallowed goal is down to a stupid rule change on handball, VAR makes it possible to see glancing touches that the old rule would deem excusable. the rules are an arse now.

The ball hit his hand that directly led to Jesus getting the ball and burying it, anyone who is in favour of VAR should be hailing that decision, had it not been for that little flick off his hand the ball may not have reached Jesus, the rules are clear for the reason I said, who is to say what is a deliberate handball and what is accidental? It would open up a big can of worms to say oh that handball is accidental and allow the goal.

 

[Pantani]

You favour viscerality over correct decisions? We will have to differ then. Also about the life and death comment - football, as you would know if you're old enough, is more important than that.

I know the quote, but Shankley was joking. And yes, I do favour viscerality over correct decisions, and I am not alone as you can clearly see from this thread.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Why would I stop posting on NSC? I’m still a Brighton fan.

And yet you have ripped up your season ticket and (one infers) won't be watching The Albion?

Isn't that a bit like taking a vow of celebacy but continuing your monthy subscription to Reader's Wives?

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

I know the quote, but Shankley was joking. And yes, I do favour viscerality over correct decisions, and I am not alone as you can clearly see from this thread.

He wasn't. It was a faux pas at best. It was me that was joking.

No, that's fine. I understand.

It will be interesting to see whather laws are changed or VAR binned.

 

[Brightonfan1983]

I thought it went to var if there was a doubt, not every goal to be poured over with a microscope for a couple of minutes looking for something that happened in the minute leading to the goal to get it disallowed

Me too. Though wasn't Dan Burn flagged as well as VAR'd? (I don't know, I only watched online). And how long did they take yesterday to disallow it?

 

[Sussex Nomad]

And yet you have ripped up your season ticket and (one infers) won't be watching The Albion?

Isn't that a bit like taking a vow of celebacy but continuing your monthy subscription to Reader's Wives?

He wasn't. It was a faux pas at best. It was me that was joking.

No, that's fine. I understand.

It will be interesting to see whather laws are changed or VAR binned.

Mr I criticise other posters for grammar and spelling.

 

[Sussex Nomad]

Me too. Though wasn't Dan Burn flagged as well as VAR'd? (I don't know, I only watched online). And how long did they take yesterday to disallow it?

Burn wasn't flagged and it took around 2 mins, with one added to extra time, go figure.