[Football] The future of VAR in England

[The Large One]

And how often do you see the lino's use this technology to tell the ref to correct something?

They must see some of these cock ups. I keep coming back to the Villa Sheff U game last season. Lino must have seen it. Everyone did, but bottled it. Lino's are subservient and increasingly pointless. They even look at the ref before choosing who a throw should go to now. I think the only time a 4th official has ever intervened was Zizou. Even then he wasn't meant to. Why should this be?

In rugby, the dynamic between on field officials works brilliantly. We need to make it like that

The mere fact you didn't know that the officials had been miked up for so long kind of obliterates your argument. You don't know what they do and don't see, nor how they communicate - you've admitted as much. In fact, it appears you're more arguing FOR refereeing by television.

I've often seen linos and referees in disagreement (e.g. whether to award a goal kick or a corner), and the ref defer to the linesman without going over to confer. Or the linesman spot an infringement, and suggest to the referee that it merited more than just a free kick.

As for the fourth official, Romain Vincelot was sent off on the back of something the fourth official saw. The others missed it because it was off the ball. And that's the point, anything the fourth official sees that the others will miss will be because it will be an off the ball incident. At all other times, all four officials will all see the same thing.

When they're not sure which way to give a throw-in, linos have ALWAYS looked to the referee - usually for assistance. If they don't know who it came off, they don't know. Nothing to do with subservience.

As for the Villa / Sheff U game, it's well appreciated that the ball was over the line for a fraction of a second, and the linesman's view was partially blocked. So it was not obvious to him. And for such a call, it's a brave linesman who will over-ride the goal line technology. Why VAR didn't pick up on it, I've no idea though.

Good rant though.

 

[Silverhatch]

Apart from goal line technology (Villa v Sheff U excepted) no one appears to agree on CLEAR & OBVIOUS for any other facet of the game. The product is (imho) absolute shit with rules as they are. VAR is just technology but the rule makers and referees cannot operate it in its current form. Bin it and only reintroduce it if it is fit for purpose and, MOST IMPORTANTLY, okayed by fans in stadiums

 

[blue-shifted]

I wish it were true, but it's not.

Much like PPV VAR is going nowhere, no matter what we collectively think about it.



PPV will be back, perhaps later this season, definitely next season.
It will be £10 (I doubt we'll be lucky enough to get it for a fiver).

Maybe it will, but the principle stands. Fans aren't powerless and can effect real chance if organised, motivated and prepared to act on their views. Your deterministic approach isn't helpful (unless you want it to stay).

One of the real problems is that football supporters, including myself, are superficial. I've massively gloated at opposing fans when getting the better end of a VAR decision, but hey, I'm never sober at football. However as always, the overall health of the game should be more important than any individual result

 

[Brok]

goal line tech, yes, video replays for the ref IF he wants to have a look . . . .. otherwise BIN IT.

I'd be happy to see a Ref look at a pitch side screen and make a call, make an announcement for all to see/hear and move on.

Its far more important at present, to have better trained and qualified officials.

This. Really pretty much this.

 

[Stat Brother]

Maybe it will, but the principle stands. Fans aren't powerless and can effect real chance if organised, motivated and prepared to act on their views. Your deterministic approach isn't helpful (unless you want it to stay).

One of the real problems is that football supporters, including myself, are superficial. I've massively gloated at opposing fans when getting the better end of a VAR decision, but hey, I'm never sober at football. However as always, the overall health of the game should be more important than any individual result

I don't want it to stay but:-

I'm not naive enough to think it will now go, because it's shite.
I'm not naive enough to think if VAR were gone everybody would be happy.
I'm not naive enough to think PPV is gone.
I'm not naive enough to think linos no nothing.


I guess we live in different footballing worlds.

 

[maltaseagull]

In principle I would like to keep it but it needs better trained operators and possibly ex players involved but more importantly, a review of the handball and offside laws and their interpretation is vital.

For example:
A player is in an offside position if: any part of the head, body or feet is in the opponents' half (excluding the halfway line) and. any part of the head, body or feet is nearer to the opponents' goal line than both the ball and the second-last opponent.

Surely, common sense should change this?

Bamford was pointing where to pass the ball last week and so his finger, being part of his body, was offside.

Feet only perhaps?

As for handball, I would like to see the old interpretation of hand to ball brought back.

 

[Stat Brother]

In principle I would like to keep it but it needs better trained operators and possibly ex players involved but more importantly, a review of the handball and offside laws and their interpretation is vital.

For example:
A player is in an offside position if: any part of the head, body or feet is in the opponents' half (excluding the halfway line) and. any part of the head, body or feet is nearer to the opponents' goal line than both the ball and the second-last opponent.

Surely, common sense should change this?

Bamford was pointing where to pass the ball last week and so his finger, being part of his body, was offside.

Feet only perhaps?

As for handball, I would like to see the old interpretation of hand to ball brought back.

The act of leaning forward and pointing cause Bamford's arm pit to be offside.

 

[Giraffe]

As I said right from the very beginning it was always going to ruin football.

Football, for me, is nothing if you can't enjoy celebrating a goal. You have to have that moment. That has been almost entirely been taken away by VAR, however well you did it. The fact they have brought it in so badly has exaggerated how awful it is, but even if it was done well it would still ruin football for me.

If we are honest, in the old days, how many decisions that really mattered can you think of that have stayed with you for more than the evening after a match. I can only come up with Stephens sending off at Middlesborough, Lampard v Germany (which goal line technology would now cure) and Maradona's handball. Beyond that, yes there has been debatable penalties or marginal offsides but I can't think of any that truly cost us.

VAR is therefore totally a sledgehammer to crack a nut and the downside is so bad that any upside is not worth it.

JUST BIN IT.

As a ps) I now don't watch non Albion games as I find it too frustrating and stressful to watch with VAR. Have to endure for Albion but not for anyone else.

 

[southstandandy]

Get rid - FULL STOP.

There were errors before and there are STILL errors now. Even the close offside calls are largely subjective so would rather things went back to as they were when we just got on with it and debated the merits (good or bad) in the pub after the game. Was football so bad 2 years ago that it needed VAR? I don't think so.

There's no shame in the authorities admitting they made a mistake and undoing that mistake in the future. There's no need to continue to flog a dead horse of an idea just because the powers at be are too embarassed to revert to things as they were before and are worried they might lose face.

Hence this is also the reason I've been enjoying watching local county football again so much. Ironically I'm falling out of love with Premier League football big time but starting to love the local county scene once again. I don't miss the Amex half as much as I thought I would. For me VAR is the main reason for my change in attitudes over the last season or so.

 

[beorhthelm]

id like to say pause and refine the rules. however they had a chance to do that over the summer and failed to. its still causing more controversy than not using, being abused as hawkeye for offside, missing obvious infractions its supposed to alert, and diminished the role of the officials on the pitch. so get rid of.

 

[Albion Dan]

Get rid. Has absolutely ruined the moment of scoring. When we were at the Amex I hated that the moment after scoring a goal was immediately subdued by the need to see if VAR was having a look.

 

[Sarisbury Seagull]

Scrap it altogether ASAP.

It is never going to be compatible with football no matter how many rule changes you make.

Referee mistakes, which actually weren’t that regular before VAR anyway, are just part of the game like player and manager mistakes.

 

[Stat Brother]

Get rid - FULL STOP.

There were errors before and there are STILL errors now. Even the close offside calls are largely subjective so would rather things as they were when we just got on with it and debated the merits (good or bad) in the pub after the game. Was football so bad 2 years ago that it needed VAR. I don't think so.

Hence this is also the reason I've been enjoying watching local county football again so much. Ironically I'm falling out of love with Premier league football but loving the local scene once again. I don't miss the Amex half as much as I thought I would.

I shall continue to labour the point.

Yes it was so bad.

We were constantly told how bad it was.
How the game was now too fast.
How the 'big six' got all the decisions.
How incompetent the referees were.
How the game was ruined because the world knew the correct decision, even the people sat in the stands.

2 years ago the EPL was a joke billion pound division being run in the 19th century.

 

[beorhthelm]

I shall continue to labour the point.

Yes it was so bad.

We were constantly told how bad it was.
How the game was now too fast.
How the 'big six' got all the decisions.
How incompetent the referees were.
How the game was ruined because the world knew the correct decision, even the people sat in the stands.

2 years ago the EPL was a joke billion pound division being run in the 19th century.

and now? VAR has not made anything better and made a few things worse.

 

[Stat Brother]

and now? VAR has not made anything better and made a few things worse.

Absolutely.

Please don't take my contrarian view as a Pro VAR stance.

VAR has removed celebrating from football - that is unforgivable.


But VAR didn't just appear and was forced onto football.

All things football (supporters inc), just 2 years ago, were at a point that VAR had to be bought in because it just couldn't continue as it was, while hoovering up vast sums of cash.

Let's not rewrite history.

The fact the the panacea turned out to be a snake oil salesman - well who could have seen that coming!

 

[SittingbourneSeagull]

I have voted to bin it, but actually I think lots of what seems wrong with VAR is actually more to do with the actual rule changes in football around things like the handball rule.

The current rule gives defenders no chance of avoiding a penalty even when the ball is hit at them from a few yards away.

There are though so many discrepancies in the way it is used. These often seem to favour the so called big sides, and of course we would say that, but just thinking about the Spurs game when Trossard was dragged down in the box and nothing was given because the defender didn't hold onto him for long enough just makes me feel that there is a bias.

 

[Guinness Boy]

The media have been anti VAR from the start. It gives them something to talk about and it boosts the ego of the pundits to make disparaging comments about it. With VAR more decisions are technically right than without it, although of course it has many downsides. I say pause it for a year and review procedures whilst we see how the referees and their assistants can cope with offside and more particularly the intimidating cheats that we have for players and managers these days. Then we can have a better view as to whether its reintroduction would be of overall benefit.

Football had already been dealing with all that for about a hundred years, and do you know what ? It was brilliant. Football WASN'T broken. We don't need a years pause to find that out. The vast majority of offsides were called correctly, and yes there would sometimes be the odd howler, but football is a game of chaos run by humans, so human error is a factor built in to the game. What we have discovered with VAR is that it is IMPOSSIBLE to eradicate human error because, well, its still a human making the decisions, whether that be on the pitch or in a studio.

If it was used to correct a decision where a ref or lino has properly dropped a bollock then fine. But its trying to make binary decisions on marginal calls of interpretation, resulting in the mess we have now.

I do like your idea in one way though - if we had a years pause from VAR, we'd at least get a year of having our game back.

^^ what [MENTION=70]Easy 10[/MENTION] said.

But also, I'm going to play devil's advocate even further. The post above Easy's says

With VAR more decisions are technically right than without it,

Why do we need technically right decisions? Being a football fan in this country gives you access to a unique community and culture, one I'm proud to be part of. And when I first started being part of it one thing was clear; the referee was a in black who didn't know what he was doing and needed to borrow the spectacles belonging to the old bloke two steps below me. They were all biased to the big clubs and, in many cases, had been "bribed" by our opponents (many of whose fans were making similar allegations at different times in the game). But so what?

There are a few things from those days that we are well rid of. Racism. Casual violence on the terraces. Balls so hard they gave centre halves dementia years later. Scratchy kits. Wagon Wheels. But we risk throwing the baby out with the bathwater in our constant striving for "perfection". VAR is the football equivalent of air brushing a magazine picture and just as unwanted. Not once did I ever hear the old bloke who was offering the ref his specs say "do you know what would clear this up? Stupid handball rules and some lines drawn on the pitch in crayon by software based near Heathrow".

I once went all the way to Sunderland and saw us lose to a goal that was 10 yards offside and it never did me any harm. In fact it gave us something FUNNY to talk about on the train home over many tinnies and a renewed sense that it was us against the world after all.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Keep it FOR CLEAR AND OBVIOUS ERRORS ONLY - as was the idea in the first ****ing place. i.e. stuff like the Henry handball vs Ireland.

Anything that isn't clear and obvious can stay with the ref's onfield decision.

Trouble is the only way for clear and obvious errors to be identified is if VAR checkes every decision.

Also to check for a clear and obvious error the process has to be triggered by VAR. If the ref has made any sort of error the error is made. By definition the referee thinks his decision is correct.

The problem for me is the rubric.

I would like to see VAR continuousy monitor for foul play, handball and offside. If VAR considers there is a meaningful error (potentially game changing) by the ref then it alerts the ref who can either accept the VAR advice (my preference - why the **** not?) or check a screen.

So what is a meaningful error? I would say these:

• A red car decision missed or given falsely.
• An offside decision missed resulting in a meaningful advantage - a goal, free kick or a corner .
• A penalty decision missed or given falsely.

I would consider these to not be a serious error and VAR can keep out of these:

• A yellow card given when it is not worth a card, and vice versa.

• An offside decision missed where the attacking side gained no advantage

So what is the problem? The problem is the laws:

Offside now is a mess. We have decisions given now when something the forward can't score with such as his arm is being called offside. There is no simple answer to this but just guessing is no solution. The fairest solution is the one Wenger suggested (although I suggested it before him): clear blue daylight.

So that's the rule, but how much daylight is daylight? Statistically the chance of someone being exactly 0.1 mm onside or offside is extremely unlikely so it should always be possible to see the clear blue daylight. I would give VAR 20 sec to evaluate this and if it is too close for them to call just leave it to the ref and lino. All play should be allowed to run on with an offside check only if the attack leads to a goal or a free kick or corner that advantages the attackers. If the defence wins out who cares whether it had been offside? Clean quick and simple. This means that refs and linos should not be calling any offsides. They only matter when the attack gets a meaningful advantage, and if they do VAR can check in the background and advise the ref.

Handball is also a mess. The issues are where does the hand start, when is contact unavoidable, and whether it should even be an offense if it is unavoidable? All rubrics have changed multiple times in the last couple of years. Thundercuntery at its finest. The hand ball rule was brought in to stop egregious cheating. In other words the player gains a meaningful advantage. That is always easy to spot in my view. My solution?

If the player clearly moves his hand towards the ball or sticks his arm in a position where it is going to give him an advantage, and obtains a meaningful advantage, it is handball. This is subjective. Let the referee decide, with VAR guidance if VAR considers there has been a meaningful error (rubric as above). There is no point having pernicketty rules about 'ball to hand, or' or the recent 'if it is in the box it is a pen even if it wouldn't have been handball elsewhere on the pitch' bollocks. There is no point giving a hand ball if the play doesn't result in a goal, corner or free kick. Irrelevant hand balls that don't obtain an advantage are irrelevant.

So the other bit is 'what is a hand in handball?'. We have lost site of the relative irrelevance of this by mithering about where the shoulder ends and the arm begins. FFS - we will never know so the decision is subjective. My solution?

• If the ball hits the shoulder it isn't hand ball.If the player obviously moves his shoulder to control or deflect the ball (this hardly ever happens) it is handball. The decision is given only if it matters (see above).

Bottom line any discussion about VAR is moot till the laws are fixed. We have seen how football is run by dribbling dimbots, repeatedly, so I don't expect any sanity soon, just more ****wittery and soppy compromise to keep the referees union happy.

 

[Stat Brother]

The current rule gives defenders no chance of avoiding a penalty even when the ball is hit at them from a few yards away.

You are wrong.

Defenders have one chance.
They have to be playing again The Albion.



Or as said on Football Weekly:-

Brighton and their vegan football, desperate to not offend anyone by scoring a goal'.

 

[Seasidesage]

That's not my point.

My point is everything you and [MENTION=12101]Mellotron[/MENTION] and others have suggested to make VAR 'work' are pretty much meaningless.

All your rule changes are open to the same interpretation, all you suggest is wholesale moving of the Titanic's deckchairs.


I guess taking my point to it's (il)logical conclusion would be:-

To make VAR work (which we have to because as we all agree isn't never going away)

Football needs to remove

- Live TV.
- Pundits.
- Slow motion.
- Critical analysis.
- Phone ins
- Review shows.

and so on.


Basically for VAR to work we need to remove all the aspects of the bloated swirling noise that engulfs the game, which caused VAR to be implemented in the first place.

Stat I got your point

I think we need to minimise the controversy even if that keeps a lot of media in employment. Making sensible changes to the laws would remove the 10mins trying to separate two lines on a tv screen to decide offside. Similarly an outbreak of common sense would minimise the handballs and ridiculous fouls a la the Palace game.

Football is a marvelous game with so many sides, so many stories and so many interesting things to talk about. The Ref and whether a strikers toe nail was offside is boring especially when its the same thing every bloody week. Football generates enough stories and controversy of its own without artificially manufacturing new ones.