Worried Man Blues
Well-known member
There should be a time limit on Var decisions, if it takes over 5 seconds it isn't clear and obvious
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Football] The future of VAR in England
- Thread starter The Albion Roar
- Start date
Official Old Man
Uckfield Seagull
Wasn't there an advert at half time showing odds of 11/1 for a 1:2 scoreline. Believe our refs are fine though.
As for cricket, that is simple. Would the ball have hit the wicket.
It's implementation in England is an embarrassment, mostly for the referees. In the past, most reasonable fans would cut them some slack for mistakes as everyone acknowledged that, on the field, it was a really difficult, pressurised job and impossible to get everything correct.
Now, they have the benefit of multiple replays, yet are still making decisions that are way out of step with what the majority of fans, players and managers would consider to be penalty/red card offences. No context or common-sense considered, just a robotic implementation of the letter of the law. All good laws have grey areas to allow for individual cases to be taken into account, so there is no sensible way forward when treating everything as a black or white decision.
From being massively in favour of VAR, I now see no way to keep it without massively restricting its powers. Perhaps better to bin it altogether and get back the unique rhythm and flow that made football the world's most popular sport. Shame, a really good opportunity to improve key decisions has been totally wasted.
Now, they have the benefit of multiple replays, yet are still making decisions that are way out of step with what the majority of fans, players and managers would consider to be penalty/red card offences. No context or common-sense considered, just a robotic implementation of the letter of the law. All good laws have grey areas to allow for individual cases to be taken into account, so there is no sensible way forward when treating everything as a black or white decision.
From being massively in favour of VAR, I now see no way to keep it without massively restricting its powers. Perhaps better to bin it altogether and get back the unique rhythm and flow that made football the world's most popular sport. Shame, a really good opportunity to improve key decisions has been totally wasted.
If we were to simplify it, my suggestion would be the following:
a) offside, put the onus back on the linesman to decide by flagging as normal. They used to get most of them right. VAR will still check but can only intervene if no part of the players' bodies is level (i.e. there is daylight between them and the lino has dropped a massive clanger). To prevent the VAR agonising for 4 minutes over whether 2 toenails overlapped, see c) below.
b) penalties: VAR cannot award them. VAR can overturn them only if the replays shows there was no contact of any kind (to prevent the worst dives).
c) red cards: VAR can only intervene if the on-field referee has not seen the incident.
c) All VAR checks to be limited either by time (45-60 seconds max) or, perhaps more practically, the number of times the incident can be viewed (four? two of which must be at full speed). If it's a big enough howler to merit intervention, it will be immediately obvious and the on-field referee should go to the monitor. Their conversation must be made available, preferably live but, if not, post-match.
d) the media - and to an extent fans - to grow up a bit and not excessively focus on VAR arguments off the back of every single match. How does it help, for instance, when MOTD drones on and on about refs over-scrutinising every incident, but then produces new technology not available to match officials to make a big issue of a Man Utd clearance going out of play?
a) offside, put the onus back on the linesman to decide by flagging as normal. They used to get most of them right. VAR will still check but can only intervene if no part of the players' bodies is level (i.e. there is daylight between them and the lino has dropped a massive clanger). To prevent the VAR agonising for 4 minutes over whether 2 toenails overlapped, see c) below.
b) penalties: VAR cannot award them. VAR can overturn them only if the replays shows there was no contact of any kind (to prevent the worst dives).
c) red cards: VAR can only intervene if the on-field referee has not seen the incident.
c) All VAR checks to be limited either by time (45-60 seconds max) or, perhaps more practically, the number of times the incident can be viewed (four? two of which must be at full speed). If it's a big enough howler to merit intervention, it will be immediately obvious and the on-field referee should go to the monitor. Their conversation must be made available, preferably live but, if not, post-match.
d) the media - and to an extent fans - to grow up a bit and not excessively focus on VAR arguments off the back of every single match. How does it help, for instance, when MOTD drones on and on about refs over-scrutinising every incident, but then produces new technology not available to match officials to make a big issue of a Man Utd clearance going out of play?
Doonhamer7
Well-known member
- Jun 17, 2016
- 1,448
Allow each team 2 VAR checks per match - like cricket the team captain has 10 secs to ask for it
Blue Valkyrie
Not seen such Bravery!
Rename it COVAR to remind them about "Clear and Obvious" every time it is used.
