[Football] VAR today

[LamieRobertson]

A lot is still going to be down to opinion....ref on the pitch will have one..the one in a studio will have another...all the best with that lot

 

[Kalimantan Gull]

My expectation, also, is that I don't think this will be Brexitty (with the public split roughly 50:50, with a loud and militant contingent in each camp). I think people will come on board pretty quickly onnce they see it in action week after week. MOTD won't be going over shocking decisions like it does now. Instead it will be showing how without VAR there would have been a shocking decision.

Anyway, by this time next year, unless the FA doesn't bottle it and not introduce it, we shall know for sure

What you need is a system that rules out the blatant mistakes and leaves everything else alone. Unfortunately such a system doesn't exist. All we will do is shift the goalposts of what is a 'controversial decision' Instead of arguing 1-yard offsides we'll be arguing 1-inch offsides. MOTD will still discussing these decisions instead (and there's a lot more of them than the blatant handballs we have at the moment)

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

I thought the idea of VAR was to check the validity of all goals, among other things, and if so why were the penalties at Burnley, Man Utd & Newcastle not retaken as players from both sides had encroached in the area.

The two main issues with VAR are misue by referees (if the ref starts asking questions and initiating a conversation with VAR HQ, unless the HQ people stick to their guns and blankly state their decision, this will create the lengthy time waste we have already seen on occasions in the world cup and games in the UK) and the still as yet unsettled question of what type of decision could be or should be adjudicated by VAR. The latter is very important. As you say, why no retake if there was encroachment? The answer is because unless the ref calls for a VAR check, it is up to VAR central to contact the ref. I am not sure that VAR central has quite got its ducks lined up over this (what issues, what decisions?). Also I am not sure that refs are all clear on whether they must take note of a VAR call or whether they can overrule it and ignore it. Finally, to be honest, I do not know myself the answer to the latter. Given that VAR will come in, it would be nice if these issues can be settled. Ironically, I don't see the referees pushing for clarity, however, because it isn't in their interest for there to be clarity (this undermines the 'special role' of the referee).

Anyhow, perhaps the simplest way of understanding how VAR will work is this. Ahem:

VAR means VAR.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

What you need is a system that rules out the blatant mistakes and leaves everything else alone. Unfortunately such a system doesn't exist. All we will do is shift the goalposts of what is a 'controversial decision' Instead of arguing 1-yard offsides we'll be arguing 1-inch offsides. MOTD will still discussing these decisions instead (and there's a lot more of them than the blatant handballs we have at the moment)

Yes of course. There are some decisions that cannot be resolved with 100% certainty even with multiple camera angles. A workable rubric here would be for the uncertainty to be recognised quickly (by VAR) and the referee invited to make a judgement call (i.e., if it is Zaha, the call will be 'dive'). Failing that you have a drop ball when a decision cannot be made.

However, if we accept that VAR is a means of avoiding egregiously bad decisions (just as goal line tech has ruled out equivocation about was it or wasn't it), which it will, the remaining issue is the good will of the referees, and the rubric for the curation of process (which issues, by what means, how adjudicated). If people want it to fail and kick against it, it will continue to be a source of consternation.

All of this discussion however makes me smile. We got the same tide of whinging when the breatherliser test and speed cams were brought in.

Everything will be better, I'm convinced. A few refs may have to be given a quiet word en route though, I expect.

 

[Bodian]

I thought the idea of VAR was to check the validity of all goals, among other things, and if so why were the penalties at Burnley, Man Utd & Newcastle not retaken as players from both sides had encroached in the area.

Ah - the trouble with multiple threads. I just asked the same on a different VAR thread!

 

[hoveboyslim]

I thought the idea of VAR was to check the validity of all goals, among other things, and if so why were the penalties at Burnley, Man Utd & Newcastle not retaken as players from both sides had encroached in the area.

I think encroachment is generally only a factor if one of the players encroaching touches the ball. If they were retaken for every encroachment we’d be there all day.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[brightn'ove]

I just don’t think the benefit of getting slightly more (and that’s all it will be) decisions right outweighs ruining goal celebrations for fans. So many goals will be a case or waiting for a VAR decision to be given rather than for the ball to hit the net. I think it will ruin football.

This hasn't happened in leagues where it's in use.

Referees and fans will get used to it and it will be fine.

 

[Whitechapel]

How long did it take everyone to get to and back from Cardiff? Would a one minute delay to see us get a point be that painful? Really? Same at Burnley. As for getting home one minute earlier with one point rather than three against Leicester? That one minute was important to everyone’s life.

This post is so staggeringly stupid I don’t even know how to respond.

I’m not quite sure how you’ve read my post and came to the conclusion that my gripe is how long it will take people to get home?

 

[Bodian]

I think encroachment is generally only a factor if one of the players encroaching touches the ball. If they were retaken for every encroachment we’d be there all day.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

We had a thread on this some while back. The conclusion was that any sort of encroachment is an offence, regardless of the impact of the encroachment. That is - even if it's a blinder into the top corner, if an attacker has encroached, the kick should be retaken.

Like with all these things, because it's so rarely punished it happens. If they were retaken on a regular basis, it would soon stop.

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

Sounds like you both think this excellent system won't work because we (The FA and EPL) ar too shit to make anything work. So what would you prefer? Carry on with 'referee's whimsy'?

My view is that it won't work well if the English referees sabotage it.....

Sometimes I wonder how we ever won the war (BTW it wasn't by having no rules, no standards and no discipline).

The refs want it, I don’t think they are wanting to destroy it.

The issue is we have rushed into it with out being properly ready, nor do we have the same equipment at the World Cup.

Look at the pictures from the Huddersfield v United game last year, completely useless.

 

[Whitechapel]

Fair enough (and [MENTION=29779]Whitechapel[/MENTION]).

I agree with your main point; as I have said, if the refs consciously or subconsciously sabotage it (so easy to do) then the long faff is inevitable. We can't have decisions taking 5 minutes (and with some of the clowns reffing at the moment this is a strong possibility). However, my expectation is that if this happens then the process will be tweaked.

My expectation, also, is that I don't think this will be Brexitty (with the public split roughly 50:50, with a loud and militant contingent in each camp). I think people will come on board pretty quickly onnce they see it in action week after week. MOTD won't be going over shocking decisions like it does now. Instead it will be showing how without VAR there would have been a shocking decision.

Anyway, by this time next year, unless the FA doesn't bottle it and not introduce it, we shall know for sure

For me there are two key problems.

1) So many of the decision VAR is used for are up for interpretation. Look at yesterday. The Man.U penalty and the Burnley non-penalty. Both offside calls; however both came down to ‘Is Lukaku/Vokes interfering with play?’ In my opinion VAR made the wrong call with both decisions. You might disagree and think it got one of them right, or even both of them right. VAR has just moves the decision away from the referee. What about the Huddersfield red card against us? Or Stephens against Cardiff? These aren’t black or white decisions; there’s a whole grey area where it’s down to an individuals interpretation. Video technology works in cricket because there’s a right or wrong answer. He edged the ball or he didn’t. Football isn’t that straight forward.

2) When is the cut-off for whether a wrong decision leads to a goal? This is a massive point that nobody seems to discuss. If we put a cross in, which goes out of play before curling back on to Duffys head for a goal then it’s clear the wrong decision directly lead to a goal so VAR can be used. But what if the ball had gone out for a throw that wasn’t awarded 20 seconds ago? 25 seconds? 30 seconds? How far back can referees go to check decisions? If Zaha shanks a cross in to Ryan’s hands and we then go on the break to score but the ball had been out of play then could VAR overrule our goal and give us a goal kick? Again, it works in cricket because there are set phases of play. Every ball is contained to itself. Not the case with football.

Those two fundermental problems with VAR outweigh all the perceived positives. The other negatives, such as not being able to celebrate goals properly because you’re waiting for somebody somewhere to check if Murray was 0.2 inches offside just compound to the fact that it’s not a workable system currently. It’s very easy to go “Well if we had VAR we’d have beaten Leicester.” but people forget all the points we would have lost too so I completly ignore the effect it would have had on us this season and try to judge it evenly. However it’s just not going to work IMO.

Roll on players asking for VAR every 30 seconds, managers panning it for still being wrong in interviews, and fans turning against it very quickly. Genuinely considering not renewing my season ticket for next year over it.

 

[Berty23]

This post is so staggeringly stupid I don’t even know how to respond.

I’m not quite sure how you’ve read my post and came to the conclusion that my gripe is how long it will take people to get home?

Who cares whether we know all that is going on? Why is it treating fans badly? When someone is down injured we don’t really know do we? What about when Lino discusses with ref? I simply don’t understand why it is treating fans badly. Please explain.

 

[Berty23]

For me there are two key problems.

1) So many of the decision VAR is used for are up for interpretation. Look at yesterday. The Man.U penalty and the Burnley non-penalty. Both offside calls; however both came down to ‘Is Lukaku/Vokes interfering with play?’ In my opinion VAR made the wrong call with both decisions. You might disagree and think it got one of them right, or even both of them right. VAR has just moves the decision away from the referee. What about the Huddersfield red card against us? Or Stephens against Cardiff? These aren’t black or white decisions; there’s a whole grey area where it’s down to an individuals interpretation. Video technology works in cricket because there’s a right or wrong answer. He edged the ball or he didn’t. Football isn’t that straight forward.

2) When is the cut-off for whether a wrong decision leads to a goal? This is a massive point that nobody seems to discuss. If we put a cross in, which goes out of play before curling back on to Duffys head for a goal then it’s clear the wrong decision directly lead to a goal so VAR can be used. But what if the ball had gone out for a throw that wasn’t awarded 20 seconds ago? 25 seconds? 30 seconds? How far back can referees go to check decisions? If Zaha shanks a cross in to Ryan’s hands and we then go on the break to score but the ball had been out of play then could VAR overrule our goal and give us a goal kick? Again, it works in cricket because there are set phases of play. Every ball is contained to itself. Not the case with football.

Those two fundermental problems with VAR outweigh all the perceived positives. The other negatives, such as not being able to celebrate goals properly because you’re waiting for somebody somewhere to check if Murray was 0.2 inches offside just compound to the fact that it’s not a workable system currently. It’s very easy to go “Well if we had VAR we’d have beaten Leicester.” but people forget all the points we would have lost too so I completly ignore the effect it would have had on us this season and try to judge it evenly. However it’s just not going to work IMO.

Roll on players asking for VAR every 30 seconds, managers panning it for still being wrong in interviews, and fans turning against it very quickly. Genuinely considering not renewing my season ticket for next year over it.

What points have we gained this season due to no VAR? Isn’t it better to get the right result.

It isn’t perfect in cricket either. There is an even larger grey area where it is umpire’s call. Also replays for whether a ball carried are flawed. That said it means that far far more decisions are correct and the clangers are removed. To reject something because it is not perfect means we don’t get any improvements.

How many times was VAR used against Bournemouth? It is very very easy to add something about phase of play and how long you go back.

You have just listed very easily overcome issues.

I am calling bull on not renewing season ticket over it next year. Goodness me.

 

[Whitechapel]

Who cares whether we know all that is going on? Why is it treating fans badly? When someone is down injured we don’t really know do we? What about when Lino discusses with ref? I simply don’t understand why it is treating fans badly. Please explain.

We score a goal. Starts celebrating. Ref signals for VAR. Celebrations stop. 2 minutes of non-action. Nobody at the ground has a clue what’s happening. Goal disallowed. No idea why. Game carries on.

You can’t see why that might just ruin the experience for match going fans? Really?

I use another forum which is just a general football forum, for fans of every team. There have been numerous fans on there who have been at games where there has been a major VAR incident which has left the fans in the dark. (Liverpool v West Brom & Man.U v Huddersfield IIRC). Every single one of them has said the experience in the ground was terrible , completly killed the atmosphere and impacted how much they enjoyed the game. It’s fine if you’re watching on TV, they can show replays and explain what they’re reviewing, but everyone I know who had been at the ground when one of these incidents happened had said it is an awful experience if you’re actually there.

Next time you watch a film pause it randomly at a certain point, wait for 2 full minutes without moving and then skip 10 minutes of the film so you don’t know what’s happened when you resume. Is that a good way to watch a film?

 

[Whitechapel]

What points have we gained this season due to no VAR? Isn’t it better to get the right result.

It isn’t perfect in cricket either. There is an even larger grey area where it is umpire’s call. Also replays for whether a ball carried are flawed. That said it means that far far more decisions are correct and the clangers are removed. To reject something because it is not perfect means we don’t get any improvements.

How many times was VAR used against Bournemouth? It is very very easy to add something about phase of play and how long you go back.

You have just listed very easily overcome issues.

I am calling bull on not renewing season ticket over it next year. Goodness me.

Huddersfield away is the main one off the top of my head. The red card might not have been given with VAR (but it might have been, see an incident where VAR is useless). Duffy pulling Pritchard down in the box would have been a penalty and Balogun should have 100% had a red card near the end. Any combination of those being given could have seen us leave with 1, or even 0 points. If Balogun gets the red he should have against Huddersfield he’s then not able to score against Palace, and when Duffy gets sent off we are then down to 1 first team CB for the next 2 games. That’s without going in to all the instances of shirt pulling we get away with from almost every corner we defend.

If VAR was being used to only correct clangers then I would be all for it. But that’s not how it’s cuttently being used so there’s point pretending it is. If it’s so easy to add in something about phases of play then why hasn’t it be done yet? Why didn’t the World Cup have guidelines? Why doesn’t the FA Cup have guideline?

You can carry on rooting for VAR. Hopefully we can keep on improving football. Maybe we should just cut to simulating matches to cut out mistakes by players too? The football would be perfect and you can sit there evening about great it is.

I’ve had some really interesting debates about the pros & cons of VAR with people. Sadly this isn’t one of them.

 

[Berty23]

Huddersfield away is the main one off the top of my head. The red card might not have been given with VAR (but it might have been, see an incident where VAR is useless). Duffy pulling Pritchard down in the box would have been a penalty and Balogun should have 100% had a red card near the end. Any combination of those being given could have seen us leave with 1, or even 0 points. If Balogun gets the red he should have against Huddersfield he’s then not able to score against Palace, and when Duffy gets sent off we are then down to 1 first team CB for the next 2 games. That’s without going in to all the instances of shirt pulling we get away with from almost every corner we defend.

If VAR was being used to only correct clangers then I would be all for it. But that’s not how it’s cuttently being used so there’s point pretending it is. If it’s so easy to add in something about phases of play then why hasn’t it be done yet? Why didn’t the World Cup have guidelines? Why doesn’t the FA Cup have guideline?

You can carry on rooting for VAR. Hopefully we can keep on improving football. Maybe we should just cut to simulating matches to cut out mistakes by players too? The football would be perfect and you can sit there evening about great it is.

I’ve had some really interesting debates about the pros & cons of VAR with people. Sadly this isn’t one of them.

You are drifting into opinion again. Motd agreed it wasn’t a pen for the Duffy (sic) pull. Unlikely either of the others are overturned on VAR.

I am really into cricket and you sound very much like people who hated third umpire when it first Came in because it won’t be correct 100% of the time. But surely 98% correct is better than 90%.

How could anyone be confused about the decisions yesterday? Motd missed the point on the Burnley pen. They were both offside. Vokes’ foot was inches in front of the defender. So offside. It was odd they missed that. People say “only inches” well where does it become offside? Only mm stopped Liverpool goal.

My guess is that VAR will become part of the game as it is in cricket and rugby and people will wonder what all the fuss was about.

 

[Whitechapel]

You are drifting into opinion again. Motd agreed it wasn’t a pen for the Duffy (sic) pull. Unlikely either of the others are overturned on VAR.

I am really into cricket and you sound very much like people who hated third umpire when it first Came in because it won’t be correct 100% of the time. But surely 98% correct is better than 90%.

How could anyone be confused about the decisions yesterday? Motd missed the point on the Burnley pen. They were both offside. Vokes’ foot was inches in front of the defender. So offside. It was odd they missed that. People say “only inches” well where does it become offside? Only mm stopped Liverpool goal.

My guess is that VAR will become part of the game as it is in cricket and rugby and people will wonder what all the fuss was about.

If you watched MOTD then you would have seen that the decisions I mentioned divided the opinion of Upson and Dublin. Voles was offside, Vydra wasn’t. However you’re ignoring that so you can continue to w*nk off VAR and hold some weird smug superiority. You’re boring and this chat is about as much fun as masturbating with sandpaper gloves on so I’m going to leave it here.

 

[Wardy's twin]

A last minute winning Murray goal in the cup against Palace was confirmed by VAR wasn’t it, why wouldn’t you like that?

i would prefer a 3 nil thrashing personally better for my sanity & bowels.

 

[Bodian]

What points have we gained this season due to no VAR?

Newcastle. The goal came from a corner that should have been a goal kick. Don't know if VAR would have addressed that or not??

The Burnley one is a bit odd to me. I thought VAR was only meant to be used to check for offsides if a goal had been scored, not any other time?

 

[Wardy's twin]

VAR is not going to solve everything but it is likely to improve matters by correcting easily spotted bad decisions that have been missed and potentially remove what might be emotive decision making by referees. I think there should be a set time for such decision making as to not completely destroy the flow.