[Football] VAR

[Pavilionaire]

It is totally unsustainable for fans at the stadium to remain in the dark about VAR referrals, and having to phone or text friends / family who are watching the game on TV to find out what is going on at the stadium where you're sat is an embarrassment to football.

 

[Perfidious Albion]

Spontaneous joy at a goal, indignation- fury - when an unjust foul is given , are all a part of the game . To lose that to a soulless VAR is to take drama out of the game.... Accuracy is beneficial, yes, but as we have seen, people still don’t accept the decisions.

 

[Wardy's twin]

We all hate bad decisions that go against us, but as soon as VAR comes in we realise that it takes the joy (and pain) out of football. I'd love them to get rid, but fear that its too far along now.

On a side note, considering tonights match, I reckon VAR will make giant killings much less likely

it hasn't taken the pain out though it has made it worse.

 

[Easy 10]

Highly marginal...apart from the clear shirt pulling on the Rochdale defender you mean?

Come off it, they had a hold of each other. Ruling a goal out for that was ridiculous. Ruling it out without even going over to look at it again on the pitchside monitor was frankly astonishing. I just cannot even begin to understand the process there. You cannot make a more crucial decision than ruling whether a goal is a goal or not. He pressed his ear and let the bloke in Heathrow make the decision. Incredible.

 

[Acker79]

It is totally unsustainable for fans at the stadium to remain in the dark about VAR referrals, and having to phone or text friends / family who are watching the game on TV to find out what is going on at the stadium where you're sat is an embarrassment to football.

Who actually needs to do this?

I really can't understand this attitude that fans are so stupid that they don't understand that when the ref is stood there with a finger to his ear, he is in communication with the video assistant ref. It's not that subtle or complicated. I don't understand why the same signals that have been enough for us to understand refereeing decisions for decades, suddenly aren't enough for us just because they come after the ref has stood with his finger to his ear for a bit just before gesturing. That somehow, seeing video of an incident will turn a rabidly biased crowd of fans into magnanimous, honest and sporting people who view an incident from the perspective of disinterested scholars of the game.

 

[Easy 10]

How is that any different to a linsman ruling out a goal for a foul the referee does not see?

What exactly is the point of the pitchside monitor then, if the game is going to be refereed remotely ?

 

[GT49er]

I thought the whole idea was for the ref to referee the game as normal but consult the VIdeo Ref if unsure, as in rugby.

No, not the latter. There should be no referrals or appeals to the VAR at all. All the VAR should do is have a word in the ref's ear if he's dropped a clanger, or missed something serious. That should be all.

 

[GT49er]

How is that any different to a linsman ruling out a goal for a foul the referee does not see?

Totally diferent. The linesman (or Assistant Referee(!)) calls the ref over and tells him of the foul/offside/whatever by waving his flag to attract the ref's attention. It is not the same as the ref muttering into his mic, 'Can I have a second opinion, please, or can you make that decision for me?'

 

[GT49er]

I think the problem here is that, due to the huge amount of pressure on referees from managers, players, fans and the media, they will almost certainly consult VAR if there is even a hint of doubt. From their perspective it or worth a two minute delay to avoid the amount of stick they would receive for getting a key decision wrong.

Simple. Don't give the ref the option of referring it. VAR only to be used if the VAR thinks it appropriate to intervene.

 

[Seasider78]

Astonishing they are actually pressing ahead with this at the World Cup. So poorly thought out and implemented and an unwelcome addition to the game. Leave the pouring over replays to the pundits and let’s just leave the game to flow

 

[Blue Valkyrie]

Astonishing they are actually pressing ahead with this at the World Cup. So poorly thought out and implemented and an unwelcome addition to the game. Leave the pouring over replays to the pundits and let’s just leave the game to flow

Putin is running the VAR at the World Cup and he would be displeased if they decided not go ahead with it [emoji38]ol:

 

[Sorrel]

Putin is running the VAR at the World Cup and he would be displeased if they decided not go ahead with it [emoji38]ol:

I wonder if it will be easier to nobble the referees who are doing VAR or the ones on the pitch.

 

[cunning fergus]

Astonishing they are actually pressing ahead with this at the World Cup. So poorly thought out and implemented and an unwelcome addition to the game. Leave the pouring over replays to the pundits and let’s just leave the game to flow

I don’t think you have thought it through, VAR is a means to develop more advertising revenue.

At the moment it’s embryonic and a limited revenue generator in the stadiums whilst the decision is taking place, picture an animated spinning bottle coke that pours out the decision “goal stands”, or something like that.

In time though the VAR will be like a time out in NFL maybe with managers getting a couple of challenges per half, and when it takes place viewers will get a couple of adverts.

VAR could be the end of football as we knew it..........as of now, we are merely at the thin end of the wedge.

Merry Christmas!

 

[Blue Valkyrie]

I wonder if it will be easier to nobble the referees who are doing VAR or the ones on the pitch.

Not difficult to imagine an FSB agent in the corner of the VAR room nodding or shaking his head... [emoji38]ol:

 

[Seasider78]

I don’t think you have thought it through, VAR is a means to develop more advertising revenue.

At the moment it’s embryonic and a limited revenue generator in the stadiums whilst the decision is taking place, picture an animated spinning bottle coke that pours out the decision “goal stands”, or something like that.

In time though the VAR will be like a time out in NFL maybe with managers getting a couple of challenges per half, and when it takes place viewers will get a couple of adverts.

VAR could be the end of football as we knew it..........as of now, we are merely at the thin end of the wedge.

Merry Christmas!

I think you are right this is where it will lead but the primary reason for putting it in is a replay culture that has been generated by the media. It started with Andy Gray and his little toys to pull apart every decision and now all the mainstream outlets spend hours after games calling out all the perceived injustices.

The problem is it is easy to switch off ‘Carra and Nev’ or Alan Shearer boring us to bits but now we are going to have this in our stadiums as we try and actually enjoy the match day experience flaws and all

 

[cunning fergus]

Football is about opinions from who is the best team, player etc. refereeing decisions are no different.

There have been plenty of controversial decisions, some good some bad and it’s been part of the fabric of the game for decades.

If those that run football want a game that at its best flows with natural rhythm and tempo, that can be exillerating and dramatic for the viewing fan then VAR will be consigned to the bin.

The VAR quid pro quo here is too high, those that run the game should hold their nerve, sadly I think their eyes are on a different prize.

 

[GT49er]

Because a referee has never gone over to an assitant to clarify if a defender has touched the ball, playing someone who scored on-side, before!?
Of course VAR should be able to clarify something the referee is uncertain about, just like the other assistants at the ground. They should just be used like another assistant.

No it shouldn't - that's what the problem is with it.

 

[scamander]

one of the reasons for technology is because laws are increasingly more complex. You could make things much easier if
1. Offside if level
2. Every player is in play, even if injured.

That would make offsides easier to deal with for a start. I suspect the laws were only changed in the first place to make the game more attacking and thus easier to sell as 'exciting'.

 

[Acker79]

How is that any different to a linsman ruling out a goal for a foul the referee does not see?

The referee can see where the Linesman is and know what his view of events were. He doesn't know what the VAR is basing his opinion on, if the VAR has seen exactly the same thing that the Ref saw and just interpreted it differently (I know, in an ideal world every referee would make the exact same decision as each other in every situation, but we live in the real world where referees are human beings and their interpretation of where that line is is different for everyone, and it is unfair to condemn officials for that when fans, players, pundits, journalists have that same inconsistency among themselves).

 

[Acker79]

I think the referee on the field should be in charge and if his interpretation should be the taken in the game. I mean what is wrong with the VAR asking if he saw something (obviously not minor)? Or the referee asking for some specific clarification (not an opinion just things like "did x touch the ball")?

A factual thing like that (or offsides with linesman, to continue the comparison) I wouldn't have a problem with. But the specific incident being discussed was a foul in the build up to the goal, which is an opinion thing, and that should be the ref's opinion, so the ref should have been looking at the video in that specific incident. (For the penalty, not so much - that was a simple 'did contact continue into the box?' and I'm not bothered about the VAR confirming that)