VAR Thoughts?

[Poor Scouser T]

1 minute ago, aws said:

Exactly- so we’ve already got a corrupt system. Maybe (maybe) money isn’t directly changing hands but we’re getting royally fucked by a bunch of mates who are probably having a good laugh at our expense while they cover up for each other. 

Yeah with regards VAR you are basically asking the officially to drop his mate in the shit by over ruling a big decision. Even unconscious bias makes that less than likely. Unless like the Jones red you can shaft us and the on field ref can it wasn't me.

[El Rojo]

11 minutes ago, TheHowieLama said:

Switzerland - it's what they do.

 

That and clocks made out of delicious chocolate. 

[TD_LFC]

14 minutes ago, El Rojo said:

 

That and clocks made out of delicious chocolate. 

and dubiously acquired gold.

[Jennings]

9 hours ago, John102 said:

Despite the shit show of the weekend, id keep VAR for offsides, that's it. Make the audio available in real time and also change the language from 'check complete' to just telling the referee he is onside or offside. Better still, implement the automated system and just have it ping to the referees watch or whatever it is like goal line technology.

 

For everything its pointless. Its in no way improved anything and id imagine the number of right decisions and the level of consistency is on par with pre VAR anyway. I would potentially bring it back if you managed to get a semi functioning, independent body running.

It isn't used for off-side unless  goal is scored. what's the point in that? It's only there to chalk goals off.

 

4 hours ago, AngryOfTuebrook said:

There's no reason why the VAR officials should be drawn from the same pool as the on-field officials.  I'm starting to think that it would be best to keep them completely separate, so it's less incestuous.

Agree. Studying a video for rules infractions, is a completely different skill set than refereeing on a live footfall pitch. So why use the same people?

[Vincent Vega]

On 01/10/2023 at 19:56, sir roger said:

How cringey are the audio takes ?

 

Rugby ones sound like measured professionals discussing calmly, with first names, and trying to get to the correct decision.

 

Football ones sound like Andy McNabb crossed with traffic wardens.

' Great shout Brooksy, mate. Check complete '

 

I saw exactly that point being made on Twitter by Paul Hayward who used to be a sports writer for the Telegraph.

 

[AngryOfTuebrook]

5 minutes ago, Vincent Vega said:

I saw exactly that point being made on Twitter by Paul Hayward who used to be a sports writer for the Telegraph.

 

I take it the P in PGMOL refers to the Game, not the Officials.

[Vincent Vega]

John Cross from the Mirror also made a good point in his article on Saturday’s farce, he said you don’t see the errors we’re seeing made by the PL officials in the Champions League and international tournaments.
 

Richard Masters should be hauling Webb and PGMOL over the coals for the utter shitfest that is refereeing in the world’s pre-eminent league.

 

Incidentally, where the fuck is Webb? More than 48 hours after the most ridiculous fuck up imaginable and he’s nowhere to be seen. I thought he’d promised to be accountable?

[El Rojo]

Carragher stole my idea on Monday Night Football that proper referees and VAR officials should be brought in from mainland Europe. 

[Bob]

6 hours ago, Poor Scouser T said:

Get some tech nerds to run it. Semi auto. Put them on an intensive course and enforce the rules of the game not opinion.

Fuck off with that. The rules of the game run by nerds who don’t know football is half the problem.

[Megadrive Man]

26 minutes ago, El Rojo said:

Carragher stole my idea on Monday Night Football that proper referees and VAR officials should be brought in from mainland Europe. 

Brexit means Brexit.

 

Don't want forrin refs coming over ere taking ARE jobs!

[Nelly-Szoboszlai]

One thing that’s annoying me is the amount of idiots mentioning narrow offside decisions that have gone against their team (that were actually offside) as some sort of evidence of what happened yesterday being an issue that has happened to most teams, not just Liverpool. 
 

They’re totally missing the point. Their examples were offside. Ours wasn’t. But, that’s still not the point. The point is not the tightness of the offside, or if it was missed. The issue is the totally unprecedented situation where an official should have been checking to check if an offside was correctly called, but he instead checked to see if a player was onside and if a goal was legitimately scored. And the issue is that he gave an answer to this second bit, but everyone else thought he’d answered and confirmed the first bit. And the additional issue is that nobody amongst 5 or more on and off pitch officials either recognised their error or, if they did, did nothing to rectify their fuck up. 
 

It’s not an issue of loads of teams get tight offside decisions against them. It’s about the complete breakdown of a system that was brought into the game to get these decisions right. But, some people are just to thick or tribal to see this and to understand that a thorough investigation into what happened will benefit pretty much everyone. 

[Megadrive Man]

Nailed it.

 

The way some fans are reacting you'd think this was the first time we've had a decision go against us due to VAR.

[Joey8FrogsLegs]

12 hours ago, Lee909 said:

It's gotten worse with use in English football. Thought in its first uses in the world cup it had sone promising aspects. 

That may be because they chose to use the semi-automatic VAR technology in the WC. Also they had more competent people using it probably. Could be other reasons as well, but those two seem pretty obvious.

[TheHowieLama]

16 minutes ago, Section_31 said:

State of footy media these days.

 

 

 

6 minutes ago, Nelly-Matip said:

One thing that’s annoying me is the amount of idiots mentioning narrow offside decisions that have gone against their team (that were actually offside) as some sort of evidence of what happened yesterday being an issue that has happened to most teams, not just Liverpool. 
 

They’re totally missing the point. Their examples were offside. Ours wasn’t. But, that’s still not the point. The point is not the tightness of the offside, or if it was missed. The issue is the totally unprecedented situation where an official should have been checking to check if an offside was correctly called, but he instead checked to see if a player was onside and if a goal was legitimately scored. And the issue is that he gave an answer to this second bit, but everyone else thought he’d answered and confirmed the first bit. And the additional issue is that nobody amongst 5 or more on and off pitch officials either recognised their error or, if they did, did nothing to rectify their fuck up. 
 

It’s not an issue of loads of teams get tight offside decisions against them. It’s about the complete breakdown of a system that was brought into the game to get these decisions right. But, some people are just to thick or tribal to see this and to understand that a thorough investigation into what happened will benefit pretty much everyone. 

 

 

Yep. It is the same line of thinking that would have somebody publish the story above.

 

You don't gain points unless the decision was wrong. We didn't gain anything.

[aws]

If true, it just means that the ref tried to stiff us but the VAR said he wouldn’t be able to get away with it. 

[NoelM]

This

 

 

[Nelly-Szoboszlai]

The Times and Telegraph are apparently reporting that Howard Webb will “bow to pressure” and release the VAR audio. 

[Megadrive Man]

10 minutes ago, Nelly-Matip said:

The Times and Telegraph are apparently reporting that Howard Webb will “bow to pressure” and release the VAR audio. 

 

[Scooby Dudek]

46 minutes ago, Megadrive Man said:

Brexit means Brexit.

 

Don't want forrin refs coming over ere taking VAR jobs!

Fixed 

[Einch]

Pigmol thought they had a choice in the matter? Predictable arse covering. 

[DJLJ]

1 hour ago, Nelly-Matip said:

The Times and Telegraph are apparently reporting that Howard Webb will “bow to pressure” and release the VAR audio. 

Won’t change a thing. They created their story based to fit the audio. 

[Barrington Womble]

3 hours ago, DJLJ said:

Won’t change a thing. They created their story based to fit the audio. 

As I posted in another thread discussing this, I can't imagine Liverpool don't already know what's on the audio. 

 

I also think it's notable we all know the narrative that the VAR is claiming he thought the goal had been given and he merely backed that up. Yet the PGMOL have never said that. Their statement just says "significant human error", there's nothing specific at all. In my opinion they've leaked a narrative to the press to give some type of answers to why they fucked up. I believe LFC know what was said and know it doesn't match the audio. Otherwise I don't know why we'd ask to hear it specifically as opposed to just wanting it as part of a review. . 

[Poor Scouser T]

9 hours ago, Bob Spunkmouse said:

Fuck off with that. The rules of the game run by nerds who don’t know football is half the problem.

I disagree. We have refs who think they understand the game and interoperate the rule as they see fit. They do not apply them hence the inconsistency.

[Bob]

1 hour ago, Poor Scouser T said:

I disagree. We have refs who think they understand the game and interoperate the rule as they see fit. They do not apply them hence the inconsistency.

I don’t disagree with you - and I am the one of my mates who gets called boring for how often I call refs out for being shit - but the answer is definitely not nerds applying the letter of the law. 
 

The answer is pretty simple to me, it’s transparency. You mic the refs and let everyone at home hear every word both ways. You see what the var shows them AND what the var says. Rugby don’t have this a million times better because their rules are better or easier - I’d say it’s the opposite - but they have it a million times better.

 

we’re not going to end up with better referees tomorrow, so we’re gonna have to live with that for a bit, but this would be a huge beneficial change.

 

and stop hiding behind “you can’t mic up the refs because the players swear too much” put that responsibility to not swear on the players. It’s not impossible. Tell them “you’re mic’d and it’s always live, if you swear at me you’re booked - no ifs, no buts”. 

[No2]

4 hours ago, Barrington Womble said:

As I posted in another thread discussing this, I can't imagine Liverpool don't already know what's on the audio. 

 

I also think it's notable we all know the narrative that the VAR is claiming he thought the goal had been given and he merely backed that up. Yet the PGMOL have never said that. Their statement just says "significant human error", there's nothing specific at all. In my opinion they've leaked a narrative to the press to give some type of answers to why they fucked up. I believe LFC know what was said and know it doesn't match the audio. Otherwise I don't know why we'd ask to hear it specifically as opposed to just wanting it as part of a review. . 

Would LFC TV have already heard it? I assume they get the same feed as Sky Sports.