VAR Thoughts?

[Mook]

57 minutes ago, CrownPaints said:

Why not have the Tennis and Cricket systems where the teams have a limited number of challenges?

 

Take it out of the refs hands completely.

 

Tennis & cricket are shite and absolutely nothing like football.

 

We should look to go back to when our sport was more enjoyable rather than taking ideas from inferior, stop/start sports.

 

People should try to think of Football more as an art form than a sport, it's like a ballet or a classical music concert, which ebbs & flows with its highs, lows & its imperfections. Go and watch those old World Cup films they made in the 70s & 80s instead of trying to compare it with American Football, tennis or cricket.

 

When you take away that passion people have when their team score a goal, or delay that for even a few  seconds, it's time to pack up & go home.

[Barrington Womble]

1 hour ago, Mook said:

 

It is the system.

 

Get other, better people in and they will still need to review every goal to some extent, ruining the game in the process.

 

'Clear & obvious' is highly subjective.

 

VAR should be scrapped outright.

Spot on. For me, clear and obvious is if you watch anything and your conclusion it is the opposite to what was given - it's not ambiguous, it is in your opinion right or wrong.

 

But the issue is firstly nearly all refereeing decisions are subjective, so there will always be disagreements. So while I feel clear and obvious itself is a binary choice (if it is wrong to you, it is both clear & obvious), it's inevitable 2 referees will not agree on every decision. 

 

Secondly, if you are trying create a bar where there are different "grades" of clear and obvious, so for example there's an element of "I can see why he gave it, but I just don't agree, so play on", well that covers about 90% of refereeing decisions. There's always an argument for that. And so where to get involved is subjective and all referees as a consequence will interfere differently and differently in game, as 2 decision are rarely the same?

 

So once you see that, what is clear and obvious is the whole system can only be a fuck up. 

 

I want it scrapped, but I do think an appeals system would provide a compromise. We were told VAR was to get the big decisions right. So the examples we were given were those once a season type gaffs. So in that situation, give a limited number of appeals per season (half an dozen ?) and allow the onfield referee to re-ref his own decision without any guidance from a referee in a TV studio. Let him go to the camera, let him ask for his replays from the video guy and make a decision. In stadia with big screens, put it on and have the referee justify his decision live. In the likes of our ground, at least we hear the audio. 

 

But scrap it is the real answer. 

[Jennings]

Because of VAR, goals are not celebrated with spontaneous joy anymore.

 

There should be a fucking mutiny over this.

[Jennings]

14 hours ago, Barrington Womble said:

The league cup semis against Fulham were a breath of fresh air.

 

 

[Babb'sBurstNad]

1 hour ago, Barrington Womble said:

I want it scrapped, but I do think an appeals system would provide a compromise. 

 

This is where I'm at. They won't scrap it, so at best we could see its use limited. A challenge / appeal system is the only way I can see that happening.

 

Oddly, I think many managers would just accept more contentious on-field decisions rather than gamble an appeal away.

 

Far from ideal, but it would alleviate this sense that every goal is being checked anyway for minor infringements that even opposing players aren't blaming.

[VladimirIlyich]

14 minutes ago, Babb'sBurstNad said:

 

This is where I'm at. They won't scrap it, so at best we could see its use limited. A challenge / appeal system is the only way I can see that happening.

 

Oddly, I think many managers would just accept more contentious on-field decisions rather than gamble an appeal away.

 

Far from ideal, but it would alleviate this sense that every goal is being checked anyway for minor infringements that even opposing players aren't blaming.

They are looking to cancel out goals and create incidents rather than the opposite. This deliberate and why it wont go.

[Barrington Womble]

21 minutes ago, Babb'sBurstNad said:

 

This is where I'm at. They won't scrap it, so at best we could see its use limited. A challenge / appeal system is the only way I can see that happening.

 

Oddly, I think many managers would just accept more contentious on-field decisions rather than gamble an appeal away.

 

Far from ideal, but it would alleviate this sense that every goal is being checked anyway for minor infringements that even opposing players aren't blaming.

I think you're right about the gamble. Which is no real problem. We're told VAR is to help with the biggest decisions, if the club concerned doesn't feel fit to appeal, then surely it can't be that much of a controversy?

[Jennings]

They only reason they won't scrap it, is because everyone blames everything other than VAR itself. 

[Barrington Womble]

12 minutes ago, Jennings said:

They only reason they won't scrap it, is because everyone blames everything other than VAR itself. 

I think that cunt Howard Webb is certainly happy for VAR "the machine" rather than him and his referees take the blame. But as I keep saying, I think VAR is a global issue, but there's no doubt because we have the most viewed league in the world, we play a massive part of the perception of it. 

[Jennings]

I'd like to know just how many goals are scored and allowed, without VAR inspecting them?

 

I think it is a number that tends to zero. 

[Smell The Glove]

14 hours ago, VladimirIlyich said:

Why would Trent be mistaken for Gravenberch?

You're right. In that scenario I should have said Robbo and Quansah

[Bob]

17 hours ago, Babb'sBurstNad said:

 

This is where I'm at. They won't scrap it, so at best we could see its use limited. A challenge / appeal system is the only way I can see that happening.

 

Oddly, I think many managers would just accept more contentious on-field decisions rather than gamble an appeal away.

 

Far from ideal, but it would alleviate this sense that every goal is being checked anyway for minor infringements that even opposing players aren't blaming.

American football has many (many) faults and their use of tv replay is definitely not what we should be aiming for, but… 

 

with that said, their use of replay is only permitted for specific things, and those are all intended to be fact based, non subjective calls.

 

was a ball caught; was a player already ‘down’ before fumbling; was a players foot in or out of bounds; were there 12 men on the field; was the ball past the goal line/1st down marker.

 

Absolutely not a perfect, but even they have it right that you can’t use slow motion replays to confirm or overturn subjective calls for fouls.

 

we’re stuck with VAR and technology so we need the rulers of the game to accept the same. Use it for objective calls only.

 

Did the ball cross the line (that tech obviously works); did the ball go out of play (the tech isn’t there but cameras can usually give a good angle to confirm or deny); is a player offside (I don’t like it, I think it’s against the spirit of the law but I’ll accept I’ve lost this one, and use the automated system); is it the right person that getting booked or sent off for an offence.
 

For fouls the only time it should be used is to check if there was contact when a penalty has been awarded (ie overturn if a complete dive, but stick with a decision otherwise).

 

If it can’t be entirely objective, either because it’s a subjective call in the first place or because the evidence isn’t there/clear, then let the refs decision stand.

 

I’m theory, it should be possible to use it for some other subjective things, like rugby does, but it’s been proven beyond doubt that they can’t do it without it spoiling the game or continuing to have massive errors. That’s either because it simply doesn’t suit the game or because the officials are too incompetent to use it, or too insecure / immature / unprofessional to use it. It doesn’t matter why, in truth. It just simply is proven to make the game worse and so should be binned off as far as possible.

 

ideally, it would be scrapped altogether but that’s not a reasonable expectation so instead, let’s strip it as far back as possible.

[VladimirIlyich]

10 hours ago, Smell The Glove said:

You're right. In that scenario I should have said Robbo and Quansah

Ok,due to your sarcasm I will play along. Was there a specific incident where Trent and Gravenberch were confused by officials?

[Jose Jones]

17 hours ago, Jennings said:

I'd like to know just how many goals are scored and allowed, without VAR inspecting them?

 

I think it is a number that tends to zero. 

I thought they checked every goal?

[Smell The Glove]

1 hour ago, VladimirIlyich said:

Ok,due to your sarcasm I will play along. Was there a specific incident where Trent and Gravenberch were confused by officials?

No. As I'm running through the squad in my head I'm thinking of a plausible scenario where this could happen where you'd be most annoyed if it did. The league has previous for this with Gibbs and Ox.

 

You're assuming I didn't think of the implications about using these players and tried a cheap shot.

 

If I'd waited 24 hours I could have used McConnell and Bradley as I kept getting those two mixed up all day yesterday. Would that have been OK?

[an tha]

Joke

 

https://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/genk-anderlecht-replay-var-decision-31981417?int_source=amp_continue_reading&int_medium=amp&int_campaign=continue_reading_button#amp-readmore-target

[Jennings]

12 hours ago, Jose Jones said:

I thought they checked every goal?

 

Why would they do that?

[Barrington Womble]

3 minutes ago, Jennings said:

 

Why would they do that?

To get to the outcome they most desire. 

[Tj hooker]

 

 

 

[Anubis]

Let the piss-boiling commence!

[Pete]

5 minutes ago, Anubis said:

Let the piss-boiling commence!

Yeah but Li-VAR-Pool innit.  Don't let facts ruin a good narrative.

[Pete]

Back pages seem to be all running a story on how VAR isn't good enough. 

Well yeah!  it;s fucking shite!

[Barrington Womble]

1 hour ago, Pete said:

Back pages seem to be all running a story on how VAR isn't good enough. 

Well yeah!  it;s fucking shite!

There's some premier league report on VAR released, telling us how marvelous it is. Apparently it has only been used incorrectly 3 times all season! There are 17 occasions when it should have intervened and hasn't. But honestly, just fuck off with this shit. We're at match day 23 and they can only find 20 incidents in the whole season. This is why it's all fucked. These cunts are all patting themselves in the back for being absolutely fucking shit. 

[VladimirIlyich]

8 hours ago, Tj hooker said:

 

 

 

That's potentially 12 points but realistically maybe 4/5/6 points lost to a so called 'better' system.

[Ne Moe Imya]

The anti-VAR crowd seem to have completely forgotten how terrible the officiating was in the pre-VAR days.

 

Does VAR get it wrong on occasion? Yes, and we should work to reduce that. Is it anywhere near as bad as it used to be? Not even close.

 

There are millions of examples of egregious calls in extremely important games, but I always remember that but for this absolutely outrageous offsides call, Gerrard would have won the league and lifted the trophy as capitain:
 

 

That sort of thing used to happen ALL THE TIME.