VAR Thoughts?

[ZonkoVille77]

It needs a lot of work.

Any player calling for the ref to go to VAR by doing a TV screen shaped action with their hands needs to be automatically kicked in the stones.

[Barnesey]

I watched a lot of the World Cup on the telly either at home or at my local football club with a pint in my hand. VAR doesn't really impact on the armchair fan and it is difficult to argue with "getting decisions right".

 

However, merely changing one man's opinion for another, quite often just as suspect even after several slow-mo replays, does not advance the position of the referee or satisfy fans or administrators.

 

As a match going fan, who was at Anfield for the WBA cup game, I see VAR as a disater that will eat into the very fabric of the game. Football is not Rugby, Cricket or Tennis where the fan is used to long delays between the action; we expect a full blooded, all action encounter that has us excited throughout. Sitting there for several minutes awaiting a decision, even when it went our way, left me cold and disillusioned. I genuinely couldn't care less which way the decision went, I just wanted the game back. My straw poll suggests 90%+ of fans present felt the same way.

 

I've given this example before but it remains relevant. I was lucky enough to be at Citeh for the CL fixture. I have never been so tense before a match knowing Citeh were good enough to turn around the 3-0 scoreline; not helped by the action in the first 2 minutes. The tension continued and nerves were raw. Then Mo scores. The release of that tension, the unbounded joy that follows was fantastic; it is why we go the the match. People falling over each other, seats, ending up several rows away from where we started, kissing complete strangers. It was brilliant.

 

Imagine that scenario with VAR in play. There is no way I can let myself go to that extent without being certain that the goal will stand. And when, 10, 20 30 seconds or later, the goal is confirmed the moment has gone. Yes we will celebrate but nothing like we did at that moment; it will be similar to the conversion of a penalty.

 

For me, VAR is for TV pundits and armchair fans. As a regular matchgoer, I see it as a disaster that will change the face of my match day experience for the worse.

 

I think we need to ask the question; is it really that important that every decision is absolutely correct and is it worth the sacrifice to match continuity? Not to mention that even reviewed decisions create a lot of dissent as to their validity.

 

I'm out.

[Trumo]

As a match going fan, who was at Anfield for the WBA cup game, I see VAR as a disater that will eat into the very fabric of the game.

 

The big problem with the use of VAR in last season's FA Cup was that the way it worked was akin to a fat-fingered fuck trying to use a smartphone.

 

VAR at the World Cup worked very well for the most part but one thing I would want to eradicate is the VAR officials relaying an incident to the ref on the pitch for several minutes, and then the ref going over to view it on a screen himself. I think the ref should make the VAR hand signal and go over to the screen immediately to view the incident, in discussion with the VAR officials. They would come to a conclusion in less time than was taken at the World Cup, and a lot less time than what we saw in the FA Cup last year.

[moof]

I think for a team like ours, that routinely gets shafted on penalty decisions, it would be beneficial

[sir roger]

I think the VAR people should make the decision & relay it to the match ref , simple as that. No screen for the on-pitch ref as it is pointless and wastes time. If they say it undermines the on-pitch ref then I would say they shouldn't be so shit & they wouldn't have to worry.

[Aventus]

 

 

It needs a lot of work.

Any player calling for the ref to go to VAR by doing a TV screen shaped action with their hands needs to be automatically kicked in the stones.

[Dave D]

I watched a lot of the World Cup on the telly either at home or at my local football club with a pint in my hand. VAR doesn't really impact on the armchair fan and it is difficult to argue with "getting decisions right".

 

However, merely changing one man's opinion for another, quite often just as suspect even after several slow-mo replays, does not advance the position of the referee or satisfy fans or administrators.

 

As a match going fan, who was at Anfield for the WBA cup game, I see VAR as a disater that will eat into the very fabric of the game. Football is not Rugby, Cricket or Tennis where the fan is used to long delays between the action; we expect a full blooded, all action encounter that has us excited throughout. Sitting there for several minutes awaiting a decision, even when it went our way, left me cold and disillusioned. I genuinely couldn't care less which way the decision went, I just wanted the game back. My straw poll suggests 90%+ of fans present felt the same way.

 

I've given this example before but it remains relevant. I was lucky enough to be at Citeh for the CL fixture. I have never been so tense before a match knowing Citeh were good enough to turn around the 3-0 scoreline; not helped by the action in the first 2 minutes. The tension continued and nerves were raw. Then Mo scores. The release of that tension, the unbounded joy that follows was fantastic; it is why we go the the match. People falling over each other, seats, ending up several rows away from where we started, kissing complete strangers. It was brilliant.

 

Imagine that scenario with VAR in play. There is no way I can let myself go to that extent without being certain that the goal will stand. And when, 10, 20 30 seconds or later, the goal is confirmed the moment has gone. Yes we will celebrate but nothing like we did at that moment; it will be similar to the conversion of a penalty.

 

For me, VAR is for TV pundits and armchair fans. As a regular matchgoer, I see it as a disaster that will change the face of my match day experience for the worse.

 

I think we need to ask the question; is it really that important that every decision is absolutely correct and is it worth the sacrifice to match continuity? Not to mention that even reviewed decisions create a lot of dissent as to their validity.

 

I'm out.

 

Excellent post- hard to disagree.

 

On the other hand, I was incandescent with anger after the Tottenham game at Anfield. I know he missed one (Kane) but neither was a pen and we were utterly and unjustly robbed.

 

Salahs goal was a piece of art that deserved to win the game.

 

I guess it almost illustrates your point, Tottenham fans will have been falling over seats kissing strangers   

[Brownie]

I thought it was pretty good during the World Cup but it needs some refinement to be as effective as it needs to be.

 

There will always be opposition to it but that’s just how it is with changes, especially relatively big ones.

 

There was a question in a post above:

 

is it really that important that every decision is absolutely correct and is it worth the sacrifice to match continuity?

The answer for me is a loose “yes”. The idea of VAR isn’t to make every decision right, just the major ones that have a big impact on a game. It won’t even achieve 100% accuracy with that because of the nature of objectivity.

 

But if it fixes errors then for me it’s worth it. Less major errors in the game has to be a good thing in the long run. So what if your celebration gets wasted, as long as it’s legitimately over-turned then I personally can accept that (I know some can’t, and I respect that, but don’t agree).

[Bob]

I don’t like var, and frankly I don’t expect I ever will. I don’t like the idea of it. I think it’s bad for the game to see players calling for it constantly. I think it’s pointless that in the World Cup final you can’t review a free kick that was a blatant dive and led directly to a goal, when if that same thing had happened in the box it could’ve been. I don’t like that they didn’t review clearly incorrect decisions about goal kicks/corners, I don’t like that subjective calls are still being made just with a replay to assist but still massive debate over whether it was the right call. I don’t like that refs can now bottle a decision with a get out clause.

 

I didn’t like the VAR penalty we were awarded last year (was it West Brom? Even though it was in our favour, the ball was way over Salah’s head when he was tugged back.

 

If you limit its use to off ball incedents like elbows and punches, offsides, shirt pulling from corners and free kicks where one pair of eyes can’t see everything and in/out, corner/goal kick, then I’m ok with it. But then it should be a simple word in the ear, change or confirm a call, done.

[Jose Jones]

I watched a lot of the World Cup on the telly either at home or at my local football club with a pint in my hand. VAR doesn't really impact on the armchair fan and it is difficult to argue with "getting decisions right".

 

However, merely changing one man's opinion for another, quite often just as suspect even after several slow-mo replays, does not advance the position of the referee or satisfy fans or administrators.

 

As a match going fan, who was at Anfield for the WBA cup game, I see VAR as a disater that will eat into the very fabric of the game. Football is not Rugby, Cricket or Tennis where the fan is used to long delays between the action; we expect a full blooded, all action encounter that has us excited throughout. Sitting there for several minutes awaiting a decision, even when it went our way, left me cold and disillusioned. I genuinely couldn't care less which way the decision went, I just wanted the game back. My straw poll suggests 90%+ of fans present felt the same way.

 

I've given this example before but it remains relevant. I was lucky enough to be at Citeh for the CL fixture. I have never been so tense before a match knowing Citeh were good enough to turn around the 3-0 scoreline; not helped by the action in the first 2 minutes. The tension continued and nerves were raw. Then Mo scores. The release of that tension, the unbounded joy that follows was fantastic; it is why we go the the match. People falling over each other, seats, ending up several rows away from where we started, kissing complete strangers. It was brilliant.

 

Imagine that scenario with VAR in play. There is no way I can let myself go to that extent without being certain that the goal will stand. And when, 10, 20 30 seconds or later, the goal is confirmed the moment has gone. Yes we will celebrate but nothing like we did at that moment; it will be similar to the conversion of a penalty.

 

For me, VAR is for TV pundits and armchair fans. As a regular matchgoer, I see it as a disaster that will change the face of my match day experience for the worse.

 

I think we need to ask the question; is it really that important that every decision is absolutely correct and is it worth the sacrifice to match continuity? Not to mention that even reviewed decisions create a lot of dissent as to their validity.

 

I'm out.

Completely agree with this. Excellent post.

 

In the World Cup VAR contributed to just as many wrong decisions as it did right ones. It basically decided the final by getting that handball decision wrong. So the argument that it's worth it to get the big decisions right, is pretty fallacious when it's biggest impact was to be wrong.

[Lee909]

I thought VAR started really well at the world cup but started to be used both wrong and once the tv companies started the pressure on it it was over used

[Jose Jones]

I thought VAR started really well at the world cup but started to be used both wrong and once the tv companies started the pressure on it it was over used

It was good for sorting out wrestling at corners - but then not all the time - and refs in most cases were already in a good place to give penalties. The issue is that they just shit out of giving them. So the good impact of VAR here could easily be replicated by some stronger refereeing.

There were also plenty of shit penalties given on VAR overturned decisions that weren't "clear and obvious" errors.

[moof]

I think the moral of the story is referees are, to a man, utterly fucking useless. Apart from clatts

[A_S]

It was good for sorting out wrestling at corners - but then not all the time - and refs in most cases were already in a good place to give penalties. The issue is that they just shit out of giving them. So the good impact of VAR here could easily be replicated by some stronger refereeing.

There were also plenty of shit penalties given on VAR overturned decisions that weren't "clear and obvious" errors.

 

It still annoys me that the Griezmann pen in the Australia game was originally called no penalty, then replays show that the defending player actually got a nick on the ball, so based on this evidence they give a pen. About as far away as 'clear' as you can get, yet they overturn it. 

[Guest]

It needs a lot of work.

Any player calling for the ref to go to VAR by doing a TV screen shaped action with their hands needs to be automatically kicked in the stones.

They could use VAR to prove that he requested VAR. Instant impact to the batteries.

[Mcfaggen]

It still annoys me that the Griezmann pen in the Australia game was originally called no penalty, then replays show that the defending player actually got a nick on the ball, so based on this evidence they give a pen. About as far away as 'clear' as you can get, yet they overturn it.

Agree entirely. I’m also convinced that they didn’t even show the ref the angle that clearly showed the defender winning the ball.

[aws]

I don't like it even though it might favour us as we'll probably get more pens. Maybe use it for offsides but even then I don't like the way the linesmen shit out of putting their flags up as they let VAR make the decisions 60 seconds later while play goes on.

[Jose Jones]

I see we were scientifically the "unluckiest" (i.e. most shafted by shit referees) team in the league last season, while (surprise, surprise) the Mancs were the "luckiest":

https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/45087444

 

Liverpool were the 'unluckiest' team in the Premier League last season while Manchester United were the 'luckiest', new research claims.

The Reds dropped 12 points in matches affected by wrongly disallowed goals or incorrect decisions on penalties and red cards, says a study conducted by ESPN, Intel and the University of Bath.

 

It says United gained six points over incidents that went in their favour.

 

Manchester City remain top in a new simulated table accounting for 'luck'.

However, the study found Huddersfield should have been relegated instead of Stoke when 'incorrect' refereeing decisions were taken into account.

It also found Brighton would have finished six places higher - moving up to ninth and earning an extra £11.5m in prize money on their return to the top flight.

 

Conversely, Leicester would have finished 14th instead of ninth, ending the season with £9.7m less in prize money.

 

Fourth-placed Liverpool would have swapped with second-placed United, and champions City fallen three points short of their 100 mark.

 

How did the 'Luck Index' work?

 

A research team collaborated with ex-Premier League referee Peter Walton, analysing footage from every game of the 2017-18 Premier League season and watching for:

◾Goals that should have been disallowed

◾Incorrectly disallowed goals

◾Incorrectly awarded penalties (that were scored)

◾Penalties that were not awarded but should have been

◾Incorrect red-card decisions

◾Red-card incidents that were missed

◾Goals scored after injury time overran

◾Deflected goals

 

Once incidents had been identified, an alternative outcome of the affected matches was predicted, using a model that also considered factors including team strength, form, and home advantage.

 

For example: in Liverpool's 0-0 draw with Manchester United at Anfield on 14 October, the study concluded Jurgen Klopp's side should have been awarded a penalty in the 63rd minute, and the new simulated scoreline was a 1-0 victory for the home side.

 

Once the process was completed, the Premier League table was redrawn to reflect the new simulated results.

 

 

The research team analysed over 150 incidents and also found:

◾Leicester scored three goals after injury time overran - more than any other side.

◾Huddersfield's John Smith's Stadium saw the most deflected goals - five. Two of those worked in the Terriers' favour.

◾Matt Ritchie was the 'luckiest player'. The Newcastle winger avoided two red cards, while a handball in the box against Leicester went unnoticed.

 

Assistant Professor Thomas Curran from the University of Bath said each game was simulated "thousands of times to model how it should have turned out".

He said the project was "one of the most detailed pieces of research we have ever conducted".

 

Former referee Walton added: "The results demonstrate the impact and importance of refereeing decisions on a game.

"With the Premier League deciding not to introduce VAR for the coming season, it is interesting to see how much luck plays a part in the way the league unfolds."

[etho]

Just saw that. Own team fan bias aside, nice to have an extensive piece of research confirm what we thought we saw with our own eyes, which was that we got done alot more times than we gained a decision in our favour. Interesting we'd have 'only' been 10 points behind Man City with a bit more 'luck'.

 

It's not a criticism, but I do think we/Klopp make it a bit easier to be shafted with our lack of complaining about referees etc, but then would I rather that then be a cunt like Mourinho? Not sure.

 

The Champions League final was probably an extreme version of that, the dark arts came to the fore. With VAR Ramos would have been sent off. Without it, someone should have taken a yellow/red to snap the cunt in two.

[Jose Jones]

Just saw that. Own team fan bias aside, nice to have an extensive piece of research confirm what we thought we saw with our own eyes, which was that we got done alot more times than we gained a decision in our favour. Interesting we'd have 'only' been 10 points behind Man City with a bit more 'luck'.

 

It's not a criticism, but I do think we/Klopp make it a bit easier to be shafted with our lack of complaining about referees etc, but then would I rather that then be a cunt like Mourinho? Not sure.

 

The Champions League final was probably an extreme version of that, the dark arts came to the fore. With VAR Ramos would have been sent off. Without it, someone should have taken a yellow/red to snap the cunt in two.

Maybe this will give refs the excuse they need to be a bit more favorable to us this season?

I also don't think VAR would make a difference it just gives the refs more opportunity to be wrong - see World Cup final. There is also no way Ramos would have been sent off in the Champions League final with VAR.

[No2]

We blitzed 4 or 5 teams in 10 minute spells last season. Take City at home for an example, Firmino's "challenge" on Stones gets reviewed at a minimum, possibly even overturned just for the crack. If i remember correctly Mane's goal involved a fairly forceful challenge on Otomendi, De Bruyne had a shout for a foul around the half way line for one of the goals too. Even on review if none were overturned just by the time taken we have lost a goal, City have had a couple of 90 second breaks to gather themselves and the crowd just can't build up the chaotic noise they did. For those reasons I'm against it. One of the reasons it seemed to work at the world cup was because of the type of fans in attendance, definitely weren't your standard Russian crowds or the even the normal type that follow their countries around the world.

[VladimirIlyich]

Goals in injury time or past injury time shouldn't go against those teams as the referee is supposed to indicate the minimum time to be played and not the maximum.

[sir roger]

I am not a tinfoil hat merchant against referees generally & accept that ourselves in our pomp & United thereafter got a lot of decisions through crowd / managerial pressure , but last season was the first where I have thought there was actually something fishy.

 

From the very first game ( obvious offside not given at Watford )  to the very last game with Brighton where it was obvious that we were never going to be given a penalty despite some challenges being more UFC than football.

 

While I understand the varied reasons that fans give against VAR , while Jurgen is in command at our place & insisting we give the referees an easy time we need VAR to safeguard us.

[VladimirIlyich]

I am not a tinfoil hat merchant against referees generally & accept that ourselves in our pomp & United thereafter got a lot of decisions through crowd / managerial pressure , but last season was the first where I have thought there was actually something fishy.

 

From the very first game ( obvious offside not given at Watford ) to the very last game with Brighton where it was obvious that we were never going to be given a penalty despite some challenges being more UFC than football.

 

While I understand the varied reasons that fans give against VAR , while Jurgen is in command at our place & insisting we give the referees an easy time we need VAR to safeguard us.

We don't need VAR,we just need to be bigger cunts like Utd and City.

[sir roger]

I'm with you to an extent VI , but let's face it while Jurgen is here we are going to be relative choirboys , although Fabinho & Baby Keith may increase our nastiness quota.