VAR shit show 19/20

[Bob]

29 minutes ago, Seasons said:

Remember when we didn't have VAR and people internet virgins were drawing lines on paint from various angles to prove offside/onside calls? Or goals being allowed and people complaining that if X decision went for us, we'd have got 3 points and won Y? 

 

[AngryOfTuebrook]

VAR being used for some FA Cup matches, but not for all of them: only the ones hosted by Premier League clubs.

 

http://www.thefa.com/news/2020/jan/02/emirates-fa-cup-third-round-match-officials-020120

 

So, for example, Tranmere's draw away at Watford was subject to VAR, but the replay won't be.  How is that anything other than fucking nuts?

[Grinch]

24 minutes ago, AngryofTuebrook said:

VAR being used for some FA Cup matches, but not for all of them: only the ones hosted by Premier League clubs.

 

http://www.thefa.com/news/2020/jan/02/emirates-fa-cup-third-round-match-officials-020120

 

So, for example, Tranmere's draw away at Watford was subject to VAR, but the replay won't be.  How is that anything other than fucking nuts?

Don't they have VAR to thank for even having a replay? 

 

Not much they can do if the lower league clubs can't afford it. 

[SlugTrail]

I've been told by a guy I know that the international universal control of the association to keep Everton as a shitty no mark club have arranged for us to win by VAR tomorrow.

[A_S]

2 hours ago, AngryofTuebrook said:

VAR being used for some FA Cup matches, but not for all of them: only the ones hosted by Premier League clubs.

 

http://www.thefa.com/news/2020/jan/02/emirates-fa-cup-third-round-match-officials-020120

 

So, for example, Tranmere's draw away at Watford was subject to VAR, but the replay won't be.  How is that anything other than fucking nuts?

One of the big reasons Manchester City even made the final, let alone won it, as there was no VAR setup at recent PL participant Swansea City last season. Just an absurd situation all round. 

[Reckoner]

I dint really mind VAR but I do join in with the ‘fuck VAR’ song as I think it’s a catchy tune.

[dockers_strike]

Fuck off! Just pandering to the neanderthals with this shit. We'd still be at the top of the Prem with a healthy points lead. I see there's no mention that we'd actually have got all 3 points at old trafford as Sadio's goal would have stood.

 

In its first season in use in the Premier League, Video Assistant Referees have earned plenty of headlines for a number of high-profile decisions.  

Whether it was Gabriel Jesus's last-minute winner against Tottenham being chalked off for handball, to the anger of Manchester City boss Pep Guardiola, or Roberto Firmino's armpit being deemed to be offside in their thriller away to Aston Villa, VAR has made its presence known.  

And so, if VAR was not available in the Premier League this season, just how would the current standings look? Research by ESPN, in conjunction with the London School of Economics found out that the title race would be far more exciting, rock-bottom Norwich would be equal on points with the team in 16th place, while Manchester United would drop down to ninth. 

The research group's methodology was to create an Anti-VAR index which would show the league standings without VAR intervention.  

The algorithm takes into account goals that have been chalked off, or alternatively awarded, as well as the point in the game at which the incident occurred, the form of the sides and the squads' relative strength - and they all determine a new set of results to create the VAR-less table.  

ESPN's findings show that Premier League fans would be treated to a far closer title race between Liverpool and Manchester City if VAR was not involved. 

The gap between them would be just seven points, instead of the 14 points that currently separates the two teams.

Liverpool have been targeted on social media for benefiting from VAR decisions and the research has revisited their trip to Crystal Palace, where they left with a narrow win. But the updated results without VAR, according to the system, would see that game finish in a draw with James Tomkins' disallowed goal for Palace awarded instead. 

Guardiola and Manchester City have felt particularly aggrieved over the new technology and being five points worse off will only strengthen their beliefs. 

That home match against Tottenham would be converted into a win and the Manchester derby, where they were surprisingly beaten by Manchester United, would reverse from a loss to a win with Marcus Rashford's penalty at 0-0 chalked off and form favouring the hosts. 

The big loser in the race for the top four is actually Manchester United, who, without VAR, would find themselves down in ninth spot, two points worse off than they are right now.

Tottenham also suffer a similar fall away from the top-four race as Jose Mourinho's side drop to eighth with their draw to Watford calculated as a match they should have lost, and their home loss to Newcastle boosted to a draw.

At the bottom end, Norwich City can feel particularly aggrieved as a VAR-less league would see them six points better off and, crucially, off the foot of the table. 

Daniel Farke's side would rise to 18th and would only find themselves inside the relegation zone on goal difference, a far more palatable position than the one they are in now, seven adrift of safety. 

There was one particular incident that left those at Carrow Road dumbfounded by VAR, when striker Teemu Pukki was, like Firmino, adjudged to have his right armpit offside. 

Sat joint 16th in the VAR-less standings, level with Brighton, would make much better reading instead of looking at the 10 points that separate the two sides in the current standings.

Elsewhere, Wolves would be four points better off, and just two points adrift of the top four, while Sheffield United would also find themselves closer to the Champions League spots with Chris Wilder's side three points down in the current standings.   

So far, VAR has overturned 63 on-field decisions and 17 of those have led to goals, with 34 leading to goals being disallowed. 

Newcastle remain the only side yet to experience a VAR overturn in the Premier League this season.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-7873117/Liverpools-title-lead-HALVED-Premier-League-table-look-without-VAR.html

[s(k)aturation]

4 hours ago, dockers_strike said:

The algorithm takes into account goals that have been chalked off, or alternatively awarded, as well as the point in the game at which the incident occurred, the form of the sides and the squads' relative strength - and they all determine a new set of results to create the VAR-less table. 

 

Yep, all these undeniable "facts" like state of play, form, squad stength... and Mick Jagger's London School of Economics no less - what higher football authority is there to judge such things?

 

Oh well, we'll just have to live with the shame of our tainted triumph if it comes - and thank Stockley Park for all the assists:

 

 

 

 

[A_S]

So ridiculous. They use a blatantly bad miss from Taylor that VAR fixed, yet managed to also chalk off the other manc goal, giving City the win. 

 

If football was all about algorithms, City would win the league every single season. But it's not. 

[s(k)aturation]

12 minutes ago, A_S said:

So ridiculous. They use a blatantly bad miss from Taylor that VAR fixed, yet managed to also chalk off the other manc goal, giving City the win. 

 

If football was all about algorithms, City would win the league every single season. But it's not. 

 

Society's all about algorithms nowadays - don't be surprised in future if we have a VAR appeals board (based at the London School of Economics of course), where the decisions awarded in and results of matches can be disputed and the right result arrived at.

 

A post-modern "Pools Panel" if you will...

 

The game will be even more exciting for it: iif you lose on the day, nil desperandum - you can always get the result put through a computer in London, interpreted by the experts (in consultation with AI of course) and algorithmically reversed.

 

The first ever "test tube" League champions will one day be crowned.

 

 

 

[A_S]

9 minutes ago, skaro said:

 

Society's all about algorithms nowadays - don't be surprised in future if we have a VAR appeals board (based at the London School of Economics of course), where the decisions awarded in and results of matches can be disputed and the right result arrived at.

 

A post-modern "Pools Panel" if you will...

 

The game will be even more exciting for it: iif you lose on the day, nil desperandum - you can always get the result put through a computer in London, interpreted by the experts (in consultation with AI of course) and algorithmically reversed.

 

The first ever "test tube" League champions will one day be crowned.

 

 

 

And heeere comes the league champs!

 

[Guest Pistonbroke]

19 minutes ago, skaro said:

 

Society's all about algorithms nowadays - don't be surprised in future if we have a VAR appeals board (based at the London School of Economics of course), where the decisions awarded in and results of matches can be disputed and the right result arrived at.

 

A post-modern "Pools Panel" if you will...

 

The game will be even more exciting for it: iif you lose on the day, nil desperandum - you can always get the result put through a computer in London, interpreted by the experts (in consultation with AI of course) and algorithmically reversed.

 

The first ever "test tube" League champions will one day be crowned.

 

 

 

 

Is that still a thing? It used to be used quite a lot when I was a kid and under soil heating hadn't been introduced to stadia. They came up with some right dubious decisions to ruin peoples chances of winning the pools. 

 

[s(k)aturation]

3 minutes ago, Pistonbroke said:

 

Is that still a thing? It used to be used quite a lot when I was a kid and under soil heating hadn't been introduced to stadia. They came up with some right dubious decisions to ruin peoples chances of winning the pools. 

 

 

I always remember thinking WTF?! about them, even as a boy.

 

 

[rb14]

Presumably it's already been mentioned on here. Rugby union has a Television Match Official (TMO) which has never pretended to be perfect. It simply advises and helps the ref make an informed decision. The way VAR has been implemented in football is a perfect example of how not to do it. You can never please all the people all the time, but you can do an awful lot better than what we have now. 

• VAR adjudication must be communicated effectively - "CHECKING FOR OFFSIDE IN THE BUILD-UP". 
• Decisions should be made as quickly as possible, but as cautiously as necessary. 
• THE PROCESS MUST be transmitted on large screens at games where VAR is in operation and relayed for the TV audience. Install VAR screens Liverpool and ManU. 
• Decisions must be clearly explained - the ref must wear a mike that broadcasts the VAR check, decision and explanation. 
• Close calls should benefit the attacking player. What is a close call? We have to trust the ref on that - given the previous bullet point. Refs that consistently find against a particular team or player will be demonstrably exposed. 

[Barnesey]

How does the LSE factor in our mentality? I am very confident if our Wolves goal is disallowed or their goal awarded we go on and get another.

 

No one will ever know for sure so no point drawing up "what if" tables.

[Barrington Womble]

On 11/01/2020 at 10:50, rb14 said:

Presumably it's already been mentioned on here. Rugby union has a Television Match Official (TMO) which has never pretended to be perfect. It simply advises and helps the ref make an informed decision. The way VAR has been implemented in football is a perfect example of how not to do it. You can never please all the people all the time, but you can do an awful lot better than what we have now. 

• VAR adjudication must be communicated effectively - "CHECKING FOR OFFSIDE IN THE BUILD-UP". 
• Decisions should be made as quickly as possible, but as cautiously as necessary. 
• THE PROCESS MUST be transmitted on large screens at games where VAR is in operation and relayed for the TV audience. Install VAR screens Liverpool and ManU. 
• Decisions must be clearly explained - the ref must wear a mike that broadcasts the VAR check, decision and explanation. 
• Close calls should benefit the attacking player. What is a close call? We have to trust the ref on that - given the previous bullet point. Refs that consistently find against a particular team or player will be demonstrably exposed. 

Is this your wish list? This "install screens" thing. So both clubs have said they would need to lose seats to add screens. Do you really think we should do that?

[VladimirIlyich]

12 minutes ago, Barry Wom said:

Is this your wish list? This "install screens" thing. So both clubs have said they would need to lose seats to add screens. Do you really think we should do that?

Yeah. And put tv screens on the back of the seats in front of you like they do on aeroplanes. Then you won't even have to look at the pitch.

[dockers_strike]

I think the excuse that there's no space to install big screens at Anfield is a smoke screen.

 

About 3 years ago, the club got planning permission to install two 'big' screens at either end of the now named SKD Upper. The screens were to be positioned where the glass like side panels are at each end of the stand. For whatever reason,Liverpool decided not to install these.

 

The obvious places for 'big screens' is on top of the Kop and ARE roofs as one or two other clubs have done. They'd be viewable virtually anywhere in the ground except the back of the ARE lower tier and maybe the top couple of rows in the SKD Upper.

 

There's even space at the Kop end of the Main stand, again, where the glass like panels were installed.

 

Myself, Im not arsed about 'big screens.' If you dont like the VAR decision, seeing it on a screen wont make you like it any more. If you agree with the VAR decision, you're not arsed about any controversy.

[Barrington Womble]

3 minutes ago, dockers_strike said:

I think the excuse that there's no space to install big screens at Anfield is a smoke screen.

 

About 3 years ago, the club got planning permission to install two 'big' screens at either end of the now named SKD Upper. The screens were to be positioned where the glass like side panels are at each end of the stand. For whatever reason,Liverpool decided not to install these.

 

The obvious places for 'big screens' is on top of the Kop and ARE roofs as one or two other clubs have done. They'd be viewable virtually anywhere in the ground except the back of the ARE lower tier and maybe the top couple of rows in the SKD Upper.

 

There's even space at the Kop end of the Main stand, again, where the glass like panels were installed.

 

Myself, Im not arsed about 'big screens.' If you dont like the VAR decision, seeing it on a screen wont make you like it any more. If you agree with the VAR decision, you're not arsed about any controversy.

I think the benefit of having a screen to see it is not make you like it more, but give you a clue to what they're looking at. For instance both our goal against wolves and their ruled out offside I had no idea. Once the board said handball, I at least knew for the 1st one what it was (even though from the kop i knew it wasn't, Taylor the cunt!), but the offside for them, I had no idea what they were even looking at . But even that handball, it took one look and they were actually checking when Taylor blew his whistle. They needed to share that too, because someone with no eyes knew that wasn't handball. 

[Guest Pistonbroke]

57 minutes ago, VladimirIlyich said:

Yeah. And put tv screens on the back of the seats in front of you like they do on aeroplanes. Then you won't even have to look at the pitch.

 

Internet connection so you can watch porn while they are at it. Porn on the pitch, porn in the stands. The West Ham porn kings would be up for it. 

[Paulie Dangerously]

If correct decisions were incorrect teams would have different points. Isn't that why it was brought in?

[rb14]

5 hours ago, Barry Wom said:

Is this your wish list? This "install screens" thing. So both clubs have said they would need to lose seats to add screens. Do you really think we should do that?

Yes, I've re-read my post and that's EXACTLY what I said. Lose any number of seats. I think 4,000 should be OK. Each end. No, make it 8,000 each end. 

 

Tell you what, why don't you make up some more suppositions about what you think I said. 

[Barrington Womble]

3 hours ago, rb14 said:

Yes, I've re-read my post and that's EXACTLY what I said. Lose any number of seats. I think 4,000 should be OK. Each end. No, make it 8,000 each end. 

 

Tell you what, why don't you make up some more suppositions about what you think I said. 

So it wasn't you who said "Install VAR screens Liverpool and ManU. "? How silly of me. 

[dockers_strike]

There's no need to lose any seating at Anfield for VAR screens installations. The club just doesnt want it despite its briefing.

[Barrington Womble]

15 minutes ago, dockers_strike said:

There's no need to lose any seating at Anfield for VAR screens installations. The club just doesnt want it despite its briefing.

While the club are saying that's what they'd have to do, it's what they'd have to do. I'm sure they're not resisting putting them in because of money, because in the grand scheme of things they're buttons and I would imagine they could probably shift a bit of advertising to fund it anyway.