By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
if we have this it has got to be in every game not just thw top leauges .and tonight it was not neded . if it becomes standard then we dont need refs or linesmans
But if the right decision is made, isn't that the whole point and what we want as fans?
No. Not if it means that the slightest touch that wasn't visible to players of either team, fans or the referee when it happened results in one of those moments that make football what we all love is absolutely ruined.
I'd much rather put up with the odd refereeing error than have to deal with that sort of shyte.
No. Not if it means that the slightest touch that wasn't visible to players of either team, fans or the referee when it happened results in one of those moments that make football what we all love is absolutely ruined.
I'd much rather put up with the odd refereeing error than have to deal with that sort of shyte.
I think in the case Clive showed that is a bit ridiculous and the goal should have stood but until this was tried we'd never know if it works or not, I just think give it a season in the prem, if it's crap then get rid of it and find an alternative.
VAR at the moment requires a VAR referee plus an assistant. It also requires one replay operator per 12 cameras With this cost and the cost of the equipment only clubs in the Prem can afford this. It will be a while before it is generally available.
I do think that would work a lot better, could be the captain making an appeal or an analyst in the stand
In games involving Wayne Rooney, there's no need for anything as complicated as that, given that he usually tries to referee the games himself...
RFA
"Things had started becoming increasingly desperate at Loftus Road but QPR have been handed a massive lifeline and the place has absolutely erupted. it's carnage. It's bedlam. It's 1-1."
But if the right decision is made, isn't that the whole point and what we want as fans?
I'm with you on this. Whilst I recognise that there are issues and downsides, I see VAR as one of the few things which is likely to stop the - cough - "big clubs" - having more than their fair share of the big decisions go in their favour.
RFA
"Things had started becoming increasingly desperate at Loftus Road but QPR have been handed a massive lifeline and the place has absolutely erupted. it's carnage. It's bedlam. It's 1-1."
But if the right decision is made, isn't that the whole point and what we want as fans?
Do you think that's the right decision there? Is the guy playing the ball anywhere in the general vicinity of the player, or in his direction? Is he even playing the ball at all? Is he playing it forwards? It just squirts out of a tackle, off a Juventus player. It's a bolox decision.
I think in the case Clive showed that is a bit ridiculous and the goal should have stood but until this was tried we'd never know if it works or not, I just think give it a season in the prem, if it's crap then get rid of it and find an alternative.
Once Pandora’s box is opened there’s no closing it IMO.
We’ll rue the day VAR started being used IMO. I’m bored of it already.
Football is the peoples game. The professional game mirrored the jumpers for goal posts in the park version.
Its a ball, players and a goal.
Fu(k technology. I like moaning about dodgy decisions, I like moaning about the performance of the ref. I like we stil talk about the hand of god (even if it didn't go our way).
And if they are going to use VAR, use it to ban all the divers. The game is a sh!tter for this modern phenomenon.
and VAR (actually being a human and not a 'video') STILL gets it wrong
2 recent examples form the 3rd round - Fulham's penalty which was never ever a pen and Burnley penalty taker stopped IN HIS RUN UP and offside given to the oppo (when it wasn't!) - that one was 'only' 90 seconds after the incident as well!
Sorry if it's a bit off-topic but I thought laws were already in place for retrospective action on serious foul play? So why can't VAR be used for that e.g. the recent injuries caused to Cameron and Lumley? That dirty Leeds player tore Cameron's ankle ligaments and he'll be out for weeks (if not months). Both fouls were arguably straight reds as they clearly kept their boots in deliberately.
[Post edited 9 Jan 2019 9:59]
That's not really VAR as he goes home after the match.
FA DO take retrospective action, but only if referee has not seen the incident.
Lumley - Which is why I argued the yellow was the wrong decision - if he's not seen it - he can't give a red, but he can't give a yellow either!
There wasn't a handball in the buildup though so would have made no difference.
I thought the same as you on goals but it didn't seem to have that impact during the world cup celebrating England goals. I think it's worth trialing for a season as a lot of the problems will only be found and fixed when it goes live
A lot of people say that but it HAS been used extensively in other countries with the same problems as we have seen so far here and at the WC.
1) As I've already said VAR is actually a person so still going to get decisions people disagree with
2) It gives players/managers another reason to dispute a decision - calling for VAR everytime they disagree with the ref
3) Technology used is already most current so its not going to get any quicker or 'better' in some way overnight
I do think that would work a lot better, could be the captain making an appeal or an analyst in the stand
In Hockey ONLY the referee can ask for a review - IF we have to have it, I would go down that route.
But as Clive has pointed out, in Rugby that has meant referees checking nearly every try, which takes us back to the 'waiting to celebrate' a goal argument
Was watching Juventus Sampdoria the other week, 2-1 to Juve going into injury time and this Sampdoria lad pulls an incredible goal out of the bag - 20 yarder, curled into the top corner, absolute worldie to make it 2-2 with basically the last kick. He goes absolutely mental, jumping into the crowd behind the goal, away end going crazy. Great scenes.
VAR tells the referee he's got to come and look at something.
Replay shows that when a tackle (and it was a tackle) was made in the build up on the far side of the pitch the Sampdoria player just got a foot on the ball first, and it moved about two inches forward before hitting the Juventus player involved and bouncing the other way. The goalscorer then collected the ball and popped it in. They ruled that because the ball had gone forward in the tackle, and that the goalscorer had been half a yard offside when it did so, that because it then bounced back to him off a Juventus player he was offside.
Goal disallowed and Juventus won.
It was one of the most scandalous things I've ever seen in football. This idea that VAR will clear up controversy, there will be no argument, etc etc is nonsense. It will just create new ones, and in many cases worse ones.
Poor quality clip below...
This post has been edited by an administrator
and that is the crux of the problem with VAR and why I am against it.
That decision, strictly as per LOTG, IS correct - but never in a million years is that given in any other game - impossible to see.
Like the offsides that ARE off...…. as long as you have a fine line drawn across the pitch and hit the exact frame the player has passed the ball.
Again, the Fulham penalty - the defender has made the slightest of contacts with the Fulham player - never enough to send him over, impossible to see with naked eye - yet its a pen? Whereas actually wrestling a player to the floor that you see in every match at every corner is perfectly OK?
Everyone shouts about 'consistency' - VAR seems to me to be the exact anthesis (big word -sorry!) of that.
Do you think that's the right decision there? Is the guy playing the ball anywhere in the general vicinity of the player, or in his direction? Is he even playing the ball at all? Is he playing it forwards? It just squirts out of a tackle, off a Juventus player. It's a bolox decision.
This post has been edited by an administrator
the offside definition is 'touched' by a team mate, so it IS the correct decision but.....see above!
In Hockey ONLY the referee can ask for a review - IF we have to have it, I would go down that route.
But as Clive has pointed out, in Rugby that has meant referees checking nearly every try, which takes us back to the 'waiting to celebrate' a goal argument
That would be fine but you'd still get players screaming for every decision to be checked. Easiest way is to give the captain/manager or an analyst 3 reviews per game and they pick when it is done. They would also need a time limit to appeal it so can't review it themselves first.
I'm not convinced by VAR yet but as I say I don't see a big issue with trying it.
In Hockey ONLY the referee can ask for a review - IF we have to have it, I would go down that route.
But as Clive has pointed out, in Rugby that has meant referees checking nearly every try, which takes us back to the 'waiting to celebrate' a goal argument
It's also resulted in games well over 2 hours long, and tries disallowed for spurious nonsense that was never what the rule was brought in to prevent in the first place.
It's also resulted in games well over 2 hours long, and tries disallowed for spurious nonsense that was never what the rule was brought in to prevent in the first place.
IF they stuck to the 'clear and obvious' error criteria it would be fine but your example, the Fulham penalty and the Kane offside are a long long way from being 'clear and obvious'
No. Not if it means that the slightest touch that wasn't visible to players of either team, fans or the referee when it happened results in one of those moments that make football what we all love is absolutely ruined.
I'd much rather put up with the odd refereeing error than have to deal with that sort of shyte.
Maybe they can look at the method used in other sports where the on field decision stands unless there's an obvious error?
Totally against it, it will ruin the game in my view. As Clive says you will lose all the spontaneity of goal celebrations etc. for a start. Part of football has always been the occasional controversy over some sort of incident, refereeing decision etc. I would prefer to see much stronger retrospective action taken against diving and other forms of cheating to stamp that out of the game. If you didn't have 22 players on the pitch all cheating and trying to con the referee you would not need VAR. It does work well in cricket, but that is far more a stop/start sport which lends itself to the process.
and that is the crux of the problem with VAR and why I am against it.
That decision, strictly as per LOTG, IS correct - but never in a million years is that given in any other game - impossible to see.
Like the offsides that ARE off...…. as long as you have a fine line drawn across the pitch and hit the exact frame the player has passed the ball.
Again, the Fulham penalty - the defender has made the slightest of contacts with the Fulham player - never enough to send him over, impossible to see with naked eye - yet its a pen? Whereas actually wrestling a player to the floor that you see in every match at every corner is perfectly OK?
Everyone shouts about 'consistency' - VAR seems to me to be the exact anthesis (big word -sorry!) of that.
Sorry to be a pedant but I think you meant the bigger word antithesis?
Do you think that's the right decision there? Is the guy playing the ball anywhere in the general vicinity of the player, or in his direction? Is he even playing the ball at all? Is he playing it forwards? It just squirts out of a tackle, off a Juventus player. It's a bolox decision.
This post has been edited by an administrator
To be honest Clive, that footage is so bad I couldn't work out what the fck was going on to have an informed opinion on that particular incident. And you may be right, it may well be a bollox decision.
But you say that you'd prefer no VAR where mistakes by officials will happen more frequently than not.
You think that particular incident was a bollox decision and you're clearly unhappy about it, yet you'll get a considerably higher percentage of bollox decisions without VAR, but you'd prefer that?
To be honest Clive, that footage is so bad I couldn't work out what the fck was going on to have an informed opinion on that particular incident. And you may be right, it may well be a bollox decision.
But you say that you'd prefer no VAR where mistakes by officials will happen more frequently than not.
You think that particular incident was a bollox decision and you're clearly unhappy about it, yet you'll get a considerably higher percentage of bollox decisions without VAR, but you'd prefer that?
The proportion of obviously bllx decisions we get now is very small indeed. I'm absolutely happy to live with that to avoid all the negatives VAR will bring as discussed previously. Listening to the radio at 5pm on a Saturday, there are invariably several controversial incidents brought up and discussed ad nauseam with biased comment from both sides of the argument, but when you wait and watch MOTD you realise that in most cases the ref's decision was actually right all along.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
