VAR Discussion

[Deutsch Wolf]

The first problem I have with it is I know who wrote it, and I know he wants to permanently live in a prism where everything is like it was in 1978. And I can't stand him.

That's before I get to fundamentally disagreeing with the point he's making (repeatedly). His bit about everything in a game being perpetually reviewed is just strawman bollocks.

 

[Templeton Peck]

I hate it because it takes spontaneity out of the game. I wasn't bothered about the England game yesterday so was meh about the goal being ruled out on an emotional level, but the scoring of a goal, the celebrations, then the hand to the ear for 2 minutes, then the running off to look at a screen for another minute is mechanical and soulless.

As I said yesterday I don't care whether it gets the correct result in the end that's not what it's about for me. Of course I want referees to make the correct decisions but not at this price. I know that means errors will happen and people will trot out the pompous 'well you can't ever moan about a refereeing decision again' line, but that's how I feel.

This is pretty much where I am. I seem to remember reading a study a while back that said referees get 90% of decisions right - that's good enough for me. If the price for an extra 9% is VAR in its current form then I'm out. If we have to have VAR then it should be 2 appeals per manager like the tennis.

 

[Deutsch Wolf]

That 90% stat will be ludicrously balanced. It will include stuff like kicking off at 3pm, giving a goal kick when a shot flies miles over the bar and no one else got anywhere near it, giving routine throws the correct way, awarding a penalty when a defender punches the ball off the line, etc.

Key/debatable decisions will be way, way, way lower than that.

 

[Templeton Peck]

I don't agree 100% with this particularly the middle part about human error being something to embrace, but the top 1/3 of this sums up my thoughts

https://www.football365.com/news/on-the-scourge-of-var-football-should-be-poetry-not-mathematics

He makes a good point about expansion too - another fear of mine.

 

[The Bear]

I was arguing with someone at work about this today. I mostly won with similar points ts to Dan's above, but here was one I couldn't counter.

It was that a simple shirt pull can disallow a goal when it is scored because VAR will check that. But the same shirt pull which should be given as a penalty will not be checked if the ref doesn't give it and play carries on.

 

[Tony Towner]

I was arguing with someone at work about this today. I mostly won with similar points ts to Dan's above, but here was one I couldn't counter.

It was that a simple shirt pull can disallow a goal when it is scored because VAR will check that. But the same shirt pull which should be given as a penalty will not be checked if the ref doesn't give it and play carries on.

That should be checked, whether it would is disputable but it should as it's still something the ref missed

 

[Paddingtonwolf]

Penalty possibilities will be checked. However, the challenge where it might or might not be inside the area is not a VAR decision if it is outside. At that point VAR no longer consider whether it is a foul as it is outside their remit.

 

[Alan]

Sport is competition first, entertainment second, IMO. VAR generally upholds the validity of the competition. Therefore, IMV, there is no worthy argument against it. Period.

 

[Templeton Peck]

Sport is competition first, entertainment second, IMO. VAR generally upholds the validity of the competition. Therefore, IMV, there is no worthy argument against it. Period.

Disagree. If football wasn't entertaining nobody would care.

 

[Deleted Cyber]

For me at the very worst officials will always be honest with var. Pointless bribing a ref if there is technology to overule it. Now corruption is a small part of the world game but every little helps.

It gives a safety net. Call what you see, then check it. It will also reduce dissent. Pointless arguing when technology proves it.

As for fans in the ground, I agree big screens and a tannoy would stop confusion. I hate to say this but fans in the ground in the premier league don't pay the bills now, TV money does . that's how Bournemouth cope with 12 k watching every week. That should not stop those necessary var improvements in ground happening

 

[Alan]

Disagree. If football wasn't entertaining nobody would care.

Being a competition first does not preclude it from also being entertaining. But if you lose competitive validity, you may as well sell it to Vince McMahon.

 

[Premier Quality]

I don’t mind VAR if it’s used for factual stuff (offsides), or clear and obvious errors (no contact on penalties etc) - the problem is that it’s been used to re referee decisions that are dubious and matter of opinion.

 

[pavlosmacwolf]

so far on this thread i sort of agree with Marka jim, ( i think), that once the decision goes to Var the ref basically can fuck off. either the guy in the booth with 99 replays can see it better than the real time ref or he can't.
As for the goal celebrations, oh come on when the ball hits the sprout bag you are up in the air, if after a few minutes that is dissalowed you're pissed, BUT, what is the difference between that and the little linesman's flag?
It has to be shown live in the ground at the time, no question!

 

[Deano]

For me one of the things that makes football so good is the spontaneity of the wild celebrations after a last minute winner - VAR wont take that away straight away but if every goal is review-able - you only need a few of these to go against you before it will take some of that away. Now i'm not saying if you score you wont celebrate - of course you will but it 100% will take some of that excitement away knowing that we need to spend another couple of minutes checking that the goal will actually stand.

Another thing on the above is the grey areas with VAR in it's current format, for example Team A scores a goal from a cross but after a VAR review it is judged that the winger has fouled the fullback in the build up so the goal is not given. What happens however if that foul is not committed by the winger, but 4 passes before he receives it - somewhere further back - it's technically still part of the move which has contributed to a goal but may not get picked up, so that is still an unfair outcome.

I still don't buy the comparisons with cricket because decisions reviewed in Cricket are usually objective. For example - he edged it or he didn't, it's LBW or it isn't. With football the decisions are subjective and with VAR in an infant stage it's telling that even after seeing these decisions back, slowed down from about 5 different angles there's still wide spread disagreement. Cricket is also more of a stop-start game than football so it doesn't really affect the flow of the game as much.

One thing I will say is that I can see the reasons for bringing VAR in and why people want to get behind it, as ultimately people want to see a fairer game with correct decisions being made, but I definitely don't want that if it is going to have a negative effect on the game as a spectacle which I am sure it is going to. I hope to be proven wrong and only time will tell but I think this is going to be a shambles in the Premier League next season.

 

[James]

I’ve gave this some thought on what I’ve seen and think of VAR

- the officials seem to be hesitant to raise there flags when they see something obvious (Wilsons disallowed goal against the Swiss) which leaves the decision down to VAR to correctly disallow the goal. In the MLS they’ve had clear incidents that have happened and then theres been a chance at the other end but the game gets dragged back because of how long the check has been made.
- the lengths of the checks on goals ruins the excitement of the goal. Wilson goal from the ball hitting the net to the ref having a look was around 3 minutes which is way too long. I think that the VAR ref should make the decision and not arse about with everyone standing about waiting on a decision.
- the Premier League allowing stadiums to show VAR reviews is a great decision as in the current format of not seeing whats going on in the ground is crap and is again tailoring to the TV fans and not the fans in the ground.
- cheating b**tard clubs will now get caught out so it should stop the likes of Salah, Sterling etc falling to the ground and conning penalties.

Again just an opinion

 

[Kenny]

I’ve gave this some thought on what I’ve seen and think of VAR

- the officials seem to be hesitant to raise there flags when they see something obvious (Wilsons disallowed goal against the Swiss)

Because they are told to do so.

 

[James]

Because they are told to do so.

If that’s the case whats the point! If you can see a clear foul put your flag up and alert the ref dont wait for VAR to check that you’re correct/incorrect.

 

[Deutsch Wolf]

It wasn't that obvious in real time, was it. It was quite a way from the action, neither Wilson nor Akanji were anywhere near the ball when they clashed, plenty of bodies in the box so who knows what the actual view for the ref or linesman was.

Every goal gets checked, oh look, there was a foul there which no-one noticed. Disallowed and rightly so.

 

[James]

My mistake I thought the linesman had a clear view of it well thats the argument talksport made this morning. As what has been stated before my 2 cents on it, I agree 100% with DW on the Marginal argument and the fact Bournemouth won’t be getting as many penalties next season

 

[Deutsch Wolf]

Again it's communication. Watching on TV, we knew what the offence was after a couple of replays and I'm pretty sure everyone would say fair enough.

But in the ground, what are you thinking? Was it offside? High boot? Handball? What?