VAR won't fix everything. It can't. When you can have a studio of experts, watching the same incident from 7 angles in slow motion and they reach contrasting conclusions, then it's clear there are lots of decisions which are not black or white, for me Gary. These will continue to favour the big sides. It's simple maths. A ref who gives a soft, but awardable penalty for Hazzard going down under minimal contact, will get little scrutiny in the press. Award Watford a debatable foul for climbing on Deeney, in the box, to enable Watford to take points off a big team, and all the pundits and journos will be up in arms, discussing how the decision might affect the destiny of one of the actually important sides. However for years we've seen utterly black and white mistakes; players sent off for nothing, penalties given for dives, penalties not given for us, when utterly Stone wall and these decisions have often cost us points (Or gained us on occasion). "It evens out over a season" is a lazy solution to injustice and can't be backed by evidence. If VAR gets rid of some bad calls, even if only some, then it's a good thing. Of course it needs to be used correctly and clearly, but it can help.
Different opinions. I think refs waving away stone wall penalties, sending off players for clean tackles and awarding offside goals is ****. I'd prefer these to be corrected, even if it isn't a comprehensive silver bullet to fix all decisioning .
If VAR is meant to prevent clearly poor decisions, maybe there's a case for having something like the "umpire's call" rule in cricket...for offsides, maybe 4 inches either side of the "offside line" can be viewed as so marginal as allowing the original decision given on the field to stand. And lets remember, the guidance is meant to be that any benefit of the doubt should go to the attacker, which makes a lot of the angst surrounding the most recent extremely tight offside goals that have been given a bit over the top.
There are always grey areas though. In your above example, what happens if it looks like he's about 4.25 inches offside but the measurement isn't clear. VAR is supposed to overturn obviously wrong decisions but what is "obvious" will always be in doubt and always favour the big clubs. I think once referred, it has to be a straight right/wrong decision. If it's not clear, the original decision stands but even so there will be grey areas over what is clear...
Police officer to Eddie, did you steal the jewellery? Eddie; no sir didnt see it at all. Police officer; well the jewellery was marked with invisible dye that shows up under UV light and you've got very red hands. Eddie; ****. Thats how i see VAR going.
Part of the reason for a 4" "ref's call" area is that this will compensate for the fact that the VAR lines & the exact point of contact with the ball in the final pass will not be 100% dead accurate every time. If you're allowing 4" leeway, then even 4.1" is outside that zone & will be "obviously wrong".
The only way VAR will work is if they show what's being seen by the video refs on the screens inside the stadiums. They won't because football fans aren't trusted. It will be utterly sh*t. That's before the TV companies start showing ads when there's a decision looming. It's the death of football.
I don't get that. Each incident will still involve the other clubs, so the reviews will still affect both sides.
Except it wouldn't be clear that it's exactly 4.1. The minute you start allowing decisions that you can see are wrong to stand, you are simply moving the line over which debates will be had and making it even more complicated. "Well he looks about 4 inches offside....just more, just less ??". If you can see that the decision is wrong once you have gone to a review, surely you must reverse it. You only give the referee benefit if it's impossible to be sure after the review.
I like the idea of VAR but it won't eradicate everything and I like that. If Deeney or Lukaku were offside over the weekend then it was marginal and hopefully when like that it will come down to the original decision. I think there should be a time limit on it as if it takes more than 30 seconds then it 's most likely that it's very close to offside or they're not quite sure if contact was made so it stays with the original decision. It should stop the diving which can only be a good thing. Question - If we take the Janmaat tackle against Cardiff where at first look, it looked like a penalty, what happens if it goes to VAR but it shows the tackle outside the box so in fact the first decision was correct, it's not a penalty but then does he award a free kick?
I think those things have been part of football for years and, frustrating as they can be, are what makes football what it is. I don't want a sanitised, remote controlled version of the game brought in purely to appease the sense of injustice of TV pundits and armchair fans who - on the fifth or sixth slow-motion replay - feel that 'the ref got it wrong'.
Indeed. Across the history of most sports, the idea of change scared pundits and fans. The back pass rule introduction was met with laughable criticism and campaigns to leave things the way they are. Cricket was going to be ruined due to DRS, Rugby due to video referrals etc. Baseball and American Handegg both reacted the same way. Now they couldn't live without it. Football will be same, just like it was with the back pass rule.
I'd rather they focused on lifting the ban on drinking alcohol during matches than wasting their time on this sort of nonsense.
I think VAR being used to decide a player is offside by a toe is unbelievably bad for the game. The reason they brought the whole “phases of play” rule in is because everyone was continually offside and the game was getting incredibly negative. I know it’s being discussed on here about leeway in these decisions but I can’t see that working. Where would you draw the line. Unfortunately the offside element, rather than phases or interference, is pretty black and white. VAR will disallow both Lukaku and Deeney goals and both would be bad decisions (I’m not entirely sure a Leicester foot doesn’t play Deeney onside anyway). Technically they’d be right but this really starts to favour the defence far more than it should. I guess it’ll be the same for everyone but it will look pretty rediulous when a great bullet header is disallowed because the guys knee was 0.5” offside.
Agree. I know Troy does it and maybe AG did it after the game v Everton but I did notice AG walking over to a girl/lady (I think) in red in a wheelchair between the GT and Rookery and handing her his shirt. Nice touch- (as it was for his goal ! )
No-one in the stadium - or on the pitch - on Sunday felt Deeney was off-side at the time he scored. The thought that once we've got VAR a goal like that could be chalked off after some pillock in a protacabin has spent 5 minutes looking at it in slow motion from ten different angles makes me feel physically sick
No one knows for sure. But my take is the clear and obvious error was that it was not a foul. So that decision will be overturned by VAR. The call about whether it was a pen or fk is so tight that it would depend on the ref's initial call, as arguably replays could be used to support either version.
I've said it before, when that load of old Playstation cobblers comes into the Premier League, that's me done. My local non-League team are utter turds this season, but at least the fixture list isn't subject to change at two weeks notice, I can rock up when I feel like it, stand where I want and not have to listen to some running-mouthed ******* doing his own witless commentary on the game for everyone else's benefit (every single time I've been to a game this season, this has happened) and it doesn't set me back well over £100 every time I go. I'm really glad that Watford are doing so well and long may it continue, but the entire experience of planning for and going to games is now unbearable. My Cat B fan ID will be available for anyone who wants to use it next season. Thanks for listening, Liz x
If Ibiza were my local team, then it would be wrong to describe them as utter turds, as they are actually doing quite nicely, despite Fobi's best efforts to drag them down to his level. How are you doing since you gave up your driving licence Sweet Prince?
Oh I still drive, I just have to put a bloody ridiculous rubber face mask and use the fake licence that M16 gave me when I do. I've barely hit a civilian in the last 2 weeks, touch wood, and when i do I just call this special AA number and someone comes and makes all the mess go away. Can't wait until this Brexit thing is done and we can get all these flaming immigrants off the road and out of my bloody way. Phil the Greek x
There have been too many contentious VAR decisions to prove it works sufficiently well enough, not that I think they are needed any way. Ultimately it is still up to the ref to make a decision on the video screen and with some refs having the incompetence of eg. Moss, the bias they will (sub)consciously apply to a VAR decision in the heat of the moment doesn't guarantee objectivity. I want instant human decisions and not to sit around waiting whilst some imperfect technology takes a few minutes to arrive at an imperfect decision. Let's face it, VAR is only really there for TV games, it's all about money (no doubt VAR providers will make a mint out of this with backhanders to various FAs around the world) and yet another example of not caring about us paying fans, who are not trusted to watch the VAR replays in the first place. **** VAR and all 'on-field' technology. It doesn't belong on a football pitch (or with rugby, cricket and any other sport) and I urge all football fans in every ground to seek out VAR cameras and smash them.
The goal line thing works well because its instant, unobtrusive and has a simple did it or didn't it? decision to make.
It won't be long til AI VAR will be ready. With AI VAR the decision will be instant, like goal line technology. No humans needed.
Moog will make his fortune by selling clubs AI fans, so we won't have to bother to go to the matches. He could start by filling those empty spaces in the SEJ
True, although had it been around in 1966 we would still be without a World Cup win! (and wouldn't be going on & on & on & on about it every tournament since, bemoaning 'X' years of hurt, so not all bad then!)
Exactly this again. There will be an argument that says the referee wouldn’t refer it because it wasn’t spotted or claimed for. But when players know VAR is there, they won’t hesitate to surround the ref and pressure him to look again. The footballing authorities are already far too lenient on players cheating. I don’t think VAR will clear that up but actually will increase players trying to gain an advantage . Players like Vardy and Hazard actively tumble at the merest touch and get rewarded - I think VAR won’t punish them but actually see them protected further and gain even more than they do now. VAR will only work properly in these instances when the offside rule is re-simplified and the games authorities go back and accept the game is a contact sport.
And then, in turn - robotic refs, linos, fans, managers etc. First step on the slippery slope towards a time when FIFA 19 will be the only football available.
It won't matter a to55 if it's 4.1 or 4.05 or 4.2....the area 4" beyond the "offside line" is greyed in on the tv view & if any part of the attacking player that can legitimately score a goal is beyond that area, the decision to allow the goal is overturned. I believe much better than the ridiculous situation of someone's big toe being just beyond an "offside line" that is drawn on the assumption the line has 100% lateral accuracy at the exact split-second the forward pass is played.
You really don't understand do you ? What is the difference between someone's big toe being possibly just offside and someone's big toe being possibly just more than 4 inches offside when you are prepared to allow 4 inches ?? It's the same problem shifted by 4 inches !
