If VAR was in use this season.....

Looking at today’s decision, I wonder now if refs will not whistle for close offside calls and see if the ball goes in.

 

Great to see. Why it took so long to implement I do not know but how easy was that?! 67 seconds isn't too long a wait either.

Can't wait till it's in full time use.

 

Don't like it at all. Need to burn something.

 

I’m a big advocate for this system, and as I thought, it works very well.

There are bound to be some issues down the line until everyone gets used to it, but at least the correct decision will be arrive at a lot more.

 

I'm a big fan of it until we get ****ed over by it.

 

Also a big fan of it , it may help to equalise some of the big club bias amonst some of the officials. The amount of money at stake these days ,we need to get the correct decision far more often For example remember back to the reading ghost goal when all the officials were temporarily blind. IMO we might be a few points better off so far this season if system had been in use all season .
At the very least it has to be trialled and given a chance to work .

 

I am hoping use of VAR will give refs a good kick up the backside and make them think about decisions a bit more before wading straight in

Hopefully it will remove some of the bias against the smaller clubs particularly against the giants away from home

 

Had it been in place o Saturday I’d have been fine about the decision to disallow Doucoure’s goal.

Big decisions have to be correct. I am certain we will benefit more often than not by quite a margin.

 

The whole system feels like a slippery slope - starting with officials bottling decisions and leaving it to VAR.

For example, If you're a lino, you'll tend not to flag forwards offside in case you're wrong. (There's no adequate comeback for the attacking team if you wrongly stop a player through on goal - so you'll give him the benefit of the doubt.) At the moment, VAR will be used if a goal results from the move, so you're covered. Ah, but what if a corner results, or a free-kick? If we end up seeing a lot of attacking chances from moves that should have been flagged offside earlier, will they refer to VAR for every passage of play?

I reckon VAR will change the game in ways no-one has anticipated. The authorities will be compelled to take more and more logical steps to correct things so VAR works more fairly - with the ultimate logical conclusion that the game is monitored and controlled by someone off-the-pitch watching a screen, continually pausing play to check on-the-ball and off-the-ball footage to ensure there was no possible infringement anywhere in the build-up to a goal.

Anyone want to sit around watching that?

If you don't want that to be the logical conclusion, at which particular point of unsatisfactory VAR procedure are you going to stop? Because there'll be pressure on you not to stop - as perfection is sought. (Perfect officiating reduces variability, which means the better teams win more easily. The big clubs will drive VAR to its logical conclusion.)

The officiating system of football has worked fine for decades - making it a far more interesting and emotional watch than it would otherwise be. By tinkering, the authorities are playing with fire.

 

AI is coming on in leaps and bounds , so we will soon replace officials with robots ,you know linebots refbots etc take it further we can make the players and fans robots as well ,some are not far off already

 

It's a shame it wasn't Vardy.

VARdy-namite!

 

Great post. I really want VAR to work, but you have articulated all my concerns. The 'player through on goal' scenario is the biggest anomaly in my view because it's totally arbitrary whether he gets the ball in the net to enable a review or not.
Interestingly, I've read someone elsewhere who thought VAR would lead to linesmen flagging for everything they can, rather than nothing, so that VAR decides.

 

In principle I’m for VAR, but I think last nights decision is a bit of a weird one and I can’t see how linesman can continue doing what they do now if VAR is going to be used to check if raising their flag was in fact correct or not.

What would’ve happened last night if any of the defenders or the keeper had looked across the line, seen the offside flag and stopped playing? Surely that happens all the time?

Once the linesman raises his flag it has he potential to affect the chain of events that follows. Even if one player sees it then surely that isn’t fair?

How can the ref be sure that the lino raising his flag hasn’t affected the defence? It could mean that all the defenders have to do is watch the linesman and immediately stop playing to render and VAR appeal redundant. This part of it all seems a bit of a mess to me.

 

Or they could just play to the whistle, just like little kids starting out playing football are taught? I'm not convinced it's as difficult as you're making out.

 

Lots of incidents in the Chelsea v Norwich game tonight. I think the most interesting/unsurprising aspect has been listening the the player's union of pundits waffling on talking nonsense. "He's entitled to go down there". "There's contact". Blah blah blah. None of which is remotely relevant to whether a foul is committed but I think they're starting to realise how much VAR - or even the threat of it - is going to show up lots of the cheating that goes on.

 

Yes of course they could, but does that mean the ref has to let every pattern of play run it’s course before blowing his whistle in case the player was actually onside? Or does he have to blow his whistle as soon as possible to avoid the issue of a goal being scored and having to be reviewed?

 

As I understand players are being told to play to the whistle. So referees will decide on a case by case basis - which is basically what they do now. Most borderline offsides play out in that situation anyway. If the defence or the keeper want to risk standing around and letting their opponent score a tap in they'll do so at their own risk.

 

I thought that referees always favoured the bigger teams?

 

Fair enough. I’m still struggling to get my head round the offside aspect of it though. You’ve got a human being making offside calls that will naturally not all be correct, you’ve then got another human being in the form of the ref second guessing the lino’s call if he’s not sure it was correct, then you’ve got the VAR who can get every decision 100% correct. To me it seems like you may as well get rid of linesman full stop and just let VAR review every offside.

 

Except that would slow everything down considerably in some matches. Ultimately only certain offside scenarios are going to end up changing. If Iheanacho had broken through a high defensive line just beyond the centre circle and the flag went up play would just stop for a free kick. There wouldn't be a VAR review as I understand it, even if he wanted to gallop on and round the keeper or immediately hammered it in from 45yds. It's in the interests of the game to just crack on.

 

Why get rid? The lino still has to make the inital call - like in cricket umpire gives out and then it can get referred. I think for VAR to work each team should be given something like 3 challenges - and for anything that is not clear cut ie where the replay is inconclusive based on human opinion, then the referees/linos decision remains

 

If a flag goes up and the guys kicks it in the net after the whistle, and VAR shows that he was indeed offside does he get booked for time wasting? Do players have to ignore the whistle now because subsequent shots/tackles may still be valid after VAR? How long do they keep going for? As you say if defence and keeper stop then how can VAR be used for the incident?

 

So VAR in play 20 yards out but not 45 yards out? What about 30 yards? As a defender so I have to decide whether to keep playing depending on where we are on the pitch? Or is the rule that as soon as ref blows whistle any subsequent action is then “dead”?

 

Comment from the Daily Express live reporter at the Chelsea vs Norwich game.. concerning the use of VAR.
“Chelsea players are currently drawing more TV screens in the air than Lionel Blair and Una Stubbs put together”

Genius!

 

The FA website says:

VARs are being trialled for clear and obvious errors, or serious missed incidents, relating to specific incidents in three ‘game changing’ situations – goals, penalty/no penalty decisions and straight red cards, plus mistaken identity for red or yellow cards.

So my interpretation is that yes, an offside decision miles out is not going to be allowed to play out and will just be treated like normal. It's similar to the 'clear and obvious goalscoring opportunity' rule in that regard I suppose.

 

I think VAR is working fine, it's just the refs need to get up to speed with using it and gaining experience. I think the Willian decision was bang on last night. Yes there was contact, but when he moved the ball he lifted both feet waiting for a contact and was already going down before the contact happened. It doesn't help all the pundits saying 'you have a right to go down there', if it's a foul, like anywhere on the pitch, a penalty/ free kick will be awarded. Players who are booked for diving should still receive a ban. It will never get sorted without sufficient punishment. Chelsea should be disqualified from the cup it was like watching olympic diving.

 

Interesting - I wonder if the next, slow, step would be referrals (which can be lost) like in hockey and, I think, cricket.

 

What I would have introduced far quicker than VAR, is an increase in instances where referees can give indirect free kicks in the box. Personally, I believe penalties should only be given if a clear goal-scoring opportunity has been denied. Not a player going down by the by-line, nor going away from goal, or for indeliberate handball. Diving is a scourge on the game - and the authorities inability to tackle the issue strongly enough years ago has lead to cheating being commonplace, with players knowing what they can do to gain a penalty, regardless of what position of the box they are in. It’s even promoted now by pundits with statements such as

‘I would have down there...’
‘He’s entitled to be looking for a penalty there..’

Morata last night - is his fall to the ground proportionate to the contact made upon him? No. It’s a dive. But some pundits would argue he’s entitled to go down once a hand goes on his shoulder. Morata probably got penalties for that week-in, week-out in Spain and Italy so he’s just doing what he believes is acceptable. If that went to VAR last night and Mike Jones looked at it, in his opinion it may have been a penalty. So the decision coming from VAR would have been wrong still - so where’s the benefit.

The rules of the game need to be tightened up and simplified. As right now, they are bringing in VAR to to make up for shortcomings nothing more, nothing less.

 

That was the unanimous view of tje pundits, but after several viewings I shared the view of the officials that Willian jumped over Klose's leg and them fell over. Mind you, I thought the Morata incident was 55/45 in favour of a pen, albeit a soft one

 

The damning angle on that one was the one from from behind. As soon as the defender puts his hand on Morata's shoulder the striker dives away from him.

 

How embarrassing for Chelsea to get 3 yellows for diving. Must be a record?