Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Football] VARs etc - does anyone actually want them?
- Thread starter Adders1
- Start date
studio150
Well-known member
The professional game is already far removed from the grassroots, with floodlights, goal line technology, goal line officials.
With the money involved at the top level, combined with the world wide TV coverage it (to me) makes sense for certain decisions to be reviewed. Just two examples, the hand of god goal, and the Lampard 'goal' against Germany at WC finals. With a worldwide tv audience it just looks daft that such obvious errors are not corrected.
The introduction needs to be carefully trialed to ensure that the flow of the game is not unduly affected, and that only major incidents are reviewed. What we don't want is teams asking for reviews such to stop the game, to try and stop the momentum of the other team. Then will any review pictures be shown inside the ground, or just on home TV.
With the money involved at the top level, combined with the world wide TV coverage it (to me) makes sense for certain decisions to be reviewed. Just two examples, the hand of god goal, and the Lampard 'goal' against Germany at WC finals. With a worldwide tv audience it just looks daft that such obvious errors are not corrected.
The introduction needs to be carefully trialed to ensure that the flow of the game is not unduly affected, and that only major incidents are reviewed. What we don't want is teams asking for reviews such to stop the game, to try and stop the momentum of the other team. Then will any review pictures be shown inside the ground, or just on home TV.
- Thread starter
- #3
Money is all very well, but is that really what people want? I counter that imperfection is really what defines sport
Important point for me. Witness the England Australia egg chasing last weekend. All the big decisions came down to VAR, so arguably it was vital in the match result being correct and fair. But on the other hand it did make the game incredibly stop-start, and managed to suck a lot of the joy out of the big moments. If pretty much every score needs 5+ minutes of TV umpire reviewing to microscopically determine whether there was or wasn't a single blade of green grass between a bouncing ball and touchline, for example, it does erode something of the zest and drama of live sport.
worthingseagull
Well-known member
- Sep 28, 2011
- 1,443
I disagree, human imperfection is one of but definitely not the main thing that defines sport. Sporting ability, speed and skill are more important in the argument of what defines sport and if someone gets over the line first in a race or scores a goal after a mazy run or hits the ball perfectly on the line in tennis it should be rewarded and not missed by dimwit officials. I would argue that taking 10 seconds to quickly replay a major incident to get the call right adds to the suspense and atmosphere in the stadium while we await the decision. PLUS the opposing supporters are more likely to accept this decision as they know its been monitored & reviewed and the days of 'you don't know what you're doing' might well be behind us
I'm really unsure about video replays - one of the TMO decision in the Eng/Aus match took eight minutes. If you have three or four in every game, that's nearly half an hour added on.
It may be acceptable if they ended controversy but they don't: Australia and Scotland both thought they were hard done-by on Saturday and there have been countless examples in cricket where players are still moaning after replays.
Official Old Man
Uckfield Seagull
If we are talking about the Murray penalty then how long would the VAR have to review it? Even then they may be undecided.
Gazwag
5 millionth post poster
Maybe it will improve the refereeing - when you look at cricket and tennis nowadays correct umpiring/line decisions massively outweigh mistakes
PaoloAlbioni
New member
- May 6, 2016
- 126
I agree with Adders1 and amexer - and what hope is there for non-league and even lower league football teams who can't afford goal-line technology let alone VARs?
Farehamseagull
Solly March Fan Club
I'm totally against it. I know we were wronged last night and Lee Mason didn't have a good game at all but I do genuinely believe decisions even themselves out over time and it gives fans/pundits more to talk about and debate which is part of it. Even after TV replays, a lot of people will still disagree on decisions anyway, a lot of calls are really 50/50. Footballers make errors all the time so why can't officials occasionally? I actually think professional referees are actually very good and make very few really bad decisions overall.
It will be another thing that moves the game further away from the beauty of football which is just people kicking a ball. I think that argument about it being a billion pound business is irrelevant as bad decisions do even themselves out and generally if you go down or lose your job, you deserve to. There are already enough stoppages in a 90 minute match and not enough football played in that time, this will make it worse and take away a lot of it's entertainment.
It will be another thing that moves the game further away from the beauty of football which is just people kicking a ball. I think that argument about it being a billion pound business is irrelevant as bad decisions do even themselves out and generally if you go down or lose your job, you deserve to. There are already enough stoppages in a 90 minute match and not enough football played in that time, this will make it worse and take away a lot of it's entertainment.
Farehamseagull
Solly March Fan Club
But there are regular natural breaks of play in cricket and tennis meaning there is an easy opportunity to look at replays which we don't have in football. This could take away any natural flow to a game of football.
Say someone goes over in the box and appeals for a penalty but the ref plays on and the defending team start a counter attack, when do you stop the game to look at the replay?
worthingseagull
Well-known member
- Sep 28, 2011
- 1,443
well sky sports did it in 20 seconds
Bwian
Kiss my (_!_)
- Jul 14, 2003
- 15,898
It was 20 seconds and there was a natural stoppage for that incident. It took Mason far longer to think about what had happened before coming up with two wrong decisions.
Goal line technology technology took forever to be introduced because there was a reluctance to implement change that couldn't be replicated at all levels of the game. Then the money in the game got totally stupid and grass roots considerations went out the window. We all know that goal line technology is hardly ever used but we all know that it is available when needed.
I like to believe that the new VAR (?) will be called upon sensibly and that just knowing it is available might bring about much needed change by the embarrassing diving cheats stinking out our game. It will be a game changer if it is done right.
We have the technology so let's try and make best use of it. It will likely take a couple of seasons to get the balance right of when and how to make use of it but in my opinion it will be worth the effort. Nearly every football fan has a moan about the amount of cheating going on, we need to see if this helps. If it doesn't, it can always be dropped.
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
It's this that really p*****s me off. I can maybe live with ref's getting some decisions wrong but the incidence of cheating is on the rise in my view and this will stop a lot it.
Quiite apart from the Murray pen, the incident last night when it was either Zouma or Diouf that pretended he'd been stamped on by March was outrageous and I would hope it was that sort of thing that can be eradicated or hugely reduced by the introduction of VAR. It has to be tried or the next thing is that we'll find cheating being coached
Codner pharmaceuticals
Well-known member
If it can’t be done within the natural flow of the game then stick with the refs decision. For the Penno he could have consulted with his linesman by which time someone could have said yes/no/don’t know. If you can’t tell quickly from the replay then it isn’t obvious show it shouldn’t go to VAR.
BensGrandad
New member
Anything that helps to get the correct decisions for the top leagues has got to be good for all concerned,players officials, supporters everybody
FIFA have been trying to get commercial breaks into football for years. The introduction of video replays would have enormous appeal for advertisers as it could introduce breaks of a couple of minutes into every half.
Take last night, there would have been a break for at least three of the goals; the penalty, the Murray booking (and possibly the Shawcross body check) and the March/Diouf incident towards the end - that's seven breaks of three or four minutes, adding 20 to 25 minutes to the game. Not only does it break up the game more but longer games would mean more people leaving straight after the game, making transport harder.
TMOs started in rugby as a way of stopping obvious injustices, they're now used routinely and rugby games are becoming much, much longer. Football will go the same way if we're not careful
Take last night, there would have been a break for at least three of the goals; the penalty, the Murray booking (and possibly the Shawcross body check) and the March/Diouf incident towards the end - that's seven breaks of three or four minutes, adding 20 to 25 minutes to the game. Not only does it break up the game more but longer games would mean more people leaving straight after the game, making transport harder.
TMOs started in rugby as a way of stopping obvious injustices, they're now used routinely and rugby games are becoming much, much longer. Football will go the same way if we're not careful
BensGrandad
New member
Surely it wouldnt take as long as 3 or 4 mins to decide an incident so maybe 30-45 secs maximum, just enough time to show 1 advert.
albion534
Well-known member
Teams should have a tennis type system. 2 VR calls per game. Something like that.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk