[Technology] Players VAR ( and Pardew )

[clapham_gull]

Absolutely hilarious the players (and management) appear to be unhappy about the VAR replay.

The arguing has moved on from:

1) The ref got it wrong

to

2) The ref(s) got it right but we aren't allowed to see the video.



Maybe the ref should get all the players into the middle of pitch, wait for it to be uploaded to You Tube and have a vote round his phone.

 

[B-right-on]

I hate to agree with the Palarse, but....

 

[studio150]

Why do the players need to see any video.

IF a clear error may have been made, the team reviewing the video should make a quick decision which is communicated to the referee who either stays with decision or reverses it based on the feedback.

What next every 5 minutes the game is stopped and both teams sit down and review the last 5 minutes play and then challenge any decision they were not happy with, meaning that each game last about three and a half hours. BUT no video action for the fans in the stadium

 

[clapham_gull]

Why do the players need to see any video.

IF a clear error may have been made, the team reviewing the video should make a quick decision which is communicated to the referee who either stays with decision or reverses it based on the feedback.

What next every 5 minutes the game is stopped and both teams sit down and review the last 5 minutes play and then challenge any decision they were not happy with, meaning that each game last about three and a half hours. BUT no video action for the fans in the stadium

Exactly

When this beds in the LAST THING we want is everything played back on the big screen.

Give the chance for players to contest the VAR.

It will ruin the game.

Wait till you get home.

 

[whosthedaddy]

VAR is good to have as a tool to getting the big decisions right (the officials can't be trusted with close calls), and it's here to stay, never mind what Shearer thinks.

All that needs to be sorted is the length of time it takes to make the correct call, it will come eventually.

 

[Saunders]

All that needs to be sorted is the length of time it takes to make the correct call, it will come eventually.

100% this

 

[oldboyroy]

agree with above but players need to take heed as well...what is the point in pulling shirts holding in penalty area when u know var will spot it.. with literally the next Liverpool set piece after the pen shirt pulling was going on again

 

[wellquickwoody]

VAR is good to have as a tool to getting the big decisions right (the officials can't be trusted with close calls), and it's here to stay, never mind what Shearer thinks.

All that needs to be sorted is the length of time it takes to make the correct call, it will come eventually.

And fan interest, nay passions, wane as all talking points are removed from the game. You know, taking the pixx out of a mates team after a dodgy decision, a great pub discussion about whether 'it' was or should have been. Becoming a boring game for boring people, bit like life perhaps?

 

[Seasider78]

VAR is good to have as a tool to getting the big decisions right (the officials can't be trusted with close calls), and it's here to stay, never mind what Shearer thinks.

All that needs to be sorted is the length of time it takes to make the correct call, it will come eventually.

VAR is ruining the flow of the game and should be binned in my view. Last night was farcical and the decisions referred to VAR should have been able to be made by a competent referee and linesman not always referred to VAR otherwise what’s the point in the man in the middle.

Would rather focus on improving quality of human decisions than referring to technology to solve all of the games problems

 

[Jack Daniels]

My main concern was the time added on at the end of the first half. Gibbs was down for around 3 to 4 minuets, RK for 2-3, VAR decisions took around 2 & 5 minuets respectively. How that added up to 4 minuets additional time is beyond me. Dread to think what the ball in play time was. Real concern of time being eaten up, especially towards the end of the game.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

 

[Petunia]

My main concern was the time added on at the end of the first half. Gibbs was down for around 3 to 4 minuets, RK for 2-3, VAR decisions took around 2 & 5 minuets respectively. How that added up to 4 minuets additional time is beyond me. Dread to think what the ball in play time was. Real concern of time being eaten up, especially towards the end of the game.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

https://youtu.be/yIKKDXCP2_M

4 minuets? That’s quite a time

 

[Super Steve Earle]

VAR is ruining the flow of the game and should be binned in my view. Last night was farcical and the decisions referred to VAR should have been able to be made by a competent referee and linesman not always referred to VAR otherwise what’s the point in the man in the middle.

Would rather focus on improving quality of human decisions than referring to technology to solve all of the games problems

Nothing is referred to VAR. VAR contacts the ref after the decision is made, but may not be correct. It's actually another human decision but with tech support to help.

I agree that the focus should therefore be on better decisions on the pitch in the first place, but VAR needs to have the same multi camera views as Sky, BBC, BT Sport etc otherwise decisons will still be made incorrectly.

I also agree with wellquickwoody that by taking out the debate around decisions, we may well end up with a boring, sanitised sport which rugby and tennis seem to have avoided with their versions of tech support.

 

[Seasider78]

Nothing is referred to VAR. VAR contacts the ref after the decision is made, but may not be correct. It's actually another human decision but with tech support to help.

I agree that the focus should therefore be on better decisions on the pitch in the first place, but VAR needs to have the same multi camera views as Sky, BBC, BT Sport etc otherwise decisons will still be made incorrectly.

I also agree with wellquickwoody that by taking out the debate around decisions, we may well end up with a boring, sanitised sport which rugby and tennis seem to have avoided with their versions of tech support.

I think that’s the thing for me all it is achieving is highlighting how bad some referees are. Take the West Brom offside did that really need VAR take the technology away I would expect the linesman to spot that. I am still not 100% convinced with the Salah penalty either and neither was the ref it seems as he watched it about 20 times and still could have gone one way or another as a decision.

The use of the VAR technology is intrusive to the natural flow and feeling of being at a game and is a step too far IMO. Not against technology as believe the smart and well thought out introduction of goal line technology has been a success but have he feeling this will become adopted no matter how bad the continued usage seems to be. Needs stopping and taking back to the drawing board

 

[Sussex Nomad]

Why do the players need to see any video.

IF a clear error may have been made, the team reviewing the video should make a quick decision which is communicated to the referee who either stays with decision or reverses it based on the feedback.

What next every 5 minutes the game is stopped and both teams sit down and review the last 5 minutes play and then challenge any decision they were not happy with, meaning that each game last about three and a half hours. BUT no video action for the fans in the stadium

They could have a secret ballot, every player votes yes or no, I love football.

 

[supaseagull]

Last night was a bizarre situation which would rarely occur, just like a 4-4 game.

The fact is that some referees are simply shouldn’t even be allow to officiate if they can’t keep up with play to see a key decision is proof of why the game needs it.

I’ve slated Pawson in the last as he has been in charge of some really shocking decisions. However, his performance as a referee last night was top drawer.

The fact is how many times have we as supporters have appeared to see things that on a replay don’t occur?

Also how many huge mistakes have been made by refereees and their assistants. You only need to take the Stephens sending off Vs Boro, Maradona’s & Henry’s handballs in key World Cup games and Lampards goal against Germany as proof...they were all key decisions that three men got desperately wrong that they shouldn’t have!

Nowadays referees at all levels get paid good money and so they should be accountable for their actions. VAR allows them to review a decision and rectify it. If that takes 3 minutes then so be it...it’s no different to pausing the game when a player goes down injured.

Football is changing and there is too much money involved in it now NOT to be used. Whether we like it or not, it’s happening.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Deportivo Seagull]

The use of the VAR technology is intrusive to the natural flow and feeling of being at a game and is a step too far IMO. Not against technology as believe the smart and well thought out introduction of goal line technology has been a success but have he feeling this will become adopted no matter how bad the continued usage seems to be. Needs stopping and taking back to the drawing board

What natural flow of the game? Goal kicks that take 30secs plus, goalkeepers wasting time, free kicks that take at least a minute if not more. According to the commentary the penalty took three minutes ... a whole 30 secs longer than normal, about the time of a goal kick when goal keepers are being arses. Football has delusions of grandeur.

Only football could take a perfectly good idea and f**k it up!

The main problem is the players heckling the ref take this away and with a bit more practice it’ll be fine.

 

[Bladders]

If the VAR team or ref, or whoever it is who looks at the screens, if they cant make their mind up after 60 seconds of looking at the screen then just stick with the ref's decision on the pitch.

Its the blatant mistakes that this technology should be for , not the ones where you have to look at multiple angles 10 times and still not sure.

 

[PILTDOWN MAN]

Any player/manager contesting a decision by VAR or making the square signal to the ref should be sent off. That'll stop a huge amount of time being wasted. Ref tells both captains and that's it. It was embarrassing watching them still argue with the decision and the w@nker shaking his head on the sidelines when the correct decision was made for the penalty

 

[Noah All]

Agree that lengthy VAR reviews are adding to the playing time lost, which is not regained fully by 'added time'.

Will VAR hasten the introduction of timed halves of say 30 minutes 'with the ball in actual play' ?

This will reduce time-wasting but could lengthen the time refs take to review VAR incidents, further disrupting the flow of the game.

 

[Acker79]

I think the criticism of VAR was predictable. It wasn't wanted by 100% of people, so it was obvious those that were against it would be criticising any implementation (Shearer being a prime example).

I don't consider myself to be smarter than most. But I knew ahead of the Brighton/Palace game basically how VAR worked. I knew the referee made a decision on the pitch, and there was someone in a studio looking at video footage who would inform him if he'd missed something/made a mistake, and that the guy in the studio would communicate with the ref through his ear piece. So when Murray's goal went in and the ref put his finger to his ear while the players celebrated I thought 'he's hearing from the video guy', when we got ready to take kick off, I assumed that meant there was nothing wrong with the goal. Is that really all that difficult? Why are people going on about football being taken away from those in the stadium? "It's fine if you're watching on TV - the commentators can explain things, but people in the stadium have no idea what's going on!" What non-sense. If people in the stadium can't don't understand what's going on, that's their fault. It's natural there are teething problems as everyone gets used to VAR, but people in the stadium not knowing what's going on isn't one of them. (When they showed the replay of Murray's goal on the big screen I thought "that looked handball, but it's been reviewed so it probably isn't')

What VAR is exposing is how little some people understand the laws of the game and how the implementation of those laws is 'right or wrong'. By that I mean, laws are mostly written as 'in the opinion of the referee'. A challenge isn't a foul because it fulfils set criteria, it is a foul because in the opinion of the referee it meets the criteria. It doesn't matter if players disagree, if expert analysts disagree, if 99/100 neutral fans disagree. If in the referee's opinion a challenge is a foul, it is a foul. That's how the laws work. This means if a decision goes to VAR, the video assistant isn't looking at the decision and asking 'would I have given that?', he is asking 'can I see why the referee has given that (an empathetic question referees will have a better grasp of than those who haven't received referee training and who aren't invested in one side or the other), if not is that because of a clear and obvious error (not being able to see something, not having all the information because things happening on the blind side or off the ball, etc)'. It's also why there's no need for players, managers or fans to see the replays.

This idea of the referee being the ultimate authority is why football's governing body has decided on this system of VAR (with the referee looking at the replay to make the final decision). If we have a system where someone watching the game on video screens can overrule the referee, then we're not playing in accordance with the laws of the game. I never really got behind the 'we can't have VAR because the game at grassroots level should be the same as the top level' argument because of there have always been differences in equipment, facilities, standards. But the one consistent at every level is the laws of the game. While it would be quicker for the VAR to overrule the ref, I wouldn't be in favour of it for that reason.