Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Football] VAR whats worse waiting to celebrate a goal or going one down to an illegal goal?
- Thread starter nickjhs
- Start date
Tom Hark Preston Park
Will Post For Cash
- Jul 6, 2003
- 70,161
Seems like we're entering a whole new era of 'premature celebration' that will kill much of what we've loved/hated about the game up til now. A bit of the game just died. If we're going to down the rugger bugger route, how about we also adopt their ethos of respecting the referee's authority?
Bwian
Kiss my (_!_)
- Jul 14, 2003
- 15,898
I disagree with the premature celebration comment. On Saturday at Watford as the ball went in the goal we all celebrated. The same as always. VAR is no different to celebrating a goal only to see the ref stroll over to the linesman for a discussion about the validity of the goal.
At the moment it is a novelty for everybody. Players, officials, journalists, pundits, managers and fans will soon stop making a big fuss about 'VAR incidents' once we are all used to it. There clearly needs to be some revision of the offside law which appears to be confounding everybody. Handball incidents are quite clear now-under the new guidelines Murray's was not a handball.
If there had been VAR that night that Barton stomped on Kayal (?) the dirty twunt would have got a red. Similarly, Hemed would most likely not got his red card. We would, however, have played Palace without AK. It (VAR) might well eliminate a lot of the things about the game we don't like: all of the grabbing in the penalty area; diving; off the ball red card incidents that get missed etc.
Celebrate goals as we used to-hardly any will be reversed. Hopefully[emoji38]
Sent from my LYA-L09 using Tapatalk
brightn'ove
cringe
Yes, they select three frames during the pass, zoom in on the player's foot and select the frame where the player's foot makes contact with the ball. They are consistent in the way that they select the frame.
In other words... it is a lottery.
It's not a lottery, they always select the first frame showing contact. As technology develops, it will become even more accurate.
southstandandy
WEST STAND ANDY
- Jul 9, 2003
- 5,641
As much as I dislike VAR (I like the grey areas in a match and debating issues in the pub after a game with friends), I suspect we will all get used to it and not celebrating a goal at the time the ball hits the net until after it's been confirmed by VAR.
We just need to sit in our seats and await confirmation of a goal, or use the delay to go to the toilet or go and get some food and then come back for the announcement.
We just need to sit in our seats and await confirmation of a goal, or use the delay to go to the toilet or go and get some food and then come back for the announcement.
- Thread starter
- #26
THIS. Well said
- Thread starter
- #27
I want VAR as well, but seems to me that like so many things we humans get up too, we have gone from the ridiculous to the ridiculous and missed the sensible middle ground.
dingodan
New member
- Feb 16, 2011
- 10,080
There was plenty of discussion and debate on MOTD about VAR decisions, and it might seem controversial, but remember, they are now discussing correct VAR decisions. In times gone by they would have been discussing goals which should/should not have been given and points which were not fair or neccessarily deserved.
I'm as cautious as anyone about the impact this could have on the flow of feeling when you score etc, but it must surely be better to see this kind of thing rather than teams being robbed of potentially crucial points, the cost for which can be to unfairly kick you out of a cup, lose you a title, or worst of all, get you relegated.
And as for the potential for ruining goal celebrations, as has been pointed out, our two second goals on Saturday were not questionable, only some goals will be, and when they are not questionable nothing really changes.
You will also see players learn some things, like not to bother trying to sneak a stamp on your opponent, not encroaching during a penalty, not trying to hound the ref to influence decisions (there's no point) and generally to play to the whistle and trust in the fairness of the sport.
Fairness is crucial in sport, so I am (at this point) cautiously IN.
I'm as cautious as anyone about the impact this could have on the flow of feeling when you score etc, but it must surely be better to see this kind of thing rather than teams being robbed of potentially crucial points, the cost for which can be to unfairly kick you out of a cup, lose you a title, or worst of all, get you relegated.
And as for the potential for ruining goal celebrations, as has been pointed out, our two second goals on Saturday were not questionable, only some goals will be, and when they are not questionable nothing really changes.
You will also see players learn some things, like not to bother trying to sneak a stamp on your opponent, not encroaching during a penalty, not trying to hound the ref to influence decisions (there's no point) and generally to play to the whistle and trust in the fairness of the sport.
Fairness is crucial in sport, so I am (at this point) cautiously IN.
The sensible middle ground is DRS.
Yup. The main problem currently is that the technology doesn't provide enough frames to be 100% accurate. They have the same problem with stumpings / runouts in cricket - sometimes the bat/foot is crossing the line between frames and/or the bails being removed is between frames.
symyjym
Banned
They should measure the offside from the feet not the shoulder. This would definitely make it fairer.
- Thread starter
- #32
Sorry but what is DRS
Decision Review System as in cricket - described earlier in the thread. Basically a finite number of reviews allowed per team (one per half say) and otherwise the officials' decisions stand.
brightn'ove
cringe
Which seems crazy because the technology already exists to massively increase the frame rate. Enough money in the game to make sure it does get sorted soon though.
dingodan
New member
- Feb 16, 2011
- 10,080
&, importantly, quicker.
You can now go mad at a goal twice.
Easy 10
Brain dead MUG SHEEP
And you're actually ok with that ? Seriously ?
You can, except you don't. Nobody does.
Nothing can beat that rush, that feeling of pure euphoria and elation when the ball hits the back of the net. If we score and the lino's flag is down, then its time to go mental - surely THATS what we go to football for. A chance of experiencing that feeling.
VAR has now robbed us of that. There's a caveat thats been inserted, a doubt. The moment has been diluted, because in the back of your mind, you're aware there's still a chance of the goal being taken away for something so minor it was impossible to notice without a zoomed-in freeze-frame and some lines drawn on.
You HOPE that dreaded big screen message doesn't come up, and then when it does you're in limbo, often clueless as to what it is they're even looking at. Then if its given, its a relief and a token muted "yeeeah" when its confirmed - but the moment has been lost. Spoiled. Diluted.
Its too high a price to pay IMO for a nerdy "his armpit was offside" type call.
Easy 10
Brain dead MUG SHEEP
Who cares about the day after the event - surely its all about being there, in the moment, and celebrating with abandon as we have done all our lives with this game. It genuinely saddens me that people are actually happy to have goals chalked off as we all sit around waiting on the review, because someone's knee was forensically interpreted to have been a millimetre offside. Thats not the spirit of the offside law, or the game in general.
If it corrects someone being clearly a mile offside after the lino drops a bollock, then fine. But these pixel-line calls are utter gubbins, and I see they are aleady going to have a rethink on it. Hopefully common sense will prevail.
See, the actual point, is that there should NOT be a problem there. If the decision is impossible to call with certainty, using a standard 30fps TV broadcast frame rate, then the batsman should just get the benefit of the doubt.