[Football] Right then. After that demonstration... VAR? Yes or No?

Neville's Breakfast · Dec 29, 2019

Apparently Lineker tweeted that the number of times the VAR refs view the footage should be restricted. I think he mentioned the limit should be twice. Seems like a good solution as it would prevent the farcical amount of time we were waiting yesterday. It would also probably ensure that only obvious offsides were given as opposed to the current situation where they are searching for the tiniest of infringement that the laws of the game were never designed to address.

The Upper Library · Dec 29, 2019

The only way VAR will be altered or scrapped is if it starts having a direct impact on Sky TV audiences.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Iggle Piggle · Dec 29, 2019

Neville's Breakfast said:
Apparently Lineker tweeted that the number of times the VAR refs view the footage should be restricted. I think he mentioned the limit should be twice. Seems like a good solution as it would prevent the farcical amount of time we were waiting yesterday. It would also probably ensure that only obvious offsides were given as opposed to the current situation where they are searching for the tiniest of infringement that the laws of the game were never designed to address.

I don't agree with that. We'd then have Shearer with his MS Paint on MOTD slagging the video ref off for not seeing something first or second time. Make it easier to use (thicker lines or something) but doing it quickly will just make a different problem to solve - inconsistency.

If the likes of MOTD had spent more time analysing strikers missing easy chances rather than refs mistakes we wouldn't be in this mess. Of course they'd never do that as football is a closed shop and that would involve slagging members of the football union off.

southstandandy · Dec 29, 2019

Who's the first player going to be given offside for his 'todger' being deemed ahead of the last defender?

At this rate it's going to happen especially now the weather is getting colder!

darkwolf666 · Dec 29, 2019

It is ridiculous that two perfectly good goals have been scrubbed this weekend, for what appears to be the same problem/error. Burn’s goal and the Palace one involving Zaha both appear to have been scrubbed because the arm was in front of the last defender, yet the Laws of football ball clearly states “the arms and hands of all players, including goalkeepers, shall not be included”.

Why was Palace’s goal scrubbed and why was Burns, unless they are now making a distinction between arm and shoulder?

It’s a crock of shit, do away with it...!

Bold Seagull · Dec 29, 2019

3 good goals disallowed yesterday through apparent accuracy by VAR.

Pre-VAR tv would analyse those and there would be no controversy as all 3 looked onside.

VAR creating controversy, not solving it, which I thought was the point of it. :shrug:

wellquickwoody · Dec 29, 2019

darkwolf666 said:
It is ridiculous that two perfectly good goals have been scrubbed this weekend, for what appears to be the same problem/error. Burn’s goal and the Palace one involving Zaha both appear to have been scrubbed because the arm was in front of the last defender, yet the Laws of football ball clearly states “the arms and hands of all players, including goalkeepers, shall not be included”.

Why was Palace’s goal scrubbed and why was Burns, unless they are now making a distinction between arm and shoulder?

It’s a crock of shit, do away with it...!

Whoever runs the game has a decision to make. Is it The Premier League, is it their constituent clubs, is it the FA, is it the TV companies?

Should the game be refereed for the fans at the game live, or for those watching on TV? If the former then VAR should be dropped, if the later then actual attendances may begin to fall.

Herr Tubthumper · Dec 29, 2019

darkwolf666 said:
It is ridiculous that two perfectly good goals have been scrubbed this weekend, for what appears to be the same problem/error. Burn’s goal and the Palace one involving Zaha both appear to have been scrubbed because the arm was in front of the last defender, yet the Laws of football ball clearly states “the arms and hands of all players, including goalkeepers, shall not be included”.

Why was Palace’s goal scrubbed and why was Burns, unless they are now making a distinction between arm and shoulder?

It’s a crock of shit, do away with it...!

“The hands and arms of all players, including the goalkeepers, are not considered.”

You are absolutely correct. I hadn’t realised this. What a total joke VAR is. How many goals have been incorrectly scrubbed due to this?

trueblue · Dec 29, 2019

Iggle Piggle said:
I initially thought we'd get used to VAR once a few decisions went our way. Well, given the ones against Villa, Sheff utd, spurs and the fluky penalty against Everton it's interesting that everyone still hates it when we've had more go our way than against us.

3 improvements would make it more tolerable

-Thicker lines or benefit of the doubt to the attacker at offside
- Make penalties dead (like in a shoot out) to stop this encroaching bollocks. Keepers ball on the penalty spot or goal kick if he saves it
- Sort the stadium experience out. Get the crowd involved like Rugby or Cricket

The encroachment bollocks could be pretty easily solved by the players - it's not that difficult to stay outside the box until the ball is kicked and there's nothing to gain from doing it any more.

I'm think a time limit of 1 minute or limited replays would solve most of the problems, bar offside. Sure, people will still then moan that some decisions are 'wrong' but we can 't have everything. If fans can argue all day about whether or not a challenge merited a penalty, it shouldn't really be a case for VAR to sort out. Let's get back to the original intention of catching 'clear and obvious' errors instead of re-refereeing matches.

Offside's tricky but clearly the law needs to be redefined as no fan or player would complain if Zaha or Burn had been deemed onside yesterday. Even the Kane one in our game at Spurs, which was more clearly offside, would probably only have been greeted with a resigned shrug by many fans I think. We always knew that tight ones like that are difficult for the assistant to judge and that small element of inaccuracy was just part of the game.

Thunder Bolt · Dec 29, 2019

darkwolf666 said:
It is ridiculous that two perfectly good goals have been scrubbed this weekend, for what appears to be the same problem/error. Burn’s goal and the Palace one involving Zaha both appear to have been scrubbed because the arm was in front of the last defender, yet the Laws of football ball clearly states “the arms and hands of all players, including goalkeepers, shall not be included”.

Why was Palace’s goal scrubbed and why was Burns, unless they are now making a distinction between arm and shoulder?

It’s a crock of shit, do away with it...!

Three perfectly good goals if you include Pukki. I still can't see how he's offside.
VAR is ridiculous.

Bold Seagull · Dec 29, 2019

trueblue said:
The encroachment bollocks could be pretty easily solved by the players - it's not that difficult to stay outside the box until the ball is kicked and there's nothing to gain from doing it any more.

I'm think a time limit of 1 minute or limited replays would solve most of the problems, bar offside. Sure, people will still then moan that some decisions are 'wrong' but we can 't have everything. If fans can argue all day about whether or not a challenge merited a penalty, it shouldn't really be a case for VAR to sort out. Let's get back to the original intention of catching 'clear and obvious' errors instead of re-refereeing matches.

Offside's tricky but clearly the law needs to be redefined as no fan or player would complain if Zaha or Burn had been deemed onside yesterday. Even the Kane one in our game at Spurs, which was more clearly offside, would probably only have been greeted with a resigned shrug by many fans I think. We always knew that tight ones like that are difficult for the assistant to judge and that small element of inaccuracy was just part of the game.

Absolutely. I’ll keep mentioning it even though it’s a completely different sport, but LBW in cricket has similar attributes to offside. Cricket built in a margin of error given to the umpires as the system cannot be 100% so their decision carries the weight, more than half the ball needs to be hitting or missing to overturn their decision. Cricket umpiring has actually improved as a result.

If VAR is going to carry on it has to build in a margin for when a review can overturn an officials decision. At present it chalked off 3 good goals yesterday alone, 2 of them crucial for the teams that had them chalked off. It’s a travesty at the moment, ruining the experience for fans and players alike.

Herr Tubthumper · Dec 29, 2019

trueblue said:
Offside's tricky but clearly the law needs to be redefined as no fan or player would complain if Zaha or Burn had been deemed onside yesterday.

It would appear the law was implemented incorrectly yesterday. Correct application alone would be a huge step in the right direction.

Iggle Piggle · Dec 29, 2019

trueblue said:
The encroachment bollocks could be pretty easily solved by the players - it's not that difficult to stay outside the box until the ball is kicked and there's nothing to gain from doing it any more.

I'm think a time limit of 1 minute or limited replays would solve most of the problems, bar offside. Sure, people will still then moan that some decisions are 'wrong' but we can 't have everything. If fans can argue all day about whether or not a challenge merited a penalty, it shouldn't really be a case for VAR to sort out. Let's get back to the original intention of catching 'clear and obvious' errors instead of re-refereeing matches.

Offside's tricky but clearly the law needs to be redefined as no fan or player would complain if Zaha or Burn had been deemed onside yesterday. Even the Kane one in our game at Spurs, which was more clearly offside, would probably only have been greeted with a resigned shrug by many fans I think. We always knew that tight ones like that are difficult for the assistant to judge and that small element of inaccuracy was just part of the game.

I don't like the current encroachment rule. Take the Wolves v Man City game. 2 or 3 City players are in first so Wolves players naturally follow. It's so hard to stand still in that situation but then they get penalised for it and the city players who instigated it gain an advantage by enticing the wolves players in and getting a retake. Bin it off, make it a dead ball.
[MENTION=16159]Bold Seagull[/MENTION] has called it right. LBW is a classic 'argument with the wife' in that the umpires call is nearly always right. Same should somehow apply in football.

Lower West Stander · Dec 29, 2019

What I really don’t get is this massive focus on arms, armpits, torso etc and where they are in respect of a dodgy line.

No one seems to be focussing on when the ball is actually played. On the Burn one yesterday, how can we be sure he was exactly where VAR said he was when the free kick takers laces actually made contact with the ball? A microsecond would have made a difference to this.....

If VAR is going to be as anal as this, there really is no end to questions and interpretations you can make.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Bold Seagull · Dec 29, 2019

Lower West Stander said:
What I really don’t get is this massive focus on arms, armpits, torso etc and where they are in respect of a dodgy line.

No one seems to be focussing on when the ball is actually played. On the Burn one yesterday, how can we be sure he was exactly where VAR said he was when the free kick takers laces actually made contact with the ball? A microsecond would have made a difference to this.....

If VAR is going to be as anal as this, there really is no end to questions and interpretations you can make.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

It isn’t as accurate as the results it’s giving. In manufacturing you give your tolerance, +-5mm, 10mm or whatever it happens to be. VAR is saying I’m giving an offside at 5mm even though the accuracy is more likely +-50mm at best.

Harry Wilson's tackle · Dec 29, 2019

Herr Tubthumper said:
“The hands and arms of all players, including the goalkeepers, are not considered.”

You are absolutely correct. I hadn’t realised this. What a total joke VAR is. How many goals have been incorrectly scrubbed due to this?

This is the key point. The referees (and VAR referees) don't know what they're doing. I seem to recall supporters have been singing a song that recognises this fact for, oooh, decades. Who knew, eh? We all knew.

What the VAR ref needs to do is ensure the correct decision is made. Not 'help the onfield ref' make the decision. The first flaw with VAR therefore is that the referees won't allow the on field ref's supremacy be usurped. That is, frankly, bollocks.

The other changes needed are simple:

1. Clear blue daylight.
2. 20 seconds for VAR to decide and to tell the ref the decision. After 20 seconds then all 'impossible to decided' decisions should err on the side of 'the game':
(i) Penalty or not? No penalty
(ii) Offside or not? Not offside.
(iii) Red card offence or not? Yellow.
3. I like the penalty encroachment suggestion someone made - pens should be like in a shootout. Players on the half way line, ball dead after goal scored or the pen is missed or saved. Game restarts either way with a goal kick.

This rubric is absolutely simple. If VAR can see what the correct decision is within 20 seconds the correct decision can be made. If not, let there be the least damage to the game.

And referees and VAR refs - learn the effing rules - for example an arm offside is not offside because you can't score with it.

Finally, I am in favour of VAR, and think it can work. I don't mind the disappointment of having a goal chalked off (that happened before VAR, FFS). What I don't like is the English Cockwomblry between refs and VAR refs, people with overweening arrogance refusing to do the bleeding obvious. It is as if the PL heard about VAR then tried to introduce it without realising what it actually was, what it entailed, why it would be of value, and how it might be a disaster. Is there an analogy here....hang on.....ah yes! Just as I am persuaded that Brexit can work I am persuaded that VAR can work. The only difference for me is that I always wanted VAR and think it will work (if done properly) whereas I never wanted Brexit and still suspect it will be a disaster, but hey ho....can't have everything.

Harry Wilson's tackle · Dec 29, 2019

Bold Seagull said:
It isn’t as accurate as the results it’s giving. In manufacturing you give your tolerance, +-5mm, 10mm or whatever it happens to be. VAR is saying I’m giving an offside at 5mm even though the accuracy is more likely +-50mm at best.

If most science undergraduates (and more than half the bloody staff where I work) don't know the difference between precision and accuracy, how can we possibly expect refs to know?

For the benefit of the general reader, the dart board example is a favourite of mine. Precision describes the degree of exactness (or reproducibility), and accuracy describes the degree of correctness. Thus three darts in the treble twenty represents precision, but it represents accuracy only if the objective was to score 180. If the dart player was going for double top then his arrows would be precise but not accurate.

The precision and accuracy issue relating to VAR is that the camera can tell you very precisely whether a player is offside or not, but the accuracy is dubious owing to when the frame was frozen and also how well the cameras' software can create an accurate 3d map of the event.

This is why I favour clear blue daylight. It does not address the precision/accuracy issue but it shifts it into an area that would make us feel better; instead of arguing about whether Murray's cock was or was not offside, we would be arguing about whether or not his trailing leg was or was not onside. And as noted above VAR has 20 seconds to decided. To fit my 'err on the side of the game' rule for 'impossible to decide' calls, if VAR can't decide in 20 seconds whether Murray's trailing leg is onside or not, call it onside.

I really do think I've solved VAR. Shame there is zero chance of any of this actually happeneing - it requires having clear objectives, well-founded basic premises, and an ability to beta test all scenarios. Unfortunately we have PL officials and referees who do not understand reason or logic, and are more interested in their own position.

oldboyroy · Dec 29, 2019

Still in favour of Var but not as its used for bloody offside decisions. To disallow goals like burns yesterday and countless others over part of elbow armpit nose even bulge in bloody shorts whatever is so stupid beyond belief. The time it takes is so unnecessary that line they put up should be a simple no daylight advantage attacker full stop.

Pondicherry · Dec 29, 2019

Personally i want VAR binned but:

Pondicherry · Dec 29, 2019

The error due to frame rate (the 'missing' movement between each frame the TV camera records) depends on the speed of the players who are the subject of the offside decision. However, typically i believe it is 10 - 15 cm (based on other people's analysis of other incidents).

Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

[Football] Right then. After that demonstration... VAR? Yes or No?

VAR

Yes

Fence sitters

No

Well-known member

New member

Well-known member

WEST STAND ANDY

Well-known member

strong and stable with me, or...

Many More Voting Years

Well-known member

Well-known member

Silly old bat

strong and stable with me, or...

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

strong and stable with me, or...

Harry Wilson's Tackle

Harry Wilson's Tackle

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Share this page