Easy 10
Brain dead MUG SHEEP
One of my single biggest pleasures in life is losing it when the Albion score.
Can't do that any more now. Not in the same way. VAR has "recitified" it.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Football] Its simple, copy cricket and tennis.
- Thread starter nickjhs
- Start date
One of my single biggest pleasures in life is losing it when the Albion score.
Can't do that any more now. Not in the same way. VAR has "recitified" it.
Should we have VAR? Yes
Should it before decisions like city have had in the past 2 weeks? No
It should be used for goals that are a clear and obvious error - Cardiff away last season.
It’s such a flawed system - a goal scored from an incorrectly given corner is a bigger issue than some one 2mm off side
Should it before decisions like city have had in the past 2 weeks? No
It should be used for goals that are a clear and obvious error - Cardiff away last season.
It’s such a flawed system - a goal scored from an incorrectly given corner is a bigger issue than some one 2mm off side
Sure but a bit sad in the Watford game when maupay didn’t really celebrate his goal as he thought he might be offside. Turns out he wasn’t offside but the moment had gone
BBassic
I changed this.
- Jul 28, 2011
- 12,310
It's still officiated by humans. The people in the VAR room or whatever it is are humans. They're just using available technology to spot things.
VAR isn't f**king Skynet.
maltaseagull
Well-known member
1.With regards to offsides, surely it would be better if the assistants made the decision and if there was a clear error, then review but not to check every goal scored.
2. Handball. The rule change was crazy. It should be simply hand to ball is a free kick/ penalty. Ball to hand is not deliberate.
3. Why are we not seeing the wrestling at corners and free kicks being reviewed for penalties or defensive freee kicks?
2. Handball. The rule change was crazy. It should be simply hand to ball is a free kick/ penalty. Ball to hand is not deliberate.
3. Why are we not seeing the wrestling at corners and free kicks being reviewed for penalties or defensive freee kicks?
Nobby
Well-known member
- Sep 29, 2007
- 2,610
Come on now, be serious
After a potential VAR incident, you want to wait for a break in play, before it gets queried.
That could take five minutes.
Sorry but that’s just very bizarre
GT49er
Well-known member
Good point - and so is a goal scored from a wrongly awarded free kick.
...............and as for VAR rectifying things, how many penalties has VAR awarded for wrestling attackers to the ground in the penalty area which the ref. has missed?
- Thread starter
- #69
NO like I said it would need to be bloody quick same as for the ref. Take the Watford game for example, the player doing his nut over Murrays supposed handball, rather than yell at the ref he signals the skipper and it then becomes a quick matter of trust, is he being a pratt or was there really a handball, yes or no make a decision on the fly. Same as the ref has to when he calls a penalty etc.
The differences are: it's the ref's job to be in a position to see potential penalty calls, and that's what he's looking at (whereas the captain of a team has a job on the pitch to do, rather than just watching for fouls); also, when there's a decision to be made, the ref can take a second and replay the incident in his mind - that attacking team don't have that luxury, they need to keep playing.
I can't see the problem with VAR checking while play continues.
- Thread starter
- #71
It's not about checking while play continues, this would happen under my concept ie player flags captain, captain flags ref, ref calls for var. This is happening already with players demanding the ref change his decision. The issue lies in the removal of spontaneity, the demotion of the on field officials. I know you dont get it, you are part of the minority of fans who like the new system, so you will never get what the majority of us are screaming about. Using a limited referral system reduces the effect on the game but still gives the players the ability to challenge the type of awful decisions that led to the call for VAR in the first place, it was never about a players shoulder being 5 mm in front of the defender, for goodness sake this is football not gymnastics or other sports where you lose points because your body position was less than perfect.
MORTY
Well-known member
Whilst I appreciate the patronising tone, don't we currently wait for a break to review a VAR incident? The ref doesn't blow his whistle immediately and stick his finger in his ear does he. He waits for a break. So what's the difference?
Brightonrock01
New member
this, this, this!!!!!
Nobby
Well-known member
- Sep 29, 2007
- 2,610
For how long? Have we won the Watford game yet?
Nobby
Well-known member
- Sep 29, 2007
- 2,610
Who knows? I certainly don’t, like I don’t know at any point during a game if what I am watching is what I am watching.
I may be watching a passage of play that could be turned over at any time. And that’s part of the problem of this utterly shambolic introduction of a potentially useful technology.
Let’s have a ten second rule - if the guys in their little office haven’t seen a problem by then, there can’t have been a problem.
MORTY
Well-known member
Probably wasn't that bizzare a comment after all then eh?
What a palava.
Nothing new there. They can ask him for VAR too if they like, but it won't make any difference. Eventually they'll learn that they're wasting their time. Another benefit of VAR is that when players are hassling the ref to change his mind, they put doubt into his mind, hoping to influence the rest of his decisions in the game, but because he knows VAR will check things, he's immediately reassured that he's not had a nightmare, and that the players are just whinging losers.
I do 'get it', but I think the benefits outweigh the costs. Of course I'd like to be able to celebrate a goal knowing that it won't be overturned in a couple of minutes, but I also like knowing that mistakes are going to be less frequent.
You say that like it's a fact, but it has never been tested. It wouldn't have changed anything for us on Saturday. You also complain about it being too accurate, but I see from your other posts that you didn't even know the offside rules anyway.
- Thread starter
- #78
Get over yourself, I asked a reasonable question that received a variety of answers and cleared up some confusion that others had as well. Personally I would rather asked questions when I am not entirely sure of something than pretend I know the answer. Its comments like yours that have people hiding away with their eyes cast down to scared too ask a question for fear of people like you trying to score cheap points from it. Got news for you pal that won't work with me.
- Thread starter
- #79
You are assuming without reason that a team will automatically use their referral if a goal is scored, or they think there should have been a penalty rewarded. unless it is blindingly obvious that it was totally legit. I suspect they would be cautious about risking losing the referral. Even so lets look at Watford, 3 goals one penalty appeal. So according to your rational Watford would have appealed the O/G hoping Murray was deemed offside and interfering with the play, so that is their appeal gone, second half we half 3 more incidences and only one appeal which would have been overturned leaving no more use of the VAR in that game so at least one of those goals or both (not sure if the penalty shout came before or after the goals) the players and fans could have relaxed and gone mental without fear of it being over turned and the minutes worrying about a penalty would not have happened. West Ham it would not have made a difference, except I doubt West ham would have appealed the "first" goal which would have been a mistake on their part. So no I am not certain it would always improve the situation but I do think it would in high scoring/ high incidence games.
Also the handball law was changed so that handball could be categorised as "clear and obvious" for VAR. "Clear and obvious" to the VAR and referees isnt what us fans tend to think it is. It is now a law that is either black or white. So its either handball or not (hence the change to the law which removed accidental which is debatable and not clear and obvious). It either hit the hand or it didnt thats how they want it. You are offside or not even if it is by milimeters, it has removed any kind of common sense with offside or hand ball just so they dont have to put their neck on the line and make a decision while using VAR.