There probably was clear daylight between Burn and the defence wasn't there?
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Football] Football needs VAR but laws of the game aren't ready for it
- Thread starter Bozza
- Start date
Nothing underhand at all. Just Bozza protecting himself, NSC, and yourself from any potential legal claims being made for breach of copyright law.
London Irish
Well-known member
I think it has. There will always be people who'll argue offside goals should stand, handball goals should stand, because well it's what grandad Wally had to put up with after the war.
Is this controversy? Not for me. I am surprised at the number of TV pundits having a moan up about it but it just confirms to me that not a lot of them have anything original to say, empty vessel syndrome
Well, here's a page full of links that would suggest it is indeed a contrroversy that is being discussed....
https://www.google.com/search?q=VAR...747kAhXbRxUIHbTdDgkQ_AUIESgB&biw=1366&bih=613
Probably the most worrying of those is the admission by IFAB that it may take 10 years to get the technoology right.
Pavilionaire
Well-known member
- Jul 7, 2003
- 30,569
I said this at the time that UEFA should have paid a mid-tier European League to trial VAR for a whole season, i.e. tech up the SPL grounds, give each club £5 million to participate then run the whole season and monitor the results.
I agree that the handball laws are unclear and so an attacker gets penalised for accidental handball in the box but a defender doesn't.
I felt gutted at Trossard's first goal being chalked off, so I imagine the Citeh fans must feel sick about Laporte's "handball" in extra-time denying them the 3 points and the impact that has on the title race.
I agree that the handball laws are unclear and so an attacker gets penalised for accidental handball in the box but a defender doesn't.
I felt gutted at Trossard's first goal being chalked off, so I imagine the Citeh fans must feel sick about Laporte's "handball" in extra-time denying them the 3 points and the impact that has on the title race.
London Irish
Well-known member
But what was actually wrong with the tech at the weekend? Burn was offside. The ball did clearly strike the Man City guy's arm. They were both great decisions by VAR. Baffled by what people actually want except wrong decisions to stand.
I don't think this controversy has got any legs, we aren't going to go back to having poorer decisions decide matches
SollysLeftFoot
New member
Additionally, not a single West Ham player contested the goal. Whist I do believe it was, by letter of the law, a correct decision.The fact no one contested the goal originally and that there was about a whole minute between the incident and the decision to go to VAR. Not that it took a minute for a decision about goal or no goal to be made, the decision to review is something that bothered me.
VAR is a step in the right direction, but there has to be some alteration to the rules.
Sorry that this is a) The Mail and b) written by an anti-VAR journalist but if you can bring yourself to read it the technology could be out by as much as 14 inches (or about one sixth of a Dan Burn) when it comes to offside. The still briefly shown on MotD was after the ball had been kicked.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/f...-2-4cm-offside-allowed-13cm-margin-error.html
Sussex Nomad
Well-known member
Do you really believe yourself? Taking the wind out of every supporter that would have celebrated a goal last season? Are you one of those people that don't understand spontaneity? It's pretty much worked for 150 years. This is the most awful technology ever brought into football, bar none. I'm sorry I don't mean to sound rude but I cannot think of any other way of putting it. VAR will kill our game.
Some people appear desperate to blame VAR for everything. Blaming VAR for some of the contentious decisions we've seen (e.g. the penalties at the WWC or the Man City non-goal at the weekend) have more to do with the laws than the technology. Blaming VAR is like blaming the speed camera for catching you when you hadn't realised they'd lowered the speed limit to 30 from 40 and you get caught doing 38.
Having said that, there's no reason why it shouldn't be made faster. Impose a 30 second time limit on any decision, failure to reach a conclusive decision in that time leads to "referee's call" and it stays with their decision. That would make it more akin to something like the time it took to check and award that Pascal Gross goal against Man Utd the season before last, which was an amazing moment.
Having said that, there's no reason why it shouldn't be made faster. Impose a 30 second time limit on any decision, failure to reach a conclusive decision in that time leads to "referee's call" and it stays with their decision. That would make it more akin to something like the time it took to check and award that Pascal Gross goal against Man Utd the season before last, which was an amazing moment.
Winker
CUM ON FEEL THE NOIZE
Dan Burn's legs could be offside when he is standing on his own 18-yard line!
London Irish
Well-known member
Mate it seems I've been reading fans whingeing about refereeing decisions for at least 150 years. If you can hand on heart say you've never littered NSC with such moaning, then fair play. Can you?
Arthritic Toe
Well-known member
Whatever offside rule you make there will be a point where it switches from being onside to offside. Around this point there will always be arguments.
The_Viper
Well-known member
Are you joking? People have posted articles stuck behind paywalls and never ever had them removed, go to almost any thread based on a news article and its posted at some point. You're talking utter nonsense.
No he isn't. As a general warning anything we see that is fully copied and pasted will be snipped.
- Thread starter
- #56
Whenever I see a fully C&P article I will edit so that there's just a taster paragraph or two and then a link to the full thing. I don't consider it fair to those who put time and money into producing content to have it reproduced, in full, on here.
I can only do it to those posts I see myself, so there likely are examples that have been missed.
Sussex Nomad
Well-known member
Fair enough, most pieces of journalism are copyrighted, saving your butt isn't splitting hairs.
- Aug 8, 2005
- 26,545
This is a great article on how it worked (or didn't work) when first used in Germany. Not clear whether it really got any better other than each decision taken by VAR did reduce to an average of 53 seconds but there was still plenty of chaos.
https://www.dw.com/en/var-in-the-premier-league-how-has-it-worked-in-the-bundesliga/a-46333249
https://www.dw.com/en/var-in-the-premier-league-how-has-it-worked-in-the-bundesliga/a-46333249
Also, given their different business model, their VC money and the way they are getting their journalists to push the site I would expect The Athletic in particular to be quite litigious. Only a hunch but I'm not sure why you'd go subscription only and then not protect your content. So surely other sites should be afforded the same courtesy.
I was taking the piss with my analogy. Taking the piss out of folk who think that using VAR to reach a correct decision is taking all the fun out of the game and they would rather have an instant incorrect decision.