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

[Albion] Premier League 25-27/11/23



maltaseagull

Well-known member
Feb 25, 2009
13,180
Zabbar- Malta
We already have LiVARpool, maybe we should have WoeVARhampton Wanderers? What is clear is we cannot go on like this.

VAR presently sees it's job as the arbiter of ALL the big decisions, with the referee going along with 100% of all VAR decisions. Goals are chalked off on the flimsiest of evidence, the same with penalties given. And in this decision-making process, no weight is given to the position of the referee who has seen the incident with their own eyes just yards away.

There are many problems with VAR but two of the biggest are:

1. Clear and obvious error - this is a red herring, and has never been the basis on which VAR has been applied in the Prem.
2. No element of 'Umpires Call' or ability for the ref to direct VAR.

If VAR was just for clear and obvious errors you would then have a brand new problem of what to do about unclear and obscure errors, for they are still errors.

What seems to have been lost in all of this is the 'seeking to gain an advantage' aspect. In the majority of VAR offside decisions or penalty handball decisions it is clear the deemed offender has not gained any material advantage.

And with the advent of TV and VAR it is time to revisit the offside rule. The rules was brought in to deter players from always lurking around the goal looking for goalscoring opportunities and football becoming and endless round of launching it long. I wonder just how offside you had to be in those early matches for the linesman to raise his flag. I like the Arsene Wenger proposal that the entire body of the forward should be in front of the last defender to be considered as offside.
But then VAR could say the player´s thumb was stopping it being the WHOLE body nothing would change. VAR is not fit for purpose the way it is being used and the operators need to be retrained to look at the replays and use common sense on wether to over rule the referee on the pitch. Also the assistant referees need to step up and not just decide on throw ins and the occasional offside but really assist the ref and alert them to dodgy fouls etc.
 




Jim in the West

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Sep 13, 2003
4,710
Way out West
VAR has runied football for me. To the extent that I am considering not bothering anymore.

The reason I love(d) football is that amazing 5 or 10 seconds when we score. The unbridled joy of being amongst like minded people - the feeling you can't describe to non football fans..

That's been taken away. I find myself sitting, arms cropssed, when we score now - waiting to see if I'm allowed to celebrate.

Not for me.
I’m not giving up on going (yet), but my reactions now are the same as yours. I stupidly allowed myself to celebrate Welbeck’s “goal” at Spurs last season as it was pretty much right in front of us, and I couldn’t see any possible reason for it to be disallowed. Then VAR managed to detect a minuscule deflection off Mac Allister’s hand. I’ve learned my lesson!
 


Pavilionaire

Well-known member
Jul 7, 2003
30,953
But then VAR could say the player´s thumb was stopping it being the WHOLE body nothing would change. VAR is not fit for purpose the way it is being used and the operators need to be retrained to look at the replays and use common sense on wether to over rule the referee on the pitch. Also the assistant referees need to step up and not just decide on throw ins and the occasional offside but really assist the ref and alert them to dodgy fouls etc.
Things like "common sense" and "clear and obvious errors" are subjective, and what needs to happen is the referees need to be allowed to make the calls, not VAR. If you change the offside law to whole body, and you have a general principal that the striker will be given the benefit of the doubt then - at a stroke - you drastically reduce the incidences of VAR checks for possible offside.

With handballs in the penalty area, again if there is a general principle about intent and gaining an advantage, if the ref thinks a handball is unintentional and/or there is no advantage sought or gained it's no penalty.

The referees have to regain control and authority over this process, and to do that they need football to redefine the rules for this VAR / Multi-Camera / £billion pound industry that we are now in. People want to see more goals, not less, and football is shooting itself in the foot.
 


BrightonCottager

Well-known member
Sep 30, 2013
2,377
Brighton
Two dodgy penalties have given Fulham the win. Cairney dives for the first, and the ref’s bought it. No clear and obvious in VAR’s mind, and it stands.

In the last incident, Wilson has run into the unsighted defender’s leg and tumbled - he’s initiated contact. No pen awarded, but VAR intervenes and penalty is eventually awarded after monitor check. Shite decision, because in no way is that a clear and obvious error.

I’m really starting to dislike Fulham, which is weird because they’ve always been a “meh” club for me. And VAR + PL officiating is a steaming pile.
Sorry to hear that, but it seems everyone is at it. For the record, I thought our first and Wolves' penalties were correct decisions (& can't understand why Ream didn't get a 2nd yellow), but our 2nd didn't look it from the stand and no-one around thought it either. It was VAR what won it for us.
 


Flounce

Well-known member
Nov 15, 2006
2,520
Sorry to hear that, but it seems everyone is at it. For the record, I thought our first and Wolves' penalties were correct decisions (& can't understand why Ream didn't get a 2nd yellow), but our 2nd didn't look it from the stand and no-one around thought it either. It was VAR what won it for us.
Do you accept that you are basically a team who rely on shithousing to get results though? After the last three games against us that is my considered opinion, I don’t watch any of your other games though :smile:
 




BrightonCottager

Well-known member
Sep 30, 2013
2,377
Brighton
Do you accept that you are basically a team who rely on shithousing to get results though? After the last three games against us that is my considered opinion, I don’t watch any of your other games though :smile:
Nope. Not at all. Against the Albion for the last few (of 7) games, we've 'relied' on Lewis Dunk (who I reckon is a 'sleeper' Cottager), you not taking your chances and us taking our chances.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: cjd


maltaseagull

Well-known member
Feb 25, 2009
13,180
Zabbar- Malta
Things like "common sense" and "clear and obvious errors" are subjective, and what needs to happen is the referees need to be allowed to make the calls, not VAR. If you change the offside law to whole body, and you have a general principal that the striker will be given the benefit of the doubt then - at a stroke - you drastically reduce the incidences of VAR checks for possible offside.

With handballs in the penalty area, again if there is a general principle about intent and gaining an advantage, if the ref thinks a handball is unintentional and/or there is no advantage sought or gained it's no penalty.

The referees have to regain control and authority over this process, and to do that they need football to redefine the rules for this VAR / Multi-Camera / £billion pound industry that we are now in. People want to see more goals, not less, and football is shooting itself in the foot.
Refs made the calls before VAR and everyone complained. So in your expert view, what's next.
 


Pavilionaire

Well-known member
Jul 7, 2003
30,953
Refs made the calls before VAR and everyone complained. So in your expert view, what's next.
What, back in the day when you could celebrate a goal?

What's next? That's easy. More VAR intrusion.

The mistake I made was to support the introduction of VAR on the basis that Hawkeye had already improved tennis, DRS / Third Man had improved cricket, the TMO had improved rugby union. However, football seems to have bucked the trend in introducing technology and making its sport worse, not better.
 




m20gull

Well-known member
Jun 10, 2004
3,440
Land of the Chavs
What, back in the day when you could celebrate a goal?

What's next? That's easy. More VAR intrusion.

The mistake I made was to support the introduction of VAR on the basis that Hawkeye had already improved tennis, DRS / Third Man had improved cricket, the TMO had improved rugby union. However, football seems to have bucked the trend in introducing technology and making its sport worse, not better.
Tennis and cricket are using the technology for essentially objective calls in a sport that is a series of discrete plays. Football is not like that. I'm not familiar with how it's used in rugby but I get the impression that TMO has a higher reliance on the on-field referee.
 


Pavilionaire

Well-known member
Jul 7, 2003
30,953
Tennis and cricket are using the technology for essentially objective calls in a sport that is a series of discrete plays. Football is not like that. I'm not familiar with how it's used in rugby but I get the impression that TMO has a higher reliance on the on-field referee.
You need to watch rugby and the relationship between referee and TMO because it is a template for where football needs to be, i.e. the referee in control at all times, retaining their authority. There is no reliance at all, the TMO is there to help the referee, not - as in football's case - make all the key decisions for him.
 


m20gull

Well-known member
Jun 10, 2004
3,440
Land of the Chavs
You need to watch rugby and the relationship between referee and TMO because it is a template for where football needs to be, i.e. the referee in control at all times, retaining their authority. There is no reliance at all, the TMO is there to help the referee, not - as in football's case - make all the key decisions for him.
https://www.rugbyworld.com/tourname...tmo-television-match-official-explained-88934

Is this a good description? If so I take away that it works because it's referee-led (but with TMO advice on foul play), the ref makes decisions based on a big screen so fans can see what the ref does, it works well in rugby because it's slower paced, the refs have been told to use it sparingly, and it took over 15 years to get it working properly!
 




Bodian

Well-known member
May 3, 2012
12,713
Cumbria
Sorry to hear that, but it seems everyone is at it. For the record, I thought our first and Wolves' penalties were correct decisions (& can't understand why Ream didn't get a 2nd yellow), but our 2nd didn't look it from the stand and no-one around thought it either. It was VAR what won it for us.
 


Justice

Dangerous Idiot
Jun 21, 2012
19,761
Born In Shoreham
After the refs at AEK and. Ajax there really is a huge noticeable difference between them and our clowns.
PL refs really do like to make it all about them , in reality you shouldn’t notice the ref if he does his job well.
 


Questions

Habitual User
Oct 18, 2006
25,089
Worthing
Subjectivity is the problem word in all these VAR controversial decisions.
 




Machiavelli

Well-known member
Oct 11, 2013
17,182
Fiveways
After the refs at AEK and. Ajax there really is a huge noticeable difference between them and our clowns.
PL refs really do like to make it all about them , in reality you shouldn’t notice the ref if he does his job well.
The ref for our home game against AEK says otherwise
 


BrightonCottager

Well-known member
Sep 30, 2013
2,377
Brighton
Thank you @Bodian . Fulham's second penalty looked a bit dodgy from my seat but when I viewed the replay it looked more like a pen - the Wolves' player's leg was outstretched it and prevented Harry Wilson smashing the ball into the net/row Z.
 




Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here