VAR has been used in the Bundesliga this season. My German friends hate it for exactly what we saw last night at the Etihad. Although VAR may eventually result in the correct factual decision during a game, it is an absolute nightmare for football fans who will find that they are often unable to celebrate a goal just in case a player is found to be 2 centimetres offside etc.

The 2 centimetres bit is the issue that needs sorting.
A toe just beyond the defender and the like.

I think if there is not a complete body, with gap, between the striker and defender, then that should be counted as inline and onside. Anything else still allows for one rule for them and another for us.

My view is that they simply need to come out and say who gets the benefit of the doubt - the attacking side or the defending side.

But, really, it would be better if they followed cricket's lead - each side gets so many incorrect challenges during the game. You can use it for any incident where you think the officials have got it wrong. If you waste them, then, tough. DRS in cricket had some teething problems, it still isn't perfect, but (IMO) it has improved things. VAR looks too problematic to me to be used at the moment.

The rule is very clear at the moment. If any part of the body that you can score a goal from is in front then it's offside. This "gap" thing will just move the problem. A clear gap, so do you include the arms? What about a trailing leg? Or a complete air gap between them? What about the defenders arms and legs? You could get a scenario where a attacker has a arm behind him, a defender his arm out towards goal and the attacker is like 2 yards in front, but there could be 2cm of fingers overlapping and he's onside.

I don't see there being a solution to this, but at least at the moment this system has seen City knocked down a peg or two

IanMcL wrote:The 2 centimetres bit is the issue that needs sorting.
A toe just beyond the defender and the like.

I think if there is not a complete body, with gap, between the striker and defender, then that should be counted as inline and onside. Anything else still allows for one rule for them and another for us.

You also get the problem - as with run outs in cricket - that it comes down to which frame you stop it at. If it's so close that there is centimetres in it when do you judge when the ball has actually been kicked? Especially when - as we saw last night - there is pressure on the officials to make the decision quickly.

They either need an equivalent of Umpires Call for offsides or just apply the "clear and obvious" rule. a toe offside isn't clear and obvious either way so just stick with the on-field decision. Llorente's goal last night wasn't a clear and obvious handball so allow it and move on.

Foulthrow wrote:My view is that they simply need to come out and say who gets the benefit of the doubt - the attacking side or the defending side.

But, really, it would be better if they followed cricket's lead - each side gets so many incorrect challenges during the game. You can use it for any incident where you think the officials have got it wrong. If you waste them, then, tough. DRS in cricket had some teething problems, it still isn't perfect, but (IMO) it has improved things. VAR looks too problematic to me to be used at the moment.

I’ve advocated this for a long time.

Complete waste of time and money. Ruining the A league with ridiculous interpretations of the rules. Slows down a spontaneous game.

IanMcL wrote:I think if there is not a complete body, with gap, between the striker and defender, then that should be counted as inline and onside. Anything else still allows for one rule for them and another for us.

All that means is they'll have a line on the VAR screen to see if there's a 'complete body, with gap' between them. Once you have this idea that there is an absolute right and wrong, black and white decision you're stuck with it. We've seen already, almost every call is debatable, especially handballs and often offsides.

VAR hasn't really cleared anything up. It'll get the odd absolute clanger but it's not being used for that. It's here for the minutiae of every split second, multi angle incident and often it's no closer to being decisive.

It'll be interesting to see how the Etihad reacts next time they score a goal. Imagine the 'Aguuuuueeeeeroooooo' moment being followed by muted applause and a couple of minutes of anxious glances up at the screen to see if they had indeed won the league in injury time.

The linos can only judge by torso. Forget the rest of the body.

Ball with winger.
You are far side of your defender, who is close to you.
You want to stay behind him and yet need to be level and have forward momentum.
You place a foot ahead and peer round the defender, to see the ball.
That is the necessary movement and yet it leads to pundits pointing to head and foot for offside.
Rubbish! It's football, not the 100m Olympic final!

IanMcL wrote:The linos can only judge by torso. Forget the rest of the body.

Ball with winger.
You are far side of your defender, who is close to you.
You want to stay behind him and yet need to be level and have forward momentum.
You place a foot ahead and peer round the defender, to see the ball.
That is the necessary movement and yet it leads to pundits pointing to head and foot for offside.
Rubbish! It's football, not the 100m Olympic final!

Ironically, the Olympic 100m final does use torso - they don't muck about with the "longest toenail wins" rule.

Question under the new rules - can you be played onside by a defender's pony tail? Or put offside by your own pony tail, for that matter?

Ruined what was a fantastic game last night,I hate it already.

It’s creating more problems than it is solving right now. Needs to have much better definitions and be slicker.

its a load of garbage aimed solely at tv fans.

Steve1956 wrote:Ruined what was a fantastic game last night,I hate it already.

how on earth did it ruin last nights game ? bizarre

quoonbeatz wrote:its a load of garbage aimed solely at tv fans.

Completely agree with this. Its going to ruin the experience of going to a game. People will only get burnt once or twice, before they sit on their hands in the moments after a goal is scored.

Vegas Claret wrote:how on earth did it ruin last nights game ? bizarre

Ruined it for me and I suspect many others. A match of excitement which had almost everything finished with a complete let-down ........a goal that was disallowed after a ridiculously long wait. i wanted City to lose ....but not like that. Without VAR we would have accepted the offside goal was a genuine mistake and moved on (or applauded the linesman for a fantastic call if he had flagged).

keith1879 wrote:Ruined it for me and I suspect many others. A match of excitement which had almost everything finished with a complete let-down ........a goal that was disallowed after a ridiculously long wait. i wanted City to lose ....but not like that. Without VAR we would have accepted the offside goal was a genuine mistake and moved on (or applauded the linesman for a fantastic call if he had flagged).

ridiculous wait ??
It was the correct decision. I for one would have hated for anyone to get knocked out of a competition because the decision was wrong when the technology could have helped. It'll quicken up the more they use it, might take a season or two but it will be worth it. Everyone will just have show some patience as it is here to stay

Vegas Claret wrote:ridiculous wait ??
It was the correct decision. I for one would have hated for anyone to get knocked out of a competition because the decision was wrong when the technology could have helped. It'll quicken up the more they use it, might take a season or two but it will be worth it. Everyone will just have show some patience as it is here to stay

Just out of interest, was the decision to allow Lorente's goal the correct decision? I reckon we'd get a 50/50 response to that question. VAR doesn't get things right because there is no right most of the time.

It's not a super computer churning out scientific decisions, it's a telly showing another angle to a ref while 50,000 people sit around to see how he interprets what he sees.

NottsClaret wrote:Just out of interest, was the decision to allow Lorente's goal the correct decision? I reckon we'd get a 50/50 response to that question. VAR doesn't get things right because there is no right most of the time.

It's not a super computer churning out scientific decisions, it's a telly showing another angle to a ref while 50,000 people sit around to see how he interprets what he sees.

every angle I've seen (i think all of them) it's a goal, if you look where his arm finished he is trying to get it out of the way of the ball, never ever in the history of the game was that handball. Fortunately the game had the best ref on the planet and even he was "what the **** are you on about" to the VAR

Vegas Claret wrote:how on earth did it ruin last nights game ? bizarre

A massive anti climax for me,VAR with create more problems that it solves and completely ruin our national game.But I respect that you like it,I think it's Shite waiting three minutes for a decision

Steve1956 wrote:A massive anti climax for me,VAR with create more problems that it solves and completely ruin our national game.But I respect that you like it,I think it's Shite waiting three minutes for a decision

don't get me wrong, there's a lot of work needs doing to improve it but I think people will just have to be patient.

football fans "we've got to give our new signing a season to bed in"

football fans '2 mins is too long for a decision"

Steve1956 wrote:A massive anti climax for me,VAR with create more problems that it solves and completely ruin our national game.But I respect that you like it,I think it's Shite waiting three minutes for a decision

Completely ruin the national game

If you found last night anti climactic then it's you that's the issue, not VAR.

For most it added to the drama in the game, especially with what was at stake and so late in the game.

Of course, it won't always be that exciting.

One thing I've seen mentioned in various places is how people say it will mean the game has less to talk about if VAR is making the decisions more accurate.
Based on last night, that's rubbish as shown on here.

GodIsADeeJay81 wrote:Completely ruin the national game

If you found last night anti climactic then it's you that's the issue, not VAR.

For most it added to the drama in the game, especially with what was at stake and so late in the game.

Of course, it won't always be that exciting.

One thing I've seen mentioned in various places is how people say it will mean the game has less to talk about if VAR is making the decisions more accurate.
Based on last night, that's rubbish as shown on here.

Try telling that to the City fans.

Foulthrow wrote:My view is that they simply need to come out and say who gets the benefit of the doubt - the attacking side or the defending side.

But, really, it would be better if they followed cricket's lead - each side gets so many incorrect challenges during the game. You can use it for any incident where you think the officials have got it wrong. If you waste them, then, tough. DRS in cricket had some teething problems, it still isn't perfect, but (IMO) it has improved things. VAR looks too problematic to me to be used at the moment.

I agree with that; DRS was brought in to eradicate the out-and-out poor decisions and by and large it has done that (there is the odd example where a team has used its reviews when it really needs one).

If football adopted this appeal approach, there would still be those grey areas though (“contact” being one).

It would probably also end up with every goal being reviewed in the hope that something was spotted on the replay. At least until the reviews were used up.

Steve1956 wrote:Try telling that to the City fans.

At some point they'll be on the receiving end of VAR decisions in their favour, as people always say it swings and roundabouts etc, just like normal refereeing decisions.

Steve1956 wrote:Try telling that to the City fans.

I would if I could find any

GodIsADeeJay81 wrote:At some point they'll be on the receiving end of VAR decisions in their favour, as people always say it swings and roundabouts etc, just like normal refereeing decisions.

Ha.. this is true. We've not really moved on that much. Worth remembering, even with VAR, these are still refereeing decisions. 90% are opinion.

GodIsADeeJay81 wrote:At some point they'll be on the receiving end of VAR decisions in their favour, as people always say it swings and roundabouts etc, just like normal refereeing decisions.

If that's the case it's no real benefit to the game.

Last night I thought the handball goal was rightly given. This morning on seeing the other angle I would of disallowed it. Criminal the ref didn't get to see the other angle.

Not a fan from what I have seen so far.

Quickenthetempo wrote:If that's the case it's no real benefit to the game.

Last night I thought the handball goal was rightly given. This morning on seeing the other angle I would of disallowed it. Criminal the ref didn't get to see the other angle.

Not a fan from what I have seen so far.

Spurs would've gone out due to an offside without it.

Foulthrow wrote:My view is that they simply need to come out and say who gets the benefit of the doubt - the attacking side or the defending side.

But, really, it would be better if they followed cricket's lead - each side gets so many incorrect challenges during the game. You can use it for any incident where you think the officials have got it wrong. If you waste them, then, tough. DRS in cricket had some teething problems, it still isn't perfect, but (IMO) it has improved things. VAR looks too problematic to me to be used at the moment.

My thoughts exactly! 2 per half etc. Works in Cricket and Tennis.

GodIsADeeJay81 wrote:Spurs would've gone out due to an offside without it.

Spurs would of gone out with not being awarded the handball goal if used right.

GodIsADeeJay81 wrote:Spurs would've gone out due to an offside without it.

Television viewers had more angles than the referee looked at for the handball goal,....VAR is crap

Quickenthetempo wrote:If that's the case it's no real benefit to the game.

Last night I thought the handball goal was rightly given. This morning on seeing the other angle I would of disallowed it. Criminal the ref didn't get to see the other angle.

Not a fan from what I have seen so far.

Look at where his arm starts then look where his arm ends up - it clearly goes the opposite way so there is zero intent and all the images show him moving his arm out of the way

Vegas Claret wrote:don't get me wrong, there's a lot of work needs doing to improve it but I think people will just have to be patient.

football fans "we've got to give our new signing a season to bed in"

football fans '2 mins is too long for a decision"

It's been in use for rugby for ages and often you're still waiting for a few minutes after a try to celebrate (and the rules are a lot more clear cut in rugby).

The enjoyment of the fans at the ground has been sacrificed so that the neutrals watching on TV have a bit more excitement. Gicen the minimal contact, marginal offsides, etc that it's being used for it's never going to be an instantaneous decision. There's always going to be that restraint when we score wondering whether it will actually be a goal.

It's trying to make subjective decisions objective, it's not going to work without the laws changing to match that.

Taffy on the wing wrote:My thoughts exactly! 2 per half etc. Works in Cricket and Tennis.

The two most slow moving boring games on the planet...

aggi wrote:It's been in use for rugby for ages and often you're still waiting for a few minutes after a try to celebrate (and the rules are a lot more clear cut in rugby).

The enjoyment of the fans at the ground has been sacrificed so that the neutrals watching on TV have a bit more excitement. Gicen the minimal contact, marginal offsides, etc that it's being used for it's never going to be an instantaneous decision. There's always going to be that restraint when we score wondering whether it will actually be a goal.

It's trying to make subjective decisions objective, it's not going to work without the laws changing to match that.

agree 100% which is why they will change some of the rules - sure I'd read that as from next season if the ball hit's your hand then it's handball regardless of intent - should be 8 penalties a game

The authorities need to try and find a way to reinforce the "clear and obvious mistake", these borderline decisions are the problem at the moment

Quickenthetempo wrote:Spurs would of gone out with not being awarded the handball goal if used right.

Down to interpretation

The only way VAR could be more popular right now is if it disallowed Brexit.

Vegas Claret wrote:don't get me wrong, there's a lot of work needs doing to improve it but I think people will just have to be patient.

So you are quite happy that immediate goal celebrations will be completely obsolete in a few seasons time?

There will be no longer any celebrations as a goal is scored, only muted applause a minute or so afterwards.

TheFamilyCat wrote:I agree with that; DRS was brought in to eradicate the out-and-out poor decisions and by and large it has done that (there is the odd example where a team has used its reviews when it really needs one).

If football adopted this appeal approach, there would still be those grey areas though (“contact” being one).

It would probably also end up with every goal being reviewed in the hope that something was spotted on the replay. At least until the reviews were used up.

It was the same in cricket though, you get folks like Stuart Broad who try to use it for everything, but teams rapidly cotton on that they need to be smart in how it’s used.

the handball decision was right, there wasn't even a need for var with that. whats he supposed to do, cut his arms off?

the offside was more contentious as silva had no intention of playing the ball to aguero, it was just a deflection. daft rule.

glad spuds won though.

those above talking about the spontaneity of celebrations are right, one of the top clubs have been burned now so it will quickly spread and you'll have everyone being a bit more restrained.

you only have to look at rugby to see how soulless it is. the biggest cheers you et from a rugby crowd are the ooooooohs at the big screen waiting to announce a tv decision.

football deserves better than that fate.

There was some bloke on 5Live earlier advocating that everything that hits an arm or hand in the box should be a penalty. Then, the likes of Messi and Ronaldo could aim for opponents to try to win a penalty.

Seems to me that this is what we will more or less see next season.

I only learnt today listening to Keith Hacket this afternoon on 5Live that there will be no pitch-side monitors used in VAR in the Premier League next season.

As somebody said on TV recently, when the officials off the field tell the on field ref that he needs to have another look at something, in his mind he is automatically going to think he got it wrong first time, otherwise they wouldn't be asking him to check. So if when he checks, he still thinks he was right originally, he will still tend to change his mind anyway on the assumption he's missing something and is going to look a chump. And as others have said, at present it takes far, far too long and no one will ever celebrate a goal because there will be a five minute hiatus whilst the video is checked and re checked. It's absolute garbage imo at present and |i'm not sure how it can be made to work effectively. Even after watching replays it's often still all about opinions and that is how it's always been anyway and the ref's opinion is the only one that matters, rightly or wrongly. Over the past 5 seasons we'd have had numerous decisions which went against us overturned in our favour, but we'd also have had a good number which went for us overturned too. Koscielny's handball goal and Wood's "winner" at Watford are among the ones we tend to remember very clearly, but the ones where we've been lucky (Hendrick's impromptu juggling audition at Brighton!) we like to forget. I'd either bin it or give it a total and complete re think. If not, long standing, real fans who pay good money to turn up and watch games will become fewer and fewer as they feel everything is simply pandering to the TV market, largely in China, Asia and across the wider world. I also think "the big 6" are big drivers of it too because they have this belief that whenever smaller clubs do well against them, they have mostly been undone by some rubbish refereeing decisions and never genuinely outplayed or fairly beaten. Well they may come to regret it tbh, because they benefit from crap decisions far, far more than we do.

Sadly, it'll be the end of celebrations like this one for the Ashley Barnes goal.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OagjY5iGU8E" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Spijed wrote:Sadly, it'll be the end of celebrations like this one for the Ashley Barnes goal.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OagjY5iGU8E" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I’m not a lover of VAR.

There is no way though that it would stop me celebrating a goal and particularly one that I assumed to be wholly legitimate, as the example shown.

Spijed wrote:Sadly, it'll be the end of celebrations like this one for the Ashley Barnes goal.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OagjY5iGU8E" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Not really because there's no argument that he was onside.

Another issue is that after a while every decision will go to var.

When was the last time an umpire gave a run out without referring it to a replay?