Time to get rid of VAR

mapinchina · Post by **mapinchina** » Sat Oct 19, 2019 6:39 pm

If VAR is needed then why have a ref. on the pitch ? I really do not understand.

scouseclaret · Post by **scouseclaret** » Sat Oct 19, 2019 6:51 pm

This is exactly the response the PL want. The PL and the big clubs don’t want it.

If we felt it was going to level the playing field, e were clearly wrong.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Sat Oct 19, 2019 6:57 pm

scouseclaret wrote:This is exactly the response the PL want. The PL and the big clubs don’t want it.

If we felt it was going to level the playing field, e were clearly wrong.

Is there actual data supporting this idea that it's not working? Or is this all based on how it feels?

Tall Paul · Post by **Tall Paul** » Sat Oct 19, 2019 7:01 pm

Man City have just been denied a penalty by VAR, in what looked far more like a foul than Wood's today. That kind of blows my theory that they've changed the way it's being implemented out of the water.

Rileybobs · Post by **Rileybobs** » Sat Oct 19, 2019 7:05 pm

Tall Paul wrote:Man City have just been denied a penalty by VAR, in what looked far more like a foul than Wood's today. That kind of blows my theory that they've changed the way it's being implemented out of the water.

Should have booked DeBruyne for diving. He did the Jamie Vardy trick of sticking his leg out, waiting for a touch and falling over.

ClaretAL · Post by **ClaretAL** » Sat Oct 19, 2019 7:18 pm

IF VAR was as good as the Rugby TMO and the Refs were as good we would not have this ********!

RalphCoatesComb · Post by **RalphCoatesComb** » Sat Oct 19, 2019 7:31 pm

Bordeauxclaret wrote:Dyche spot on with his analysis.

Fazakerley, as the scousers say.

VAR is fine. It should come good in time.

The problem today was Madeley and his TV screen watchers at Stockley Park.

100 Football Fans were asked to view it.

97% said GOAL.

The others were from Leicester, Lower Darwen and the third was Madeley himself

RammyClaret61 · Post by **RammyClaret61** » Sat Oct 19, 2019 7:44 pm

RalphCoatesComb wrote:VAR is fine. It should come good in time.

So how long you giving it? VAR as been in football 4 years now, and it’s still a basket case.

wickdkewlclaret · Post by **wickdkewlclaret** » Sat Oct 19, 2019 7:49 pm

Am I right in thinking the Ref didn’t make a decision on the ‘foul’ on Evans. Therefore how can VAR make a decision on something that wasn’t even considered by the officials?

scouseclaret · Post by **scouseclaret** » Sat Oct 19, 2019 8:00 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:Is there actual data supporting this idea that it's not working? Or is this all based on how it feels?

Yes - the fact that we are having this debate, as are Watford fans, and that follows on from dozens of other contentious VAR decisions already this season.

Surely the point of VAR is that it reduces the number of dodgy decisions rather than creating them?

Do you honestly believe that if that goal had stood, there would be any serious complaints? You probably would, because you like to wind people up. But normal people??

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Sat Oct 19, 2019 8:07 pm

scouseclaret wrote:Yes - the fact that we are having this debate, as are Watford fans, and that follows on from dozens of other contentious VAR decisions already this season.

Surely the point of VAR is that it reduces the number of dodgy decisions rather than creating them?

Do you honestly believe that if that goal had stood, there would be any serious complaints? You probably would, because you like to wind people up. But normal people??

Simply having the debate is not "data".

beddie · Post by **beddie** » Sat Oct 19, 2019 8:11 pm

Rileybobs wrote:Should have booked DeBruyne for diving. He did the Jamie Vardy trick of sticking his leg out, waiting for a touch and falling over.

100% Correct. Var looks at it, no penalty but should have told Taylor book DeBruyne. The systems a joke.

Nonayforever · Post by **Nonayforever** » Sat Oct 19, 2019 8:16 pm

VAR is just another cog in the wheel, along with the ' kick racism out' cog, to get rid of the true football fan, and create a media driven sport for the worldwide TV viewers.

Don't get on the racism bandwagon, that is just a vehicle for the next ban. ( I'm not condoning racism)

The Americans, who are now trying to control football, see the potential in ' tourist' supporters ( who will pay a higher ticket price ) over the season ticket supporters, to fill the grounds and create the ' Mexican wave' effect type of supporter.

VAR isn't here for the season ticket holder.

scouseclaret · Post by **scouseclaret** » Sat Oct 19, 2019 8:31 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:Simply having the debate is not "data".

What do you mean, “data”? All that VAR has demonstrated so far is that refereeing decisions will always be questioned with or without the technology.

My point is that, at least in as far the PL have used it (I thought it worked very well in the World Cup last year) it is creating controversy rather than reducing it.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Sat Oct 19, 2019 8:47 pm

scouseclaret wrote:What do you mean, “data”? All that VAR has demonstrated so far is that refereeing decisions will always be questioned with or without the technology.

My point is that, at least in as far the PL have used it (I thought it worked very well in the World Cup last year) it is creating controversy rather than reducing it.

What i mean is that VAR decision can me measured for accuracy. For example, over the course of a season you can take all the VAR decisions and test them by asking a selection of professionals to evaluate them based on what action they would have taken with the benefit of video replays.

Then you can measure the efficacy of VAR by comparing it with the decision on the field and see how many decisions were corrected by VAR, and how many were incorrectly overturned. You can then compare this figure with the accuracy of officiating without VAR to demonstrate how much better or worse for officiating accuray VAR is in football.

This has been done in the past, and the results of which is why i was an eager supporter of VAR being implemented in football, but this was before VAR was widely adopted. The reason i asked you if this has been done is because you said that it is "clearly wrong" to think that VAR provides a level playing field, and i simply wanted to know if your claim is based on this kind of data, or if you were basing your assertion on your hurt feelings.

ClaretTony · Post by **ClaretTony** » Sat Oct 19, 2019 8:53 pm

wilks_bfc wrote:Is it a single person checking the decisions at all the games or does each game have their own VAR ref

There should be a panel of ex players, ref & managers watching each game. At least then there would be some consensus

There is a VAR & AVAR for each game. I always name them when I do the ref piece ahead of the game. Was Andy Madley & Dan Robotham today.

Pstotto · Post by **Pstotto** » Sat Oct 19, 2019 8:54 pm

Safe standing the same. The Zimmer frame apparatus represents the disablement of the Englishman in his own country as part of a media fascist damning of male spirit to crush mass morale for a supplicant populace.

Hibsclaret · Post by **Hibsclaret** » Sat Oct 19, 2019 8:55 pm

ClaretTony wrote:There is a VAR & AVAR for each game. I always name them when I do the ref piece ahead of the game. Was Andy Madley & Dan Robotham today.

More like Dick Turpin and Stevie Wonder....I reckon

Pstotto · Post by **Pstotto** » Sat Oct 19, 2019 8:57 pm

It's the Irish backstop applied to football, is VAR.

scouseclaret · Post by **scouseclaret** » Sat Oct 19, 2019 9:02 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:What i mean is that VAR decision can me measured for accuracy. For example, over the course of a season you can take all the VAR decisions and test them by asking a selection of professionals to evaluate them based on what action they would have taken with the benefit of video replays.

Then you can measure the efficacy of VAR by comparing it with the decision on the field and see how many decisions were corrected by VAR, and how many were incorrectly overturned. You can then compare this figure with the accuracy of officiating without VAR to demonstrate how much better or worse for officiating accuray VAR is in football.

This has been done in the past, and the results of which is why i was an eager supporter of VAR being implemented in football, but this was before VAR was widely adopted. The reason i asked you if this has been done is because you said that it is "clearly wrong" to think that VAR provides a level playing field, and i simply wanted to know if your claim is based on this kind of data, or if you were basing your assertion on your hurt feelings.

My point is that the “measure of accuracy” will always be based on the subjective opinion of those asked to assess rather than being absolute fact, but if that’s the road you want to go down, even you must concede that you are in a tiny minority-and not just on this board - who have expressed an opinion on the matter that thinks that today’s decision was correct.

If my feelings are hurt it’s because, for the third time this season, my team has been on the wrong end of a contentious decision involving VAR that most people believe to have been incorrect, and we’re 3 points worse off as a result.

FCBurnley · Post by **FCBurnley** » Sat Oct 19, 2019 9:07 pm

and IT

Darnhill Claret · Post by **Darnhill Claret** » Sat Oct 19, 2019 9:18 pm

Why would you book De Bruyne? Zaha wrestled him to the ground but got the benefit of the doubt.

Darnhill Claret · Post by **Darnhill Claret** » Sat Oct 19, 2019 9:23 pm

Just heard SD give his opinion on the Chris Wood/Johnny Evans incident. Two points. Whether Evans would have got to the ball is completely irrelevant. A kick or a trip does not have to be deliberate. The only ‘deliberate’ offence is deliberate handball. There is no offence of deliberate kicking or deliberate tripping. If the ref feels the player did those things deliberately the player is more likely to be carded than not.

Darnhill Claret · Post by **Darnhill Claret** » Sat Oct 19, 2019 9:25 pm

I still thought it was a good goal but I’m not gonna get Sean to defend me in a court of law.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Sat Oct 19, 2019 9:25 pm

scouseclaret wrote:My point is that the “measure of accuracy” will always be based on the subjective opinion of those asked to assess rather than being absolute fact, but if that’s the road you want to go down, even you must concede that you are in a tiny minority-and not just on this board - who have expressed an opinion on the matter that thinks that today’s decision was correct.

If my feelings are hurt it’s because, for the third time this season, my team has been on the wrong end of a contentious decision involving VAR that most people believe to have been incorrect, and we’re 3 points worse off as a result.

There's nothing wrong with having your feelings hurt by this. Believe it or not, and don't tell anyone i said this, but i was gutted it was ruled out too. My feelings were hurt just like yours. But remember, i'm not a Proper Claret™ so keep that between us, eh? Of course, as we all should do when our feelings are hurt we should look for something that brings us joy to keep up our spirits. Some people turn to alcohol or drugs. Some turn to comfort food. I have you guys and your reactions

Foulthrow · Post by **Foulthrow** » Sat Oct 19, 2019 9:27 pm

If Wood goes off to celebrate to his right instead of his left then it's a goal.

My only hope is that whenever we concede in the future all of our team - including the bench, manager and all our supporters - immediately fall over. Hopefully there will be contact at some point.

Hey presto! We never concede a goal again and soon become European champions.

Hibsclaret · Post by **Hibsclaret** » Sat Oct 19, 2019 10:11 pm

Darnhill Claret wrote:Just heard SD give his opinion on the Chris Wood/Johnny Evans incident. Two points. Whether Evans would have got to the ball is completely irrelevant. A kick or a trip does not have to be deliberate. The only ‘deliberate’ offence is deliberate handball. There is no offence of deliberate kicking or deliberate tripping. If the ref feels the player did those things deliberately the player is more likely to be carded than not.

Agree with you on that.

However, he was fuming in that interview so he was not as polished as usual in his assessment. What I think he meant, and what most people probably think is that a touch does not always mean a foul. Therefore, it does not matter whether the touch was or was not deliberate it should be whether the touch was a foul....it clearly wasn’t.

It seems to me the refs have reviewed some of the earlier season decisions that they got wrong (like silva at Bournemouth) and are now, more than ever, classing any evidence of a slight touch as a foul, which is, of course nonsense.

scouseclaret · Post by **scouseclaret** » Sat Oct 19, 2019 10:26 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:There's nothing wrong with having your feelings hurt by this. Believe it or not, and don't tell anyone i said this, but i was gutted it was ruled out too. My feelings were hurt just like yours. But remember, i'm not a Proper Claret™ so keep that between us, eh? Of course, as we all should do when our feelings are hurt we should look for something that brings us joy to keep up our spirits. Some people turn to alcohol or drugs. Some turn to comfort food. I have you guys and your reactions

Sad as we are for rising to it, trolling really isn’t a pastime for grown-ups...

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Sat Oct 19, 2019 10:31 pm

scouseclaret wrote:Sad as we are for rising to it, trolling really isn’t a pastime for grown-ups...

I haven't trolled, yet.

claretonthecoast1882 · Post by **claretonthecoast1882** » Sat Oct 19, 2019 11:53 pm

scouseclaret wrote:Sad as we are for rising to it, trolling really isn’t a pastime for grown-ups...

Don’t entertain the nutcase. He’s an internet mouth the fact the sad **** needs multiple ids on here for when he gets banned due to his life being so empty this is the only social interaction he has.

He once braved the big outdoors and got put on his arse for being a gobshite by someone on this board funnily enough he wasn’t as brave or lairy at the time and just accepted he was a knob.

Why all his ids aren’t banned permanently nobody knows. He’s very big at telling everyone what they should be doing but doesn’t actually do anything himself. Hence why when there’s been protests the last 2 weeks over something he cares so much about he’s been sat in his bedroom rather than being involved. No wonder he was ostracized by his family.

If it be your will · Post by **If it be your will** » Sun Oct 20, 2019 12:09 am

Only just seen it. I think it highly improbable the clearance would have been made whether there was contact or not.

That said, from a strictly technical perspective, even though the foul was both completely accidental and probably inconsequential to the outcome, it probably was a foul.

But by that reckoning, if, in the build up of a 30-yard screamer, in a completely different part of the pitch that was of no consequence to the action whatsoever, someone accidentally trips someone up, that goal should be disallowed by VAR also? Clearly not. I don't know where the line should be drawn.

I'd have VAR for offside decisions only, until it's better defined how to interpret it for all other things.

ClaretLoup · Post by **ClaretLoup** » Sun Oct 20, 2019 12:26 am

If someone is walking past you in the street and you stick your leg out as they pass you by, you trip someone up. If your leg is sticking out already and a passers-by by fails to avoid it, they trip over you. The rules state that a foul occurs when you trip another player so although there was contact, plainly Wood does not trip Evans as there is not the slightest intent as Dyche said there is no motion towards the opponent.

At the very least there is scope for doubt and therefore it is not clear and obvious that Fatty Moss got it wrong by not penalising Wood.

Meanwhile Vertongen clearly and obviously assaults a Watford player, gets nowhere near the ball and the refs error is backed up.

So yep get rid of VAR for fouls as it's not working.

If it be your will · Post by **If it be your will** » Sun Oct 20, 2019 1:24 am

I know what you mean. If 100 referees saw the last minute penalty at Wolves on a video, I'm sure most wouldn't consider it warranted a penalty, but we mostly, if grudgingly, accepted it on the clear and obvious rule.

Looking at the benchmarks elsewhere - like Spurs today - there is no way on earth ours qualifies as a clear and obvious error by the on-field ref, who didn't give a foul.

VAR is throwing up all sorts of questions that hadn't been thought through properly before it was introduced. (But so far we have been unlucky, no doubt about it.)

Dejavu · Post by **Dejavu** » Sun Oct 20, 2019 1:30 am

I honestly thought that VAR would end clearly wrong decisions that always seem to favour the big clubs. Instead it has led to them getting even more dodgy decisions. The very slightest reason to go against us and they do. The very slightest reason to side with the bigger clubs and they knock themselves out to favour them, especially the top six.
Wood completely unintentionally barely touches Evans, who falls like a sack of spuds and was clearly nowhere near getting the ball, the goal disallowed!!
Vertonghen fouls Delofeu 3 times in a couple of seconds with the ball still in play and winnable in a dangerous position. No penalty!!
Alli clearly and deliberately controls the ball with his arm, bringing his shoulder forward at the time of contact. Goal stands!!
They use this "clear and obvious" nonsense when and if it suits them.
It's ruining football for me.
As for Shearer and the rest on MOTD, they must be watching different footage to the rest of us!

If it be your will · Post by **If it be your will** » Sun Oct 20, 2019 1:33 am

Would the whole thing work better if those reviewing VAR had no idea what the on-field decision actually was, I wonder?

Dejavu · Post by **Dejavu** » Sun Oct 20, 2019 1:41 am

It would definitely work better if they had no idea which teams were involved!

Dejavu · Post by **Dejavu** » Sun Oct 20, 2019 1:41 am

It would definitely work better if they had no idea which teams were involved!

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Sun Oct 20, 2019 2:30 am

I think sometimes they have no idea what game is being played. But it doesn't seem to help.

Burnleyareback2 · Post by **Burnleyareback2** » Sun Oct 20, 2019 8:20 am

Can anyone remember what the dodgy/ bloody awful decision monitor was like at this stage of last season.

Is that 2 for VAR - effectively 1 when we use the credit from the overturn at Villa? Yes I know it was offside but that would of stood last season.

scouseclaret · Post by **scouseclaret** » Sun Oct 20, 2019 9:16 am

Dejavu wrote:It would definitely work better if they had no idea which teams were involved!

Dejavu!

Darnhill Claret · Post by **Darnhill Claret** » Sun Oct 20, 2019 9:28 am

Again people are forgetting what was implemented at the beginning of this season.
If in the build up to a goal an offence is committed by an attacking team the goal will not stand. They even removed the ‘deliberate’ from the offence of deliberate handball. Whilst keeping the term ‘deliberate handball’ before penalising a defender, stating that the penalty awarded in the Champions League final would not have been awarded over here. Have we already forgotten the Man City ‘goal’ against Spurs this season?

evensteadiereddie · Post by **evensteadiereddie** » Sun Oct 20, 2019 9:53 am

claretonthecoast1882 wrote:Don’t entertain the nutcase. He’s an internet mouth the fact the sad **** needs multiple ids on here for when he gets banned due to his life being so empty this is the only social interaction he has.

He once braved the big outdoors and got put on his arse for being a gobshite by someone on this board funnily enough he wasn’t as brave or lairy at the time and just accepted he was a knob.

Why all his ids aren’t banned permanently nobody knows. He’s very big at telling everyone what they should be doing but doesn’t actually do anything himself. Hence why when there’s been protests the last 2 weeks over something he cares so much about he’s been sat in his bedroom rather than being involved. No wonder he was ostracized by his family.

Says the right-wing bully boy.

Swizzlestick · Post by **Swizzlestick** » Sun Oct 20, 2019 10:55 am

claretonthecoast1882 wrote:Don’t entertain the nutcase. He’s an internet mouth the fact the sad **** needs multiple ids on here for when he gets banned due to his life being so empty this is the only social interaction he has.

He once braved the big outdoors and got put on his arse for being a gobshite by someone on this board funnily enough he wasn’t as brave or lairy at the time and just accepted he was a knob.

Why all his ids aren’t banned permanently nobody knows. He’s very big at telling everyone what they should be doing but doesn’t actually do anything himself. Hence why when there’s been protests the last 2 weeks over something he cares so much about he’s been sat in his bedroom rather than being involved. No wonder he was ostracized by his family.

You’ve got some brass neck I’ll give you that. All you contribute to this forum are snide comments.

And he’s clearly living rent free in your head.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Sun Oct 20, 2019 11:00 am

claretonthecoast1882 wrote:Don’t entertain the nutcase. He’s an internet mouth the fact the sad **** needs multiple ids on here for when he gets banned due to his life being so empty this is the only social interaction he has.

He once braved the big outdoors and got put on his arse for being a gobshite by someone on this board funnily enough he wasn’t as brave or lairy at the time and just accepted he was a knob.

Why all his ids aren’t banned permanently nobody knows. He’s very big at telling everyone what they should be doing but doesn’t actually do anything himself. Hence why when there’s been protests the last 2 weeks over something he cares so much about he’s been sat in his bedroom rather than being involved. No wonder he was ostracized by his family.

I missed this golden post. So full of contradictions and fantasies. Makes me think that're you're not ok.

And i love how i'm the big bad meanie for enjoying how hysterically you lot react to a game of football as if that should get me banned, yet you delight in physical violence against another forum user.

What a hypocrite

I love it.

MDWat · Post by **MDWat** » Sun Oct 20, 2019 11:40 am

Noted, IT...

If it be your will · Post by **If it be your will** » Sun Oct 20, 2019 12:06 pm

Darnhill Claret wrote:Again people are forgetting what was implemented at the beginning of this season.
If in the build up to a goal an offence is committed by an attacking team the goal will not stand. They even removed the ‘deliberate’ from the offence of deliberate handball. Whilst keeping the term ‘deliberate handball’ before penalising a defender, stating that the penalty awarded in the Champions League final would not have been awarded over here. Have we already forgotten the Man City ‘goal’ against Spurs this season?

Do you happen to know if there's any allowance made for how relevant that offence is? Let's say someone accidentally bumps into an opponent in the centre circle during the build up to a goal, but neither player had anything to do with the goal.

That's part of the problem with this one - leaving aside for now whether it was even a foul, it is highly likely it would have gone in whether Wood touched him or not, but no allowance seems to have been made for this.

The decision was unfair, don't get me wrong, but I do have (a tiny bit of) sympathy for the position the VAR person was put in.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Sun Oct 20, 2019 12:10 pm

If it be your will wrote:Do you happen to know if there's any allowance made for how relevant that offence is? Let's say someone accidentally bumps into an opponent in the centre circle during the build up to a goal, but neither player had anything to do with the goal.

That's part of the problem with this one - leaving aside for now whether it was even a foul, it is highly likely it would have gone in whether Wood touched him or not, but no allowance seems to have been made for this.

The decision was unfair, don't get me wrong, but I do have (a tiny bit of) sympathy for the position the VAR person was put in.

I don't understand how you guys can reach the conclusion that Evans was never getting to the ball. It seems pretty clear that it was certainly possible he could have cleared it. It was less than a metre from him when he was fouled.

It's right there in front of him. Maybe he wasn't getting to it anyway, but i think the idea that it was so unlikely that the referee should be able to decide he wasn't is just fantasy https://imgur.com/knxgNv9" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Hibsclaret · Post by **Hibsclaret** » Sun Oct 20, 2019 12:11 pm

I’m still to understand what offence was committed by the attacking team. Anywhere else on the pitch that is play on so why, just because someone dives and then remonstrates with the incompetent ref, does it become an offence....

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Sun Oct 20, 2019 12:13 pm

Hibsclaret wrote:I’m still to understand what offence was committed by the attacking team. Anywhere else on the pitch that is play on so why, just because someone dives and then remonstrates with the incompetent ref, does it become an offence....

"Dives"

Wood tripped him. If you can't understand that yet then i don't think anyone on here is qualified to help you.

Here you go https://lmgtfy.com/?q=burnley+opticians&s=d&t=w" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Hibsclaret · Post by **Hibsclaret** » Sun Oct 20, 2019 12:15 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:"Dives"

Wood tripped him. If you can't understand that yet then i don't think anyone on here is qualified to help you.

Here you go https://lmgtfy.com/?q=burnley+opticians&s=d&t=w" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I don’t reckon you’re qualified to get out of bed in the morning