VAR changes

[Down_Rover]

BFC income from fans is, at most, 7 or 8 million a year. TV revenue for BFC is over £100 Million per season. Who do you think has the most sway with Premier League Chairmen?

That’s the whole point. It is the fans, be they attenders or stay at home, who generate that £100m.

What other business would make wholesale changes to their product without carrying out customer suer eyes?

VAR could turn out to kill the golden goose. I expect the majority of customers want spontaneous results, and waiting for unaccountable and anonymous ivory towered officials to decide results for them simply removes the attraction of football’s offering

[Paul Waine]

The rules here highlight one of the problems where inconsistency is guaranteed before you even start with VAR....

HANDLING THE BALL

It is an offence if a player:
deliberately touches the ball with their hand/arm, including moving the hand/arm towards the ball
gains possession/control of the ball after it has touched their hand/arm and then:
scores in the opponents’ goal
creates a goal-scoring opportunity
scores in the opponents’ goal directly from their hand/arm, even if accidental, including by the goalkeeper

It is USUALLY an offence if a player:
touches the ball with their hand/arm when:
the hand/arm has made their body unnaturally bigger
the hand/arm is above/beyond their shoulder level (unless the player deliberately plays the ball which then touches their hand/arm)
The above offences apply even if the ball touches a player’s hand/arm directly from the head or body (including the foot) of another player who is close.

Except for the above offences, it is not USUALLY an offence if the ball touches a player’s hand/arm:
directly from the player’s own head or body (including the foot)
directly from the head or body (including the foot) of another player who is close
if the hand/arm is close to the body and does not make the body unnaturally bigger
when a player falls and the hand/arm is between the body and the ground to support the body, but not extended laterally or vertically away from the body
The goalkeeper has the same restrictions on handling the ball as any other player outside the penalty area. If the goalkeeper handles the ball inside their
penalty area when not permitted to do so, an indirect free kick is awarded but there is no disciplinary sanction.

If they remove the 2 USUALLY words it should give us better consistency on handball......

Anyone know what this means?

[RammyClaret61]

Anyone know what this means?

Ask the Mrs.

[Hibsclaret]

Usually is not a word that should be applied to laws of any kind...and yet we have them in football laws. It’s no wonder the refs are confused which means the fans are confused and the game is confused....

[TVC15]

Embarrassingly poor response to what has been a disaster this season. In my 45 years of following football I can not remember so much negative feeling about the game as we had this year.
It’s not just VAR to blame though - the rules for offside and handball are also to blame. For offside it needs changing for me to either daylight between players or don’t use VAR for offside given we are ruling out some great goals for fractions. Handball rules are in a mess. How can it be fair that a team is awarded a penalty when you might handle the ball accidentally on the edge of the area when someone has wacked a ball at you from 2 yards and your hands don’t happen to be down your side ?!!

Personally I am up for ex players being involved in the VAR rulings - they can be taught the rules if they don’t know them but more importantly it’s about the interpretation of those rules. Or alternatively do not give so much power to the referees - they are making decisions to cover their own and their fellow colleagues backs and Swarbrick / Reilly etc who are in charge are ex referees who are part of this. They are ruining the game and the authorities are facilitating it by giving them this power - we should not be surprised as there is nothing more than most referees love than more power and influence to feed their Clatenburg style egos.

This response to communicate better to the crowds is pathetic after the carnage we have seen this season. If the clubs and managers are behind this response then the relationship between fans and clubs is going to deteriorate even quicker than it has in recent years.

And it’s not just about fans who turn up to the game and how small a percentage of revenue this is for clubs. If VAR carries on like this there will be less fans watching football and subscribing to sky and BT etc

[Stayingup]

Its not always used in the way it was intended and it woukd appear that common sense is not being applied
Until it is it needing binning.

[Stproc]

Interesting the most common chant has moved on from “The referee’s a w******” to “F***” VAR”.
Says it all really.

[Hipper]

The key point for me is that the referee should be in charge. That used to be the core principle of refereeing.

He has made a decision that will be reviewed by television. He should look at the television too. He can get advice from VAR but in the end the ref must make the decision. In other words it's another tool to help the referee, just as his assistants are.

Clearly on questions of offside VAR will be more accurate, but the ref should interpret the importance of that offside, as he should handballs, pushes etc..

I'm not saying this will get correct decisions everytime but it will stick to the core principle and not undermine the ref's authority, which VAR as it's currently implemented clearly does.

[Ashingtonclaret46]

Embarrassingly poor response to what has been a disaster this season. In my 45 years of following football I can not remember so much negative feeling about the game as we had this year.
It’s not just VAR to blame though - the rules for offside and handball are also to blame. For offside it needs changing for me to either daylight between players or don’t use VAR for offside given we are ruling out some great goals for fractions. Handball rules are in a mess. How can it be fair that a team is awarded a penalty when you might handle the ball accidentally on the edge of the area when someone has wacked a ball at you from 2 yards and your hands don’t happen to be down your side ?!!

Personally I am up for ex players being involved in the VAR rulings - they can be taught the rules if they don’t know them but more importantly it’s about the interpretation of those rules. Or alternatively do not give so much power to the referees - they are making decisions to cover their own and their fellow colleagues backs and Swarbrick / Reilly etc who are in charge are ex referees who are part of this. They are ruining the game and the authorities are facilitating it by giving them this power - we should not be surprised as there is nothing more than most referees love than more power and influence to feed their Clatenburg style egos.

This response to communicate better to the crowds is pathetic after the carnage we have seen this season. If the clubs and managers are behind this response then the relationship between fans and clubs is going to deteriorate even quicker than it has in recent years.

And it’s not just about fans who turn up to the game and how small a percentage of revenue this is for clubs. If VAR carries on like this there will be less fans watching football and subscribing to sky and BT etc

All well and good, however, VAR applies to no more than 1% of all the football played in the UK on any weekend. Do the same Laws of the Game apply at all these matches or are they changed when VAR is present?
No VAR involved in the European Championships --why? Presumably because there is not the same amount of money around in International Football so the stakes are not as high. The game is cattle trucked!

[Grumps]

VAR doesn’t check corners/goal kicks. It would be a nightmare if all those were checked too.

They don't check every foul either, but do if it leads to a goal, corners could be done in the same way

[ClaretTony]

They don't check every foul either, but do if it leads to a goal, corners could be done in the same way

But they are not - do that and then you'd have to start checking every throw in - would make it even worse than it is now.

[claretonthecoast1882]

But they are not - do that and then you'd have to start checking every throw in - would make it even worse than it is now.

The 4th official has indicated there will be a minimum of 92 minutes injury time

[TVC15]

All well and good, however, VAR applies to no more than 1% of all the football played in the UK on any weekend. Do the same Laws of the Game apply at all these matches or are they changed when VAR is present?
No VAR involved in the European Championships --why? Presumably because there is not the same amount of money around in International Football so the stakes are not as high. The game is cattle trucked!

I doubt very much whether the offside and handball rules are applied below the premier league or at grass roots level especially as its virtually impossible for officials to see those ridiculously marginal decisions. As you probably well know yourself at amateur level the vast majority of referees biggest single input in any game is to wave their arms up and down whilst shouting “PLAY ON” and “get on with the game” !!!!

My guess is that the European Championships don’t have VAR because many of the smaller countries don’t have the facilities or infrastructure etc. Presumably they will have VAR in the final as they did in the World Cup final.

Before this season I did think their was a place for VAR in the game and it would definitely improve it - and part of the reason was some of the very bad decision we had been on the end of against the likes of Arsenal. I still think (just!!) that there is some way that VAR can improve the game but it needs a whole new rethink and I would suspend it to have a review undertaken by a cross selection of fans, players, ex players, managers, and reluctantly I suppose we need a referee in there ! Although in seriousness I think it should be an ex referee who has had nothing to do with the current VAR process - someone like Halsey or Poll

[Claretmatt4]

Slowing down play for things like handball and fouls, without changing the interpretation of the laws, was bound to be an issue. Every details is scrutinised and the laws weren't written for slow mo replays and poring over pixel perfect offsides.

Just get rid. It's spoiling the enjoyment of a goal. I didn't celebrate any of them last week.

[Ashingtonclaret46]

Slowing down play for things like handball and fouls, without changing the interpretation of the laws, was bound to be an issue. Every details is scrutinised and the laws weren't written for slow mo replays and poring over pixel perfect offsides.

Just get rid. It's spoiling the enjoyment of a goal. I didn't celebrate any of them last week.

Sadly, they will not get rid of it because of the money at the top level. They will persevere ad nauseam because it is media driven and will eventually find its way into The Championship and possibly Leagues One and Two, although I doubt that they will be able to afford to bring it in.
In all honesty, the biggest obstacle in introducing it at the lower league level will not be the cost, it will be the lack of officials available because there are more and more hanging up their whistle all over the country.

[RalphCoatesComb]

The fans think they are important but nobody else does.

So what's new?

[uni_queue]

The TMO who officiate at the egg chasing games seem to manage to have an input into the game without making anything like as much of a meal of the process.

OK , the play in rugby tends to be more punctuated with stoppages
but
what is the difference between spotting a forward pass in rugby and an offside in the round ball game?
Surely both are theoretically objective?

But in rugby as I understand the guidance to TMO, if the direction of the pass is not "clear and obvious" (their words - but where have they also been used?) then the move should be allowed to run and the try given - They could put a line across the screen but I dont think thay do - it just fuels the fire
Sensible approach ?

As I understand it, from a try the TMO looks back through two phases of play to spot any potential infringements . That seem to me to be an easily understood definition of what the TMO can look at .

The on field referee and the TMO look at the same pictures on the big screen and have a public discussion - the referee says what he sees and again the "clear and obvious" error should be judged by the TMO otherwise the referee should be allowed to move the game on.

The referee is still in charge of the game ... is the guiding principle .

How did the premier league - with some good options to follow, manage to make things so opaque?

[Grumps]

But they are not - do that and then you'd have to start checking every throw in - would make it even worse than it is now.

As it stands, the ref misses a foul in normal play VAR does not get involved. If he misses a foul in the build up to a goal VAR does get involved. Why Carnt corners be dealt with in the same way?

[dsr]

As it stands, the ref misses a foul in normal play VAR does not get involved. If he misses a foul in the build up to a goal VAR does get involved. Why Carnt corners be dealt with in the same way?

What you are trying to do is find a reason to disallow goals. You would have them taking a corner which would be meaningless because they can't score from it. It would be a waste of time and effort, and would add nothing to the game. How far back would you go? What about a series of four or five corners when the first one was wrong? What if it came from a goal kick two minutes earlier that should have been a corner the other way?

What they would need to do, if they are going back in time, is to check every corner, free kick, and throw in. This would take too long.

[dsr]

The TMO who officiate at the egg chasing games seem to manage to have an input into the game without making anything like as much of a meal of the process.

OK , the play in rugby tends to be more punctuated with stoppages
but
what is the difference between spotting a forward pass in rugby and an offside in the round ball game?
Surely both are theoretically objective?

But in rugby as I understand the guidance to TMO, if the direction of the pass is not "clear and obvious" (their words - but where have they also been used?) then the move should be allowed to run and the try given - They could put a line across the screen but I dont think thay do - it just fuels the fire
Sensible approach ?

As I understand it, from a try the TMO looks back through two phases of play to spot any potential infringements . That seem to me to be an easily understood definition of what the TMO can look at .

The on field referee and the TMO look at the same pictures on the big screen and have a public discussion - the referee says what he sees and again the "clear and obvious" error should be judged by the TMO otherwise the referee should be allowed to move the game on.

The referee is still in charge of the game ... is the guiding principle .

How did the premier league - with some good options to follow, manage to make things so opaque?

In rugby, forward passes are not reviewed because they are subjective - the "momentum rule" being because a player running forward can pass back to a player running alongside but behind him, and it is obviously a legal pass; except that (because of the momentum of the runner) the ball has actually travelled forwards. Hence, even when a try is scored as a result, it isn't reviewable.

(Rugby union does it differently.)

[ClaretTony]

As it stands, the ref misses a foul in normal play VAR does not get involved. If he misses a foul in the build up to a goal VAR does get involved. Why Carnt corners be dealt with in the same way?

Once a corner is given then it becomes a different phase of play - missed free kicks and the game continues. If you started messing with corners, goal kicks then you'd have to do it for throw ins as well and then you'd be working back through several phases of play. At least four corners given recently at Sheffield United that were goal kicks. As it happened, no goals scored from them but you can't start checking all those, they'd need to be done in any case BEFORE they are taken.

[Grumps]

Once a corner is given then it becomes a different phase of play - missed free kicks and the game continues. If you started messing with corners, goal kicks then you'd have to do it for throw ins as well and then you'd be working back through several phases of play. At least four corners given recently at Sheffield United that were goal kicks. As it happened, no goals scored from them but you can't start checking all those, they'd need to be done in any case BEFORE they are taken.

Not sure they would have to give it before the corner was taken, but it still wouldn't be as crazy as playing on when there's a penalty claim, then the other side go up and score whilst they are still deciding if it was a penalty, if they can do that, disallowing a goal, from a wrongly awarded corner really doesn't sound that strange.

[Paul Waine]

Embarrassingly poor response to what has been a disaster this season. In my 45 years of following football I can not remember so much negative feeling about the game as we had this year.
It’s not just VAR to blame though - the rules for offside and handball are also to blame. For offside it needs changing for me to either daylight between players or don’t use VAR for offside given we are ruling out some great goals for fractions. Handball rules are in a mess. How can it be fair that a team is awarded a penalty when you might handle the ball accidentally on the edge of the area when someone has wacked a ball at you from 2 yards and your hands don’t happen to be down your side ?!!

Personally I am up for ex players being involved in the VAR rulings - they can be taught the rules if they don’t know them but more importantly it’s about the interpretation of those rules. Or alternatively do not give so much power to the referees - they are making decisions to cover their own and their fellow colleagues backs and Swarbrick / Reilly etc who are in charge are ex referees who are part of this. They are ruining the game and the authorities are facilitating it by giving them this power - we should not be surprised as there is nothing more than most referees love than more power and influence to feed their Clatenburg style egos.

This response to communicate better to the crowds is pathetic after the carnage we have seen this season. If the clubs and managers are behind this response then the relationship between fans and clubs is going to deteriorate even quicker than it has in recent years.

And it’s not just about fans who turn up to the game and how small a percentage of revenue this is for clubs. If VAR carries on like this there will be less fans watching football and subscribing to sky and BT etc

Agree, TVC15.

Offside rule needs amending/clarifying to now fit in with the new technology. If technology is "split second timing" and measurement to decimals of a centimetre, then I suggest:
1) offside only measured by reference to players' feet, both defender's and attacker's;
2) position of those feet exactly at the time the ball is played forward by attacker's team mate;
So, technology firstly establishes exactly the point in time when the ball is played forward - and shows this time with tv picture on big screen; then technology shows where the defender's feet were and the attacker's feet were. If any point on attacker's feet - at this exact time - is nearer goal line than second nearest defender, then it's offside.
If this was the rule we could even take this decision away from lino, just allow the technology to monitor for these situations, just like technology monitors if the ball has crossed the goal line.

I'd also get rid of "there was contact so player is entitled to go down" idea. Let's define what a trip is, what a shirt grab is - which should both be fouls - and what is contact, because it's a contact sport, but contact is not a foul. Maybe we can get the technology to sort out these decisions....

And, let's send all the officials back to "ref school" if they believe that the "severity of the injury" means a yellow card should be a red. Those guys are only a tiny step away from saying that the guy who took the shot which Loris dropped in his goal and injured his arm in the process should have been red carded.

[dougcollins]

Pandora's box has been opened.

They're just gonna spend a bit more time explaining how they got it wrong.

[4:20]

I hate it. I've never hated anything that has been implemented into the rules of the game before until now. I want the theatre and responsibility and bravery of human fallibility back where it worked.

[Cirrus_Minor]

I was in favour of VAR but never considered that the officials could make such a balls of it. Taking more than 3 minutes to establish whether an incident is clear and obvious or using quantum technology to declare a toe is offside is bonkers. If they can't use it sensibly and consistent with the pace of a game then it should be scrapped.

[ClaretTony]

Not sure they would have to give it before the corner was taken, but it still wouldn't be as crazy as playing on when there's a penalty claim, then the other side go up and score whilst they are still deciding if it was a penalty, if they can do that, disallowing a goal, from a wrongly awarded corner really doesn't sound that strange.

Absolutely clear, once corner is given and taken it is a totally different phase of play.

[Hibsclaret]

In other words it's another tool to help the referee, just as his assistants are.

Totally agree. There are lots of tools that are helping the referee....and therein lies the problem

As for the incorrect corner issue this is not even an issue unless you want to play until midnight...let’s replay every incorrect decision while we are at it....it’s annoying if you concede from an incorrect decision but when the play has stopped it restarts with corner, goal kick, throw in or whatever the restart happens to be

[Grumps]

Absolutely clear, once corner is given and taken it is a totally different phase of play.

Everything I've heard about VAR was that it's all about getting the right decision, quite clearly our goal on Saturday shouldn't have happened, 1st,3rd or 23rd phase it doesn't matter, that decision led directly to a goal. ok, there may have been 3 corners given incorrectly at Sheffield, but they didn't lead to a goal, so no need to check.
I don't like VAR one little bit, but if it's staying it needs tweaking, and checking a corner, that leads directly to a goal sounds like a sensible idea to me, they are checking everything else once a goal is scored so what's the difference

[ClaretTony]

Everything I've heard about VAR was that it's all about getting the right decision, quite clearly our goal on Saturday shouldn't have happened, 1st,3rd or 23rd phase it doesn't matter, that decision led directly to a goal. ok, there may have been 3 corners given incorrectly at Sheffield, but they didn't lead to a goal, so no need to check.
I don't like VAR one little bit, but if it's staying it needs tweaking, and checking a corner, that leads directly to a goal sounds like a sensible idea to me, they are checking everything else once a goal is scored so what's the difference

You haven't heard everything then or you've misinterpreted it. If you did that then you have to check every single corner because if the ref has given a goal kick wrongly, he's robbed a side of potentially scoring from a corner. It doesn't work like that and thank God it doesn't, it would be even worse than it is now and I keep hoping that it will get worse so that someone pulls the plug on it.

[Grumps]

You haven't heard everything then or you've misinterpreted it. If you did that then you have to check every single corner because if the ref has given a goal kick wrongly, he's robbed a side of potentially scoring from a corner. It doesn't work like that and thank God it doesn't, it would be even worse than it is now and I keep hoping that it will get worse so that someone pulls the plug on it.

I've heard and understood everything thankyou, which is why I suggested it needs tweaking.
Taking loyalties aside, with all the technology available do you think it was right that we scored from a corner which the ref got wrong?
I think you've not understood my point that the corner is only checked IF a goal is scored, just like handball, offsides, fouls are only checked when a goal is scored ( or possible pen). Using your logic that every corner would need checking, then every offside should be checked, as a wrongly given offside could have led to a team potentially scoring, and all offsides are not checked, so nothing wrong at all using same rules for corners, only when a goal is scored.

[ClaretTony]

I've heard and understood everything thankyou, which is why I suggested it needs tweaking.
Taking loyalties aside, with all the technology available do you think it was right that we scored from a corner which the ref got wrong?
I think you've not understood my point that the corner is only checked IF a goal is scored, just like handball, offsides, fouls are only checked when a goal is scored ( or possible pen). Using your logic that every corner would need checking, then every offside should be checked, as a wrongly given offside could have led to a team potentially scoring, and all offsides are not checked, so nothing wrong at all using same rules for corners, only when a goal is scored.

The day they take it back further as you suggest is the day we might as well all give up. All you are suggesting is potentially penalising the attacking team even more. Let's check them all so goal kicks aren't erroneously given, let's check throw ins just in case. The VAR rules are bad enough as they are thanks.

[Grumps]

The day they take it back further as you suggest is the day we might as well all give up. All you are suggesting is potentially penalising the attacking team even more. Let's check them all so goal kicks aren't erroneously given, let's check throw ins just in case. The VAR rules are bad enough as they are thanks.

Take it back further? Don't get that at all, the set piece that leads directly to the goal? That's not far back.

[boatshed bill]

I'm not sure I understand the remit, but should VAR only be used at the ref's request?

[Grumps]

I'm not sure I understand the remit, but should VAR only be used at the ref's request?

They check certain things automatically, like goals etc, then advise the ref, i don't think the ref can request a check

[boatshed bill]

They check certain things automatically, like goals etc, then advise the ref, i don't think the ref can request a check

That's sort of what I thought.
I'd sooner the game stayed in the control of the ref.

[ClaretTony]

I'm not sure I understand the remit, but should VAR only be used at the ref's request?

No. They check things automatically.

[dsr]

I've heard and understood everything thankyou, which is why I suggested it needs tweaking.
Taking loyalties aside, with all the technology available do you think it was right that we scored from a corner which the ref got wrong?
I think you've not understood my point that the corner is only checked IF a goal is scored, just like handball, offsides, fouls are only checked when a goal is scored ( or possible pen). Using your logic that every corner would need checking, then every offside should be checked, as a wrongly given offside could have led to a team potentially scoring, and all offsides are not checked, so nothing wrong at all using same rules for corners, only when a goal is scored.

Remember Tottenham last year? We should have had 7 corners in the match. But in the first half the ref gave a goal kick that should have been a corner, and in the second half he gave a corner that should have been a goal kick. So we actually had 7 corners in the match which was the correct number.

We scored from the one in the second half that we shouldn't have had. Now, you are saying that because we scored, that corner should be disallowed. So we would have only had 6 corners in the match. Do you think that's fair? I don't. The only way to make it fair would have been to go back to the first half and start again from the corner we should have had. Would that be fairer? Would that be sensible?

[Grumps]

Remember Tottenham last year? We should have had 7 corners in the match. But in the first half the ref gave a goal kick that should have been a corner, and in the second half he gave a corner that should have been a goal kick. So we actually had 7 corners in the match which was the correct number.

We scored from the one in the second half that we shouldn't have had. Now, you are saying that because we scored, that corner should be disallowed. So we would have only had 6 corners in the match. Do you think that's fair? I don't. The only way to make it fair would have been to go back to the first half and start again from the corner we should have had. Would that be fairer? Would that be sensible?

The only corner that would have been checked would have been the one a goal was scored from, the rest are irrelevant. We could have been offside 10 times, but the only one they'd check is if we scored.

[dsr]

The only corner that would have been checked would have been the one a goal was scored from, the rest are irrelevant. We could have been offside 10 times, but the only one they'd check is if we scored.

Exactly. you would be using VAR as a means to disallow as many goals as you could. It may be good for the purist that no goal is ever scored without 5 minutes of clean play leading up to it, but it isn't good for the entertainment. At some point we need to get back to the idea that football is a game to enjoy, rather than an exercise in pure logic.

[Nonayforever]

Take it back further? Don't get that at all, the set piece that leads directly to the goal? That's not far back.

What if, after a wrongly given corner, play continues for 5 or even 10 minutes and then a goal is scored ?
Is that then disallowed ? How many touches of the ball should be allowed ( if a goal is scored) before it is reviewed back to the corner ?
You haven't thought your response through.

[Grumps]

What if, after a wrongly given corner, play continues for 5 or even 10 minutes and then a goal is scored ?
Is that then disallowed ? How many touches of the ball should be allowed ( if a goal is scored) before it is reviewed back to the corner ?
You haven't thought your response through.

Yes I have, that's why I said directly from the corner.
What happens currently if offside is given incorrectly? Or not given when it should have been, They don't go back to it if a goal is scored 10 mins later, corners would be no different

[dougcollins]

Exactly. you would be using VAR as a means to disallow as many goals as you could. It may be good for the purist that no goal is ever scored without 5 minutes of clean play leading up to it, but it isn't good for the entertainment. At some point we need to get back to the idea that football is a game to enjoy, rather than an exercise in pure logic.

Takes away more than it gives. My biggest problem with it.

[Dark Cloud]

Genuine question: Last season Chris Wood scored a last minute "winner" away at Watford and was flagged offside so the goal didn't stand. It was clear straight away on the replay(s) that the liner got it wrong and it should have stood. Would VAR have awarded a goal??

[dsr]

Genuine question: Last season Chris Wood scored a last minute "winner" away at Watford and was flagged offside so the goal didn't stand. It was clear straight away on the replay(s) that the liner got it wrong and it should have stood. Would VAR have awarded a goal??

As long as the ref hadn't blown his whistle, then yes. The ball is dead as soon as the whistle blows but not before.

[FactualFrank]

As long as the ref hadn't blown his whistle, then yes. The ball is dead as soon as the whistle blows but not before.

Or blown one of the opponents.