I know we benefited from it today, but what an absolute joke that was!

Everything from the screen announcements, the tannoy that you couldn't hear properly, the time it took, and then the decision itself, which is the shape of someone's football boot.

It has to go!

Or the offside rule needs changing in favour of the attacker?

The decisions are correct to the letter of the law. Imagine if we didn't have VAR today and they were given the first goal. We would be saying he were offside.

As poor as it seemingly is it's getting decisions correct

fanzone wrote: ↑

Wed Jan 01, 2020 3:37 pm

Or the offside rule needs changing in favour of the attacker?

The decisions are correct to the letter of the law. Imagine if we didn't have VAR today and they were given the first goal. We would be saying he were offside.

As poor as it seemingly is it's getting decisions correct

That's just not true.

If we didn't have VAR, then no one would've complained about the goal being given because he was level.

VAR has ensured that there is now no such thing as level, and the benefit of the doubt being given to the attacker in tight calls now no longer exists.

Either way, it wasn't a clear and obvious error, which is what we were told this nonsense was being brought in for... hence the time taken to make the decision!

There is now a new way of celebrating goals... wait until the opposition have restarted the game, because the ref can't then go back.

An utter farce and ruining the game!

Absolute farce, ruining the game. It's taking an age, the big screen at Burnley often doesn't bother and when it does, as with a penalty shout this afternoon, it goes up AFTER play has been resumed. Absolute nonsense all round.

fanzone wrote: ↑

Wed Jan 01, 2020 3:37 pm

Imagine if we didn't have VAR today and they were given the first goal. We would be saying he were offside.

This isn't a go at you but only an idiot would have quibbled about their first goal that never was.

fidelcastro wrote: ↑

Wed Jan 01, 2020 3:48 pm

That's just not true.

If we didn't have VAR, then no one would've complained about the goal being given because he was level.

VAR has ensured that there is now no such thing as level, and the benefit of the doubt being given to the attacker in tight calls now no longer exists.

Either way, it wasn't a clear and obvious error, which is what we were told this nonsense was being brought in for... hence the time taken to make the decision!

There is now a new way of celebrating goals... wait until the opposition have restarted the game, because the ref can't then go back.

An utter farce and ruining the game!

I agree with you but to the letter of the law VAR is getting the decisions correct. Everything needs cleaning up and once its done it will work very well and level out decisions for all teams .

It’s the death of football. I’m done after this season. I reckon I’ll be happier asa result......and at least £550 richer.

fanzone wrote: ↑

Wed Jan 01, 2020 3:55 pm

I agree with you but to the letter of the law VAR is getting the decisions correct. Everything needs cleaning up and once its done it will work very well and level out decisions for all teams .

Are you buying that the lines, the measurements and the decision about when the ball is played are so accurate? I don't think it's even proven the decisions are correct.

fanzone wrote: ↑

Wed Jan 01, 2020 3:55 pm

I agree with you but to the letter of the law VAR is getting the decisions correct. Everything needs cleaning up and once its done it will work very well and level out decisions for all teams .

Read it again!

CLEAR AND OBVIOUS ERRORS!

That decision today was not overturning a clear and obvious error. It was simply finding a reason to disallow a goal. Just like Wood's 'goal' against West Ham.

It can never work well, as you suggest, and needs ditching pronto!

I’d rather we lost 3-1 today without VAR, than 2-1 with it.

Horrible. Goals can’t be celebrated. Can’t say I even particularly celebrated their goal being disallowed as I had waited so long for the announcement that I was at the point where I just wanted the game to restart. It really has ruined the game and I can’t see how any amount of tweaking or law changes can bring the same level of enjoyment back to the game. It’s a failed experiment and should be scrapped at the end of the season but we know that it won’t.

fidelcastro wrote: ↑

Wed Jan 01, 2020 4:00 pm

Read it again!

CLEAR AND OBVIOUS ERRORS!

That decision today was not overturning a clear and obvious error. It was simply finding a reason to disallow a goal. Just like Wood's 'goal' against West Ham.

It can never work well, as you suggest, and needs ditching pronto!

Not sure how many times this needs pointing out......... Clear and obvious doesn't apply to offside.

ClaretTony wrote: ↑

Wed Jan 01, 2020 3:50 pm

Absolute farce, ruining the game. It's taking an age, the big screen at Burnley often doesn't bother and when it does, as with a penalty shout this afternoon, it goes up AFTER play has been resumed. Absolute nonsense all round.

Not only that but the tannoy system in the Jimmy Mac upper is inaudible and has been for some time.
All we could hear when the VAR check was finished was some mumbling coming out of the speakers.

This isn't a recent problem, you would think that the club would need to sort this out with regard to the safety certificate.

Grumps wrote: ↑

Wed Jan 01, 2020 4:10 pm

Not sure how many times this needs pointing out......... Clear and obvious doesn't apply to offside.

It does if it's a 'clear and obvious' offside.

What we saw today was not. We were literally talking millimetres, which as already mentioned, isn't exactly convincing with those silly lines being drawn anyway.

Targetman wrote: ↑

Wed Jan 01, 2020 4:14 pm

Not only that but the tannoy system in the Jimmy Mac upper is inaudible and has been for some time.
All we could hear when the VAR check was finished was some mumbling coming out of the speakers.

This isn't a recent problem, you would think that the club would need to sort this out with regard to the safety certificate.

It's not good in our stand either but I was at Watford and Bournemouth recently when the announcements were no more than mumblings.

I'd suggest contacting the club's safety officer if you think there is a safety problem. It's Cliff Edens.

fidelcastro wrote: ↑

Wed Jan 01, 2020 4:16 pm

It does if it's a 'clear and obvious' offside.

What we saw today was not. We were literally talking millimetres, which as already mentioned, isn't exactly convincing with those silly lines being drawn anyway.

Clear and obvious doesn’t apply to any offside decisions. Maybe it should, but it doesn’t.

Rileybobs wrote: ↑

Wed Jan 01, 2020 4:21 pm

Clear and obvious doesn’t apply to any offside decisions. Maybe it should, but it doesn’t.

I think we all know when a player is blatantly offside.

That wasn't the case today. If the 'goal' had been given, I can't believe anyone would have complained.

fidelcastro wrote: ↑

Wed Jan 01, 2020 4:24 pm

I think we all know when a player is blatantly offside.

That wasn't the case today. If the 'goal' had been given, I can't believe anyone would have complained.

I agree. I was just pointing out that clear and obvious errors don’t apply to offsides.

Rileybobs wrote: ↑

Wed Jan 01, 2020 4:27 pm

I agree. I was just pointing out that clear and obvious errors don’t apply to offsides.

Then that just makes it even more silly.

What was wrong with the old rule?

If they can't decide within seconds of looking at it the goal should be given. I thought it was a handball before the cross came in anyway.

Do we actually know the decision was correct? They were showing it on the TV and I still didn’t see how he was offside even with the wonky lines they put in.

It’s almost like they use Microsoft paint to draw lines to then guess the decision when the results are clearly inconclusive, there’s absolutely no way you can factually say Wesley was offside today, so it was a guess.

I was in the Jimmy Mac and I thought it was because he was offside the VAR farce, but it didn't really matter with a performance that bad.

Maybe someone could post the VAR pictures from today’s game so those who were at the game can see, I wouldn’t know where to find them.

fidelcastro wrote: ↑

Wed Jan 01, 2020 4:29 pm

Then that just makes it even more silly.

What was wrong with the old rule?

What old rule?

Rileybobs wrote: ↑

Wed Jan 01, 2020 4:27 pm

I agree. I was just pointing out that clear and obvious errors don’t apply to offsides.

According to IFAB it does, and the PL have got it wrong

KRBFC wrote: ↑

Wed Jan 01, 2020 4:36 pm

Maybe someone could post the VAR pictures from today’s game so those who were at the game can see, I wouldn’t know where to find them.

KRBFC wrote: ↑

Wed Jan 01, 2020 4:33 pm

Do we actually know the decision was correct? They were showing it on the TV and I still didn’t see how he was offside even with the wonky lines they put in.

It’s almost like they use Microsoft paint to draw lines to then guess the decision when the results are clearly inconclusive, there’s absolutely no way you can factually say Wesley was offside today, so it was a guess.

Certainly the benefit always seems to go to the defending team.

The sooner we get rid of it and go back to human error the better. I really do think it's stopping the enjoyment of the game.

thatdberight wrote: ↑

Wed Jan 01, 2020 4:37 pm

What old rule?

The rule where if you appeared to be level then you were considered onside. Any level of doubt was given in favour of the attacker.

I know this was only the interpretation of what a linesman saw in a split second, but narrowing it down to the tightest margins is making things a hundred times worse in my opinion.

fidelcastro wrote: ↑

Wed Jan 01, 2020 4:44 pm

The rule where if you appeared to be level then you were considered onside. Any level of doubt was given in favour of the attacker.

I know this was only the interpretation of what a linesman saw in a split second, but narrowing it down to the tightest margins is making things a hundred times worse in my opinion.

If you mean, "Ditch VAR", I'm with you. But no laws have been changed.

thatdberight wrote: ↑

Wed Jan 01, 2020 3:59 pm

Are you buying that the lines, the measurements and the decision about when the ball is played are so accurate? I don't think it's even proven the decisions are correct.

This mock precision is ridiculous. The frame rate of the camera means there's 0.02 seconds between images. There was something on TV this week that showed that players running in opposite directions can cover 10-20cm in that time. Absolutely no way that should have been disallowed today.

And after all the messing about, the ref adds 2 minutes stoppage time at the end of the half!?

thatdberight wrote: ↑

Wed Jan 01, 2020 4:51 pm

If you mean, "Ditch VAR", I'm with you. But no laws have been changed.

But they have, because there is now no such thing as level.

It might be a change by default, but it's still a change.

It should have been disallowed for handball anyway.

quoonbeatz wrote: ↑

Wed Jan 01, 2020 4:58 pm

It should have been disallowed for handball anyway.

The first screen announcement was that they were checking for a possible handball. I'm guessing that they decided it wasn't.

Hard to know what's going on for certain though.

Hope this shows up. But this was the angle and cameras which they use for offsides. Looking at it it is a clear goal....no the ball hasnt actually crossed the line although it seems to have. Just shows the system up at the moment as being inadequate

Just watched MOTD and the disallowed goal.
Ludicrous decision by the VAR man.
These people are ruining football with their silly slide rule.

said this in a different thread - simple fix, take away the ability to draw lines, 2 replays only - if it's not clear and obvious then the pitch ruling stands. As it is, I've watched far less games this season than in the previous 10 seasons because of VAR and I'll be finding other things to do with my time in the future

We are now in a unprecedented situation with more controversy & confusion with seemingly good goals chalked off & some awarded, despite the old system having its flaws I think overall it was better, even some of the referees & football pundits/journalists think we are worse off & are baffled with some of the decisions micro measuring still shots & juggling lines to assess if somebody's limb or limb extensions are protruding by a millimetre fraction.

Jakubclaret wrote: ↑

Thu Jan 02, 2020 1:37 am

We are now in a unprecedented situation with more controversy & confusion with seemingly good goals chalked off & some awarded, despite the old system having its flaws I think overall it was better, even some of the referees & football pundits/journalists think we are worse off & are baffled with some of the decisions micro measuring still shots & juggling lines to assess if somebody's limb or limb extensions are protruding by a millimetre fraction.

VAR wouldn't have caught Dion Dublin out more than most by that assumption I suspect

fidelcastro wrote: ↑

Wed Jan 01, 2020 4:53 pm

But they have, because there is now no such thing as level.

It might be a change by default, but it's still a change.

Exactly right. The old rule, when "level" was changed from offside to onside, was issued with guidance to refs that "level" meant to the normal human eye, not to the millimetre. I think the words used were "If a player appears to be level, then he is level." This is a change of law - essentially they have reversed that decision from 30 years ago which was designed to increase the number of goals, and sleepwalked into this version which is designed to reduce the number of goals.

I didn’t realise until watching MOTD the offside was given for the first ball in, prior to Tarkys clearance.

I thought it was given for Wesleys attempted flickon to Grealish.

ClaretTony wrote: ↑

Wed Jan 01, 2020 3:50 pm

Absolute farce, ruining the game. It's taking an age, the big screen at Burnley often doesn't bother and when it does, as with a penalty shout this afternoon, it goes up AFTER play has been resumed. Absolute nonsense all round.

Just wait until we get the second one, then it will be a shambles. Imagine BFC trying to get two screens in perfect synch with each other

fidelcastro wrote: ↑

Wed Jan 01, 2020 3:30 pm

I know we benefited from it today, but what an absolute joke that was!

Everything from the screen announcements, the tannoy that you couldn't hear properly, the time it took, and then the decision itself, which is the shape of someone's football boot.

It has to go!

Absolutely, and don't forget it was all compounded by the "2 minutes added time" at the end of the half!! BLOODY JOKE!!!

Dark Cloud wrote: ↑

Thu Jan 02, 2020 10:12 am

Absolutely, and don't forget it was all compounded by the "2 minutes added time" at the end of the half!! BLOODY JOKE!!!

That's the TV companies running football for you.. Half time advertisements slots are prime time real estate so can't be missed under any circumstances. VAR check, a goal, few stoppages and 2 minutes only.. TV Director calls the shots..

ClaretTony wrote: ↑

Wed Jan 01, 2020 3:50 pm

Absolute farce, ruining the game. It's taking an age, the big screen at Burnley often doesn't bother and when it does, as with a penalty shout this afternoon, it goes up AFTER play has been resumed. Absolute nonsense all round.

There's a big screen? Where? Those of us at the top of JH Upper never see one!
Sorry for the sarcasm, but please can there be one that we can see soon? No-one ever seems to give a proper answer to this question. Perhaps they are waiting for VAR to be abolished so we won't need to see one!

Im_not_Robbie_Blake wrote: ↑

Thu Jan 02, 2020 10:59 am

There's a big screen? Where? Those of us at the top of JH Upper never see one!
Sorry for the sarcasm, but please can there be one that we can see soon? No-one ever seems to give a proper answer to this question. Perhaps they are waiting for VAR to be abolished so we won't need to see one!

After the last few home performances you can only hope and pray they install it right in front of your seat so you can't see the pitch

Vegas Claret wrote: ↑

Thu Jan 02, 2020 1:36 am

said this in a different thread - simple fix, take away the ability to draw lines, 2 replays only - if it's not clear and obvious then the pitch ruling stands. As it is, I've watched far less games this season than in the previous 10 seasons because of VAR and I'll be finding other things to do with my time in the future

And upgrade the cameras so you can actually freeze it at the moment the ball was played. A GoPro has a higher fps than what VAR is using and that is ridiculous.

We thought there was a handball in the build up. Then it said foul, then a lifetime of offside... to which I don't think it was, certainly shouldn't have been disallowed. I'm guessing he didn't handball it then.
I say scrap the lines for offside, if it looks offside, it is. If you can't tell clearly, decision stays. Surely it can't be that difficult, especially when it obviously takes 5 minutes to draw the bloody lines.

How VAR has made offside decisions even more contentious is beyond me

There should be a pitch-side monitor that the ref has to consult. He and the chump at Brackley Park can discuss qickly what is on screen and if it's not an absolute gimme of offside, the goal should be given - promoting the art of good attacking - or disallowed if we're looking at promoting the art sound defence.
Either way, I think the ref should have the final decision and the game moves on.