VAR not imrproved

[Firthy]

Read the following article and compare it to the non penalty decision in our game on Friday and tell me which you prefer. VAR or no VAR.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/62783142

After watching matches this season I'm definitely in the no VAR camp. Yes mistakes will be made but they are far more understandable and excusable when made in real time than making the wrong decision after minutes of viewing slow motion replays from various angles.

[tiger76]

No VAR, yes we arguably got the rough end of decisions on Friday, but equally we got a goal at Wigan that with VAR would have been ruled out, so swings and roundabouts for me, and I'm happy to take the rough with the smooth over the course of the season.

[northeastclaret]

It was the crucial third goal as well at Wigan , not the icing on the cake goals

[bfcjg]

About as improved as the spelling.

[NottsClaret]

For years we had losing managers in their post match press conferences bemoaning a poor decision and saying ‘.. we’ve got the technology, let’s use it!”.

As if there’d been some breakthrough in AI science and a super computer would spit out unquestionably correct decisions. I still suspect this is what some fans believe when they think it would be fine, if only we used it correctly.

At the end of the day, it’s always going to be a bloke in a hut looking at a TV, forming a subjective opinion on something another referee has just seen himself. Or drawing lines on a blurry freeze frame while fans sit around in a stadium 100 miles away waiting for all the joy of the live experience to be drained out of it.

Even ‘clear and obvious’ is leading us up the path to nowhere. Everything is clear and obvious when you believe you’re right. That bar is set so low it may as well not exist.

Even after the lad at WBA pulled off the save of the season and the ref denied us a penalty and ultimately 3 points, I 100% adamantly believed having VAR is the worst thing to happen to football.

[Firthy]

About as improved as the spelling.

I blame Tony for removing the edit function so soon after you've potsed

[Juan Tanamera]

As shown yesterday by the appalling decision to overrule Cornet's 'goal' it's a get out of jail card for the so called big clubs.
It's here to stay.

[bfcjg]

Goal line technology is the only thing that works. If the ref or linesman allow or disallow a penalty/goal that should be it VAR should be used retrospectively to punish missed fouls etc and that's it.

[RammyClaret61]

What really puzzles me is, other leagues continue to vote to implement it. Scotland are bringing it in after the World Cup.
Enjoy this season, it’ll be in the championship soon.

[gandhisflipflop]

What really puzzles me is, other leagues continue to vote to implement it. Scotland are bringing it in after the World Cup.
Enjoy this season, it’ll be in the championship soon.

It’s because there’s too much money that’s been poured into it to admit it was a mistake. They WILL make it work come rain or shine! It’s the worst thing that’s happened to the game.

[elwaclaret]

I think the moving on of Riley tells us that VAR has never been operated properly. I’ll be interested in the new methods implemented by a much better referee (whose name escapes me). I noticed MOTD were once again banging the drum for ex-footballers be added to the VAR shed of operations… potentially that would cut out a lot of the mistakes we saw yesterday in the Premier League…

If used properly VARstill has to be the better option. The first rule should be if it is not clear to the eye then VAR don;t get involved, they have every available angle, they don’t need to draw lines for offsides… it kills the games momentum.

I’ll be interested in the review, and how Hallesey (names coming back to me (if not the spelling(?)) implements the recommendations.

[RammyClaret61]

It’s Howard Webb isn’t it ?

[jetblackcat]

I think the moving on of Riley tells us that VAR has never been operated properly. I’ll be interested in the new methods implemented by a much better referee (whose name escapes me). I noticed MOTD were once again banging the drum for ex-footballers be added to the VAR shed of operations… potentially that would cut out a lot of the mistakes we saw yesterday in the Premier League…

If used properly VARstill has to be the better option. The first rule should be if it is not clear to the eye then VAR don;t get involved, they have every available angle, they don’t need to draw lines for offsides… it kills the games momentum.

I’ll be interested in the review, and how Hallesey (names coming back to me (if not the spelling(?)) implements the recommendations.

I agree that having former players involved ought to improve things. The thing that worries me is that they are from the “there was contact so he’s entitled to go down” cohort.

[Stayingup]

VAR can be highly controversial when decisions like some yesterday are made and clearly wrong. But its not VAR at fault its the people operating it. I wonder if ex players adjudicating with it might bring about an improvement.

[NottsClaret]

But its not VAR at fault its the people operating it.

Not sure about this. Basically what that means is, it’s not the Video Assisted Referee that’s at fault, it’s the Video Assisted Referee.

[Steve-Harpers-perm]

Say it everyone season VAR is used by the officials who love to be part of the show and keep themselves relevant in the hope they get a gig in the studio when they retire. Even technology can’t help ineptness.

[elwaclaret]

I agree that having former players involved ought to improve things. The thing that worries me is that they are from the “there was contact so he’s entitled to go down” cohort.

There seems to be only clowns like Hendry and the ITV D list celebrity players still making that sort of comment. But it is hardly impossible that they will be the kind chosen as ‘playing experts,’ one lives in hope.

[fidelcastro]

Much as I wanted us to stay up last season, the consolation was not having to put up with this rubbish that I personally never wanted in the first place.

Who remembers the fans on here and elsewhere, that said it would benefit clubs like us because the big clubs would no longer get the big decisions?

Remember, if it wasn't for VAR we'd have stayed up last season!

[yTib]

for it to have any chance of being effective all reviews must be seen in real time.

but they won't be.

i agree it's the worst thing to have happened to footy in ages. if you can't even celebrate a goal properly any more what's the point?

[NRC]

There shouldn’t be a guy in a hut, there should be a pitch-side monitor and the referee has sole discretion to use it under his own volition, and over time his performance metrics will reflect with precision

[SydneyClaret]

It’s always the same idiots on VAR that make the same mistakes. Lee Mason for example.

[Paul Waine]

How to sort out VAR: both teams have 3 VAR reviews each. Ref can also have 3 VAR reviews. And, that's it. So, 3 reviews possible by 3 different "interested parties" in 90 minutes. No retaining review if your review is proved correct by VAR. No VAR official deciding to review except when review requested by any of the 3 parties. Do you use any of your reviews for a yellow or red card decision? Do you use any for handball in the box? Or, the first goal that goes against you? And, limit the section of the game reviewed to events no more than X seconds before the review was called - so wind back and look at events leading up to the event, but no more than X seconds behind.

[claptrappers_union]

Watching BHA v Leicester. Another shocking decision in my opinion

[Stanbill05]

Absolutely. Never a free kick. VAR should have corrected it and booked the diver.

[KRBFC]

Watching BHA v Leicester. Another shocking decision in my opinion

How is that a shocking decision? he's 3 yards offside

[claptrappers_union]

He don’t touch the ball. I’ve seen loads of similar instances where that would’ve been given the other way.

I genuinely don’t know the rules anymore

[taio]

He don’t touch the ball. I’ve seen loads of similar instances where that would’ve been given the other way.

I genuinely don’t know the rules anymore

He was still interfering with play.

[KRBFC]

He don’t touch the ball. I’ve seen loads of similar instances where that would’ve been given the other way.

I genuinely don’t know the rules anymore

He interferes with play, tries to overhead kick it. Not only does he FORCE the Leicester defender into heading it away, he also interferes with the defenders vision before he heads it away.

[claptrappers_union]

Right, let’s see what happens next week. They’ll be a similar instance the decision will be different.

[taio]

Right, let’s see what happens next week. They’ll be a similar instance the decision will be different.

It doesn't really matter what happens next week. This one was the correct decision in the end. A player doesn't have to touch the ball to be interfering with play.

[claptrappers_union]

I remember an instance a couple of weeks ago, I think it was in the Liverpool thrashing of Bournemouth when a defender headed into his own net, but he was reacting to a player in an offside position behind him… but apparently he wasn’t interfering and they gave the goal.

[clive40golf]

I would suggest, if it takes 4-5 minutes to make a decision with VAR and all those camera angles, then it can’t be classified as a “clear and obvious mistake”

[claptrappers_union]

Offsides are ‘factual’ - clear and obvious doesn’t come into it

[clive40golf]

I understand what your saying, and agree that offsides are factual, but a guy having a swing at a ball , not hitting it, is just the same as someone trying to head the ball and not hitting it. Besides the ball then bounced to someone else,who scored. If The ref made his decision on that, then it’s not a clear and obvious error,

[claptrappers_union]

You might as keep a player in an offside position all the time, and only come back on-side when the team attacking the 18 yard box.

[clive40golf]

Do you mean like Thierry Henry did and other players do regularly?
I totally agree with you statements, but there’s no consistency with the decisions that are being brought up by VAR.

[Vegas Claret]

Offsides are ‘factual’ - clear and obvious doesn’t come into it

Only factual if you can prove it to be correct and they cant
https://www.sportbible.com/football/new ... s-20190922

[Stayingup]

Not sure about this. Basically what that means is, it’s not the Video Assisted Referee that’s at fault, it’s the Video Assisted Referee.

I think you know what I mean. The operators not the system. Like you I dont like it because of the interpretations and time taken sometimes for a decision by the operators. What many are saying now is that decisions are favouring the Big Six. Just like before VAR. Moyes was apoplectic yesterday after Maxwels goal was disallowed.

[DAVETHEVICAR]

Another one to be disputed

[Goody1975]

Another one to be disputed

Many will say it was a foul but the new directive is asking referees to give leeway for challenges like this, you can't dismiss this just cause it led to a goal.

[Taffy on the wing]

Fancy putting Lee Mason in charge of something & being surprised when it goes to hell!
Good goals chalked off again today.......JOKE!

[bobinho]

Offsides are ‘factual’ - clear and obvious doesn’t come into it

Unless the powers that be have changed the definition by which VAR is used, then 'clear and obvious' DOES come into it.

No-one is doubting that offside is a `fact`. Just questioning whether it should be used at all in certain situations. People are arguing the fact that if lines are needed to be drawn across a screen and that is then scrutinised for an age in order for the correct decision to be made, then the `mistake` made by the on field officials was neither clear nor obvious.

[Firthy]

Great discussion but would you rather VAR or no VAR as it's used at present?

[4midable]

Erikksen down soft
Goal disallowed
Terrible

[Steve-Harpers-perm]

Great discussion but would you rather VAR or no VAR as it's used at present?

I might be wrong but I suspect the majority of fans would be happy to see the back of it. And that’s with the fact it would have benefited us on Friday!

[Jimscho]

Erikksen down soft
Goal disallowed
Terrible

Erikksen fouled Arsenal got advantage.Var got it right.No goal.

[Vegas Claret]

Many will say it was a foul but the new directive is asking referees to give leeway for challenges like this, you can't dismiss this just cause it led to a goal.

they are choosing to re-ref the games and that's not what it's supposed to do. It's being used to the detriment on the game

[Jimscho]

they are choosing to re-ref the games and that's not what it's supposed to do. It's being used to the detriment on the game

Var is used to check goals,potential penalties,potential red cards and mistaken identity.It doesnt re-ref the whole game.

[scouseclaret]

What really puzzles me is, other leagues continue to vote to implement it. Scotland are bringing it in after the World Cup.
Enjoy this season, it’ll be in the championship soon.

The problem with VAR is not the concept itself, but rank bad officiating. Maybe the reason other leagues want to adopt it is that it works much better in other leagues or, for example, the last Euros where VAR seemed to work very well. Here, VAR just seems to have replaced one set of **** decisions with another - usually still favouring the “big” clubs. The decision to disallow the West Ham equaliser yesterday was a disgrace.

[Colburn_Claret]

VAR can only ever be as good as the people who use it.

I would prefer to replace all incompetent referees, but I'd settle for ex footballers and coaches in control of VAR central.