VAR farce

[Tall Paul]

I don't think that it is fair to have VAR at some ties whilst there is none at others ---it should be all or nothing.

Why? Who is it unfair to?

[Ashingtonclaret46]

Why? Who is it unfair to?

It is unfair to all those clubs who have to use it, however, it is equally unfair to all those that do not have to use it ----it is unfair!!
There will also be goal line technology being used in some games but not in others because they do not have it.
As far as I am concerned, they should bin VAR anyway but they won't and I accept that.

[Tall Paul]

It is unfair to all those clubs who have to use it, however, it is equally unfair to all those that do not have to use it ----it is unfair!!
There will also be goal line technology being used in some games but not in others because they do not have it.
As far as I am concerned, they should bin VAR anyway but they won't and I accept that.

That doesn't make sense. Something is only unfair if some teams have an advantage over their opponents. Which teams have an advantage?

[Ashingtonclaret46]

That doesn't make sense. Something is only unfair if some teams have an advantage over their opponents. Which teams have an advantage?

Not worth pursuing. FA Cup Competition --every club involved should be playing to the same rules and under the same conditions --they aren't.
You disagree, then fair enough.

[ClaretTony]

Not worth pursuing. FA Cup Competition --every club involved should be playing to the same rules and under the same conditions --they aren't.
You disagree, then fair enough.

Turns the competition into a farce for me when different games are playing to different rules. For or against VAR, this can't be right. Imagine if we'd not got that late penalty against Barnsley, that would have meant a replay for Barnsley and a potential crack at Man City because of the VAR decision in the first half.

At the same time, another League One club might have had exactly the same scenario but with no VAR the penalty is given, scored and they go out.

Also, had we had a replay at Barnsley it wouldn't have been used. So if the game had played out the same way, there would have been no VAR to potentially rule out a pen. Changing the rules, in effect, half way through the tie.

[whentheballmoves]

Agree. I have no issue with it being used, but it should be every game from, say Round 3, or not at all.

[mdd2]

VAR has been shown to be as bad or as good as the present system. If VAR had not been in use we would have had two pens against Barnsley- so VAR unfair on us. On Saturday VAR may have given us two extra points so VAR fair on us. It will remain swings and roundabouts and to be honest the very close decisions should not be bothered about IMO. Goal line decisions, glaring errors by the officials with pens, and offsides but these hair line offsides we see should not be decided. The reality is offside by 2 toes will not get you a goal you wouldn't have got if you were two toes onside IMO

[Tall Paul]

In a knockout competition like the FA cup, as long as both teams in the tie are playing by the same rules it can't be unfair on either of them.

The other teams in the draw could be playing rugby, basketball and hockey and it wouldn't make any difference to the fairness of the team playing football with or without VAR.

[Test User]

There really needs to be better tech for calling offsides with VAR.

Watching the Benfica v Porto game now and Porto have had a goal ruled offside based on the yellow line marker camera thingy but i'm convinced that when lean is taken into account that the Porto defender's head was playing him onside.

The call by the Lino was offside (though play was allowed to continue to a goal) so either the VARs thought he was offside or that the video was inconclusive and referred back to the call on the field (probably the latter). But surely it's not that expensive to have 3D tech at these top tier games that can create an offside plane instead of just an offside line on the pitch.

Unless the offside rule is changed feet-only, which would make kinda make sense anyway.

[Test User]

Also, Benfica's ground is still awesome.

[Down_Rover]

This happened in a game in Australia this weekend. Through ball, striker runs onto it, one on one with keeper, flag goes up, everyone stops. On replay the striker is clearly onside, at least a yard. If he’d continued and stuck the ball in the net, what would’ve happened with VAR?

This is a good point.

If VAR was in place the player would have ignored the flag and put the ball in the net. This can only encourage players to ignore the officials on the off chance VAR proves in their favour

There will be no respect for referees

But if we must have it for offside can we give the ref a margin of error like ‘umpires call’ for lbw

[RammyClaret61]

This is a good point.

If VAR was in place the player would have ignored the flag and put the ball in the net. This can only encourage players to ignore the officials on the off chance VAR proves in their favour

There will be no respect for referees

But if we must have it for offside can we give the ref a margin of error like ‘umpires call’ for lbw

VAR was in opperation in this game. But because everyone stopped an the free kick was taken. VAR didn’t intervene, if it did, I’ve no idea what it could’ve done? He rally should’ve stick the ball in the net. Then all hell would’ve broke out because everyone stopped on the flag, and I presume whistle? But a perfectly good goal would’ve been scored? It vertualy makes the linesman redundant, play on, score, then let’s have a look at it?? Complete game changer

[Ashingtonclaret46]

That is the easy answer though, Rammy, just get rid of all the onfield officials and do everything by VAR.
Think how peaceful it would be with nobody haranguing the officials because there won't be any.

[dsr]

This is a good point.

If VAR was in place the player would have ignored the flag and put the ball in the net. This can only encourage players to ignore the officials on the off chance VAR proves in their favour

There will be no respect for referees

But if we must have it for offside can we give the ref a margin of error like ‘umpires call’ for lbw

If the referee has blown his whistle before he put the ball in the net, then it's no goal. If he hasn't blown his whistle, then VAR will overturn the offside and make it a goal.

"Play to the whistle" is still the golden rule. If the whistle hasn't gone, then what happens next may still count; if the whistle has gone, then the ball is dead.

[dsr]

There really needs to be better tech for calling offsides with VAR.

Watching the Benfica v Porto game now and Porto have had a goal ruled offside based on the yellow line marker camera thingy but i'm convinced that when lean is taken into account that the Porto defender's head was playing him onside.

The call by the Lino was offside (though play was allowed to continue to a goal) so either the VARs thought he was offside or that the video was inconclusive and referred back to the call on the field (probably the latter). But surely it's not that expensive to have 3D tech at these top tier games that can create an offside plane instead of just an offside line on the pitch.

Unless the offside rule is changed feet-only, which would make kinda make sense anyway.

If you need to draw a plane rather than a line to determine offside, then you can't judge offside anyway because the technology isn't good enough. You need cameras with at least 200 frames per second to judge it within 3 inches.

And offside feet-only is no use. How is a linesman supposed to judge it? We have the same nonsense now with VAR, that if two men are racing side by side down the pitch to run onto a through ball, then they may be absolutely dead heating for Olympic sprint purposes, but for football purposes they're changing from offside to not offside about 8 timies a second because of the running action. How is a linesman supposed to judge that? This is just another of the many problems of VAR as it is being used. The rule for VAR matches is now different, in practice, than the rule for non-VAR matches.

[Test User]

If you need to draw a plane rather than a line to determine offside, then you can't judge offside anyway because the technology isn't good enough. You need cameras with at least 200 frames per second to judge it within 3 inches.

And offside feet-only is no use. How is a linesman supposed to judge it? We have the same nonsense now with VAR, that if two men are racing side by side down the pitch to run onto a through ball, then they may be absolutely dead heating for Olympic sprint purposes, but for football purposes they're changing from offside to not offside about 8 timies a second because of the running action. How is a linesman supposed to judge that? This is just another of the many problems of VAR as it is being used. The rule for VAR matches is now different, in practice, than the rule for non-VAR matches.

But cameras with 200 frames per second exist. They have done for quite a long time. Tennis is utilising cameras capable of several thousand frames per second. So the objection that the technology doesn't exist is, well, bullshit.

[dsr]

But cameras with 200 frames per second exist. They have done for quite a long time. Tennis is utilising cameras capable of several thousand frames per second. So the objection that the technology doesn't exist is, well, [deleted].

So have they got them installed?

And of course the next question, when they have got the cameras installed, is when is offside to be judged? Is it at the moment the player first makes contact with the ball, or the moment that the ball leaves his foot? Bear in mind that in that time period (about 1/100th of a second) a running player covers about 3 inches; the defender running out can cover the same difference; the defender's back foot goes even faster. There could be an 8 inch gap between first contact and last contact.

Can the technology establish to the 1/100th of a second when the ball left the foot of the man making the pass?

[Funkydrummer]

Stick a sensor in the ball.

[Test User]

So have they got them installed?

And of course the next question, when they have got the cameras installed, is when is offside to be judged? Is it at the moment the player first makes contact with the ball, or the moment that the ball leaves his foot? Bear in mind that in that time period (about 1/100th of a second) a running player covers about 3 inches; the defender running out can cover the same difference; the defender's back foot goes even faster. There could be an 8 inch gap between first contact and last contact.

Can the technology establish to the 1/100th of a second when the ball left the foot of the man making the pass?

I don't know if they have them installed. You only said the technology wasn't good enough. If what is installed isn't capable then guess what they can do. They can upgrade the cameras.

Can the technology establish to the 1/100th of a second when the ball left the foot of the man making the pass?

Probably if there's enough cameras. But do you want to know what technology can't establish 0.01 second accuracy? A bloke with one live-action view from up to 100 yards away.

VAR doesn't have to be perfect, which, as always, seems to be your illogical demand for anything to be allowed to change. It just needs to be better than current.

[Funkydrummer]

Sack the offside rule. Now that would be interesting, if not a sh!t idea.

[dsr]

I don't know if they have them installed. You only said the technology wasn't good enough. If what is installed isn't capable then guess what they can do. They can upgrade the cameras.



Probably if there's enough cameras. But do you want to know what technology can't establish 0.01 second accuracy? A bloke with one live-action view from up to 100 yards away.

VAR doesn't have to be perfect, which, as always, seems to be your illogical demand for anything to be allowed to change. It just needs to be better than current.

As ever, your mind reading skills are abysmal. VAR doesn't have to be perfect, but what it does have to be is reasonable. We already have a rule that says if a player is level with the second-last defender, then he is onside. So why not keep the definition of "level" the same with a camera as it is with a naked eye - if he looks level, then he's level. The rule change in 1990 wasn't intended to give the attacker an extra half an inch; it was to give him a significant advantage, perhaps a couple of feet.

The problem with VAR as it is currently used, is that it takes a situation that currently would be judged onside every time (given an accurate linesman) and replaces it with one that cannot tell whether it's offside or not, but it has a guess. If VAR was used only to correct mistakes where the linesman got it wrong under the current rules, the brilliant. Go for it. In that respect, it would be better than current.

But VAR is being used to judge the linesman under in effect a different rule, or at least the same rule to a very different standard, and it is doing it with inadequate technology. In that respect, it is not better than currently, it is worse.

(By the way, the linesman is never 100 yards away. They changed the rules on pitch sizes, at professional level at least, some time ago.)

[Test User]

As ever, your mind reading skills are abysmal. VAR doesn't have to be perfect, but what it does have to be is reasonable. We already have a rule that says if a player is level with the second-last defender, then he is onside. So why not keep the definition of "level" the same with a camera as it is with a naked eye - if he looks level, then he's level. The rule change in 1990 wasn't intended to give the attacker an extra half an inch; it was to give him a significant advantage, perhaps a couple of feet.

The problem with VAR as it is currently used, is that it takes a situation that currently would be judged onside every time (given an accurate linesman) and replaces it with one that cannot tell whether it's offside or not, but it has a guess. If VAR was used only to correct mistakes where the linesman got it wrong under the current rules, the brilliant. Go for it. In that respect, it would be better than current.

But VAR is being used to judge the linesman under in effect a different rule, or at least the same rule to a very different standard, and it is doing it with inadequate technology. In that respect, it is not better than currently, it is worse.

(By the way, the linesman is never 100 yards away. They changed the rules on pitch sizes, at professional level at least, some time ago.)

What's this, your third different objection?
"So why not keep the definition of "level" the same with a camera as it is with a naked eye - if he looks level, then he's level"
Sure. Fine. I've no problem with that. It's the same in tennis. The Hawkeye cameras are only accurate to a certain degree. They have a margin for error that is accounted for on every challenge, and there's no reason for offside cameras not to have that either.

But that's not how the rule is applied now. If the cameras show a player even an inch offside, and that can be determined by the VAR, then he is called offside. I've already said i'm open to a change to the offside rule to accommodate VAR, but without that then the VAR cameras should, and can, be more accurate and clear.

And no. The VAR doesn't guess. If the VAR can't make a determination either way then they indicate that to the referee and the call on the field stands. So it's actually the linesman's "guess" that is applied. So, if you want to reduce guesswork...

[dsr]

What's this, your third different objection?
"So why not keep the definition of "level" the same with a camera as it is with a naked eye - if he looks level, then he's level"
Sure. Fine. I've no problem with that. It's the same in tennis. The Hawkeye cameras are only accurate to a certain degree. They have a margin for error that is accounted for on every challenge, and there's no reason for offside cameras not to have that either.

But that's not how the rule is applied now. If the cameras show a player even an inch offside, and that can be determined by the VAR, then he is called offside. I've already said i'm open to a change to the offside rule to accommodate VAR, but without that then the VAR cameras should, and can, be more accurate and clear.

And no. The VAR doesn't guess. If the VAR can't make a determination either way then they indicate that to the referee and the call on the field stands. So it's actually the linesman's "guess" that is applied. So, if you want to reduce guesswork...

The majority of games of football in this country and round the world don't use VAR. So when I said "the way the rule is applied now", I was using non-VAR games as the norm and VAR games as the new thing; not the other way round. And the way the rules are applied now, in non-VAR games, is that the linesman is not expected to estimate which of two players is an inch further forward. If they look level, they are level.

As for the "guess" stuff, is there no nitpick that you won't stoop to? OK, so the word wasn't used in the exact definition you would have used. So what? You were perfectly clear what it meant. Why waste your typing? (I didn't call you up on your obvious error about the width of the pitch.)

[Spijed]

Are they using VAR during the Arsenal - Man U game?

Obviously when a scuffle breaks out it must get switched off!

[Vegas Claret]

Are they using VAR during the Arsenal - Man U game?

Obviously when a scuffle breaks out it must get switched off!

yeah and they checked it, I don't think it was even handbags tbh

[Bordeauxclaret]

Good chance we have 6 wins out of 6 if we’d had VAR this season.

Obviously discounting knock on effects from overturned decisions.