Has the Introduction of VAR Improved Football

[Billysboots]

Great in principle. But the application has been consistently woeful.

Nothing more to say, really.

 

[doublebogey7]

No - the other way around! Take offside for example, it has been to vague for years. When VAR came in people where saying things like "how can a hand keep a player onside". This was not an issue before when someone was running and their arms where moving cause the linesman judged where their body was. The rules never allowed for grey areas because they didn't need too - linesman invented them cause their eyes where not quick enough. Now when everything is viewed frame by frame the rules still don't allow for grey areas but need to be changed to do this. i.e. you can't be played onside by a hand.

You should also remember that with VAR the system tells the operator instantly if it's offside or onside. In the same way that in tennis they don't have any line judges anymore. The "lines" you see at home are for your benefit. Same as the ooooh hawkeye graphic in tennis.

Handball is the same. The rules say if it hits your hand it's handball. 5 year olds could figure that out watching TV. The grey area of "ball to hand" and "intention" is the problem.

Not sure where you get the idea from that the technology makes the decision instantly from, it most definitely does not. We have to wait up to 3 mins for the decision. If the officials knew instantly they so would the referee and no waiting needed, just like with goal tech. We in the ground get no benefit from those lines so there is zero benefit to the wait for a decision.

 

[Orikoru]

Yeah - that's where we disagree. 100% of the time the "lines" tell you 100% correctly if it's onside or offside. You may not like how they got there but for sure the answer is correct. Match of the day may disagree but there is no debate.
To me you are proposing checking the linesman call some of the time. So you'll still have some wrong and some right. What's the point of that?

I don't even agree with that either. It used to be possible for the forward to be 'level' with the defender - which is something he can measure in real time when timing his run. Level no longer exists because you'll always have a kneecap in front of his shoulder or something like. The forward has to keep himself inside by half a yard just for allow for his stride pattern when they pause the replay and draw the lines on it. I just think it's inherently wrong to rule it to such a minute degree.

They still get decisions wrong now all the time.

 

[WGCRider]

I don't even agree with that either. It used to be possible for the forward to be 'level' with the defender - which is something he can measure in real time when timing his run. Level no longer exists because you'll always have a kneecap in front of his shoulder or something like. The forward has to keep himself inside by half a yard just for allow for his stride pattern when they pause the replay and draw the lines on it. I just think it's inherently wrong to rule it to such a minute degree.

They still get decisions wrong now all the time.

But that's just it. It is basically impossible to be level - you are either in front or behind - it is an illusion - the grey area you refer too. When last were you watching athletics and they went "oh they're level give them both a medal"? No you look at the photo and say someone is 0.001sec ahead. What you are saying is that sometimes a little bit of offside is okay or I like it when the ref get a few errors in. What we could do to get the same result is let VAR tell us the answer, but then afterwards the striker gets to roll a dice and if it's a double we let the mistake stand!!

This may be an even more niche opinion but "umpire's call" in cricket drives me mad for the same reason. You trust the technology to say it's hitting the wickets but because the umpire made a mistake up front we'll just let it stand!

 

[WGCRider]

Not sure where you get the idea from that the technology makes the decision instantly from, it most definitely does not. We have to wait up to 3 mins for the decision. If the officials knew instantly they so would the referee and no waiting needed, just like with goal tech. We in the ground get no benefit from those lines so there is zero benefit to the wait for a decision.

eeer got the idea from reading up how it works. The system uses data points on the players and a sensor in the ball to make it's decision. This is automated. The lines are added afterwards show it to viewers. Hence it's sometimes referred to as semi-automated
Ask yourself this - when you see the freeze frame on offside why have you NEVER seen them going backwards and forwards frame by frame to see when the player kicked the ball? is it because TV producers are so good they always get the exact frame or is it cause a sensor knows when the ball is kicked?

 

[Hobbit]

For me, the almost golden way to use a VAR system is as they use it in rugby. Not have the lines across the pitch -makes a rod for their own back. Do it as they do in rugby. Ref in the box has a clearer view. And the ability for a bit of slo-mo, then just make a decision. It’s done in seconds.

Let the idiots in the Sky Box bleat on as they always have done, and ignore them as most of us do.

 

[clubchamp98]

For me, the almost golden way to use a VAR system is as they use it in rugby. Not have the lines across the pitch -makes a rod for their own back. Do it as they do in rugby. Ref in the box has a clearer view. And the ability for a bit of slo-mo, then just make a decision. It’s done in seconds.

Let the idiots in the Sky Box bleat on as they always have done, and ignore them as most of us do.

Sky want their moneys worth.
fills the hours on the channel.

 

[Orikoru]

But that's just it. It is basically impossible to be level - you are either in front or behind - it is an illusion - the grey area you refer too. When last were you watching athletics and they went "oh they're level give them both a medal"? No you look at the photo and say someone is 0.001sec ahead. What you are saying is that sometimes a little bit of offside is okay or I like it when the ref get a few errors in. What we could do to get the same result is let VAR tell us the answer, but then afterwards the striker gets to roll a dice and if it's a double we let the mistake stand!!

This may be an even more niche opinion but "umpire's call" in cricket drives me mad for the same reason. You trust the technology to say it's hitting the wickets but because the umpire made a mistake up front we'll just let it stand!

I'm not saying that at all. I'm saying the offside rule is to stop the forward gaining an advantage by being closer to the goal than the defender. If 90% of his body is behind the defender, but one of his earlobes is a fraction ahead in the one frame they pause the replay, because he was leaning slightly forward, he's not gaining an advantage and to rule it in that minute detail is too clinical, and against the spirit of the game. I can't think of the right word so I can't explain what I mean and it's annoying me now.

 

[Orikoru]

eeer got the idea from reading up how it works. The system uses data points on the players and a sensor in the ball to make it's decision. This is automated. The lines are added afterwards show it to viewers. Hence it's sometimes referred to as semi-automated
Ask yourself this - when you see the freeze frame on offside why have you NEVER seen them going backwards and forwards frame by frame to see when the player kicked the ball? is it because TV producers are so good they always get the exact frame or is it cause a sensor knows when the ball is kicked?

I'm so sure you're talking about the Hawkeye system that was proposed but they didn't actually use in the end.

 

[doublebogey7]

eeer got the idea from reading up how it works. The system uses data points on the players and a sensor in the ball to make it's decision. This is automated. The lines are added afterwards show it to viewers. Hence it's sometimes referred to as semi-automated
Ask yourself this - when you see the freeze frame on offside why have you NEVER seen them going backwards and forwards frame by frame to see when the player kicked the ball? is it because TV producers are so good they always get the exact frame or is it cause a sensor knows when the ball is kicked

eeer got the idea from reading up how it works. The system uses data points on the players and a sensor in the ball to make it's decision. This is automated. The lines are added afterwards show it to viewers. Hence it's sometimes referred to as semi-automated
Ask yourself this - when you see the freeze frame on offside why have you NEVER seen them going backwards and forwards frame by frame to see when the player kicked the ball? is it because TV producers are so good they always get the exact frame or is it cause a sensor knows when the ball is kicked?

Strange then that the PL own web page on the subject says different. https://www.premierleague.com/news/1488423

 

[Hobbit]

I'm not saying that at all. I'm saying the offside rule is to stop the forward gaining an advantage by being closer to the goal than the defender. If 90% of his body is behind the defender, but one of his earlobes is a fraction ahead in the one frame they pause the replay, because he was leaning slightly forward, he's not gaining an advantage and to rule it in that minute detail is too clinical, and against the spirit of the game. I can't think of the right word so I can't explain what I mean and it's annoying me now.

We want to see goals. Why can’t the striker be given the benefit of the doubt? An earlobe/hand/toe in front, let it ride.

 

[WGCRider]

If 90% of his body is behind the defender,

This is why I think it's an issue with the rules. If 90% onside is okay, what about 89.9%? Because today we are able measure that and need an answer to the question. Cricket define this grey area as 3.5cm - the radius of the ball. Footballs rules don't define the grey area.

 

[Orikoru]

This is why I think it's an issue with the rules. If 90% onside is okay, what about 89.9%? Because today we are able measure that and need an answer to the question. Cricket define this grey area as 3.5cm - the radius of the ball. Footballs rules don't define the grey area.

They talked about bringing in a margin for error of 20cm or something, not sure if it happened or made any difference. As Hobbit says, the rules used to say that benefit of the doubt was given to the striker - i.e. when they looked about level. That's been lost completely now, so a striker cannot keep himself level with a defender because now that'll be offside on the VAR. He has to run from deeper/further behind.

 

[pendodave]

Well, it certainly makes the live spectating experience worse.
Not that anyone particularly cares about that, so not expecting any changes there.

 

[sweaty sock]

Its a no from me. Football stopped being a sporting endeavour decades ago, and has become 100% entertainment.

Incompetent referee's were one of the best remaining twsts and turns that the football story line had left. They were one of the true few things that made you revisit previous matches in conversation prior to the next game. And like bobbles on a green, it would take alot of evidence before i was convinced teams got worse than a 50% split of good and bad.

Bring back rubbish refs!

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

For me, the almost golden way to use a VAR system is as they use it in rugby. Not have the lines across the pitch -makes a rod for their own back. Do it as they do in rugby. Ref in the box has a clearer view. And the ability for a bit of slo-mo, then just make a decision. It’s done in seconds.

Let the idiots in the Sky Box bleat on as they always have done, and ignore them as most of us do.

With the benefit of hindsight...well maybe have three VAR refs watching the game and if they each individually adjudge missed a freekick, penalty or worse infringement each can hit a button within say 2 or 3secs. If a majority hit their button the ref blows up and game is stopped. The ref is then called to review the incident on a screen and calls it as he then sees it. Hindsight.

For goal/no goal decisions - similar. The three VAR refs individually review things using whatever video-only angles available they choose. But they only have say 10 secs to carry out their review and then they vote. Majority provides the ref with the result.

 

[Old Colner]

On the offsides, some of the camera angles they use for offside are ridiculous, these are Premier League grounds, they should have better angles, the frame rate technology available is not good enough one frame a player is on the next off and both show the ball on the attackers foot.

 

[pendodave]

One of the things that grates with me is that they don't use it retrospectively to punish the diving and fake injury/ feigning bring shot nonsense.
But football has jumped the shark for me over the last few years, so although it's worthy of "random irritations", it just means that it all just washes over me for the most part.
I've got golf to properly annoy me now!

 

[Old Colner]

Its a no from me. Football stopped being a sporting endeavour decades ago, and has become 100% entertainment.

Incompetent referee's were one of the best remaining twsts and turns that the football story line had left. They were one of the true few things that made you revisit previous matches in conversation prior to the next game. And like bobbles on a green, it would take alot of evidence before i was convinced teams got worse than a 50% split of good and bad.

Bring back rubbish refs!

Have you watched any Championship football lately?

I follow Burnley and some of the goings on this season have been absolutely laughable, referee's have been really poor, some of the gamesmanship going on is akin to watching professional wrestling years ago.

 

[Bdill93]

Have you watched any Championship football lately?

I follow Burnley and some of the goings on this season have been absolutely laughable, referee's have been really poor, some of the gamesmanship going on is akin to watching professional wrestling years ago.

Yeah honestly after seeing live football in the Championship only a few years back to what we have with VAR in the prem now - its miles apart.

Like it or not, VAR and premier league ref's really are the highest level we can offer and I would not want to step backwards.