VAR - Thoughts

[Tashyboy]

Whilst I get the frustration I couldn’t do Sunday‘s without football, I enjoy it too much.

What really pisses me off is when games get changed by Sky knowing there’s a very good chance the games they’ve changed will have to be moved again at a later date but at short notice. Travel and accommodation cant be booked or changed.

Talking to my lad last night when he got back from Leicester. Wonder how much it would cost to go to Leicester last night, Madrid during the week and Wembley next Sunday ?. Lot of football going off at the moment.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

Ave said all of the above and more with a couple of rammels chucked in. Anyone who says VAR just needs fine tuning Is a one eyed king in the valley of the blind. Or they have shares in the company.

Burying your head in the sand and moaning about it won’t change it either.

It’s here to stay, yes there’s been howlers, but I’d say less than the howlers completely missed by the Officials in years gone bye.

It has got more decisions right than wrong, but will never be 100%.

 

[Blue in Munich]

Burying your head in the sand and moaning about it won’t change it either.

It’s here to stay, yes there’s been howlers, but I’d say less than the howlers completely missed by the Officials in years gone bye.

It has got more decisions right than wrong, but will never be 100%.

Not this week at Stamford Bridge it hasn't mate.

 

[Swango1980]

Possible improvements, if we have to keep it:

1. As I and others have said. Offsides checked without using lines. Done by eye, and if not clear stays with linesman decision.
2. The VAR referee is part of the officiating team, and is at the ground with them. He will sit in an isolated area, and be in constant communication with on field referee.
3. Fans get to hear the ref and VAR discussing any decision. We watch the images they watch, and see how they arrive at decision. The on field referee, therefore, very much watched the footage with VaR, rather than simply having to rely on VAR. This would give referees a bit of a persona and maybe humanize them to fans, rather than just an object for abuse. It will also stop players crying and swearing like kids, hopefully, as theyd look even more pathetic.
4. Sort out that handball law.

It worrying that, despite all the problems, they are reluctant to make any changes, by trying to be consistent all season. Its pathetic. When something is so flawed, they should be trying to do everything they can to improve it now. I think 100% of fans and pundits continually insist the referee looks at the monitor, yet it appears the officials continually ignore this plea. They must know best

 

[Deleted member 16999]

Not this week at Stamford Bridge it hasn't mate.

They’re are included in the howlers.

 

[Tashyboy]

Burying your head in the sand and moaning about it won’t change it either.

It’s here to stay, yes there’s been howlers, but I’d say less than the howlers completely missed by the Officials in years gone bye.

It has got more decisions right than wrong, but will never be 100%.

Burying your head in the sand. That’s a quality statement followed by the understatement of the week “yes there’s been howlers”.

Less howlers than other years, of course there should be less, they have got VAR. ? Or have they, how can you miss a kick in the nakkas when it’s filmed from 300 angles. I know let’s not walk to the screen 10 yds away.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

Burying your head in the sand. That’s a quality statement followed by the understatement of the week “yes there’s been howlers”.

Less howlers than other years, of course there should be less, they have got VAR. ? Or have they, how can you miss a kick in the nakkas when it’s filmed from 300 angles. I know let’s not walk to the screen 10 yds away.

How many times mate, VAR is here to stay, VAR doesn’t have all the camera angles Sky or the BBC have.

I do agree with the walking to the screen, but my gut feeling (probably wrong) is that they’ve decided not to do it this season, as they should of, because of the stick and questions they’ll get. Next season it will be the fully implemented and you’ll see the Refs doing it often.

 

[Tashyboy]

How many times mate, VAR is here to stay, VAR doesn’t have all the camera angles Sky or the BBC have.

I do agree with the walking to the screen, but my gut feeling (probably wrong) is that they’ve decided not to do it this season, as they should of, because of the stick and questions they’ll get. Next season it will be the fully implemented and you’ll see the Refs doing it often.

Paul, has someone edited my posts before you have read them posts 245,249 etc state am for VAR. But not in its present format. As it is, it is rammel With no signs of cha he.

 

[Orikoru]

What changes to the offside rule would you make to improve the VAR experience?

Some wording to the effect that level is still onside, and that you can't be offside by a fraction of a millimetre. Say you have to be clearly offside for it to be given, i.e. you can clearly see that their whole body is ahead of the defenders, not just one toe, an ear or a shoulder. It's stupid when players are running side by side, but just because the forward's stride pattern is different at the point they stopped it he's given offside, that shouldn't be happening when you can see his body is level with the defence.

 

[Swango1980]

Some wording to the effect that level is still onside, and that you can't be offside by a fraction of a millimetre. Say you have to be clearly offside for it to be given, i.e. you can clearly see that their whole body is ahead of the defenders, not just one toe, an ear or a shoulder. It's stupid when players are running side by side, but just because the forward's stride pattern is different at the point they stopped it he's given offside, that shouldn't be happening when you can see his body is level with the defence.

Although, even if it was changed to that, the same arguments will still exist. Not whether any part of the attacker's body is a fraction AHEAD of the last defender, but whether any part of the attacker's body is a fraction BEHIND the last defender (i.e. if they still used those silly lines, the same problems would still exist, the reference points on the players would just be different.

 

[Orikoru]

Although, even if it was changed to that, the same arguments will still exist. Not whether any part of the attacker's body is a fraction AHEAD of the last defender, but whether any part of the attacker's body is a fraction BEHIND the last defender (i.e. if they still used those silly lines, the same problems would still exist, the reference points on the players would just be different.

No, I don't follow. I'm basically saying you shouldn't treat their limbs as individual entities, just their body as a whole. An official should be able to look at a replay of an offside call and make a judgement on whether the player is gaining an advantage by being ahead of the defence when the ball is played. EXACTLY as they were expected to do in real time before VAR came along, all this means is they get another look at it if they weren't certain.

The part they've change for VAR, i.e. the 'any part is ahead' etc, is exactly the bit of the ruling they need to change back. VAR was supposed to help officials, not replace them, so there was no need to change the law to making it more clinical. Total balls-up from the FA.

 

[Swango1980]

No, I don't follow. I'm basically saying you shouldn't treat their limbs as individual entities, just their body as a whole. An official should be able to look at a replay of an offside call and make a judgement on whether the player is gaining an advantage by being ahead of the defence when the ball is played. EXACTLY as they were expected to do in real time before VAR came along, all this means is they get another look at it if they weren't certain.

The part they've change for VAR, i.e. the 'any part is ahead' etc, is exactly the bit of the ruling they need to change back. VAR was supposed to help officials, not replace them, so there was no need to change the law to making it more clinical. Total balls-up from the FA.

What I am saying, you are only changing the reference points on the players bodies when judging to be offside. So, you'll just draw these lines on different parts of their bodies, and then see if these indicate if they were offside. So, a line will still be shown to be a mm offside or onside at times when making these decisions anyway.

You could keep the offside rule as it is, but it can only be over-turned by VAR if the entire body is offside (i.e. there is a significant error in the original decision). But, this will still draw complaints, as it could still be offside, but not at such a tolerance where it could be over-turned.

This is why, I think it is simply better to get rid of the lines entirely, and make the decision by eye. But, I think offside will always be tough, because if you do it by eye, if the VAR can't determine it is offside by eye, you can bet your bottom dollar that the players, manager and fans of the team that where at the wrong end of the call would say it was clearly offside.

 

[Orikoru]

What I am saying, you are only changing the reference points on the players bodies when judging to be offside. So, you'll just draw these lines on different parts of their bodies, and then see if these indicate if they were offside. So, a line will still be shown to be a mm offside or onside at times when making these decisions anyway.

You could keep the offside rule as it is, but it can only be over-turned by VAR if the entire body is offside (i.e. there is a significant error in the original decision). But, this will still draw complaints, as it could still be offside, but not at such a tolerance where it could be over-turned.

This is why, I think it is simply better to get rid of the lines entirely, and make the decision by eye. But, I think offside will always be tough, because if you do it by eye, if the VAR can't determine it is offside by eye, you can bet your bottom dollar that the players, manager and fans of the team that where at the wrong end of the call would say it was clearly offside.

No I'm not drawing lines anywhere, forget the lines, get rid of them. Why do you need lines to see if one person is ahead of another one? A linesman in real time doesn't have digital lines.

Start of your last paragraph is exactly what I said. The VAR just lets the ref have a look at it from the same perspective as the linesman and he makes a judgement call. You will never have a football that exists without occasional wrong decisions, everything is subjective even with TV replays.

 

[Tashyboy]

Just another one to chuck into the VAR discussion.

Hypothetically, at the end of the season there are changes to VAR. How are we to expect that the rules that are changed / tweaked will actually be carried out as per the letter of the new law. At the moment, some of them are not. Part of the problem is not just VAR, but the people at Stockley and referees. So how can we expect that these changes will be adhered to.
Will we be having these same discussions next year. ?

 

[Swango1980]

Just another one to chuck into the VAR discussion.

Hypothetically, at the end of the season there are changes to VAR. How are we to expect that the rules that are changed / tweaked will actually be carried out as per the letter of the new law. At the moment, some of them are not. Part of the problem is not just VAR, but the people at Stockley and referees. So how can we expect that these changes will be adhered to.
Will we be having these same discussions next year. ?

We probably will, as I have very little confidence in the leadership of the officials. I reckon they'll be pig headed enough not to implement some of the obvious suggestions, in case it looks like they are admitting that they got it wrong, and the fans got it right.

I wonder what they'll do to this handball law. It is crazy. A handball will never been given by an on field referee if there is the slightest of accidental touches. Play will continue, and in 95% of occasions, that will be that. Play will break up, but in some cases the attacking team may get a penalty or corner, and score from this. All of which will stand. BUT, if they actually score as part of the attack, suddenly VAR simply rules out the goal. It is crazy. Basically, it means that it is beneficial for the attacking team NOT to score, but to try and win a corner or penalty instead. How the top officials never saw how ridiculous this law is is beyond me.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

Just another one to chuck into the VAR discussion.

Hypothetically, at the end of the season there are changes to VAR. How are we to expect that the rules that are changed / tweaked will actually be carried out as per the letter of the new law. At the moment, some of them are not. Part of the problem is not just VAR, but the people at Stockley and referees. So how can we expect that these changes will be adhered to.
Will we be having these same discussions next year. ?

Laws of the Game can only be changed by the IFAB with a 3/4 majority, I’d be shocked if any laws are changed because the PL has an issue.
VAR has been better on the continent were its use is ahead of us.
I’d suggest all the problems with VAR is the Officials.

 

[Old Colner]

Just another one to chuck into the VAR discussion.


Will we be having these same discussions next year. ?

Probably

 

[Old Colner]

I’d suggest all the problems with VAR is the Officials.

I personally think most officials are sitting back on many decisions and letting VAR sort it out.

I was at the Burnley game on Saturday, the two handball decisions given against Bournemouth are still being argued over on a Clarets message board I frequent (I think they were both correctly given according to the present rules of the game).
There was actually another handball not given or shown in the BBC highlights which I thought as definitely a pen but not given and I don't think VAR even looked at it.

 

[Piece]

Laws of the Game can only be changed by the IFAB with a 3/4 majority, I’d be shocked if any laws are changed because the PL has an issue.
VAR has been better on the continent were its use is ahead of us.
I’d suggest all the problems with VAR is the Officials.

I've agreed with you on VAR, but not this one. We are ALL part of the VAR issue, not just the officials. And I mean, the fans, the managers, Sky money, the players, pundits, etc.

If you have subjective decisions then it's impossible to get agreement across all parties. Heaven knows, we've all seen this on this thread!

 

[Orikoru]

Scrap Stockley Park. VAR should only be about letting the referee have another view of incidents. Not taking the word of someone who's not even there as gospel.