VAR

[Swanson]

I think VAR can be useful used the right way. Like players diving or players playing nasty (using elbows).

[chaddyrovers]

I think one of biggest problems with VAR is refs not making decisions on the field and rely on VAR to make simple decisions and bottled the decisions making. 

Keep it out of football cos it will ruin the game and make it stop start game which football is not this type of games

Edited February 19, 2018 by chaddyrovers

[Hasta]

1 hour ago, Swanson said:

I think VAR can be useful used the right way. Like players diving or players playing nasty (using elbows).

As I said earlier, look at yesterday. Half of the people said Alli dived, half said he didn't. 

We would still be debating it whether a ref had watched a video and made a call or now. 

If you want to punish clear, clear dives and blatant elbows, do it retrospectively.

 

[Kamy100]

I was a supporter of VAR but having seen the way that it has been used in Serie A and it's implementation in the cup competitions in it's current state it is not fit for purpose.  The parameters of it's use are way to broad and in football a lot of decisions are "judgment calls" which technology cannot help with.  Someone said to me well cricket things like LBW's are judgement calls, yes they are but in cricket the ball tracking technology can be used to determine whether the umpires judgement was correct or not but in football the decisions for fouls/penalties there isn't the technology to help with those decision other than TV pictures of the incident from different angels but ultimately it is still the VAR ref using his judgement rather than with cricket were ball tracking technology gives a definitive answer. 

VAR has a future but it needs to be re-assessed and the parameters of what it can be used for need to be tightened up.  The technology also needs to improve, for example it was farcical that there was so much confusion about the offside decision which was essentially a line call which the technology should have been able to clear up quickly but instead it caused more confusion.  They also need to ensure that there is transparency so we should all be able to hear the conversations between the officials and VAR.

 

[chaddyrovers]

3 minutes ago, Kamy100 said:

I was a supporter of VAR but having seen the way that it has been used in Serie A and it's implementation in the cup competitions in it's current state it is not fit for purpose.  The parameters of it's use are way to broad and in football a lot of decisions are "judgment calls" which technology cannot help with.  Someone said to me well cricket things like LBW's are judgement calls, yes they are but in cricket the ball tracking technology can be used to determine whether the umpires judgement was correct or not but in football the decisions for fouls/penalties there isn't the technology to help with those decision other than TV pictures of the incident from different angels but ultimately it is still the VAR ref using his judgement rather than with cricket were ball tracking technology gives a definitive answer. 

VAR has a future but it needs to be re-assessed and the parameters of what it can be used for need to be tightened up.  The technology also needs to improve, for example it was farcical that there was so much confusion about the offside decision which was essentially a line call which the technology should have been able to clear up quickly but instead it caused more confusion.  They also need to ensure that there is transparency so we should all be able to hear the conversations between the officials and VAR.

 

Great post Kamy. 

Ive read and seen in German football that chaos its caused. 

VAR cannot be used for judgement calls like whether players were tripped in the box. I still think Ali were tripped yesterday. Other will disagree. 

The Offside decision that ruled out Mata's goal were straight has he was in line but it was given cos his hand/arm were offside. Crazy. 

Offside decisions need to very clear and fans need to hear the conversation between the officials. 

Still not in favour of VAR in Football. 

 

[JacknOry]

2 hours ago, chaddyrovers said:

Great post Kamy. 

Ive read and seen in German football that chaos its caused. 

VAR cannot be used for judgement calls like whether players were tripped in the box. I still think Ali were tripped yesterday. Other will disagree. 

The Offside decision that ruled out Mata's goal were straight has he was in line but it was given cos his hand/arm were offside. Crazy. 

Offside decisions need to very clear and fans need to hear the conversation between the officials. 

Still not in favour of VAR in Football. 

 

That really is crazy - shouldnt it be the feet that determine whether someone is offside? That's how I have always judged it anyway.

[had.e.nuff]

5 hours ago, chaddyrovers said:

Great post Kamy. 

Ive read and seen in German football that chaos its caused. 

VAR cannot be used for judgement calls like whether players were tripped in the box. I still think Ali were tripped yesterday. Other will disagree. 

The Offside decision that ruled out Mata's goal were straight has he was in line but it was given cos his hand/arm were offside. Crazy. 

Offside decisions need to very clear and fans need to hear the conversation between the officials. 

Still not in favour of VAR in Football. 

 

You can only be offside if a part of your body that you can play the ball with is offside an arm or hand will not count it was Mata`a knee which was offside .

[chaddyrovers]

2 minutes ago, had.e.nuff said:

You can only be offside if a part of your body that you can play the ball with is offside an arm or hand will not count it was Mata`a knee which was offside .

You can play the ball with any part of body tho. 

Offside should be whether you feet are ahead of the defenders not your knee. The current offside rule is daft, stupid and need scraping asap. Just have a simple rule. 

[darrenrover]

5 hours ago, Kamy100 said:

I was a supporter of VAR but having seen the way that it has been used in Serie A and it's implementation in the cup competitions in it's current state it is not fit for purpose.  The parameters of it's use are way to broad and in football a lot of decisions are "judgment calls" which technology cannot help with.  Someone said to me well cricket things like LBW's are judgement calls, yes they are but in cricket the ball tracking technology can be used to determine whether the umpires judgement was correct or not but in football the decisions for fouls/penalties there isn't the technology to help with those decision other than TV pictures of the incident from different angels but ultimately it is still the VAR ref using his judgement rather than with cricket were ball tracking technology gives a definitive answer. 

VAR has a future but it needs to be re-assessed and the parameters of what it can be used for need to be tightened up.  The technology also needs to improve, for example it was farcical that there was so much confusion about the offside decision which was essentially a line call which the technology should have been able to clear up quickly but instead it caused more confusion.  They also need to ensure that there is transparency so we should all be able to hear the conversations between the officials and VAR.

 

I agree with all that you've said and much preferred the game as it was played in England 10 or 15 years ago.

The authorities need to get to grips with the laws of the game first and foremost. What's a foul? What's handball? For me for the former it's not just about 'contact' and the latter it's deliberately trying to gain an advantage. Many offences penalised these days don't fall into either category in my view. 

[had.e.nuff]

36 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

You can play the ball with any part of body tho. 

Offside should be whether you feet are ahead of the defenders not your knee. The current offside rule is daft, stupid and need scraping asap. Just have a simple rule. 

Ranaldo scored a goal with his knee the other night and Unless i have missed something I think only a goalkeeper can play the ball with their hand and only when they are in their own area

law 11

It is not an offence to be in an offside position.

A player is in an offside position if:

• any part of the head, body or feet is in the opponents’ half (excluding the halfway line) and
• any part of the head, body or feet is nearer to the opponents’ goal line than both the ball and the second-last opponent
• The hands and arms of all players, including the goalkeepers, are not considered.

 

 it was allot easier with the rule as it was before all this 1 phase second phase rubbish

Edited February 19, 2018 by had.e.nuff

[chaddyrovers]

44 minutes ago, had.e.nuff said:

Ranaldo scored a goal with his knee the other night and Unless i have missed something I think only a goalkeeper can play the ball with their hand and only when they are in their own area

law 11

It is not an offence to be in an offside position.

A player is in an offside position if:

• any part of the head, body or feet is in the opponents’ half (excluding the halfway line) and
• any part of the head, body or feet is nearer to the opponents’ goal line than both the ball and the second-last opponent
• The hands and arms of all players, including the goalkeepers, are not considered.

 

 it was allot easier with the rule as it was before all this 1 phase second phase rubbish

what a daft rule. clearly written by someone sat in a office and not by ex pros. 

It should be judge on whether their feet are level not their body. more daft stupid rules. 

But VAR doesn't work and Mata goal should have stood

[Tom]

5 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

what a daft rule. clearly written by someone sat in a office and not by ex pros. 

It should be judge on whether their feet are level not their body. more daft stupid rules. 

But VAR doesn't work and Mata goal should have stood

I think that part of the offside rule is fine myself, if a cross comes in and just before  it's struck a striker has flung himself anticipating a diving header and his top half beyond the last defender and he scores I think it's right that he's offside even though his feet may not be.

For me the Mata goal was rightfully ruled out but the messy way it was proven needs work.

Out of curiosity you say you aren't a fan of any technology in football, how about goal line technology?

[Paul]

1 hour ago, had.e.nuff said:

You can only be offside if a part of your body that you can play the ball with is offside an arm or hand will not count it was Mata`a knee which was offside .

No offence to you but this is one the funniest things I’ve read in a long time. 

“Oh ref ‘is knee’s offside!”

If it’s come to this bring back the Pools Panel for every match. We can see the season’s fixtures on a Friday, do the panel bit over the weekend and award the trophies on Monday. FFS

It this is the level VAR is reducing the game to I might attemp some sabotage.

[Mike E]

Think VAR would be improved by limiting it's use in a similar way to tennis.

Give each manager 3 challenges to ref decisions. If overturned, keep. If not, it's lost. Can only be applied to penalties or offsides or red card fouls. All VAR time must be added to the match end.

Like Hawkeye, ref doesn't just use it when he fancies.

Edited February 19, 2018 by Mike E

[roversfan99]

57 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

what a daft rule. clearly written by someone sat in a office and not by ex pros. 

It should be judge on whether their feet are level not their body. more daft stupid rules. 

But VAR doesn't work and Mata goal should have stood

No it shouldnt! His knee was offside, a part of his body that he can play the ball with, therefore the actual decision was correct.

To clarify, I do agree with your repeatedly told opinion though that VAR should be scrapped.

Thats even on the assumption that is made much more efficient, ie better communication, much quicker, people given the correct pictures and not the farce seen on Saturday. Another thing is its only in certain games at the moment, which is unfair, but even if that was changed and it was brought into every game. None of these are reasons to get rid of VAR because they are things that you could argue can be improved.

I just feel that, even if all of that happened, there will always be the grey area of whether a mistake is clear cut enough to go to a replay in the first place.

But more importantly, it takes the emotion out of the game, even Wagner said that and he got the benefit of VAR. Goals are what makes football, and if a goal has to be reviewed first, it is the equivalent of letting all of the air out of a balloon, once the decision is made the euphoria is gone.

Its the debate of whether you want more correct decisions at the cost of the entertainment and spectacle of the game. Sadly though I think VAR is here to stay, albeit it will be tweaked no doubt.

[arbitro]

Only offsides where goals are scored are reviewed by VAR but I have spoken to a close friend in the refereeing world and asked him about the following scenario.

A forward is marginally offside but the Assistant Referee doesn't flag and the forward is then denied an obvious goalscoring opportunity by the goalkeeper who fouls him outside the penalty area.

My friend said it could not be reviewed by VAR and the goalkeeper would be sent off.

I said surely that can't be fair as a team would be down to ten men erroneously and that should be viewed as an critical error and as such reviewed. He said at the moment that is how it is and there are, as yet no plans to look at anything else.

At the moment there are lots of potential situations which haven't been covered and are full of ambiguity.

[Rover_Shaun]

VAR technical operator has a part time job painting street lines 

Edited February 19, 2018 by Rover_Shaun

[chaddyrovers]

5 hours ago, Tom said:

I think that part of the offside rule is fine myself, if a cross comes in and just before  it's struck a striker has flung himself anticipating a diving header and his top half beyond the last defender and he scores I think it's right that he's offside even though his feet may not be.

For me the Mata goal was rightfully ruled out but the messy way it was proven needs work.

Out of curiosity you say you aren't a fan of any technology in football, how about goal line technology?

yes goal line technology is either yes or no not down to referee opinion or linesman opinion. 

4 hours ago, roversfan99 said:

No it shouldnt! His knee was offside, a part of his body that he can play the ball with, therefore the actual decision was correct.

To clarify, I do agree with your repeatedly told opinion though that VAR should be scrapped.

Thats even on the assumption that is made much more efficient, ie better communication, much quicker, people given the correct pictures and not the farce seen on Saturday. Another thing is its only in certain games at the moment, which is unfair, but even if that was changed and it was brought into every game. None of these are reasons to get rid of VAR because they are things that you could argue can be improved.

I just feel that, even if all of that happened, there will always be the grey area of whether a mistake is clear cut enough to go to a replay in the first place.

But more importantly, it takes the emotion out of the game, even Wagner said that and he got the benefit of VAR. Goals are what makes football, and if a goal has to be reviewed first, it is the equivalent of letting all of the air out of a balloon, once the decision is made the euphoria is gone.

Its the debate of whether you want more correct decisions at the cost of the entertainment and spectacle of the game. Sadly though I think VAR is here to stay, albeit it will be tweaked no doubt.

pleased you agree it should be scrapped. 

fans here, in Germany and Italy are fed up of VAR already and no decision where it is Referee opinion should be used for VAR. 

the only entertainment of current VAR is BT Sport mess up and their forceful coverage of it. so embarrassing for them

[chaddyrovers]

23 minutes ago, OnePhilT said:

So that's a nailed on minimum of 6 VARs per match. No thanks!

Get rid of it all. 

Worse thing in football

[Paul]

I thought about VAR overnight and the more one considers it the more ridiculous it becomes.

Apparently Mata’s knee was offside. A silly statement as it’s clearly Mata who is offside not his knee. The point though is the intention of a rule. Rules and regulations are intended to prevent players gaining an advantage by breaking a rule. Handball in the penalty area is gaining a clear advantage.

VAR is asking a player to be aware of the position of every part of his body. These players are moving all the time. How on earth are they to be expected to judge if their knee, head or chest is a few inches ahead of the rest of the body? One’s foot, knee, head etc. ahead of the rest of the body can’t be intentionally gaining an advantage - it’s part of running!

VAR is wasting money on equipment and people to achieve what? Nothing other than frustrating fans and reducing the game to a farce.

 

[K-Hod]

How complicated would it have been for the head of the PL to call his equivalent in cricket, rugby or tennis and ask for the phone number of the lads that sort out Hawkeye?

Tried, tested and successful. Not this absolute shower VAR.

[perthblue02]

26 minutes ago, K-Hod said:

How complicated would it have been for the head of the PL to call his equivalent in cricket, rugby or tennis and ask for the phone number of the lads that sort out Hawkeye?

Tried, tested and successful. Not this absolute shower VAR.

If it is anything like goal line technology , it has to be approved by FIFA who collect a nice licencing fee for each system installed, obviously money is not the reason that FIFA are in favour of VAR . Call me cynical but I expect it to interrupt games a lot during the world cup $$$$$$

Le Floc’h also revealed that Fifa were in discussions with potential sponsors for the VAR system, adding: “We are talking to various technological companies who are very interested with what we are doing on the technology side of things.”

VAR usage at the World Cup is likely to lead to delays in games in Russia as different angles are reviewed, potentially allowing Fifa to brand the segment on the global broadcast feed.

http://www.sportspromedia.com/news/fifa-in-talks-with-potential-sponsors-after-confirming-var-for-2018-world

Edited February 20, 2018 by perthblue02

[riverside returns]

Any introduction of technology should not be implemented unless it can be universally accepted and implemented by all professional clubs or it risks creating yet another potential hurdle for smaller clubs to break into the top leagues.

[Rover_Shaun]

On 20/02/2018 at 11:48, riverside returns said:

Any introduction of technology should not be implemented unless it can be universally accepted and implemented by all professional clubs or it risks creating yet another potential hurdle for smaller clubs to break into the top leagues.

Agreed. The premier league and fa could introduce goal line technology at all grounds in the top 8 divisions without making a dent on their TV pigs troff

Edited February 21, 2018 by Rover_Shaun

[riverside returns]

13 hours ago, Rover_Shaun said:

Agreed. The premier league and fa could introduce goal line technology at all grounds in the top 8 divisions without making a dent on their TV pigs troff

A plan to introduce it in the prem down to league 2 with a fund to intro to new clubs as they get promoted would be ideal. Again no visible dent in the money trough in which their snouts are entrenched.