VAR tonight (1 Viewer)

[Otis]

I just think they should have waited for the system to be perfected before bringing it to the world cup. It's mad that refs use it in different ways and there are sometimes language barriers between the VAR and the on pitch ref.

The one thing I think has improved is in this continuing the game. Previously the game was stopped and everyone was left scratching their heads.

I like the fact that now there is the potential for the game to carry on seamlessly while VAR officials mull over decisions.

 

---

[Liquid Gold]

The one thing I think has improved is in this continuing the game. Previously the game was stopped and everyone was left scratching their heads.

I like the fact that now there is the potential for the game to carry on seamlessly while VAR officials mull over decisions.

That is a definite improvement. Although the officials seem to keen to wait for the word of the VAR. Sweden pen was so clear cut earlier but he didn't give it and waited until he could see the tv. Any other game he would have just given it.

 

[Otis]

That is a definite improvement. Although the officials seem to keen to wait for the word of the VAR. Sweden pen was so clear cut earlier but he didn't give it and waited until he could see the tv. Any other game he would have just given it.

They need to grow some testicles.

 

[wingy]

I just think they should have waited for the system to be perfected before bringing it to the world cup. It's mad that refs use it in different ways and there are sometimes language barriers between the VAR and the on pitch ref.

I think the system is there, it's how they implement it.
Refs seem reluctant to go to it trusting their own judgement, maybe the vid ref should have the call, or does he already.

 

[Paul Anthony]

I think the theory behind it is sound. The application maybe not so much. It's still in its infancy though, it needs refinement.

You're never going to remove the human element from it so There's always going to be a margin of error in it of course.The big concern was how much it would slow the game down, but it hasn't too much. It just needs refining and then it'll be fine.

 

[I_Saw_Shaw_Score]

What happens if there is a penalty appeal pens not given, play goes on player commits a foul equalling yellow or red card the cards shown then the ref is asked to review the original pen and gives the pen?

Do the cards still stand as the game shouldn’t have been going at that point in theory.

 

[Paul Anthony]

What happens if there is a penalty appeal pens not given, play goes on player commits a foul equalling yellow or red card the cards shown then the ref is asked to review the original pen and gives the pen?

Do the cards still stand as the game shouldn’t have been going at that point in theory.

That does raise an interesting point. If the card is proved to be issued wrongly, surely the ref could just rescind it there and then. Or would that be too much like common sense?

 

[I_Saw_Shaw_Score]

That does raise an interesting point. If the card is proved to be issued wrongly, surely the ref could just rescind it there and then. Or would that be too much like common sense?

So many grey areas, also in the same way if it takes 60 seconds to be make the call to review the decision that time should be added but I bet it isn’t as that 60 second period doesn’t actually count for anything if a decision is reversed.

I mentioned processes in this thread weeks back and stick by it appears to be none!

Also 4 officials telling you to review a decision you’ve made you know you have probably made the wrong one so will have to overturn it.

Whole process is farcical but that was to be expected.

 

[chiefdave]

I just think they should have waited for the system to be perfected before bringing it to the world cup.

They always seem to do this. Surely you look at what's likely to come in before the next competition and start testing it now.

Its OK for binary decisions like offside but for fouls its not great as its subjective unless we're going down the route, which we appear to be headed, of any contact no matter if its a follow through or accidental is a foul. They need to be careful as you can't push much further down that line before you're essentially banning tackles. If you're going to slow things down for the slightest bit of contact how can anyone go in for a challenge?

Also why do they need 4 refs watching VAR and why do they get dressed up in their kit?

 

[SIR ERNIE]

Dislike this VAR. Effectively means there are different rules in the penalty area to the rest of the field. That will give a green light to divers and 'clever' players who ensure the defender 'makes contact'.

 

[wingy]

Dislike this VAR. Effectively means there are different rules in the penalty area to the rest of the field. That will give a green light to divers and 'clever' players who ensure the defender 'makes contact'.

They already have been for eons.
Use it property to root it out .
Greismans was an example and Ronaldos too to an extent.

 

[clint van damme]

Dislike this VAR. Effectively means there are different rules in the penalty area to the rest of the field. That will give a green light to divers and 'clever' players who ensure the defender 'makes contact'.

that's an interesting take on things. Surely the rules are the same it's just that incidents in the area will receive more scrutiny?
Personally I think it's working quite well.

 

[chiefdave]

that's an interesting take on things. Surely the rules are the same it's just that incidents in the area will receive more scrutiny?

The rules don't say any contact is a foul / pen but that seems to be what we're getting now. Everything massively slowed down to see if there's the slightest bit of contact. We've even got referees acting as pundits saying players should go down if they feel any contact at all.

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

System is an arse

 

[jimmyhillsfanclub]

System is an arse

Yep.....tonights game just reinforces the point that it just shifts the debate....and often complicates it....

...dont understand how others can still argue it benefits the game......its purely technology for the sake of it....pointless.

 

[Otis]

Yep.....tonights game just reinforces the point that it just shifts the debate....and often complicates it....

...dont understand how others can still argue it benefits the game......its purely technology for the sake of it....pointless.

I think it will benefit the game. We just have to give it time to get better and improve.

Even if the VAR system could have done nothing about that first Kane foul in the area, the system could be utilised for a message to get to the ref that there was a foul there and that he should be keeping an eye out to see if it happens again.

The second one then might well have been given.

If a player is constantly diving or feigning injury, again this could be conveyed to the ref.

I just think there are a number of opportunities with the system to eliminate certain aspects of foul play and cheating.

 

[stevefloyd]

I'm still in favour.

It will work in time. Surely pretty much all technology has teething problems when it is first introduced.

Did Alexander Graham Bell stop developing the telephone because that first call wasn't a very good line?

I just think there is far too much at stake these days in the game and the money that can be involved in one single incident can be monumental.

It's going to happen for sure. Like in cricket with snicko and the Cyclops system (now Hawkeye) in tennis.

These systems all have initial teething problems.

I want to know who he called or did he keep repeating hello more times than a copper then said it's a prank call then hung up

 

[Otis]

I want to know who he called or did he keep repeating hello more times than a copper then said it's a prank call then hung up

If it was a string between two cans he was probably running back and forth between two rooms talking to himself.

 

[stevefloyd]

If it was a string between two cans he was probably running back and forth between two rooms talking to himself.

Or trying to talk to the electricity company and kept on hold

 

[eastwoodsdustman]

In principle its a good thing. It can still be used or not used as the case may be to benefit or penalise teams as the users or authorities see fit. England have always had the rough end of the stick when it comes to international football and I hoped that VAR might put a stop to it. I realised last night that it won't and I have more than a sneaking suspicion that there will be another contentious decision that goes against us and costs us later in the tournament.

 

[mark82]

Last night was a shambles. Of the 3 decisions they only gave the one that was borderline. The two Kane ones were stonewall penalties. It's almost like they wanted to give the smaller team the best chance possible.

 

[tisza]

Surely the actual system works it still remains the human element is liable to error. Still absolutely stunned that 1st Kane tackle cannot be seen as a stonewall penalty.

 

[Otis]

Last night was a shambles. Of the 3 decisions they only gave the one that was borderline. The two Kane ones were stonewall penalties. It's almost like they wanted to give the smaller team the best chance possible.

Ridiculous really.

Two clear cut not given and the really, really soft one, given.

It was embarrassing to be honest.

Think the fact that some of the match officials were South American may well have had some bearing on things. Manhandling is all just part of the game there.

 

[tisza]

Ridiculous really.

Two clear cut not given and the really, really soft one, given.

It was embarrassing to be honest.

Think the fact that some of the match officials were South American may well have had some bearing on things. Manhandling is all just part of the game there.

Genuinely don't get it.
This was one of the key things VAR was introduced for. Pre-tournament identified as a point of focus for officials.
Think standard of reffing so far very average. Seen 3 or 4 sides take a very cynical approach which refs haven't coped with. Panama, Tunisia, Swiss to name but 3.

 

[SIR ERNIE]

that's an interesting take on things. Surely the rules are the same it's just that incidents in the area will receive more scrutiny?
Personally I think it's working quite well.

Well there wasn't much evidence of 'more scrutiny' in the area last night when Kane was wrestled to the ground twice.
VAR is in danger of becoming a farce which will grab more headlines than the matches.
It's a half-baked, work-in-progress concept that should never have been road tested at a World Cup Finals.

 

[eastwoodsdustman]

Well there wasn't much evidence of 'more scrutiny' in the area last night when Kane was wrestled to the ground twice.
VAR is in danger of becoming a farce which will grab more headlines than the matches.
It's a half-baked, work-in-progress concept that should never have been road tested at a World Cup Finals.

I don't think its half baked. Its there and simple to use. If there's something the ref has missed then they can pick up on it and inform the ref straight away. Its down to the people using it choosing not to when they feel like it and that is the problem.
If anything it's just highlighting how bad the referee's are that they can watch it on tv and still miss it.

 

[clint van damme]

Well there wasn't much evidence of 'more scrutiny' in the area last night when Kane was wrestled to the ground twice.
VAR is in danger of becoming a farce which will grab more headlines than the matches.
It's a half-baked, work-in-progress concept that should never have been road tested at a World Cup Finals.

yeah, I posted my comments prior to last nights game. Something badly amiss that the Kane incidents weren't picked up on.
I think it will come good but maybe it should have been used more elsewhere first before rolling it out at a World cup.

 

[pastythegreat]

If one good thing has come from VAR, it's that everybody is talking about how VAR has let us down not how absolute dogs mess we were in the 2nd half! At least it's deflected pressure away from the players from the usual media scrutiny.
The use of VAR last night was dreadful. But it's nowhere near a finished article and should be nowhere near a World Cup finals.


Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk

 

[Sumo the Micky Quinn]

I was talking to my son about the Kane rugby tackle. I didn't see it at first, but TV replays due make it look noticeable.

I maybe wrong here but I thought VAR is bought into play by the ref and nobody else, or if the ref is doubted by a linesman, the ref has a second look.

So if the ref didn't see it he can not ask for VAR, or if the linesman didn't bring it to the attention of the ref.

But the what some people are talking about is the 4th official bringing it to the ref attention. But is he watching it like we do on TV with constant replays or his he watching it like i-player with no replay. Blink and you miss it.

How many games have you been to where you turn around to scratch your arse or something and then say to your mate next to you and said "What's that card for?"

 

[M&B Stand]

If the Maradonda hand of god had been viewed with VAR it would’ve come back as goal.

 

[Otis]

If the Maradonda hand of god had been viewed with VAR it would’ve come back as goal.

Yep. You don't mess with the big man upstairs.

 

[M&B Stand]

Yep. You don't mess with the big man upstairs.

Putin?

 

[Otis]

Putin?

Higher.

Putin''s missus.

 

[Captain Dart]

If the Maradonda hand of god had been viewed with VAR it would’ve come back as goal.

and Frank Lampard would have put one past the Germans.

 

[jimmyhillsfanclub]

I reckon as this tournament progresses to the KO stages, VAR will be the catalyst for a team to storm off the pitch in protest........