VAR (13 Viewers)

[HadjiChippo]

Horrible celebrating when you know there is a chance it could be ruled out!!

I didn’t celebrate Simms’ 2nd until I saw the replay and was certain there was nothing wrong

 

---

[Otis]

So the answer to dodgy refs is to give them more power to stop the game and change decisions?

Nope.

Just make it so it is clear and obvious. Not clear and obvious, go with the on-field decision.

They are making it so much more complicated than it ever needs to be.

That 5 mins today was ridiculous.

Give it 20 seconds. Can't see anything obviously wrong with the refs decision, go with that.

That today was nothing to do with a "dodgy ref."

 

[pusbccfc]

Reading Wolves fans trying to convince themselves it's handball is hilarious

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Thing that gets me is this:

It's meant to be video 'assistant' referee, not video referee. If you think you've seen something that is an error by the match officials, by all means get them to look at replays on a pitchside monitor themselves, but let them make the final decision. Because whenever the referee is sent to the monitor now it's to reverse his original decision, like the nonsense that led to Dominic Calvert-Lewin being sent off against Palace with the ref clearly not agreeing with VAR.

 

[Frostie]

To the surprise of absolutely nobody. Not that fans opinions matter one jot.

 

[HuckerbyDublinWhelan]

Interestingly I think VAR would benefit Sakamoto

 

[jto123]

I’m against it generally, but if it has to be used it’s so obvious to me how. You basically implement like it was initially in cricket. This is not a re-ref tool, but a tool to get rid of the absolute howler. How do you decide what a howler is? If the decision can’t be made within 20 seconds then you stick with on field decision. If it takes any longer than that it can’t be that awful a decision. Ultimately there will always be an element of interpretation in football, so you are never going to get agreement on every decision. What you can get rid of are the absolute outright stinkers.

 

[Briles]

If an offside takes 7 minutes to validate using computers then its the rule that needs changing not VAR

 

[larry_david]

It's when the goal is good, but they spend 2 mins then going back to try prove why it should be ruled out in the build up to the move. That's the issue. It's like a snotty teacher at school desperate to prove you've done something wrong

 

[clint van damme]

To the surprise of absolutely nobody. Not that fans opinions matter one jot.

I wonder how many of the fans were crying for it to be introduced before it actually came in?

 

[stevefloyd]

The idea in principle is ok but the twats they put on it are fecking useless

 

[Marty]

It shouldn't slow the flow of the game, if you can't make a decision within 1 minute just go with the on field decision.

 

[shmmeee]

It shouldn't slow the flow of the game, if you can't make a decision within 1 minute just go with the on field decision.

Even 1 min is far too long tbh.

I still think scrap the other refs and let teams request three reviews each per game by the ref at the side of the pitch not more than 30 seconds to review and see if he wants to change his mind.

 

[Frostie]

 

[COVKIDSNEVERQUIT]

If an offside takes 7 minutes to validate using computers then its the rule that needs changing not VAR

It can easily be remedied, change the rule saying there needs to be daylight between the defender and the forward to be offside.

 

[Briles]

It can easily be remedied, change the rule saying there needs to be daylight between the defender and the forward to be offside.

Think they are trialling that in canada or something soon. Im sure it used to be the rule many moons ago

 

[Aelfgar]

The VAR operator should be like an assistant ref, watching the game in real time and calling the ref to review any 'clear and obvious' mistakes, such as a fan might see when watching on TV (e.g. Haji's massively offside goal against Wednesday). Add in the three calls per team idea and you have a workable system. They are currently trying to use it like in Rugby Union when a ref needs to see if a ball was grounded before or after the line, by an attacker or defender etc. Football just isn't that complicated (unless you're daft and want to make it so).

 

[shmmeee]

It can easily be remedied, change the rule saying there needs to be daylight between the defender and the forward to be offside.

How does that help?

 

[Calista]

It's like a snotty teacher at school desperate to prove you've done something wrong

That little incident with Mr Snodgrass still rankles with you after all these years doesn't it Larry?

 

[Briles]

How does that help?

No lines required to see if someones left nut sack was slightly distended at the point of the pass

 

[COVKIDSNEVERQUIT]

Think they are trialling that in canada or something soon. Im sure it used to be the rule many moons ago

Yes it did indeed, made it easier for the officials to make a decision.

 

[shmmeee]

No lines required to see if someones left nut sack was slightly distended at the point of the pass

Why not? How do you define daylight if you don’t have lines where one player starts and another ends? Genuine Q I know this is the recommendation but not looked into it.

 

[COVKIDSNEVERQUIT]

How does that help?

Because then you can use these

 

[Calista]

I’m against it generally, but if it has to be used it’s so obvious to me how. You basically implement like it was initially in cricket. This is not a re-ref tool, but a tool to get rid of the absolute howler. How do you decide what a howler is? If the decision can’t be made within 20 seconds then you stick with on field decision. If it takes any longer than that it can’t be that awful a decision. Ultimately there will always be an element of interpretation in football, so you are never going to get agreement on every decision. What you can get rid of are the absolute outright stinkers.

Just what I have been saying. If it needs lengthy deliberations it's clearly marginal so don't interfere with the ref's on-field call.

 

[Aelfgar]

You don't need lines or daylight or anything else, the system should work with the rule as it is. If you can see an offside, there was an advantage. If you can't, the advantage simply didn't exist. Hence the idea of clear and obvious. We're humans, not machines.

 

[Calista]

It can easily be remedied, change the rule saying there needs to be daylight between the defender and the forward to be offside.

That doesn't help, you're just moving the line. Can we see a millimetre of daylight?

 

[COVKIDSNEVERQUIT]

That doesn't help, you're just moving the line. Can we see a millimetre of daylight?

You can if you use your eyes

 

[shmmeee]

You can if you use your eyes

So just get rid of VAR?

 

[Calista]

You can if you use your eyes

No they'd still have to draw the lines, just in a new place. The problem isn't WHERE you draw the lines, it's whether you demand perfection or allow sensible leeway for the on-field call.

 

[COVKIDSNEVERQUIT]

So just get rid of VAR?

The fans survey says, yes.

And we would have been in 2 FA Cup finals.

 

[COVKIDSNEVERQUIT]

No they'd still have to draw the lines, just in a new place. The problem isn't WHERE you draw the lines, it's whether you demand perfection or allow sensible leeway for the on-field call.

Yeah right, like the lines they Drew over the Manchester United defenders foot in the semi-final.

 

[richnrg]

It can easily be remedied, change the rule saying there needs to be daylight between the defender and the forward to be offside.

wouldn't work in night matches

 

[Briles]

wouldn't work in night matches

Bravo that

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

Rugby needs to be the inspiration for VAR. The referee needs to use it as a guiding tool rather than a crutch. It’s more common for referees to make their own mind up or even overrule TMO when they see incidents. In football, if VAR tells the referee to ‘have a look’, it’s all but making the decision for them.

This is why Prem referees have got worse because ultimately, they rely on VAR to make all the big calls. There’s no real accountability.

 

[Otis]

The idea in principle is ok but the twats they put on it are fecking useless

Exactly this.

The principle is fine and the system would work fine if they used it properly.