VAR VAR POLL

[BettingBlade]

Agree...there’s loads of hypocrisy amongst managers...fans etc.
In every game there are 50/50 subjective decisions.....the teams that doesn’t win that decision complains of unfairness.
The ref made a mistake (through bad luck) when he blocked off John Fleck...normally it would be no big deal..but Aguiro scored from it...shit happens..it was bad luck.
It seems that whatever happens....if your team loses....then the manager, fans, players look to blame someone, often the ref.
Where when a team wins....then notice how there’s hardly ever any criticism of the ref or VAR.

Except Pep literally was on our side with the VAR frustrations yesterday.

It’s completely different to a normal refereeing error

 

[mablethorpe utd]

Make Your Choice

Thought his name was Graham.

 

[Geordie Blade]

Exactly. Should be for clear and obvious errors missed by the ref or lino. The ‘offside’ goals us, Norwich and Wolves scored this weekend were not clear and obvious.

In the Premier League rules, it states:

“Factual decisions, such as offside or if a foul was committed inside or outside the penalty area, will not be subject to the "clear and obvious error" test.”

 

[HillmortonBlade]

In the Premier League rules, it states:

“Factual decisions, such as offside or if a foul was committed inside or outside the penalty area, will not be subject to the "clear and obvious error" test.”

Are Premier League rules different to FA Laws? Fuck me, that’s the problem right there.

 

[BettingBlade]

In the Premier League rules, it states:

“Factual decisions, such as offside or if a foul was committed inside or outside the penalty area, will not be subject to the "clear and obvious error" test.”

Except we’ve already established that offsides cannot be factual under the current technology.

 

[Alf Tuppers Shorts]

None of the above. It'd be a start if we went with what's being dubbed as 'The Souness Law', then review from there.

Exactly. Offside should be when there is clear daylight between attacker and defender . The line should be drawn further back. If attackers arse is in line with defenders arse he’s on side , any daylight , he’s off. That way it’s clear and obvious. Just like it used to be . VAR could work if used and implemented properly but at the moment like everything else the folk in charge are so far up there own arses they cannot see clear daylight.

 

[Gimli]

In the Premier League rules, it states:

“Factual decisions, such as offside or if a foul was committed inside or outside the penalty area, will not be subject to the "clear and obvious error" test.”

I never understood why that is the stance that’s been taken. Offside may be ‘factual’ but the point of the law is to stop attackers from gaining an unfair advantage - Pukki’s beard being offside is to every sane person not worthy of overturning his goal - lundstrams big toe being offside literally a minute prior to us scoring against spurs can hardly be seen as gaining an unfair advantage.
Why can’t VAR just apply ‘clear and obvious’ to offsides?

 

[Geordie Blade]

I never understood why that is the stance that’s been taken. Offside may be ‘factual’ but the point of the law is to stop attackers from gaining an unfair advantage - Pukki’s beard being offside is to every sane person not worthy of overturning his goal - lundstrams big toe being offside literally a minute prior to us scoring against spurs can hardly be seen as gaining an unfair advantage.
Why can’t VAR just apply ‘clear and obvious’ to offsides?

It was eight seconds!

 

[Gimli]

It was eight seconds!

Ok, maybe not literally

 

[YES Blade]

Agree....technology could provide massive benefits to the game.
Suspect this season is just teething problems....and in a few years VAR will be great for certain factual decisions and fully accepted.

This is the issue, it’s first season problems, look at cricket, the 3rd umpire system is completely different today compared to when it was first implemented.

Everyone is learning, next season will be an improvement, then the year after that will be better again. In 5 years time the system will be fully accepted.

 

[PokerBlade]

People are so conditioned into ref-blaming that they can’t see that their fundamental complaint is unsolvable. It’s a flowing game governed largely by subjective calls. These calls still need to be made, and attempting to render it a science is destroying the joy of the game.

Instant decisions mean errors will happen. By all means mitigate it where you can, but too many people are yet to comprehend that the whole VAR shit show is because they couldn’t accept mistakes. Managers, players, fans, the media... They all brought the best sport in the world to this crappy place.

I think refs generally do an okay job. You get some terrible mistakes but a lot of the time they're on calls that are so hard to make that we're not even sure after watching Sky review the footage fifteen times. It was always a huge mistake to think that those calls, the most contentious ones, would be solved by refs watching it again for a couple of minutes.

And I'm going to do my rant again, even though I'm tired of typing it, but the way referees are treated in football from the grassroots up is abhorrent. When I was a kid I remember watching an FA Cup final and thinking, if I couldn't be a footballer, that it must be great to be a referee. He got to walk out on the pitch at Wembley, meet the players, see the game from the middle of the pitch. He was a part of the action. I didn't get a lot older before I realised I never wanted to be a ref. It's a miserable, thankless job and to get to the highest level you have to spend your weekends getting abused by everything from posh twat parents to common thugs. The vast majority of youth refs quit the game within 18 months. It happens in a manner that would NEVER be tolerated in other sports. And we don't fast-track refs, so ex-players who would know the game inside out can't ever become officials. So all I ask for, before we overhaul the laws of the game, introduce technology just for the elite league, bicker about the mistakes and marginal decisions, maybe we could try overhauling the way referees are treated such that we might get the best candidates for the job instead of only those thick-skinned enough to reach the top. It's got to be worth a try. There's absolutely no downside.

 

[Jesus_was_a_Blade]

Sack it off!
Football's been around for 150 years without VAR & it's not done too badly...

Nobody is benefiting from it, players are in the dark, fans are pissed off. The price of getting the perfect decision is too high if it means not being able to celebrate a goal.

I watched a highlight real of the best Premier League goals of the decade yesterday, absolute incredible goals. Volleys, overhead kicks, last minute winners. All I could think about was how many of them would have been ruled out for VAR, or at the very least fans wouldn't have been able to celebrate at the time.

Football's a game, not a science. If you want to see a bunch of guys with their measuring tapes out f*ck off to B&Q!

 

[Brian Deane]

Keep it as it is ..ya moaning feckers

 

[SouthEssexBlade]

I'm afraid we are reaping the years of castigating officials. Managers, players, pundits, press and fans became increasingly hysterical in their criticism of decisions by referees and assistants. TV fed this constantly, from the days of Jimmy Hill and the action replay through to SKY and PPV coverage offering every angle in super slow motion and high definition. The message was loud and clear, officials can't get things right but we, TV have the answers to all footballs problems, TV can get rid of bad decisions.

And who got lost in all this? The punters paying for tickets and sitting in the grounds. All the above was created by TV, fed by TV then demanded by TV. With no TV coverage the fans in the ground may have a chunter, disagree with the decision, but always a grudging acceptance of what was written in the laws '..in the opinion of the referee..' TV destroyed that.

 

[jt64]

Exactly. Offside should be when there is clear daylight between attacker and defender . The line should be drawn further back. If attackers arse is in line with defenders arse he’s on side , any daylight , he’s off. That way it’s clear and obvious. Just like it used to be

Honestly? Changing the offside rule to do this changes nothing with regards to how VAR handles it. You still draw a line for the forward and you still draw a line for the defender. Sometimes those two lines will be quite close to each other, and one team or another will bitch about VAR as a result

 

[Ball_Sup (Phil)]

As a Straw Man post. Consider, the so called Souness Law. If any part of your body is behind the defender, you are onside. Or, put another way, there needs to be daylight. Here is a crudely photoshopped pic (not by me) of a Souness Law Raheem Sterling onside..

 

[PokerBlade]

As a Straw Man post. Consider, the so called Souness Law. If any part of your body is behind the defender, you are onside. Or, put another way, there needs to be daylight. Here is a crudely photoshopped pic (not by me) of a Souness Law Raheem Sterling onside..

This Souness law strikes me as an attempt to further rewrite the laws of the game in order to keep going along with something that nobody is enjoying. I don't know why we'd want to. Can't we just realise that football was pretty good before and stick with that?

Bear in mind this would be changing the laws at all levels when only the Prem even bloody has the problem.

 

[Grecian2000]

It needs removing now, and re-implementing when someone can come up with something less destructive to the game as a "live" spectator sport.

If an offside is so tight it needs lines drawing then the linesman had no chance of getting it spot on and their decision should stand.
No-one EVER complained about the kind of tight margins we are seeing being given now, the complaints were usually around goals being disallowed when a player was clearly onside or, in rare circumstances, allowed to stand when "miles" offside.

The Spurs/Brighton game encapsulated the current ridiculous situation in 5 minutes. Firstly, Kane is offside by a gnats bollock and a perfectly good goal (for the last 150 years) is ruled out. Secondly, Brighton score from a free kick that should never have been given but that can't be checked as it isn't in the same phase of play.
Those decisions, combined, make the whole thing untenable in my view.

 

[PokerBlade]

It needs removing now, and re-implementing when someone can come up with something less destructive to the game as a "live" spectator sport.

If an offside is so tight it needs lines drawing then the linesman had no chance of getting it spot on and their decision should stand.
No-one EVER complained about the kind of tight margins we are seeing being given now, the complaints were usually around goals being disallowed when a player was clearly onside or, in rare circumstances, allowed to stand when "miles" offside.

The Spurs/Brighton game encapsulated the current ridiculous situation in 5 minutes. Firstly, Kane is offside by a gnats bollock and a perfectly good goal (for the last 150 years) is ruled out. Secondly, Brighton score from a free kick that should never have been given but that can't be checked as it isn't in the same phase of play.
Those decisions, combined, make the whole thing untenable in my view.

The Villa disallowed goal was one of the worst so far. A player given offside by the skin of his heel while he's moving back towards his own goal. Add to that that Burnley got a chance to clear it before it went back into the box for a different player to score.

 

[Sean Thornton]

This Souness law strikes me as an attempt to further rewrite the laws of the game in order to keep going along with something that nobody is enjoying. I don't know why we'd want to. Can't we just realise that football was pretty good before and stick with that?

Bear in mind this would be changing the laws at all levels when only the Prem even bloody has the problem.

Isn’t it more of a clarification of existing law?

 

[Gulpy]

This Souness law strikes me as an attempt to further rewrite the laws of the game in order to keep going along with something that nobody is enjoying. I don't know why we'd want to. Can't we just realise that football was pretty good before and stick with that?

Bear in mind this would be changing the laws at all levels when only the Prem even bloody has the problem.

Goal line calls, fouls, penalties etc all benefit from VAR. It's the application of offside that needs changing.

 

[Bean Kryan]

If they want to keep doing offside they should have a single full pitch overhead camera from a drone which can let a layman judge obvious offsides that are missed by the linesman and bin all this trigonometry and millimetre shit.

 

[PokerBlade]

Isn’t it more of a clarification of existing law?

No. Currently any part of the body that can play the ball can be offside. Which makes a lot of sense at face value. But now we'd be changing that to say that as long as there's a trailing leg then you're on.

Goal line calls, fouls, penalties etc all benefit from VAR. It's the application of offside that needs changing.

I'm not going to say there haven't been instance where VAR has righted wrongs (Basham's red for instance). My problem is that it's ruining the game as a spectator sport while a lot of the most contentious decisions in football aren't even clear after VAR. And I don't want the disruption it causes if it's only marginally more accurate than refs at the time.

FIFA used to have a stance before goal-line technology that said they wouldn't introduce anything unless it was 100% accurate and instant. I still like that as a standard. Goal-line tech is brilliant. VAR is terrible.

 

[Sean Thornton]

No. Currently any part of the body that can play the ball can be offside. Which makes a lot of sense at face value. But now we'd be changing that to say that as long as there's a trailing leg then you're on.



I'm not going to say there haven't been instance where VAR has righted wrongs (Basham's red for instance). My problem is that it's ruining the game as a spectator sport while a lot of the most contentious decisions in football aren't even clear after VAR. And I don't want the disruption it causes if it's only marginally more accurate than refs at the time.

FIFA used to have a stance before goal-line technology that said they wouldn't introduce anything unless it was 100% accurate and instant. I still like that as a standard. Goal-line tech is brilliant. VAR is terrible.

Poor wording on my point.

I don’t think many of the offside decisions being talked about are to do with a trailing leg. That makes no sense. It’s the leading foot that would count, which is where any decision would be made in any event. Souness suggested feet only to simplify. Which to me anyway, makes sense, or will do when the technology is sufficient for purpise.

 

[tincan]

Put micro chips in the players boots and a GPS the ball and they could do away with refs and have instant alerts..

 

[Sean Thornton]

Put micro chips in the players boots and a GPS the ball and they could do away with refs and have instant alerts..

Eh?

 

[BLADES1988]

This is the issue, it’s first season problems, look at cricket, the 3rd umpire system is completely different today compared to when it was first implemented.

Everyone is learning, next season will be an improvement, then the year after that will be better again. In 5 years time the system will be fully accepted.

Yes, but what irreparable damage will it have done in those 5 years? will there be any fans left that can be arsed to wait 5 years?

 

[YES Blade]

Yes, but what irreparable damage will it have done in those 5 years? will there be any fans left that can be arsed to wait 5 years?

I guarantee VAR will not damage the game in the short term or even long term, attendances will not drop, if anything they will continue to rise.

I find it ridiculous when pundits make comments about VAR killing the game, it won't, nothing can. Sky TV was going to ruin the game in the 90s, everyone was going to just sit at home watching matches, look how those predictions turned out.

 

[GRUMPY BLADE]

It needs removing now, and re-implementing when someone can come up with something less destructive to the game as a "live" spectator sport.

If an offside is so tight it needs lines drawing then the linesman had no chance of getting it spot on and their decision should stand.
No-one EVER complained about the kind of tight margins we are seeing being given now, the complaints were usually around goals being disallowed when a player was clearly onside or, in rare circumstances, allowed to stand when "miles" offside.

The Spurs/Brighton game encapsulated the current ridiculous situation in 5 minutes. Firstly, Kane is offside by a gnats bollock and a perfectly good goal (for the last 150 years) is ruled out. Secondly, Brighton score from a free kick that should never have been given but that can't be checked as it isn't in the same phase of play.
Those decisions, combined, make the whole thing untenable in my view.

It's horseshit.