An interesting perspective on VAR

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

GymClassHero

GymClassHero

Member
Joined
Sep 5, 2018
Messages
816
Reaction score
1,409
Just read this re VAR. I feel it sums it up nicely.

"It's Simple.
Crooks don't like CCTV
Cheats don't like VAR
VAR does need tweaking a bit, a small bit.
It needs decisions to sped up.
How many of us have watched a game and know a player is offside from the first viewing.
Yet the VAR ref takes an age to get to the decision.

As for the handball...yes it can be harsh but as long as the same rule applies to all that's fine."

I feel this is spot on tbh.
 

GymClassHero said:
Just read this re VAR. I feel it sums it up nicely.

"It's Simple.
Crooks don't like CCTV
Cheats don't like VAR
VAR does need tweaking a bit, a small bit.
It needs decisions to sped up.
How many of us have watched a game and know a player is offside from the first viewing.
Yet the VAR ref takes an age to get to the decision.

As for the handball...yes it can be harsh but as long as the same rule applies to all that's fine."

I feel this is spot on tbh.
Click to expand...

As a matter of technology (frame rates etc), VAR cannot be as precise as its supporters claim it is. It needs to admit to a margin of error, but that undermines a large part of the reason for having it.
 
VAR to enforce rules is a good thing and has the backing of most people i think in principle.

They've just been taking liberties with "clear and obvious" all season, which has fucked everybody off. Like WB says, they cant be mm accurate, so stop trying to be, nobody even asked or expected them to. If it was just used for the obvious law enforcements, then it should/ would be el rapido.
 
Of all the VAR decisions this season in the Premier league I've never seen one ref use the pitch side monitor. What's it there for? They use it abroad all the time
 
GymClassHero said:
Just read this re VAR. I feel it sums it up nicely.

"It's Simple.
Crooks don't like CCTV
Cheats don't like VAR
VAR does need tweaking a bit, a small bit.
It needs decisions to sped up.
How many of us have watched a game and know a player is offside from the first viewing.
Yet the VAR ref takes an age to get to the decision.

As for the handball...yes it can be harsh but as long as the same rule applies to all that's fine."

I feel this is spot on tbh.
Click to expand...
Personally I think VAR is here to stay, it’s the rules of VAR that need rewriting. Already said the offside rule should be , if there is clear daylight behind or just 1 mill of daylight between defender and attacker then that is offside, at the moment we have it the wrong way round if the attacker is 1mill in front of defender the VAR official is deeming it offside. The first explanation would be acceptable to everyone because as stated the attacker would be 100% be offside as there would be daylight between the players and clearly offside.
Handball is Handball , at times it will be harsh but the hand is connect to the elbow so let’s have a clear rule of anything lower than elbow is Handball where as the upper arm and shoulder will be deemed not handball,VAR would still be the deciding factor of where the ball struck the player but as said could be harsh as it was against West Ham 👍.
Declan Rice 100% knew the ball had hit his hand , if the Ref had seen it he would have blown his whistle before it went into the net, because he did not spot it it went to VAR who quickly picked up the handball, yes handball not shoulder ball so rightly disallowed . Harsh only because it happened in added time and not because of the rule.
 
I know someone who works at a different FA than the English one and they claim that their country hasn't adopted it as the technology is not accurate enough.

Once they get the cameras to more than one megapixel it might actually work ok.
 
A few years ago on the cricket they used to show off with an “ultra motion” camera which was pretty spectacular. Doesn’t seem to be used anywhere anymore but something along those lines is EXACTLY what VAR needs if they are insistent on checking offsides where there’s a gnats bollock in it. You’ll get to see exactly when the ball has left the provider and exactly where the body of the attacker is in relation to the defender, no more instances of Lundstram and his size 27 clown boots at Spurs.

It’s a good concept just being let down by horrendous implementation in the PL. For me, offsides should only be subject to a clear and obvious test. No more bloody lines.
 
GymClassHero said:
Just read this re VAR. I feel it sums it up nicely.

"It's Simple.
Crooks don't like CCTV
Cheats don't like VAR
VAR does need tweaking a bit, a small bit.
It needs decisions to sped up.
How many of us have watched a game and know a player is offside from the first viewing.
Yet the VAR ref takes an age to get to the decision.

As for the handball...yes it can be harsh but as long as the same rule applies to all that's fine."

I feel this is spot on tbh.
Click to expand...

I think it's way off the mark.

To suggest that VAR isn't liked by cheats is tantamount to suggesting that anyone who dislikes VAR must be a cheat. So that's just about everyone then?

VAR does not need "tweaking", it needs to be seriously re-considered as to how it is being used. Not least, the fact that fans, players, everyone in the stadium, is completely detached from the decision-making process and spontaneity is killed off. Consider something else...if you went out and bought a new TV, or computer, tomorrow and then when you got it home it didn't work properly, and the manufacturer said, "We know it's not working as it should, but we'll get it right eventually" - would you be happy? The point is, you TEST things first, before you introduce them, not introduce them then test them later.

VAR technology is not the reason why it's slow. It's not a technological problem, it's a human one.

The rules are another obfuscating factor - not just the handball rule either. Those need clearing up.

Apart from all that - I totally agree with you! ;)
 
Cerberus Blade said:
I think it's way off the mark.

To suggest that VAR isn't liked by cheats is tantamount to suggesting that anyone who dislikes VAR must be a cheat. So that's just about everyone then?

VAR does not need "tweaking", it needs to be seriously re-considered as to how it is being used. Not least, the fact that fans, players, everyone in the stadium, is completely detached from the decision-making process and spontaneity is killed off. Consider something else...if you went out and bought a new TV, or computer, tomorrow and then when you got it home it didn't work properly, and the manufacturer said, "We know it's not working as it should, but we'll get it right eventually" - would you be happy? The point is, you TEST things first, before you introduce them, not introduce them then test them later.

VAR technology is not the reason why it's slow. It's not a technological problem, it's a human one.

The rules are another obfuscating factor - not just the handball rule either. Those need clearing up.

Apart from all that - I totally agree with you! ;)
Click to expand...

No it isn't - here's a handy venn diagram to demonstrate

1579162906886.png

FWIW, I think the amount of playacting has significantly reduced this year - you don`t see players going down stupidly easily in the box as much - with the exception of a few outliers (Grealish, McGinn I'm looking at you) it seems to have helped in that aspect.

The offsides is the real issue here - one look in slow mo - if you aren`t certain that you want to overturn the decision on the pitch, leave it as it is.
 
Oh I get your Venn diagram...that's why I used a fancy word like "tantamount" - meaning not exactly, but similar to..

This is like one of them psychometric tests...

"All cheats dislike VAR, some people who are not cheats dislike VAR". Which of the following are true:

1. All people who dislike VAR are cheats
2. Some people who are cheats dislike VAR
3. People who like VAR are not cheats
4. People who dislike cheats like VAR

I think you make a practical suggestion re the offside - and for sure there is too much scrutiny about it. But once again, we are focusing on the correctness of the decision - and my gripe with VAR isn't just about that at all - it's the disruption, detachment, deferring of responsibility and lack of spontaneity that it brings to the game. These factors, to me, are just as important as whether we actually got the decision right or not.
 
WalthamstowBlade said:
As a matter of technology (frame rates etc), VAR cannot be as precise as its supporters claim it is. It needs to admit to a margin of error, but that undermines a large part of the reason for having it.
Click to expand...
this sums it up
VAR to work has to every specific over when a ball leaves a foot to be specific over which frame is that moment
it is unable to be specific and therein lies its problem

goal line technology has just one element , its clear if its in or not
offside has several elements, first phase second phase did it come off a defender the precise moment of leaving the foot

if it is an unspecified moment it has to have a more general decision
half a blurred foot on an unclear video is unacceptable, a
Hand ball if made handball for even unintentional is specific and less open to criticism
 
ChipButtyBlade said:
VAR should stop trying to make the "offside rule" perfect,a player should not be called "pixelatedly offside".
Click to expand...

This

Modify the offside rule to favour the attacker and scrap the new ridiculous hand ball interpretation and it will eliminate many of the issues.

It would still be better to scrap it completely but imo but that isn’t going to happen
 
Should be an option like 'umpire's call' as there is in cricket as others have suggested.

I think it will get there.
 

You may as well say that fascists and authoritarians like ultra-surveillance.
Therefore VAR supporters are fascists.

It's actually bollocks. VAR is ruining the game. That's all.
 
In a nutshell.... Var should be used for penalty decisions, hand balls when a goal has been scored and red cards. It should only be used for offside if it is absolutely clear and obvious that the linesman has made a mistake. By that I mean like a yard offside/onside.

It's the offside usage that is killing the game. Lets keep the spontaneous raw emotion and only use var if every fucker in the ground can see he's offside but the linesman has had a brain fart.
 
I have said it on another thread , VAR should go to a challenge system and the offside review should recognise that attackers are allowed to be level under the existing rule so if they look level in real time they are. This should eliminate most of the delays and the nonsense of having every goal checked
 
WalthamstowBlade said:
As a matter of technology (frame rates etc), VAR cannot be as precise as its supporters claim it is. It needs to admit to a margin of error, but that undermines a large part of the reason for having it.
Click to expand...
They need to recognise that, at least for offside and handball, there still has to be a human judgement made. Offside with defender running one way and attacker running the other way, plus the ball being played perhaps from 40 yards back, is beyond the capability of current VAR. And if the ball hits around the armpit, again it is not possible to determine objectively whether the ball hit the arm or the torso, and presumably the looser the shirt, the more difficult the decision. It is rather like the fielder at cricket taking a low catch - the cameras cannot determine in some cases whether the ball has touched the ground. So I guess we need some technological decisions (goal-line technology), and some where VAR helps the referee decide. And let's have a presumption of a goal stands unless the ref decides that there was a clear infringement.
 
Cerberus Blade said:
I think it's way off the mark.

To suggest that VAR isn't liked by cheats is tantamount to suggesting that anyone who dislikes VAR must be a cheat. So that's just about everyone then?

VAR does not need "tweaking", it needs to be seriously re-considered as to how it is being used. Not least, the fact that fans, players, everyone in the stadium, is completely detached from the decision-making process and spontaneity is killed off. Consider something else...if you went out and bought a new TV, or computer, tomorrow and then when you got it home it didn't work properly, and the manufacturer said, "We know it's not working as it should, but we'll get it right eventually" - would you be happy? The point is, you TEST things first, before you introduce them, not introduce them then test them later.

VAR technology is not the reason why it's slow. It's not a technological problem, it's a human one.

The rules are another obfuscating factor - not just the handball rule either. Those need clearing up.

Apart from all that - I totally agree with you! ;)
Click to expand...

Horseshit would have sufficed.
 
the FA rule books first commandment was that all decisions rested on in the opinion of the referee

its just changed to in the opinion of a gaggle of referees
so instead of one judgement theres 4
that just offers too many opinions
 
Just don't use it for a Lunnys big toe scenario and its not bad at all.
 
Why have it, when the decisions are still subjective, but as opposed to the referee making the decision we have to wait for 3 minutes 22 seconds for some muppet in Stanley park to make his mind up.
If the number of mistakes had been reduced it brings something to the party but they have not
 
ive said before I think that vast majority of VAR is working of course people who come off it worse are going to dislike it but I would keep it but their needs to be some tweaks, offside is the biggest issue & specifically they need to use the human eye get rid of the lines. does he look offside its simple that would clear up the vast majority of the stupid offsides where we ruling out goals for being level. which I think out of all VAR that have annoyed me is purely offside.

the handball ball I don't mind because on that matter I think it should come under the rules of did the opposing team gain an advantage. so egan v brighton & rice v us. gets ruled out because the goals wouldn't have happened without the handball. but jesus v spurs in aug & wolves disallowed goal last night goal should've been allowed
 
bertieblade said:
Why have it, when the decisions are still subjective, but as opposed to the referee making the decision we have to wait for 3 minutes 22 seconds for some muppet in Stanley park to make his mind up.
If the number of mistakes had been reduced it brings something to the party but they have not
Click to expand...
For the avoidance of doubt:
Stanley Park
IMG_0286.JPG

Stockley Park
IMG_0287.JPG

;)
 
I think they have theirs hands over the lens of the VAR camera when all the scull duggery is going on in the area at corners etc.
 
It should only be able to overturn the onside linesmans decision of the player is cleary offside

Eg if there is daylight between the two players , which you can used the daft dotted lines for not this armpit BS
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Back
Top Bottom