VAR VAR

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

But if it had bounced off his hand onto Anels then penalty!?
Proper Blade said:
Am I right in thinking that if Gordon had put the ball in the net, it would have automatically been given as handball?

But because he squared it for someone else to tap in, it came down to intention/unnatural position and all that bollocks?
Click to expand...
Lty
 

Another thing ref VAR. People are giving views on the VAR calls by comparing lines drawn not by VAR but the media, and using the pitch grass shaded lines as a guide. Both of those lines are not accurately straight at all , in fact the pitch grass lines can be way out as manually cut, that is misleading on judging how close VAR calls are.get rid of the grass lines and then it's harder for people to question offside calls already made anyway.
Also , as has been said before, allow managers 2 times per game they can challenge any decision .this reduces the big cock ups made unless they choose to waste challenges that's up to them
 
Last edited:
How do they cock up so badly that they're both discussing opposing views?

Surely the closure of the check should be a specific decision rather than just check complete.

What's wrong with

'Award the goal, check complete.'

or

'Disallow the goal, offside, check complete'
 
Okay, devil's advocate:

Having watched the video of the VAR commentary, part of the problem, other than the VAR being on another planet, is that the check was so rushed and no proper communication took place between ref and VAR (only the delay operator had a clue what was going on).

One of the big recurring criticisms VAR got as soon as it was introduced was the lengthy delays caused by VAR checks. It was ruining the flow of games, preventing fans from being able to properly celebrate goals etc. and so VAR was encouraged to speed up checks. The decision above is a consequence of that. The VAR is so hellbent on checking it quickly, he doesn't take any time to actually confirm what the fuck the onfield decision was. If they'd spent as long on it as they did in the first Wilder prem season, that goal would be given.
 
mcbladeface said:
Okay, devil's advocate:

Having watched the video of the VAR commentary, part of the problem, other than the VAR being on another planet, is that the check was so rushed and no proper communication took place between ref and VAR (only the delay operator had a clue what was going on).

One of the big recurring criticisms VAR got as soon as it was introduced was the lengthy delays caused by VAR checks. It was ruining the flow of games, preventing fans from being able to properly celebrate goals etc. and so VAR was encouraged to speed up checks. The decision above is a consequence of that. The VAR is so hellbent on checking it quickly, he doesn't take any time to actually confirm what the fuck the onfield decision was. If they'd spent as long on it as they did in the first Wilder prem season, that goal would be given.
Click to expand...

What's the assistant VAR there for if they don't have to confirm the decision before it's relayed to the on pitch ref?

It's a good reminder that VAR is just humans, and humans fuck up. It's not an infallible process, it just gets fewer things wrong than the pre -var times
 
Last edited:
Klaatu Barada Nikto said:
What's the assistant VAR there for if they don't have to confirm the decision before it's relayed to the on pitch ref?
Click to expand...
I'll be honest, I couldn't hear him say anything in all that so god knows what the point of him is. The guy in charge of delaying the footage seemed the most competent one of the lot.
 
I thought it was an official requirement for the electronic scoreboard to state goal/no goal after a VAR check...

Obviously not with all VAR checks but certainly the ones that result in the ball going in the back of the net...

I'm sure that was made an official requirement for this season to aide fans inside the stadium...
 
It’s often said that most footballers are thick and now we know that’s true of referees as well. After all, Mike Dean was a simple chicken plucker before going pro (and that’s not rhyming slang)
 
A few years ago we had the ''forgot to turn on the machine' incident at Villa Park. That ultimately kept them up and got another team relegated. Because it was a decision against little old us it got forgotten about by the press and pundits in minutes. Human error happens to a big club and it looks like heads will roll, the whole system will be shaken up and I wouldn't be surprised to see Liverpool press for extra points. If they do, maybe we should demand the extra points we lost against Villa to be added to this seasons tally.
 
spikeachu said:
How do they cock up so badly that they're both discussing opposing views?

Surely the closure of the check should be a specific decision rather than just check complete.

What's wrong with

'Award the goal, check complete.'

or

'Disallow the goal, offside, check complete'
Click to expand...
Exactly this. It isn’t rocket science is it. Given the amount of money spent on the system, and it’s impact on games and outcomes, it is inexcusable that they have not given even basic advance thought to simple protocols to mitigate against human error under pressure of time and remote communication. Absolute clowns.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dkc
BrisBlade said:
A few years ago we had the ''forgot to turn on the machine' incident at Villa Park. That ultimately kept them up and got another team relegated. Because it was a decision against little old us it got forgotten about by the press and pundits in minutes. Human error happens to a big club and it looks like heads will roll, the whole system will be shaken up and I wouldn't be surprised to see Liverpool press for extra points. If they do, maybe we should demand the extra points we lost against Villa to be added to this seasons tally.
Click to expand...
I wonder if the machine was turned off at the other end if Villa had scored or just ours🤔
 

Selly said:
What I find remarkable is how quickly they have been able to supply the audio.

And yet here we are checks calendar over 3 years later and we still haven`t seen the "occluded" images from the "goal" at villa park.
Click to expand...
There are no images from Villa Park. The system wasn't working, either because it failed or because they didn't switch it on.

ChipButtyBlade said:
Rugby Unions method of checking anything in a game is far better than what currently happens in football.
Click to expand...

That's because a) the audio is immediately available and b) the images are shared for the on field officials to make the decision. Neither of those happens consistently with football.
 
Every other sport I can think of that uses VAR or similar (Rugby, NFL, even bloody tennis) has a system that clearly states what the on pitch decision is before the check is made. Just do that - it's not hard
 
Pintor75 said:
I wonder if the machine was turned off at the other end if Villa had scored or just ours🤔
Click to expand...
I genuinely believe the watch didn't go off. That's fine, technology fails from time to time.

It's the aftermath that annoys everyone.
  • "VAR can't overule hawkeye"
  • "Occluded cameras" - show us then
As others have said. That goal is given if it happens to Man C, Liverpool etc.
 
Balham Blade said:
There are no images from Villa Park. The system wasn't working, either because it failed or because they didn't switch it on.
Click to expand...

I'm not a computer expert but they surely they could release the operating history of the system and the club could have asked for it?
 
It was mentioned on the radio this morning that the premier league can’t introduce broadcasting the conversation between the on field referee and VAR live in the stadium or on tv like with rugby because of rules from the world footballing body. The rules would have to change globally before the PL could implement anything like this. So that won’t happen anytime soon.
 
mattbianco1 said:
That's a lie though.

Here's their statement:
View attachment 172416

The images are available from different angles. The PL and VAR decided not to intervene.
View attachment 172417View attachment 172418
View attachment 172419
Click to expand...
Those are the broadcaster/photographer images, not the hawkeye images.

Their statement claims the cameras were occluded. So release the images showing this.

The fact they haven`t done this has led to the assumption/assertion that in fact the system wasn`t turned on/wasn`t working.
 
mattbianco1 said:
The images are available from different angles. The PL and VAR decided not to intervene.
Click to expand...
It's a shame there isn't a little more honesty in the game. Did Nyland receive any criticism for blatantly cheating? I can't remember anything being said. He must have known the ball was in the net - he was holding it against the side netting after all.

We're so used to cheating in the game now. We all moan about it but nobody in authority has the balls to do anything about it
 
mattbianco1 said:
I genuinely believe the watch didn't go off. That's fine, technology fails from time to time.

It's the aftermath that annoys everyone.
  • "VAR can't overule hawkeye"
  • "Occluded cameras" - show us then
As others have said. That goal is given if it happens to Man C, Liverpool etc.
Click to expand...

What annoyed me is that everyone in the stadium (not many) and god knows how many at home, could see with their own eyes that the ball was in the net. It was also clear from Michael Oliver's body language that he'd also seen it go in. Why then did he choose to go with the decision of a bleeding wristwatch that clearly hadn't worked, rather than stop the game, speak to the other officials and come to a common sense solution?

That decision cost Bournemouth millions, and could very well have cost Sheff Utd millions as well, as we'd have been more likely to qualify for Europe.
 
Simple solution. to solve offside controversy.

Change the rules so the measure points are the front of the chest.

Then put a miniature transmitter/ chip in every ball and also inside the chest area of every shirt, some clubs already do this to measure running stats etc.

Then design software to give an instant on/ offside decision. Then there’s zero arguement and it becomes accepted like goal line technology and we all know goal line technology never fails, as you turn on the machine.
 
Refs are willing to compromise sporting integrity over compromising the strict laws of football. Which themselves aren't devine and were written by humans.

If they are so strict, as to say "oh play has restarted now can't do anything" then why aren't they so strict about other footballing rules, like when a player takes a free kick when the other team was caught offside. They almost never put it actually where the offence was taken. Same with throws. Also foul throws (although admittedly I raised this issue a few years ago and have seen a few foul throws been called since).

The point is, the refs aren't so anal about things like that. So why do other rules seem to have a higher precident?

They aren't willing to change to a common sense approach because they know it can cause controversy the current approach. That means more people watching... more money. Sporting integrity out of the window.
 
Last edited:
Let's be honest, VAR is a terrible idea for a game like football. Made decidedly worse in England by the contemptuous PGMOL who are more interested in their profile and being in the news then implementing the laws of the game to ensure the "right" decision is reached.

Automated offsides, goal line technology. That's fine. Everything else should go.
 
SuperSonicBlade89 said:
Refs are willing to compromise sporting integrity over compromising the strict laws of football. Which themselves aren't devine and were written by humans.

If they are so strict, as to say "oh play has restarted now can't do anything" then why aren't they so strict about other footballing rules, like when a player takes a free kick when the other team was caught offside. They almost never put it actually where the offence was taken. Same with throws. Also foul throws (although admittedly I raised this issue a few years ago and have seen a few foul throws been called since).

The point is, the refs aren't so anal about things like that. So why do other rules seem to have a higher precident?
Click to expand...

Of course they could do something, just as they could with the Villa Park goal. If a quite obvious process related error has occurred, no one would ever blame a referee for stopping a game and putting it right. In fact, they'd be massively praised for it. Why they chose not to in both these instances was bizarre.
 

Working Class Hero said:
Of course they could do something, just as they could with the Villa Park goal. If a quite obvious process related error has occurred, no one would ever blame a referee for stopping a game and putting it right. In fact, they'd be massively praised for it. Why they chose not to in both these instances was bizarre.
Click to expand...

Exactly!
It's almost like the referees like playing the bad guy or mardy bastard that's come to ruin a game of football.

If ever a ref needs praise it should be now with how bad their reputation has got... and it was already a low bar!

Let's get some comedy into the game. Each team is given one uno reverse card. But the ref doesn't know which player has got it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

crazyblade1889
Replay the game
2
Replies
31
Views
3K
munksyb
M
ThatJa
Has football lost its identity?
2 3
Replies
70
Views
5K
metalblade
metalblade
Y
Our goal v. Citeh. McBurnie offside?
2
Replies
33
Views
3K
PokerBlade
P
originaltrueblade
Time for Transparency
Replies
23
Views
2K
Pittsburg Blade
Pittsburg Blade
Overthehills
The Gaffer's Arblaster debate.
Replies
11
Views
1K
Bladezz
B

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