Poll reference VAR

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

Should the VAR system Be Scrapped

  • Yes

    Votes: 309 75.2%

  • No

    Votes: 102 24.8%
  • Total voters
    411

Some things in football are objective, such as the ball crossing the goal line. We now have a way to decide definitively if this has happens. All good.

Some things are more subjective - fouls, dives etc

Some things are a mix of both. Handball requires a decision as to how natural the arm position was when the ball struck it, and whether it counts if the ball hit the upper arm or not. Offside is also a mix. A players position on the pitch is objective, but interfering with play makes it more up to the referee to decide.

For all these decisions, we've historically simply given power over to the referee & linesmen and just said 'For better or for worse, you decide, and we'll stick with your decision'. The downsides of this are manifold. Different referees will come to different opinions, and will occasionally miss the blindingly obvious, such as actual goals going in the back of the net.

There's a lot of calls on here to scrap VAR. The question I have for those people is:
If VAR is removed, will you be ok with simply accepting the referee's decision when he inevitably gets it wrong, and just accepting that mistakes from players, managers and the ref all play a part of the game?

I ask this because although I think this it's a reasonable position, I remember so many complaints from fans every week about refereeing decisions. Sometimes I question if fans know what they really want.
 
My view on VAR so far

Key decisions on penalty decisions etc. They had it about right at the start of the season where virtually nothing was overturned. The process for this should be as follows
1 Incident occurs that ref doesn't see clearly so he asks VAR to look
2 VAR check several angles inside 60 seconds whilst the game goes on or the ref holds up play prior to a re-start
3 If the ref has missed an absolute obvious foul etc then the decision is overturned. Otherwise play resumed.

I don't really see the need for the ref to go and look at a video screen myself. I you accept that in certain circumstances that the VAR ref has a better view then why can't they make the call just as a linesman can.

The fact that they still sometimes get it wrong or there is still debate about the decision is not an issue for me. It's job is primarily to stop "fucking awful" mistakes from being made. I think one problem they have is that they have fallen into the trap of getting involved in decisions to justify it's introduction.

For off-sides I think it's a mess at the moment.

They have to accept that the technology has limitations and that it simply can't overturn decisions as tight as yesterdays. The errors come in measuring exactly when the ball left the foot of the passer and the exact position of defenders / attackers. It's all got a margin of error that means that the blue and red lines they draw need to loads wider than they currently draw them

If the lines then cross each other then the decision goes back to the on field officials who make the call - "umpires Call" as it's called in cricket.

This would be a big first few steps in making the technology enhance the game rather than the current mess it's creating
 
Nothing wrong with VAR. Its the way we use and interpret it that’s the problem not to mention the complex and ridiculous rules that are constantly being tweaked. Mike Riley needs to stop being so pigheaded and stubborn and admit it’s failing here far more than other countries and ask himself why?
 
blade67 said:
My view on VAR so far

Key decisions on penalty decisions etc. They had it about right at the start of the season where virtually nothing was overturned. The process for this should be as follows
1 Incident occurs that ref doesn't see clearly so he asks VAR to look
2 VAR check several angles inside 60 seconds whilst the game goes on or the ref holds up play prior to a re-start
3 If the ref has missed an absolute obvious foul etc then the decision is overturned. Otherwise play resumed.

I don't really see the need for the ref to go and look at a video screen myself. I you accept that in certain circumstances that the VAR ref has a better view then why can't they make the call just as a linesman can.

The fact that they still sometimes get it wrong or there is still debate about the decision is not an issue for me. It's job is primarily to stop "fucking awful" mistakes from being made. I think one problem they have is that they have fallen into the trap of getting involved in decisions to justify it's introduction.

For off-sides I think it's a mess at the moment.

They have to accept that the technology has limitations and that it simply can't overturn decisions as tight as yesterdays. The errors come in measuring exactly when the ball left the foot of the passer and the exact position of defenders / attackers. It's all got a margin of error that means that the blue and red lines they draw need to loads wider than they currently draw them

If the lines then cross each other then the decision goes back to the on field officials who make the call - "umpires Call" as it's called in cricket.

This would be a big first few steps in making the technology enhance the game rather than the current mess it's creating
Click to expand...
The problem with the VAR referees checking on behalf of the match referees was that they are/were reluctant to overturn a colleagues decision. It was pointless them being there especially when talking about giving penalties. For me the match ref should have 60-90 secs tops to check a pitchside monitor. If he cannot decide in that time his original decision stands. We need clarity on 1st and 2nd phases and to stop being so nit picking on ridiculous offsides. CLEAR AND OBVIOUS was the referees own directive. Yesterday was nothing like that
 
I voted no simply because it does have the potential to be used for the greater good. (believe it or not) just needs refining which may take a couple of seasons.

For offsides these days and advancement of technology, my preference would be for offsides to be based on only the foot of defender vs attacker ( none of this elbow, armpit, ponytail bullshit)

If all boots had a gps chip in them and with how specific and advanced gps is these days you would know without a shadow of a doubt whose foot was closest to the goal line. This would negate having a camera angle which isn't parallel with where the players are and trying to guess whose in front of who by drawing random lines. Only way I can ever see it being absolutely black and white.
 
jono_t2000 said:
I voted no simply because it does have the potential to be used for the greater good. (believe it or not) just needs refining which may take a couple of seasons.

For offsides these days and advancement of technology, my preference would be for offsides to be based on only the foot of defender vs attacker ( none of this elbow, armpit, ponytail bullshit)

If all boots had a gps chip in them and with how specific and advanced gps is these days you would know without a shadow of a doubt whose foot was closest to the goal line. This would negate having a camera angle which isn't parallel with where the players are and trying to guess whose in front of who by drawing random lines. Only way I can ever see it being absolutely black and white.
Click to expand...
OK. So, you have a coordinate for the defenders boot. You have a coordinate for the attackers boot. Both provided by this millimetre accurate GPS. (Which doesn't exist by the way). You only know who is closer to the goal line, by ..... drawing a line. Correct me......
 
jono_t2000 said:
I voted no simply because it does have the potential to be used for the greater good. (believe it or not) just needs refining which may take a couple of seasons.

For offsides these days and advancement of technology, my preference would be for offsides to be based on only the foot of defender vs attacker ( none of this elbow, armpit, ponytail bullshit)

If all boots had a gps chip in them and with how specific and advanced gps is these days you would know without a shadow of a doubt whose foot was closest to the goal line. This would negate having a camera angle which isn't parallel with where the players are and trying to guess whose in front of who by drawing random lines. Only way I can ever see it being absolutely black and white.
Click to expand...
But it’s not just the feet that makes a player offside or onside, so that wouldn’t work.

I think as others have said, if a definite decision cannot be agreed upon within 60 seconds the refs decision stands.

Anything that takes longer to scrutinise, is by definition, neither clear or obvious. The only problem with VAR is the clueless twats responsible for implementing and monitoring it.
 
spongebobblade said:
The problem with the VAR referees checking on behalf of the match referees was that they are/were reluctant to overturn a colleagues decision. It was pointless them being there especially when talking about giving penalties. For me the match ref should have 60-90 secs tops to check a pitchside monitor. If he cannot decide in that time his original decision stands. We need clarity on 1st and 2nd phases and to stop being so nit picking on ridiculous offsides. CLEAR AND OBVIOUS was the referees own directive. Yesterday was nothing like that
Click to expand...
I don't have a problem with the VAR being reluctant to overturn the on-pitch decision. For me that is how it should be. If the VAR official can mike up to the on-field ref and say. Fella, the defender has caught him, it's plain as day from camera 4's angle, then the on-pitch ref can change his mind just as he can when a lino sees something he can't. Ultimately that is about trust in your colleagues and these guys should be able to co-ordinate. If the bloke with the 15 camera angles can't be sure to give that advice then the on pitch decision stands. It all happens within 60 seconds and if it can't be changed in 60 seconds then that's that, play on as decided before.

Nearly 4 minutes they took yesterday and they still have me shouting at the TV that the defenders fucking shoulder looks about 6 inches further back than Lundstram's big toe. What a joke.
 

blade67 said:
I don't have a problem with the VAR being reluctant to overturn the on-pitch decision. For me that is how it should be. If the VAR official can mike up to the on-field ref and say. Fella, the defender has caught him, it's plain as day from camera 4's angle, then the on-pitch ref can change his mind just as he can when a lino sees something he can't. Ultimately that is about trust in your colleagues and these guys should be able to co-ordinate. If the bloke with the 15 camera angles can't be sure to give that advice then the on pitch decision stands. It all happens within 60 seconds and if it can't be changed in 60 seconds then that's that, play on as decided before.

Nearly 4 minutes they took yesterday and they still have me shouting at the TV that the defenders fucking shoulder looks about 6 inches further back than Lundstram's big toe. What a joke.
Click to expand...


The shoulder is an optical illusion.
 
spongebobblade said:
The problem with the VAR referees checking on behalf of the match referees was that they are/were reluctant to overturn a colleagues decision. It was pointless them being there especially when talking about giving penalties. For me the match ref should have 60-90 secs tops to check a pitchside monitor. If he cannot decide in that time his original decision stands. We need clarity on 1st and 2nd phases and to stop being so nit picking on ridiculous offsides. CLEAR AND OBVIOUS was the referees own directive. Yesterday was nothing like that
Click to expand...

The time limit will never work, it’ll just make things worse.

You can just hear it all now:

“He took his time with that one cause he didn’t want to give a penalty against Liverpool”

“He was quick with that one, he couldn’t wait to give Liverpool that penalty”

etc etc etc
 
Referees have been responsible for altering and adjusting the rules of the game so much in the last ten years.

Where they were originally ‘black or white’ they have introduced ‘grey’ areas, which are assessed by the referees interpretation. This was in my opinion, to provide a ‘get out’ when they call it wrong and to make them ever more powerful and integral figures within the game. To the games detriment.

Egotistical twats, the lot of ‘em 😡
 
blade67 said:
I don't have a problem with the VAR being reluctant to overturn the on-pitch decision. For me that is how it should be. If the VAR official can mike up to the on-field ref and say. Fella, the defender has caught him, it's plain as day from camera 4's angle, then the on-pitch ref can change his mind just as he can when a lino sees something he can't. Ultimately that is about trust in your colleagues and these guys should be able to co-ordinate. If the bloke with the 15 camera angles can't be sure to give that advice then the on pitch decision stands. It all happens within 60 seconds and if it can't be changed in 60 seconds then that's that, play on as decided before.

Nearly 4 minutes they took yesterday and they still have me shouting at the TV that the defenders fucking shoulder looks about 6 inches further back than Lundstram's big toe. What a joke.
Click to expand...
I take your point but there have been numerous times when a clear reversal of the match referees decision should have been overturned yet wasn’t. Further down the line they have admitted this. They left themselves wide open for criticism for not allegedly seeing what the rest of us can and then in the last few weeks we’ve had a fair few decisions overturned after an internal review.
They have to be clearer and more simplistic with the rules so we can all understand them better including the officials both on the pitch and at Stockley Park.
Yesterday was laughable though. When Baldocks goal went for revue you almost felt that Jon Moss was actually desperately looking for a reason to chalk it off. It’s getting bloody ridiculous and killing the game we all love. 1st phase, 2nd phase, different handballs for whether your the defender or attacker, we are getting wrapped up in complex issues brought about by meddling with rules and the ability to overanalyse. We need to take a step back, simplify and clarify for VAR to work how we all wanted and expected it to
 
blade67 said:
WTF:mad:o_O😤:(:mad::mad::rolleyes:;)
Click to expand...


The shoulder just is not further back than the knee. It's the position of the camera that makes it appear that way u til you study it.

Imagine a vertcal line drawn upwards from the knee from below. The technology picks out the furthest point vertically from the ground. Then it takes that point right across the pitch at ground level to pinpoint the on or offside.
 
I think the biggest problem with VAR is that they are trying to get the decisions correct but at a speed that doesn’t delay the game hence why the referees aren’t going to the side of the pitch monitors.

They just need to accept that the match will be delayed by VAR but the decisions as a result will be better. Personally I’d like to see the ref’s watch linked to a stadium clock so the time keeping is transparent and will give less scope for criticism.
 
I reckon Moss will have taken all that time to make his decision because he knew the decision was controversial but couldnt find any way to avoid it
In such a case the rules/ guidance/practice needs review.
 
I wouldn't scrap it. But it should only be used to overturn obvious refereeing errors, or help in areas where the ref can't see.

Knit picking over the odd millimetre here and there when using a system that can't possibly that accurate anyway, and taking 4 minutes to do so....That's just plain stupid. Even stupider when the decision in question didn't lead to the goal!
 
The process as I understand is

determine the point of reference for the defence, draw a vertical line

determine the point of reference for the attack, draw a vertical line

now draw a line across the pitch for each point, and see which is where

3 minutes 40 seconds !!! did someone go for a piss

There are Microsoft Paint officianados on here that would do a quicker job
 
Woodwardfan said:
I reckon Moss will have taken all that time to make his decision because he knew the decision was controversial but couldnt find any way to avoid it
In such a case the rules/ guidance/practice needs review.
Click to expand...

Surely the really simple way to avoid it is by not reviewing it in the first place. The reason for no review is that Dier headed the cross out of the area, end of phase start of new phase.

If that had happened, not one single person in the world would be querying Lunny's foot position and asking why VAR wasn't used.
 

Woodwardfan said:
'Clear and obvious' does not apply to offside decisions. Its 100% fact based to the extent that technology provides ' the facts'that is.
Click to expand...

Offsides should be applied in the spirit of the game. The rule was invented to stop players bog lining.

And anyways surely offsides as a minimum should be measured from the players head, as that's what the player uses to judge where he is. He can hardly look down the line to see if he's offside with his big toe can he.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

HeCanDoMagic
  • Poll
VAR Vote
2 3 4
Replies
112
Views
5K
Selly
Selly
S
  • Poll
Would you re-new Season Ticket with Hecky still in charge? Yes? No? Etc?
2
Replies
42
Views
2K
Canterbury Blade
C
Tony Currie
What VAR does for SUFC
2
Replies
30
Views
2K
Grey Blade
Grey Blade
Fjortoft's Aeroplane
  • Poll
If Ndiyae & Berge hadn't been sold do we stay up?
2
Replies
37
Views
2K
Millhousesblade1889
Millhousesblade1889
E
  • Poll
Transfer window rating
2
Replies
33
Views
2K
ReeceofBDTBL
ReeceofBDTBL

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