VAR

[SW12 to S12 to S18]

There is nothing worse in sport in my view where a referee or official makes a blatantly wrong decision. Sadly particularly in football the standard of refereeing is poor, although some of that is because the players are trying to deliberately cheat by diving. Hopefully VAR will eliminate that which can only be a good thing.

The only thing I am concerned about is the "fractional" off sides. I do not believe that the technology is good enough to detect exactly "when the ball is kicked" to the point of showing if a player ahead is 10 cms off side (Olli's beard). May be there should be a similar situation to "umpires call" in cricket where for off sides if it is marginal then the decision of the on field officials should stand. I am not sure what "marginal" might be but that would be quite capable of being defined.

When did this nonsense of a players body part being offside come into force? I thought it was where the feet were that was the guideline. The offside rule was surely never brought in for this sort of scrutiny but to stop “shit lining”.
The benefit of doubt should be given to the attacking side to help create a more exciting product, if a forwards foot is in line he’s onside, as things stand the tail is wagging the dog.

 

[Beans]

My mistake if that’s true. Still seems shady, but better than no system at all. Didn’t seem to be mentioned during the Liverpool Norwich game.

The system is exactly the same as at all other Premier League grounds, it's just that Anfield and Old Trafford don't have a big screen on which to show fans in the ground "VAR review" / "VAR review over" or whatever.

 

[Inter_blade83]

How did Maguire get away with pulling Abraham down and Manure went right through the pitch to score 2nd goal, why no VAR, very similar for Manures 3rd when Zouma was put down with a head injury and the ref just waved the play on, even Maguire and Shaw were waving for play to stop, no VAR, its bollox.

Nothing happened for the 2nd as it was outside the box. VAR is only used for penalty decisions.

3rd is purely up to the ref.

 

[Inter_blade83]

When did this nonsense of a players body part being offside come into force? I thought it was where the feet were that was the guideline. The offside rule was surely never brought in for this sort of scrutiny but to stop “shit lining”.
The benefit of doubt should be given to the attacking side to help create a more exciting product, if a forwards foot is in line he’s onside, as things stand the tail is wagging the dog.

Any part of the body you can score with.

 

[SouthEssexBlade]

The pundits and media love this shit. Gives them something to talk and write about, provides incidents of controversy to stoke their debates. Of course this is the very reason we have it in the first place. TV closely monitoring games threw into the spotlight the 'outrageous decisions' made by officials and then the pundits and media all joined together to demand action against all this. The majority of fans in the ground have an inkling that a decision might be wrong in most cases, but can't say for sure but the TV viewer is instantly shown in micro detail what has happened.

The clamour for VAR was created by TV, so that VAR could be introduced for the benefit of those watching on TV to enhance the product and drama, and create points for pundits to discuss. In terms of those actually watching in the grounds, it diminishes the enjoyment

 

[guancheblade]

My only gripe with VAR today was Fraser not being sent off for stamping on Norwood

The VAR rules as thjey stand were applied correctly - could be argued it wasn't a clear and obvious red card.

But what I would like to see is if the ref has missed the challenge and it's not a red but a clear and obvious yellow card, that the ref is then instructed to review pitch side so that he can give the yellow if he wants to after seeing the replay.

Fine margins and all that.

 

[Trigger Blade]

No issues with VAR today! Even when it works fine people still want to have a moan!

A few weeks ago, I was in my local cricket club for a well earned pint, after a hard stint on the mower. The chairman, good bloke and an ex-referee introduced me to a mate of his "Trig, this is Lee, Lee this is Trig".

I thought no more about it, we chatted about cricket, the ground and nothing about football. I was in there again on Friday night and the chairman said "I hope you didn't upset Lee when he was in a few weeks back" "I don't think so, why?" "He was doing the VAR for your game tomorrow"..... Lee Mason.

Yesterday, he was the fourth official at Old Trafford, this time I recognised him. I did a quick google to see whether he'd ever reffed us and discovered he was in charge for one of my favourite Blades games of all time, 1-0 v Arsenal PL 2006/07. He seems to have upset a fair few managers in his time, has he ever wronged us? Just asking like, but if I see him again, I'll be boring him senseless about the Nade game, is there anything else I can throw in for variety?

 

[Worksop II]

A few weeks ago, I was in my local cricket club for a well earned pint, after a hard stint on the mower. The chairman, good bloke and an ex-referee introduced me to a mate of his "Trig, this is Lee, Lee this is Trig".

I thought no more about it, we chatted about cricket, the ground and nothing about football. I was in there again on Friday night and the chairman said "I hope you didn't upset Lee when he was in a few weeks back" "I don't think so, why?" "He was doing the VAR for your game tomorrow"..... Lee Mason.

Yesterday, he was the fourth official at Old Trafford, this time I recognised him. I did a quick google to see whether he'd ever reffed us and discovered he was in charge for one of my favourite Blades games of all time, 1-0 v Arsenal PL 2006/07. He seems to have upset a fair few managers in his time, has he ever wronged us? Just asking like, but if I see him again, I'll be boring him senseless about the Nade game, is there anything else I can throw in for variety?

Now he has found a safe place to drink, he will turn up with his mates .....

Graham Poll, David Elleray and Rob Styles, do let us know how you get on ...................

 

[Akinbiyi]

Might as well pin this thread Foxy

Mark Halsey having his say on the Wolves 'handball' goal that was disallowed...


And also his views on how it should be used:


Knows his stuff Mark, I like him.

 

[Cerberus Blade]

What a load of bollocks! Any football fan with a basic grasp of the rules will be able to make a judgment of what is likely to be reviewed and what isn’t.

Are you going to hold back from celebrating a goal scored from a shot outside the box? A free header from a corner? What could possibly be the clear and obvious error with those type of goals?

Err! It was a joke. Using a construct of gross exaggeration to make the point about spontaneity.

Of course I won’t be holding back. But I think it spoils the experience if we are waiting for VAR to confirm things. I far preferred the “theatre” of watching the linesman march over to the linesman and have a natter with him for “controversial” issues.

My other concern, as mentioned, is that the use of VAR will spread to other aspects of the game and slow it down further.

I have a further concern too, about offside decisions. In the Man City game VAR revealed that a player was offside because his armpit was a few millimetres in front of the defender. Is this really what we want? What unfair advantage did that armpit constitute? Imo - none.

This is pedantic in the extreme and it’s made possible by VAR. it has the potential to “sterilise” the game. And I prefer mine “unpasteurised”.

 

[YES Blade]

Err! It was a joke. Using a construct of gross exaggeration to make the point about spontaneity.

Of course I won’t be holding back. But I think it spoils the experience if we are waiting for VAR to confirm things. I far preferred the “theatre” of watching the linesman march over to the linesman and have a natter with him for “controversial” issues.

No problems there then if you are going to celebrate a goal as normal, so you're fine with this aspect of VAR.

The "theatre" of VAR is far more inclusive for fans than the Ref and Linesman having a chat, for all we know they could be talking about what pub they are going to after the match. The supporters in the stadium and at home are watching the decision process, not just watching a couple of blokes stood talking.

My other concern, as mentioned, is that the use of VAR will spread to other aspects of the game and slow it down further.

At the moment that isn't the case, so until it becomes a reality there is nothing to worry about.

I have a further concern too, about offside decisions. In the Man City game VAR revealed that a player was offside because his armpit was a few millimetres in front of the defender. Is this really what we want? What unfair advantage did that armpit constitute? Imo - none.

This is pedantic in the extreme and it’s made possible by VAR. it has the potential to “sterilise” the game. And I prefer mine “unpasteurised”.

The armpit is part of the body, if a player's armpit is offside, the rest of his body is in an unfairly advanced position than the defenders, it may only be small and pedantic, but sport now days is all about fine margins. It's like saying the ball was only a mm short of being over the line, so we might as well give a goal. You have to draw a line somewhere and it's either offside or onside, it's black and white.

There is obviously an argument for "umpire's call" type decisions, but then where do you draw the line with offsides? Where is the acceptable level of only being a bit offside/onside? That is fine for subjective decisions like penalties/red cards, but not where there are no grey areas.

 

[gordoncharles]

The armpit is part of the body, if a player's armpit is offside, the rest of his body is in an unfairly advanced position than the defenders, it may only be small and pedantic, but sport now days is all about fine margins...

If you're going to show your faith in fine margins then someone needs to prove the exact moment the ball is actually played forward.

And I mean the exact moment, the microsecond that it leaves the boot or head of the player making the pass and I want it defined what that moment is. Is it when there is daylight between the boot and the ball? If so how much daylight, how many millimetres?

And at that microsecond I want to see the still image captured exactly adjacent to the where the last defender is, and by adjacent I mean at 90 degrees to the furthest part of his body (or is it clothing?) that's nearest to the goal. And I mean exactly in line so it can be measured in micrometres so there's less doubt about it.

It's bollocks. VAR is bollocks.

I can accept its use for really obvious offsides where the forward is in a different postal district, but the arguments I've heard all weekend that offside decisions are "binary" is... what's the word? Oh yes, bollocks.

It's just false accuracy and it's no surprise to me that those most in favour of it don't pay to watch football - pundits, hacks and football managers.

 

[BushBlade]

If you're going to show your faith in fine margins then someone needs to prove the exact moment the ball is actually played forward.

And I mean the exact moment, the microsecond that it leaves the boot or head of the player making the pass and I want it defined what that moment is. Is it when there is daylight between the boot and the ball? If so how much daylight, how many millimetres?

And at that microsecond I want to see the still image captured exactly adjacent to the where the last defender is, and by adjacent I mean at 90 degrees to the furthest part of his body (or is it clothing?) that's nearest to the goal. And I mean exactly in line so it can be measured in micrometres so there's less doubt about it.

It's bollocks. VAR is bollocks.

I can accept its use for really obvious offsides where the forward is in a different postal district, but the arguments I've heard all weekend that offside decisions are "binary" is... what's the word? Oh yes, bollocks.

It's just false accuracy and it's no surprise to me that those most in favour of it don't pay to watch football - pundits, hacks and football managers.

So if the cut off was 10mm of daylight and it was ruled offside because there was 11mm of daylight, how is that different to what’s happening now?

 

[Worksop II]

Is it when there is daylight between the boot and the ball?

I would imagine the call should be when the ball starts to move forward, so at that instant the foot, head, knee would still be in contact with the ball

I know that doesn't help ......

 

[gordoncharles]

So if the cut off was 10mm of daylight and it was ruled offside because there was 11mm of daylight, how is that different to what’s happening now?

It isn't.

That's why it bollocks.

Though cricket has its own rules for grey areas and ball tracking is far, far more accurate than this shitshow.

 

[BushBlade]

It isn't.

That's why it bollocks.

Though cricket has its own rules for grey areas and ball tracking is far, far more accurate than this shitshow.

And the reality is that the game moves too fast to be fairly refereed. In fact, I was watching some of the old re-runs and the refs used to get away with murder, absolutely scandalous decisions which Brian Moore just used to shrug about.

VAR is far from perfect but i’ll take a few dodgy offsides if it means most of the other decisions are correct.

 

[gordoncharles]

And the reality is that the game moves too fast to be fairly refereed. In fact, I was watching some of the old re-runs and the refs used to get away with murder, absolutely scandalous decisions which Brian Moore just used to shrug about.

VAR is far from perfect but i’ll take a few dodgy offsides if it means most of the other decisions are correct.

Then why not just limit it to absolutely scandalous decisions? Even I could support that.

My beef is with this false accuracy where the VAR control room is dealing in tiny distances as if they're trying to dock the fecking Space Station when they can't even be sure they've got the moment of impact right or got the camera in line.

 

[YES Blade]

It isn't.

That's why it bollocks.

Though cricket has its own rules for grey areas and ball tracking is far, far more accurate than this shitshow.

Was the 3rd Umpire in cricket as good in the 90s as it is now? Of course not, nothing is perfect from day one. VAR will evolve and improve over the years, it will just take time, it would be ridiculous to just give up on it and stop using it.

It’s absolutely pathetic that it has taken until 2019 for it to be introduced to English football when sports like cricket and rugby have been using video technology for decades. It just shows what dinosaurs we’ve had running the game for the last 25 years.

 

[bromtom]

Someone made the point earlier in this thread or on another, that now the Premier League are on board, it's going to improve enormously, it's already about 500% better than the FIFA, FA Cup and UEFA versions, so eventually we'll have the tech to do it correctly.

As it is though gordoncharles is right, VAR is fake accuracy, in the case of offside it's an extrapolation not a defined result - they're using 50fps footage, shot at an angle, from a fair distance away. An inch could be lost in a few fuzzy pixels of motion blur, the ball being played, there's no chance they actually know when it starts travelling at that frame rate, they'd need high-speed cameras with telephoto lenses tracking the ball, which they haven't got but might come.

The only really accurate way to do it would be with the technology used for tracking VR stuff. Lasers and IR LEDs, but then you've got players wearing gloves and headbands with tracking markers on, you could sew them into the shirts but then they need power. It'd be ridiculous.

I think the best thing to do is get the clubs together and decide a "human margin" for VAR, for example with Sterling, if the last defenders line on the VAR screen is a bit thicker (to allow for the inadequacy of the technology) then as long as Sterling's line is intersecting with it and not in front of it, it's onside.

To say with certainty that he was offside with the quality of footage available is just wrong quite honestly.

Penalty reviews and red cards I've no issue with, offside needs looking at.

 

[Cerberus Blade]

No problems there then if you are going to celebrate a goal as normal, so you're fine with this aspect of VAR.

The "theatre" of VAR is far more inclusive for fans than the Ref and Linesman having a chat, for all we know they could be talking about what pub they are going to after the match. The supporters in the stadium and at home are watching the decision process, not just watching a couple of blokes stood talking.



At the moment that isn't the case, so until it becomes a reality there is nothing to worry about.



The armpit is part of the body, if a player's armpit is offside, the rest of his body is in an unfairly advanced position than the defenders, it may only be small and pedantic, but sport now days is all about fine margins. It's like saying the ball was only a mm short of being over the line, so we might as well give a goal. You have to draw a line somewhere and it's either offside or onside, it's black and white.

There is obviously an argument for "umpire's call" type decisions, but then where do you draw the line with offsides? Where is the acceptable level of only being a bit offside/onside? That is fine for subjective decisions like penalties/red cards, but not where there are no grey areas.

I agree it is all to do with fine margins. And I think the money involved drives that. Nowadays a wrong decision can cost a club millions in the long run and even spark legal proceedings. So it’s becoming more and more critical to try and prove things beyond doubt. VAR is an instrument to try and achieve that - it’s less about sportsmanship and more about evidence - and this is fundamentally what I object to. But I realise I’m swimming against the tide.

If we have to have VAR, and it seems like we do, then I’d like to be assured it won’t spread to further aspects of the game (which I think it will) and not reduce the amount of time the ball is in play (which I think it will).

Only time will tell I suppose.

 

[Silent Blade]

A few weeks ago, I was in my local cricket club for a well earned pint, after a hard stint on the mower. The chairman, good bloke and an ex-referee introduced me to a mate of his "Trig, this is Lee, Lee this is Trig".

I thought no more about it, we chatted about cricket, the ground and nothing about football. I was in there again on Friday night and the chairman said "I hope you didn't upset Lee when he was in a few weeks back" "I don't think so, why?" "He was doing the VAR for your game tomorrow"..... Lee Mason.

Yesterday, he was the fourth official at Old Trafford, this time I recognised him. I did a quick google to see whether he'd ever reffed us and discovered he was in charge for one of my favourite Blades games of all time, 1-0 v Arsenal PL 2006/07. He seems to have upset a fair few managers in his time, has he ever wronged us? Just asking like, but if I see him again, I'll be boring him senseless about the Nade game, is there anything else I can throw in for variety?

Mason also refereed our first game of the 2005/06 season at home to Leicester. We scored early with an Andy Gray penalty, Leicester were easily the better side in the first hour of the match and they equalised (Connolly). A few minutes later, luckily for us, Mason spotted a handball which not many in the crowd spotted (including me) and awarded a second penalty that was converted by Gray again. Leicester then capitulated as we scored 2 further goals.

 

[Cerberus Blade]

Any part of the body you can score with.

May advantage some unfairly!

 

[BushBlade]

I think it could have been much worse. It’s worked well up to now. In fact I’d say ‘so VAR, so good’.

 

[Bladesman]

 

[grafikhaus]

As was proved yet again, VAR is a load of bollocks.The late, disallowed 'goal' for Man City yesterday was disgraceful. VAR seems to be 'striving for perfection' but how can it when the technology isn't up to speed? If you haven't seen it, after 11 minutes, City's Rodri is wrestled down in the box by Lamela. A clearer a penalty you'll never see (remember at last years WC, VAR was going to end the argy-bargy in the box?) But no, VAR decided it wasn't 'clear and obvious'. Utter crap. Then - in the 92nd minute - Jesus 'scores' a winner. No Spurs player even appeals and the players go back for the re-start. But no! VAR has decided that the ball brushed against City's Laporte's arm. To quote the Grauniad's weasel words - 'It’s worth pointing out that the handball law has been revised. So if “the ball goes into the goal after touching an attacking player’s hand/arm”, it’s a free kick “even if accidental”.

VAR doesn't need 'more work' or 'refining', it needs scrapping before attending a match becomes pointless.

 

[Trigger Blade]

As was proved yet again, VAR is a load of bollocks.The late, disallowed 'goal' for Man City yesterday was disgraceful. VAR seems to be 'striving for perfection' but how can it when the technology isn't up to speed? If you haven't seen it, after 11 minutes, City's Rodri is wrestled down in the box by Lamela. A clearer a penalty you'll never see (remember at last years WC, VAR was going to end the argy-bargy in the box?) But no, VAR decided it wasn't 'clear and obvious'. Utter crap. Then - in the 92nd minute - Jesus 'scores' a winner. No Spurs player even appeals and the players go back for the re-start. But no! VAR has decided that the ball brushed against City's Laporte's arm. To quote the Grauniad's weasel words - 'It’s worth pointing out that the handball law has been revised. So if “the ball goes into the goal after touching an attacking player’s hand/arm”, it’s a free kick “even if accidental”.

VAR doesn't need 'more work' or 'refining', it needs scrapping before attending a match becomes pointless.

Agree with all of that first paragraph 100%.

But surely, it’s the handball rule that needs changing, that’s what made the ridiculous VAR ruling yesterday technically correct?

 

[Cerberus Blade]

Agree with all of that first paragraph 100%.

But surely, it’s the handball rule that needs changing, that’s what made the ridiculous VAR ruling yesterday technically correct?

Agree with you about the revision to the handball rule.

 

[steve26272]

Know what you mean to a certain degree
But VAR is designed to ensure the rules are applied. Not sure how they got the penalty wrong as that would have been a foul in rugby for been round the neck!
But to the law the disallowed goal was correct. Had it not brushed His arm it wouldn’t have fell as kindly to Jesus, who then may have struggled to score. Fact is the chance was created in part by hand ball, and intentional or not Man C. did benefit from that. The problem is under the old rule of intentional or not was open to the acting ability of the player, and interpretation of the ref. Think back to Henry cheating Ireland out of a WC place? That would have been disallowed by VAR, how can anyone argue?

Over the course of the season we as “little ol’ Utd” will benefit, it will mean the old days of refs favouring the big teams and big name players will be gone.
Also I would much rather see the correct decision arrived at albeit by VAR than be left cursing a wrong one that cost us points

 

[Cerberus Blade]

Know what you mean to a certain degree
But VAR is designed to ensure the rules are applied. Not sure how they got the penalty wrong as that would have been a foul in rugby for been round the neck!
But to the law the disallowed goal was correct. Had it not brushed His arm it wouldn’t have fell as kindly to Jesus, who then may have struggled to score. Fact is the chance was created in part by hand ball, and intentional or not Man C. did benefit from that. The problem is under the old rule of intentional or not was open to the acting ability of the player, and interpretation of the ref. Think back to Henry cheating Ireland out of a WC place? That would have been disallowed by VAR, how can anyone argue?

Over the course of the season we as “little ol’ Utd” will benefit, it will mean the old days of refs favouring the big teams and big name players will be gone.
Also I would much rather see the correct decision arrived at albeit by VAR than be left cursing a wrong one that cost us points

If the goal hadn't stood, would it have been a penalty? It must have been! It could only be one or the other if it was handball in the penalty area. Now here's the thing I really hate about VAR - it is taking discretion away from referees. Yes, the handball rule says one thing - but it's up to the referee to interpret whether an infringement of the rules actually gave either team an advantage - and in this case I do not think there is any strong evidence that it did.

As to the point about us being disadvantaged because of who we are - I really think that's fanciful thinking and victim mentality. Yes there have been times when that's happened (first match of the season v Liverpool is a timely reminder). But we are no more advantaged or disadvantaged than anyone else by it.

Back to my original position on this: If we are going to use VAR (and obviously we are) then it should be used as "additional information" to help match officials decide the fairest way to rule on key incidents. It's not being applied like that. The Man City thing yesterday was all the proof you need. VAR showed it slightly brushed the guys arm whilst his arm was sticking out in a backwards direction. My decision on that: Technically handball under the stupid new rule, but no advantage gained, goal should stand.

(Thankfully I'm not a ref!)

 

[Topplayersleave]

Wolves and Man City have had goals chalked off for handball that would have stood last season

Handball is supposed to be a foul when it is deliberate