VAR VAR

[ChrisBlade]

There is so many points that currently militate against the use of VAR as designed by Mike Riley this season. Most have been covered, but some haven’t yet:

- If the technic used is flawed due to the physics involved, nothing is black or white but remains a case of grey areas and belief.

- The fact the VAR room is a different ref each week still produces shocking levels of consistency. It also means near zero accountability for the overall outcome and customer satisfaction levels. Should be same guys every week so they remember how a corresponding situation was dealt with before or power must revert to match referee (preferable option).

- The fact the onfield refs no longer have the final say or even see the decision criteria further diffuses accountability and is plain wrong.

- Takes too long even for simple stuff like Villa‘s pen and leaves people in the ground in the dark.

- Kills the excitement of goals without compensating fans with a feeling of greater fairness. If anything, debate on decisions is at an all-time high.

- Most crucially for me, it replaces human error that was understandable based on speed and situative circumstances by pre-meditated idiocy that feels just as wrong but is now deliberate. Human error replaced by sinister human pig-headedness. Pukki and Lunni were not offside under any common sense application of intelligent eye-sight. I am certain that a match ref on the pitch if shown the picture on the pitch monitor squares the pictures with player reactions, his gut feeling and thirty years of referee experience and allows both goals. They would not be ruled out in any other league with VAR.

Only justification and the reason for how it is used:

Diffuse criticism of the match ref. With the current system his job is easier as he is almost exempt from criticism. Shrug of the shoulders, sorry lads, Stockley Park tell me...

That is why it is how it is. Nothing to do with fairness or a better game. It is a professional body bringing in rules to look after the health and safety and stress levels of its members. Like helmets on building sites or 35 hour working weeks.

As a retired man with plenty of time, it‘s straight from Phil‘s world and to him feels intuitive....

 

[GRUMPY BLADE]

There is so many points that currently militate against the use of VAR as designed by Mike Riley this season. Most have been covered, but some haven’t yet:

- If the technic used is flawed due to the physics involved, nothing is black or white but remains a case of grey areas and belief.

- The fact the VAR room is a different ref each week still produces shocking levels of consistency. It also means near zero accountability for the overall outcome and customer satisfaction levels. Should be same guys every week so they remember how a corresponding situation was dealt with before or power must revert to match referee (preferable option).

- The fact the onfield refs no longer have the final say or even see the decision criteria further diffuses accountability and is plain wrong.

- Takes too long even for simple stuff like Villa‘s pen and leaves people in the ground in the dark.

- Kills the excitement of goals without compensating fans with a feeling of greater fairness. If anything, debate on decisions is at an all-time high.

- Most crucially for me, it replaces human error that was understandable based on speed and situative circumstances by pre-meditated idiocy that feels just as wrong but is now deliberate. Human error replaced by sinister human pig-headedness. Pukki and Lunni were not offside under any common sense application of intelligent eye-sight. I am certain that a match ref on the pitch if shown the picture on the pitch monitor squares the pictures with player reactions, his gut feeling and thirty years of referee experience and allows both goals. They would not be ruled out in any other league with VAR.

Only justification and the reason for how it is used:

Diffuse criticism of the match ref. With the current system his job is easier as he is almost exempt from criticism. Shrug of the shoulders, sorry lads, Stockley Park tell me...

That is why it is how it is. Nothing to do with fairness or a better game. It is a professional body bringing in rules to look after the health and safety and stress levels of its members. Like helmets on building sites or 35 hour working weeks.

As a retired man with plenty of time, it‘s straight from Phil‘s world and to him feels intuitive....

Could have just typed "it's bollocks".

 

[Woodwardfan]

It seems inevitable that the offside rule will be changed and VAR has spotlighted the nonsense in the rule.

Not that long ago the rule was that 'level' was offside and the game coped with the rule change almost seamlessly.

It was a move intended to increase the excitement of the game and it did.

Simple, small change can dilute the absurdity of 'armpit situations' 30 yards from goal but there has to be a line somewhere and the negative sentiment will not go away. Personally I would be dead against a 'tolerance' of say 10cms, there would still be a line and it would be a flawed concept based on sentiment and entertainment. This is still a sport and the rules should have integrity in sport.

 

[BettingBlade]

It seems inevitable that the offside rule will be changed and VAR has spotlighted the nonsense in the rule.

Not that long ago the rule was that 'level' was offside and the game coped with the rule change almost seamlessly.

It was a move intended to increase the excitement of the game and it did.

Simple, small change can dilute the absurdity of 'armpit situations' 30 yards from goal but there has to be a line somewhere and the negative sentiment will not go away. Personally I would be dead against a 'tolerance' of say 10cms, there would still be a line and it would be a flawed concept based on sentiment and entertainment. This is still a sport and the rules should have integrity in sport.

It’s not a ‘tolerance’ of 10cms, the cameras are not quick enough to define an offside or not within a certain distance. That’s the issue here. Not how close it is or how unfair it might seem, it’s scientifically impossible to tell.

There is already a margin of error that is unable to determine an offside decision for certain. That’s what needs to be taken into account here. By ruling these goals out they are guessing. VAR has no right to rule those goals out as the technology is not adequate.

 

[Ball_Sup (Phil)]

There is so many points that currently militate against the use of VAR as designed by Mike Riley this season. Most have been covered, but some haven’t yet:

- If the technic used is flawed due to the physics involved, nothing is black or white but remains a case of grey areas and belief.

- The fact the VAR room is a different ref each week still produces shocking levels of consistency. It also means near zero accountability for the overall outcome and customer satisfaction levels. Should be same guys every week so they remember how a corresponding situation was dealt with before or power must revert to match referee (preferable option).

- The fact the onfield refs no longer have the final say or even see the decision criteria further diffuses accountability and is plain wrong.

- Takes too long even for simple stuff like Villa‘s pen and leaves people in the ground in the dark.

- Kills the excitement of goals without compensating fans with a feeling of greater fairness. If anything, debate on decisions is at an all-time high.

- Most crucially for me, it replaces human error that was understandable based on speed and situative circumstances by pre-meditated idiocy that feels just as wrong but is now deliberate. Human error replaced by sinister human pig-headedness. Pukki and Lunni were not offside under any common sense application of intelligent eye-sight. I am certain that a match ref on the pitch if shown the picture on the pitch monitor squares the pictures with player reactions, his gut feeling and thirty years of referee experience and allows both goals. They would not be ruled out in any other league with VAR.

Only justification and the reason for how it is used:

Diffuse criticism of the match ref. With the current system his job is easier as he is almost exempt from criticism. Shrug of the shoulders, sorry lads, Stockley Park tell me...

That is why it is how it is. Nothing to do with fairness or a better game. It is a professional body bringing in rules to look after the health and safety and stress levels of its members. Like helmets on building sites or 35 hour working weeks.

As a retired man with plenty of time, it‘s straight from Phil‘s world and to him feels intuitive....

Firstly, we prefer the term "unemployable".
Secondly, I spent my "career" doing Big Sums. I've a great deal of admiration for The Dons who have crunched the numbers to make Hawkeye work. Coneheads of the World, unite & take over.

 

[Dullblade]

I wasn't against VAR initially however, I feel like I already celebrate goals less, trying to work out what reason will be used to rule it out this time.

As people have mentioned, the consistency isn't there and there's no way in hell that's the best equipment available to them.

The other issue you have is they are being so anal with certain aspects of the game and not others... It needs to be all or nothing... You can't allow a goal to stand after VAR review when the corner they scored from was actually a goal kick!

I believe several things need to happen.

1. Pitchside monitors need to be available to put the match back into the hands of the referee officiating and gives them responsibility overall. Different refs have different opinions, that'll bring some consistency back to each match.

2. Improve the cameras/technology used with much higher frame rates if we are going to be this anal.

3. Change the offside rule. You either make it so it's clear daylight between players or base it solely on feet position... I know they are saying any part of the body that can score but how do you get into that position to score? You don't run on your bloody head now do you!?

I'd rather scrap it but like it or lump it it's here to stay... Hopefully they make it actually functional next year and it doesn't cost us this year!!

 

[Woodwardfan]

It’s not a ‘tolerance’ of 10cms, the cameras are not quick enough to define an offside or not within a certain distance. That’s the issue here. Not how close it is or how unfair it might seem, it’s scientifically impossible to tell.

There is already a margin of error that is unable to determine an offside decision for certain. That’s what needs to be taken into account here. By ruling these goals out they are guessing. VAR has no right to rule those goals out as the technology is not adequate.

Do you not think it is a vast improvement on human linesman running up and down the touchline, rarely in line with the defensive deepest player?

That's the relevant comparison.

Also is it likely that technology will be improved even more? That's part of the big picture over time.

 

[Tazzy]

VAR needs to be took from the end of the boot not under the arm pit because you lean forward when you run .also for me just use it in the areas for holding /pushing /hand ball

 

[BettingBlade]

Do you not think it is a vast improvement on human linesman running up and down the touchline, rarely in line with the defensive deepest player?

That's the relevant comparison.

Also is it likely that technology will be improved even more? That's part of the big picture over time.

Of course it’s an improvement. But taking the 3 examples from yesterday, that’s not what VAR is for. It’s impossible to tell on any of them due to the frame rate of the camera. So VAR should not be getting involved unless it’s making an accurate decision. Its overturning goals for the sake of it.

You wouldn’t expect the linesman to flag for that so why should you expect the VAR to overturn it when they can’t tell either.

 

[Ball_Sup (Phil)]

I chew it a bite at a time. Am I sick of players diving & making a meal of it so that someone will get sent off. Yes. Are Red Cards reviewed by VAR. Yes. Will players still be able to routinely get away with "simulation" to get someone binned off. No. Evidence - Basham, Norwich.
I'm happy chewing that

 

[Woodwardfan]

Of course it’s an improvement. But taking the 3 examples from yesterday, that’s not what VAR is for. It’s impossible to tell on any of them due to the frame rate of the camera. So VAR should not be getting involved unless it’s making an accurate decision. Its overturning goals for the sake of it.

You wouldn’t expect the linesman to flag for that so why should you expect the VAR to overturn it when they can’t tell either.

There has to be a measure and it is the same for both teams is it not?

It has to be infinitely more accurate than no technology at all.

The naked eye is not fit for purpose. How can that be better?

Bit like saying penecilin doesn't cure every illness every time so don't use it at all.

 

[HighfieldBlade]

VAR cameras running at 50fps is laughable.
Any decent high-speed cameras will very easily cope with 10,000 fps, like the ones I use at work.

 

[BettingBlade]

There has to be a measure and it is the same for both teams is it not?

It has to be infinitely more accurate than no technology at all.

The naked eye is not fit for purpose. How can that be better?

Bit like saying penecilin doesn't cure every illness every time so don't use it at all.

I’m not saying it’s not better than the naked eye but if offsides are black and white like so many are saying then the technology is not currently good enough to adequately prove that.

If you can find the freeze frame that shows the exact moment the ball leaves the assisting players foot then I’ll agree with you but you won’t be able to.

The point is VAR overturned 3 goals yesterday when it potentially had no justification for doing so. How on earth can you justify overturning a decision so close when even with a camera angle you cannot tell?

 

[Woodwardfan]

I’m not saying it’s not better than the naked eye but if offsides are black and white like so many are saying then the technology is not currently good enough to adequately prove that.

If you can find the freeze frame that shows the exact moment the ball leaves the assisting players foot then I’ll agree with you but you won’t be able to.

The point is VAR overturned 3 goals yesterday when it potentially had no justification for doing so. How on earth can you justify overturning a decision so close when even with a camera angle you cannot tell?

Not wishing to upset anybody but what is the better alternative? That's the question, not just what's slightly wrong with the current technology.

 

[Ainsley Harriott]

The offsides yesterday were laughable. Pukki wasn't offside. Zaha likewise. The camera angles they use aren't in-line so how is it any use? The Lunny one at Spurs was a joke when they actually drew the line through Dier's head. Not to mention that he wasn't offside at all in the phase of play that contributed to the goal. They rewound the play until a point they actually found a reason. Furthermore, the lines they drew on the screen weren't even parallel which meant there was a blatant discrepancy.

I saw a guy explain about the FPS rates and said that because of the speed of play and cameras, it led to a discrepancy of upto 20cm being 'blurred' (which is why Lunny was wearing size 18 boots on the picture).

I can understand why it's in, I really can. I dont understand Stockley Park. Why? Why can't the fourth official look at the screen with the referee and make their minds up that way? It's there for clear and obvious errors, presumably because the referee cannot see everything that goes off. It's not there for someone in a caravan to start nit-picking and actively looking for a reason to disallow a goal.

Also, does the referee ask for a decision to be checked or do they tell the ref they're checking it?

Also find it odd that sky have more angles available than VAR does, yet they won't let VAR use them.

 

[BettingBlade]

Not wishing to upset anybody but what is the better alternative? That's the question, not just what's slightly wrong with the current technology.

Right now as it stands, the better alternative is to stop treating these offside calls as black and white as they blatantly aren’t.

The better alternative, is better technology, higher frame rate cameras but even then you don’t make it 100% accurate. Offside calls should be overturned under the guise of a clear and obvious error unless it is able to clearly tell that someone is offside.

The offside law needs altering in order to work alongside VAR as they are blatantly working against each other in its current form.

No one is saying VAR can’t work but the way it is being used at the moment on certain situations is a complete and utter mess. It doesn’t fill anyone with confidence that Mike Riley is burying is head in the sand by failing to acknowledge any faults in the current system.

 

[PokerBlade]

Never has the term run before they can walk been so apt. It’s ridiculous that an assistant referee is over ruling the referee so frequently on decisions even they don’t know are 100% correct. They certainly aren’t correct enough to over rule the original decision.

People go off as if offsides are black an white but no one can physically tell that. It’s why goal line technology worked so well straight away because there are limited variables. The goal post is the same, the ball is the same and the goal line is the same. You can say with accuracy that the ball has gone over the line or not.

The fact they are trying to use offsides in the same way is the most ludicrous decision in the history of football. Basic science says that it is completely impossible to use it in the same way. Its a complete farce.

Part of what makes it ludicrous is that calculating margins of error is really simple. The same technology that says offside by Xcm could easily output +/-Ycm. And we could just say that if it's below the margin of error then it's onside.

I'd still hate VAR, but at least it would indicate that someone had thought through the very basics of the tech they're using. Instead it feels like they're trying to wow everyone by saying "Look how precise we are with our calls, isn't this amazing?" except nobody is falling for it. I suspect this is why we have the new handball rule for attackers. Not because it was a real problem but because they figured it would make VAR look good by being able to make rulings that refs just can't.

 

[BladeInIreland]

I don't get to watch much other than our games nowadays but I watched one with no VAR today and it was great. Proper football again.

 

[BettingBlade]

Part of what makes it ludicrous is that calculating margins of error is really simple. The same technology that says offside by Xcm could easily output +/-Ycm. And we could just say that if it's below the margin of error then it's onside.

I'd still hate VAR, but at least it would indicate that someone had thought through the very basics of the tech they're using. Instead it feels like they're trying to wow everyone by saying "Look how precise we are with our calls, isn't this amazing?" except nobody is falling for it. I suspect this is why we have the new handball rule for attackers. Not because it was a real problem but because they figured it would make VAR look good by being able to make rulings that refs just can't.

Part of it is just the stupidity of the rule. It’s like no one has actually thought that the current offside rule might not actually make sense with the introduction of VAR. Because of that refs are now forced to make decisions that I’m pretty certain even they don’t want to make.

Undeterminable decisions are being passed off as matter of fact. There’s no way that should be allowed. It’s a complete disgrace.

 

[ucandomagic]

Nothing wrong with VAR - just the dickhead rules our lot are trying to implement with it.

Make the rules such that the decision is easy to see, and you remove argument and can make decisions much more quickly.

A computer can tell you immediately if there’s a gap between lines without halfwits having to stare at a screen. Just make the rules where you put the lines acceptable to the real football community.

 

[Dullblade]

I chew it a bite at a time. Am I sick of players diving & making a meal of it so that someone will get sent off. Yes. Are Red Cards reviewed by VAR. Yes. Will players still be able to routinely get away with "simulation" to get someone binned off. No. Evidence - Basham, Norwich.
I'm happy chewing that

My dad has the best rule to fix diving, aptly named the dog crap rule.

Would the player still end up on the floor if there was a steaming pile directly on the floor beneath them?

I think we all know 99% of the time players are staying on their feet in that situation!

 

[Ball_Sup (Phil)]

Nothing wrong with VAR - just the dickhead rules our lot are trying to implement with it.

Make the rules such that the decision is easy to see, and you remove argument and can make decisions much more quickly.

A computer can tell you immediately if there’s a gap between lines without halfwits having to stare at a screen. Just make the rules where you put the lines acceptable to the real football community.

I may be misunderstanding your point. But, in the current VAR, used in the PL, it IS the computer which says whether there is a gap between lines.

 

[bromtom]

If I were Wolves I wouldn't come out for the second half after the latest anti football decision from VAR.

Fucking shambles.

 

[BettingBlade]

Surprise surprise there’s another fucking one. Another one with blurry pictures and no definitive evidence of when the ball was played. Absolute disgrace.

 

[BettingBlade]

If I were Wolves I wouldn't come out for the second half after the latest anti football decision from VAR.

Fucking shambles.

Was just thinking the same. This is not on at all.

 

[Sheffsteel]

It’s the Lunny situation (v Spurs) all over again.....very similar to the McGoldrick disallowed goal.

Wolves score a really well worked equaliser...excellent goal and no one complains....looks an obvious goal as no one was offside.
However VAR say that in the build up 30 seconds earlier.....a Wolves players armpit was offside....it’s stupid and against the spirit of the game.

Lets not forget though that VAR has done a good job regards the Liverpool goal.
The ref disallowed it....but the VAR shows the ball came off the shoulder not the hand....so VAR has corrected a referring error there.

 

[Moosie]

Imagine losing the title, or getting relegated on the basis of a decision like that just now.

It's an absolute joke and it's ruining the game. It's as if they're trying to disallow each goal.

How long did the Mane goal take to check? Clearly hit his shoulder and you can clearly hear the whistle after the ball hits the back of the net.
And as soon as the VAR check came out for Wolves goal it was clear that it was going to be disallowed.

As people have said, if i was Nuno I wouldn't come out for the second half. Make a stand and I bet others would follow. They'd have to do something about it then.

 

[Tezza1889]

They’re saying that there were three checks..

Handball
Offside
And weather the ball was in the net before the whistle - apparently if it wasn’t then they can’t award the goal regardless... that’s a new one on me..

 

[BettingBlade]

No one can tell me that that’s all the same phase of play. Genuinely couldn’t be less interested in Premier League football at the minute unless it involves the Blades.

If we score today there’s not a chance I will be able to celebrate properly. Football is completely dead.

 

[Rustyblade]

John Ashdown nails it "For me, that’s not offside in any version of the game I want to watch. Rather than make the whole spectacle slicker and smarter, offside VAR has introduced a new level of stupidity to the game. "