Stretford End Phil

VAR - yes or no?

Recommended Posts

There is goaline tech which makes cold decisions of ‘goal’ and ‘no goal’, which we all seem to agree with.

We know VAR is operation in the FA Cup, and used in Germany and thanks to Jose also in Portugal - but do we like it? Jose made some interesting comments. 

Yesterday’s decisions caused a storm, which to my mind was more about English football culture than logical and rational discussion. I myself wanted it for the torrid decisions to be overturned but not at the cost our game. A knee, a large lunch box, a Sir Bobby hairline doesnt seem to me to constitute the basis for reasonable decision making and not in the spirit of the idea. As a consequence I think we need more time to work this out properly.  

What are your thoughts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When they eventually perfect it, I think it will a great addition to the game.

The speed and accuracy must improve, though.

Show us what they see on the monitor, and speed up the time it takes to relay their decision to the referee.

That should have been a simple call yesterday. The guy looks across the generated line, sees that he is offside, we see it too, and the game moves on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It has no place in football. It hasn't done much for Rugby League by all accounts (although I'm no expert on that game) and, as Wagner said, it drains the emotion from the game. It's fine for stop-start sports like the NFL but for fast-flowing games, it's useless. 'Clear and obvious' is the standard, so they tell us, but that was not applied to Mata. I don't want some fucking computer nerd in Stockley Park having any sort of input into a live game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, O said:

When they eventually perfect it, I think it will a great addition to the game.

The speed and accuracy must improve, though.

Show us what they see on the monitor, and speed up the time it takes to relay their decision to the referee.

That should have been a simple call yesterday. The guy looks across the generated line, sees that he is offside, we see it too, and the game moves on.

Unless it's clear cut then the decisions will take multiple viewings. It was a couple minute wait at worst, not worthy of the outcry. Most importantly the correct decision came through.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, SimplyGiggs said:

Unless it's clear cut then the decisions will take multiple viewings. It was a couple minute wait at worst, not worthy of the outcry. Most importantly the correct decision came through.

It was a travesty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I prefer the linesman too say it's offside. .they get paid for it..otherwise do away linesman as well and refs.if he said it was offside yesterday ..I can live that.

If takes time too make it work properly..then it's fallible. .as the wonky lines they showed in the first replay. .

If your offside..your offside. .we have wrong decisions in corners penalties and throw ins..even some fouls are given or not given..just basic human error..as they say it all evens out in the coarse of the season..

The lines drawn were from slight different angles. .from I saw .then it took a while to get it right..but was it right.

The benefit of doubt should go too the attacker,when the difference is so minute.

I prefer natural play..and in time decisions. .whether they are wrong or right..you score a goal ..it's given..you celebrate. .then 10 minutes later its disallowed. .takes away the essence of the whole game for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree we should be careful of what we wish for.   But lets not fuck about here.  The vast majority of supporters have been complaining for many years, and so also has the games officialdom that there were far too many bad decisions being made.  And very costly ones too.   There's no doubt the game has quickened up.  The constant attempts by players  of "simulation".   The referees of today don't know whether to piss fart or belch half the time.  Theyre under huge pressure.   Lets be honest if we was winning 1-0 against the Dippers yesterday with a minute of injury time left and their equalizer gets ruled out by VAR we would be praising it.    We cant have it both ways.

And I think that's what Joey was alluding to after the game.     But its the same old shit we end up arguing about.  The curse of the game that is the offside rule.   I played the game for many years like countless others no doubt, I've spoken with ex professionals and even they don't have a credible answer as to why it exists.     I remember asking Tommy Docherty at a sportsmens evening  one time  in a Q+A session  as to where did it come from and when, and do we really need it at all bearing in mind the trouble it causes.  Basically his answer was that..."It only exists because the old farts in grey suits at the FA are too frightened of change".     I'm thinking he's probably on the money.      There is of course the age old argument that if the offside rule was done away with  teams would leave 3 strikers up the pitch goal hanging.   Which is nonsense  because there's not a team on the planet that would have their midfielders and defenders running their bollocks off for 90 minutes because theyre basically 2 or 3 men down.   If a team leaves 2 strikers up, you leave a couple of defenders back.   Its not fuckin rocket science.

 

Offside sucks dick.  End of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, THE BASTARD said:

I agree we should be careful of what we wish for.   But lets not fuck about here.  The vast majority of supporters have been complaining for many years, and so also has the games officialdom that there were far too many bad decisions being made.  And very costly ones too.   There's no doubt the game has quickened up.  The constant attempts by players  of "simulation".   The referees of today don't know whether to piss fart or belch half the time.  Theyre under huge pressure.   Lets be honest if we was winning 1-0 against the Dippers yesterday with a minute of injury time left and their equalizer gets ruled out by VAR we would be praising it.    We cant have it both ways.

And I think that's what Joey was alluding to after the game.     But its the same old shit we end up arguing about.  The curse of the game that is the offside rule.   I played the game for many years like countless others no doubt, I've spoken with ex professionals and even they don't have a credible answer as to why it exists.     I remember asking Tommy Docherty at a sportsmens evening  one time  in a Q+A session  as to where did it come from and when, and do we really need it at all bearing in mind the trouble it causes.  Basically his answer was that..."It only exists because the old farts in grey suits at the FA are too frightened of change".     I'm thinking he's probably on the money.      There is of course the age old argument that if the offside rule was done away with  teams would leave 3 strikers up the pitch goal hanging.   Which is nonsense  because there's not a team on the planet that would have their midfielders and defenders running their bollocks off for 90 minutes because theyre basically 2 or 3 men down.   If a team leaves 2 strikers up, you leave a couple of defenders back.   Its not fuckin rocket science.

 

Offside sucks dick.  End of.

I’d stop watching if they got rid of the offside rule.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think in itself the system is a good idea - for years we've been talking about things missed by the referee, or a blatant dive in the box costing us a penalty, in essence this takes that away. Even in yesterday's case had it have been a simple thing it would have been easier to take.

However if we're doing this, we need to clear up the uncertainty and the secrecy. I've long advocated following Rugby and having the officials mic'ed up. This will also enforce the players to keep their language in check (and also a captain should be the only one to speak to a ref, unless the ref speaks to a player)

How many times has a referee made a decision and we've thought "dunno what he saw there" or "why's he blown up?" with the live audio we can know instantly. Let's say next week that Herrera seemingly clatters Hazard with a great challenge, but Hazard throws himself to the deck - the referee books Ander, yet replays show Ander clearly got the ball. Chelsea take the freekick, and score.

We're furious, because we've seen simulation from Hazard basically win Chelsea a goal. Now in a world where VAR works perfectly:

Ref: Number 21 red, foul, free kick blue.

VAR: Think you should review that, 21 red got the ball.

Ref: (Makes TV sign) Correction - Number 10 blue, yellow card for simulation - freekick red.

I do think in addition to microphones, that the video should also be played in the stadium, and also a time frame implemented to make the review (say a minute) if in that minute, the decision cannot be reversed, then the original decision must stand. I also think it would be better to have the referee have the screen with him, say strapped to his arm like a mobile phone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So exactly at what point do they judge the offside from,is it from when the crosser,brings his feet towards the ball,when he touches the ball, or when he  kicks the ball,and in them 3 stages,which will consist of about 30 frames , (pure guess) or so,does Mata (in this case)become onside at some point,in order for Var to really work,it should be deployed in the same way as it is in cricket, where a replay is played many times over ,in order to see if a catch is legit,or did the ball touch the ground.

Lines are only good from a camera angle at head height,in that case the linesman, would have it on his forehead. Any other angle  can lead to discrepancies. 

Slow motion replay will show,where each player is at time of the ball being released ,for the record,I'm interested in knowing,why is it not at the point of receiving ,that would be fair.

 

My campaign. 

Off side ..rule. .should it be when the ball is ,Released or Received, that's the million dollar question. 

At present Var shows when it's about to be released ,contact with ball in most cases is not made,but about to be made..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any decision made, whether its in football, business or in your home, will be a more informed one, if you have more tools and information at your disposal. But the addition of tools and information also comes with it a price. You cannot gain something for nothing. With the introduction of VAR, referees will have access to video footage which in many cases, makes the decision easier to make. But the price you pay is that this will incur a delay to the game i.e. it takes time to process the information. 

Consider an example where a goal is scored and VAR is used by the referees to confirm the goal. This incurs a one second delay between the time the ball crosses the line and the time the referee announces the decision. I believe it would be difficult to find many fans who would complain about that delay. Consider now the example yesterday, where the delay was a few minutes. Although the correct decision was made, the delay has caused controversy.

At some point, the FA need to establish a maximum allowable delay time which the majority of fans would be happy with. Unfortunately there can be no maximum (finite) delay which could be imposed where you could state, with certainty, that all decisions using VAR, will have been made. This is because there will always be underlying errors in technology - you cannot make anything perfect, and thus there will always be some statistical uncertainty in its usage, no matter how small. This is without even considering the fact that a human still has a final say in the matter, and the error brought about by human involvement in the decision making process. However it may be possible to provide a confidence level, that 95% of all decisions will be made, within the maximum "allowable" delay time. 

What needs to happen now is first, an understanding of what the tool is and what it is not. The latter is important, perhaps moreso than the former. We then need a decision to be made as to what is an acceptable time to wait. It then needs to be demonstrated that all referees can use the technology and make a decision within that acceptable time, for most circumstances, say 95% of the time. Once this has been achieved, the technology chould then be rolled out into more domestic games. 

 

Edited by pailo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, pailo said:

Any decision made, whether its in football, business or in your home, will be a more informed one, if you have more tools and information at your disposal. But the addition of tools and information also comes with it a price. You cannot gain something for nothing. With the introduction of VAR, referees will have access to video footage which in many cases, makes the decision easier to make. But the price you pay is that this will incur a delay to the game i.e. it takes time to process the information. 

Consider an example where a goal is scored and VAR is used by the referees to confirm the goal. This incurs a one second delay between the time the ball crosses the line and the time the referee announces the decision. I believe it would be difficult to find many fans who would complain about that delay. Consider now the example yesterday, where the delay was a few minutes. Although the correct decision was made, the delay has caused controversy.

At some point, the FA need to establish a maximum allowable delay time which the majority of fans would be happy with. Unfortunately there can be no maximum (finite) delay which could be imposed where you could state, with certainty, that all decisions using VAR, will have been made. This is because there will always be underlying errors in technology - you cannot make anything perfect, and thus there will always be some statistical uncertainty in its usage, no matter how small. This is without even considering the fact that a human still has a final say in the matter, and the error brought about by human involvement in the decision making process. However it may be possible to provide a confidence level, that 95% of all decisions will be made, within the maximum "allowable" delay time. 

What needs to happen now is first, an understanding of what the tool is and what it is not. The latter is important, perhaps moreso than the former. We then need a decision to be made as to what is an acceptable time to wait. It then needs to be demonstrated that all referees can use the technology and make a decision within that acceptable time, for most circumstances, say 95% of the time. Once this has been achieved, the technology chould then be rolled out into more domestic games. 

 

My cat's name is mittens.

 

(Nah, superb points if a little verbose)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it can work but limit teams to 2 reviews a half. If even with a video replay the decision isnt clear cut then they simply have to stick with the original decision. In rugby there are still controversies but now were talking about a frame of ambuguity, tiny margins and when it comes down to that we can't moan about a decision. Previously there would be glaring mistakes so if we can cut those out that is already a huge improvement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Offside ,has not been a problem throughout football. .it's the penalty decisions that kill you,the vital corner given that should not have been,or not given when it should have been...the 2nd yellow not given when it should be,the list is endless. .if your trying to fix one problem ,then fix the lot, if not..then leave it be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

VAR is the only way forward and slowly with it improving and adapting to the game we will see its advantages. That being said the system in its current form should undergo many changes before being implemeted in all large competitions. 

It looked harsh yesterday but the correct decision was made ultimately.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All I can I say, is this to cater for the upper middle to high class eastern fans,like every transfer is.

Money has certainly come too light in football ,over the last 10/15 years.

Why I say that is ,with no malice,football in the UK is ,or was for the low working class fan.,it's changing here also,and now we have quite a lot of working class ,middle to high class type of fan also,but in the middle east and even easter it takes money to indulge in football,and for the working class and middle to high class,the economy is good,so asides from booze and women,they need to impress their colleagues, what Football team they support, and  which world class footballer plays for them, how much he cost more than others,Arsenal, Chelsea,Real,Barcelona obviously Us,and other teams also,are supported passionately there,and merchandise, advertising, and TV rights are sold for vast sums of money,this football interest easily quadruples the amount of money that is gambled..

This summer we will get a £200m player. 

How about sensors,on their heads ,and legs,that would stand out ,or /could trigger a light ,that can attest the player is offside,when replaying

Btw..I'm not pissed off  truly with Var, in time it will grow on me ..like it has in cricket. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's been used in the Australia league this year and it's been an absolute disaster.

We keep hearing it's only to be used to clear up "obvious errors" but week after week we're seeing VARs sticking their nose into incidents they're not supposed to and quite frankly making just as many baffling mistakes as on-field referees.

Be careful what you wish for. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nah - Bitching about referees is as fundamental to football as scoring a goal. Offsides are one thing but when using it for fouls that are still pretty questionable either way - It becomes a mess. The sport is grand as it is. Stop trying to fix what isn't broken. 

League is already Americanised enough - Matter of time before we have sponsored VAR brought to you by some insurance company. Fuck that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@MikeM you're spot on. I'm for it if it clears up bad decisions, but the way they've implemented it makes no sense. Firstly, the video ref needs to be in the stadium and all grounds should have big screens so the fans know what is happening. We need to hear the communication between the two. I also thought it was for clear and obvious mistakes, Mata's wasn't clearly offside and how can they decipher the precise moment Young kicked the ball? And what is VAR for? Offsides? Goals? Fouls? It seems like they review all the goals and are speaking to the referee constantly. 

Edited by Danny boy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Genuinely don’t want it, football is played by humans and officiated by humans. Human error by the player and the officials is part and parcel of the game imo. You take that away you’re losing out on a massive part of the game. Although one positive to it will be that it’ll basically eliminate bribing of officials so that may be a good thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now