• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Richarlison

alekaras said:
It is the entire operation, but the human element has always been there, be it behind the screen or on the pitch. But people complain about VAR, not the VAR officials, and that is a bit disingenuous, because the tech doesn't make the calls. Humans do.

As for the guidelines, they are pretty clear: they're the laws of the game. We may not like them, but technically if you're 1mm ahead of the last defender, you're offside. If the ball just brushes your arm when it's hit from half a meter away and you're jumping for the ball with your back turned to it, it's a penalty. So in this case the issue is with rules, not with the tech. The tech just highlights how ridiculous some of these rules are. It's not the tech's fault.
Click to expand...

People don't complain about the officials? Come on now, people are losing their jobs because of it

The whole thing encapsulated is a joke for me, deflected balls hitting players on the elbow when jumping for headers given as penalties when the original ref has not given it but the techs been allowed to be slowed to the N'th for another ref to give a less than clear and obvious decision. No you can keep it

I keep hearing this the rules are the rules but there is much much more to it than that and alot more interpretation being taken as gospel on decisions. As I have said before footballs a game with humans, there will allays be error, the games was never in the state people made out it was just because a few sour cnuts like Pep, Jose and Klopp made it out to be (ironically they still moan now), it was never also a search for the absolute truth over that human element that made the game great. A game for humans and human emotion, not for people to stop a game an punish something that still can't be proven with 5 minutes of time because of a lag in frame rates....just let the game in certain quarters continue as it has

Offsides, Balls out of play and definitive decisions, penalties like Dier versus Saudi Sportswashing Machine that time when having the ball booted at your back when you are mid air...na you can keep that
 
Grays_1890 said:
The reason for the fixation is that those that happen for that long, by nature of them should not even be considered. Clear and obvious is not a 2-3/4/5 minute process IMO

It no matter that they might only happen to one game per weekend, its a clear inconsistency in process
Click to expand...
I don't disagree with that. In manufacturing (and other areas) we use process control charts to identify errors outside the acceptable tolerances. We do not change the entire process, if we get one error per 100K observations. Now for VAR it is obviously not one in 100K, but we don't know what the acceptable tolerances are deemed to be. The thing is, though, that the consumers will drive the demand for reducing these tolerances and the process (in this case VAR) will have to adapt to that. We may have just not reached that point yet, all complaining by fans aside. Eventually we will get there though. Already in european competitions there is semi-automated offside, so at least we're moving in the right direction.
 
alekaras said:
It is the entire operation, but the human element has always been there, be it behind the screen or on the pitch. But people complain about VAR, not the VAR officials, and that is a bit disingenuous, because the tech doesn't make the calls. Humans do.

As for the guidelines, they are pretty clear: they're the laws of the game. We may not like them, but technically if you're 1mm ahead of the last defender, you're offside. If the ball just brushes your arm when it's hit from half a meter away and you're jumping for the ball with your back turned to it, it's a penalty. So in this case the issue is with rules, not with the tech. The tech just highlights how ridiculous some of these rules are. It's not the tech's fault.
Click to expand...

These bloody humans they're more trouble than they're worth, the sooner we replace them all with machine the better.
 
alekaras said:
I don't disagree with that. In manufacturing (and other areas) we use process control charts to identify errors outside the acceptable tolerances. We do not change the entire process, if we get one error per 100K observations. Now for VAR it is obviously not one in 100K, but we don't know what the acceptable tolerances are deemed to be. The thing is, though, that the consumers will drive the demand for reducing these tolerances and the process (in this case VAR) will have to adapt to that. We may have just not reached that point yet, all complaining by fans aside. Eventually we will get there though. Already in european competitions there is semi-automated offside, so at least we're moving in the right direction.
Click to expand...

I personally believe thats where the issue lies, is that there is alot of talk about it like the game is manufactured, you hear that kind of verbage of the benefits all the time when people talk about VAR, for me thats the reason I think there needs to be a distinct line used on its use.

Regardless of the rights and wherefores, for me, personally, the dynamic of the game and the live experience has changed for the worse, I know for others it has not but can only speak personally here. Its one of the drivers for me passing on my season ticket. I also don't like the whole dynamic of undermining of the ref which I think creates its on issues which we have seen with the hesitation to make decisions which has led to more on field mistakes than before VAR and then this refs union issue with wrong decisions being maintained (ala December)

Its just not for me in this entirety that it is used and I think the impact on where we are now with defenders not knowing what to do at risk of something being reviewed and attackers clearly adapting their game to con more out of VAR....its just not for me
 
Grays_1890 said:
I personally believe thats where the issue lies, is that there is alot of talk about it like the game is manufactured, you hear that kind of verbage of the benefits all the time when people talk about VAR, for me thats the reason I think there needs to be a distinct line used on its use.

Regardless of the rights and wherefores, for me, personally, the dynamic of the game and the live experience has changed for the worse, I know for others it has not but can only speak personally here. Its one of the drivers for me passing on my season ticket. I also don't like the whole dynamic of undermining of the ref which I think creates its on issues which we have seen with the hesitation to make decisions which has led to more on field mistakes than before VAR and then this refs union issue with wrong decisions being maintained (ala December)

Its just not for me in this entirety that it is used and I think the impact on where we are now with defenders not knowing what to do at risk of something being reviewed and attackers clearly adapting their game to con more out of VAR....its just not for me
Click to expand...
If this is one of the drivers you passed on your season ticket, then you should probably have passed on all your season tickets, because before VAR there were some terrible refereeing decisions. Those got fans equally as riled up and there was a lot of complaining. To mitigate that VAR is introduced. Now people are complaining about VAR. You just can't win with some people.
 
alekaras said:
If this is one of the drivers you passed on your season ticket, then you should probably have passed on all your season tickets, because before VAR there were some terrible refereeing decisions. Those got fans equally as riled up and there was a lot of complaining. To mitigate that VAR is introduced. Now people are complaining about VAR. You just can't win with some people.
Click to expand...

Not at all, I could accept human error and I emphasised with refs, and the number of mistakes made were minimal, plenty of literally out there supporting that. I don't however do so when the games stopped and wrong decisions made or the game being drilled down for a decision to be overturned, there is a real stark difference TBH.

I certainly don't live for a game thats stopped for decision making only for a system promising better to get 6 mistakes on one day. Of course you can win with people, its just that some have a different POV on things...
 
Last edited:
alekaras said:
If this is one of the drivers you passed on your season ticket, then you should probably have passed on all your season tickets, because before VAR there were some terrible refereeing decisions. Those got fans equally as riled up and there was a lot of complaining. To mitigate that VAR is introduced. Now people are complaining about VAR. You just can't win with some people.
Click to expand...

There is a major difference with VAR, and that's the delay to the decision, and it absolutely does affect the fan experience.

It comes back to, if you are going to introduce such a system that will impact fan experience, you must do two things 1/actively strive to minimize that impact (I'm fudging sorry, 2+ minutes sitting in the stand while someone looks for the 19th fudging angle to prove their point is wrong), 2/actively strive to improve the accuracy/correctness, and the constant failure to admit when VAR has/is fudging up means it's not improving, it's not better this year vs. last.

And I'd add one more, learn from other sports, to me, 99% of the time the players on the pitch know when something is off, a challenge model vs. VAR checking every fudging single little item (see point 1) would be a much better idea.
 
Raziel said:
There is a major difference with VAR, and that's the delay to the decision, and it absolutely does affect the fan experience.

It comes back to, if you are going to introduce such a system that will impact fan experience, you must do two things 1/actively strive to minimize that impact (I'm fudging sorry, 2+ minutes sitting in the stand while someone looks for the 19th fudging angle to prove their point is wrong), 2/actively strive to improve the accuracy/correctness, and the constant failure to admit when VAR has/is fudging up means it's not improving, it's not better this year vs. last.

And I'd add one more, learn from other sports, to me, 99% of the time the players on the pitch know when something is off, a challenge model vs. VAR checking every fudging single little item (see point 1) would be a much better idea.
Click to expand...

Exactly this....People can debate the fact of VAR what they can't debate is how it impacts your enjoyment of the game, its not about being picky or pleased, its about not being so obsessed with perfection in the game for it to matter enough.

Stop start options that suit stop start sports, like Rugby, NFL or the cricket just don't match up for me

Anyway, one for the VAR thread

Lets hope Richy gets another start next, deserves it, playing well
 
Last edited:
Raziel said:
There is a major difference with VAR, and that's the delay to the decision, and it absolutely does affect the fan experience.

It comes back to, if you are going to introduce such a system that will impact fan experience, you must do two things 1/actively strive to minimize that impact (I'm fudging sorry, 2+ minutes sitting in the stand while someone looks for the 19th fudging angle to prove their point is wrong), 2/actively strive to improve the accuracy/correctness, and the constant failure to admit when VAR has/is fudging up means it's not improving, it's not better this year vs. last.

And I'd add one more, learn from other sports, to me, 99% of the time the players on the pitch know when something is off, a challenge model vs. VAR checking every fudging single little item (see point 1) would be a much better idea.
Click to expand...
I like the challenge model too, at least until the timeliness of VAR decisions improves. They use it in the NFL and it works great. And they have a time rule on automatic reviews whereby, if the ruling on the field isn't overturned by the time the play clock is down to 20 seconds, the on field call stands. But even there, in the last two minutes of each half there is no time limitation. Of course that's the NFL, where the game stops after every play, so it is feels less of an imposition on the flow of the game. That part needs to improve in football, so if it's not a clear and obvious mistake, the VAR officials should let things stand, which would also improve on the timeliness of the VAR officials decision.

As for your second point, admitting that the VAR official (not the tech) was wrong would be the same as a referee agreeing in the pre-VAR era that he was wrong. In other words, ain't gonna happen.
 
Raziel said:
There is a major difference with VAR, and that's the delay to the decision, and it absolutely does affect the fan experience.

It comes back to, if you are going to introduce such a system that will impact fan experience, you must do two things 1/actively strive to minimize that impact (I'm fudging sorry, 2+ minutes sitting in the stand while someone looks for the 19th fudging angle to prove their point is wrong), 2/actively strive to improve the accuracy/correctness, and the constant failure to admit when VAR has/is fudging up means it's not improving, it's not better this year vs. last.

And I'd add one more, learn from other sports, to me, 99% of the time the players on the pitch know when something is off, a challenge model vs. VAR checking every fudging single little item (see point 1) would be a much better idea.
Click to expand...
I like the challenge model too, at least until the timeliness of VAR decisions improves. They use it in the NFL and it works great. And they have a time rule on automatic reviews whereby, if the ruling on the field isn't overturned by the time the play clock is down to 20 seconds, the on field call stands. But even there, in the last two minutes of each half there is no time limitation. Of course that's the NFL, where the game stops after every play, so it is feels less of an imposition on the flow of the game. That part needs to improve in football, so if it's not a clear and obvious mistake, the VAR officials should let things stand, which would also improve on the timeliness of the VAR officials decision.

As for your second point, admitting that the VAR official (not the tech) was wrong would be the same as a referee agreeing in the pre-VAR era that he was wrong. In other words, ain't gonna happen.
 
Raziel said:
There is a major difference with VAR, and that's the delay to the decision, and it absolutely does affect the fan experience.

It comes back to, if you are going to introduce such a system that will impact fan experience, you must do two things 1/actively strive to minimize that impact (I'm fudging sorry, 2+ minutes sitting in the stand while someone looks for the 19th fudging angle to prove their point is wrong), 2/actively strive to improve the accuracy/correctness, and the constant failure to admit when VAR has/is fudging up means it's not improving, it's not better this year vs. last.

And I'd add one more, learn from other sports, to me, 99% of the time the players on the pitch know when something is off, a challenge model vs. VAR checking every fudging single little item (see point 1) would be a much better idea.
Click to expand...
Don't know why they can't make the decision process more like the TMO in rugby union. The ref communicates with the TMO throughout the making the decision and is the one that is driving the process and still in charge of the final decision. They are also miked up so everyone knows what's going on instead of like now with the fans twiddling their thumbs for a few mins with no idea of what's going on. Decisions in rugby that I haven't agreed with but at least I could understand the refs reasons for it.
 
alekaras said:
I respect your expertise in football matters, but in the case of VAR you continuously conflate the tool with the people using it. If you put a blind man behind the wheel of a car and he crashes it, it's not the car's fault. As for the opinion of most of the fans, if they too conflate the technology with the people who use it, then their opinion is meaningless, because it is based on the wrong criteria.
Click to expand...

The reason VAR was brought in ( apart for making money for those that deal in it) it was supposed to stop most ( if not all) the mistakes being made by bad calls by linesman etc and to stop arguments among fans of unfair results.

So now we have had it for a while and guess what there are even more grumbles and the same arguments about the result and how fair it is. I go to a lot of games and the vast majority of fans i meet, see, speak to want it scrapped. Tool or not its still run by humans ( several of them in those fudging studios) and you really believe is been good for the game.

:rolleyes::rolleyes:
 
K.D.D.D.D.Soc said:
The one redeeming feature of VAR is Humble Mo's missed penalty was the first spot kick awarded to Liverpool this season, a seismic change in the norm.
Click to expand...

Not a fan of var at all. But for penalties i think it should be used. There is a natural break in play where the fans anticipation is up. It doesn't destroy/interrupt a celebration.
 
Lilbaz said:
Not a fan of var at all. But for penalties i think it should be used. There is a natural break in play where the fans anticipation is up. It doesn't destroy/interrupt a celebration.
Click to expand...

Not disagreeing on VAR being used for penalties but they are now sometimes being awarded 2 or 3 minutes after an incident occurred as refs have to wait for a break in play to take VAR’s advice.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back