IFAB Principles : "1. A video assistant referee (VAR) is a match official, with independent access to match footage, who may assist the referee only in the event of a ‘clear and obvious error’ ..." http://www.theifab.com/projects/vars/principles-practicalities-protocol
I don't know what the solution is to be honest. I do get annoyed when I hear people say stuff like "VAR is useless - look at the Maguire decision". That's not VAR, that's the referee and officials. All VAR does is give them a chance to review the incident.
I like the idea of "if the ref can't rule something offside when looking at the replay, goal stands". This drawing of lines is too technical for me. Problem is, that will invite the TV companies to draw lines when they are analysing the game to point out where the ref "got it wrong" and we'll also have inconsistencies because you're allowing interpretation from the ref.
There's no perfect solution here.
Can't be arsed to keep talking about it - I now just wait and see what VAR says then move.
IFAB Principles : "1. A video assistant referee (VAR) is a match official, with independent access to match footage, who may assist the referee by making a ‘clear and obvious error’ ..."
I'm not so sure. The attacker times his run to be onside, by what he can see. As it stands he could be onside, but called offside based on the limits of technology. With the daylight suggestion, an on side will never be called offside, but a marginal offside could be onside which favours the attacking side. I think moving the line is a definite advantage in favouring the attacker."clear and obvious" is a terrible phrase to use, I can look at a Cuneo for 3 hours and not see the mouse, as soon as someone points it out to me it is clear and obvious from that point forward
the daylight suggestion is stupid, it just moves the line
I don't know what the solution is to be honest. I do get annoyed when I hear people say stuff like "VAR is useless - look at the Maguire decision". That's not VAR, that's the referee and officials. All VAR does is give them a chance to review the incident.
I like the idea of "if the ref can't rule something offside when looking at the replay, goal stands". This drawing of lines is too technical for me. Problem is, that will invite the TV companies to draw lines when they are analysing the game to point out where the ref "got it wrong" and we'll also have inconsistencies because you're allowing interpretation from the ref.
There's no perfect solution here.
Scrap the offside rule altogether.
Stretch the game out, create space for
players to play, and reintroduce the obsolete art of goal hanging.
Jumpers for goalposts too.Scrap the offside rule altogether.
Stretch the game out, create space for
players to play, and reintroduce the obsolete art of goal hanging.
I'm not so sure. The attacker times his run to be onside, by what he can see. As it stands he could be onside, but called offside based on the limits of technology. With the daylight suggestion, an on side will never be called offside, but a marginal offside could be onside which favours the attacking side. I think moving the line is a definite advantage in favouring the attacker.
I do however think players will master the art of jumping the offside trap whilst trailing a leg for as long as possible.
that doesn't actually matter though
It does though because then you have TV analysts bemoaning inconsistencies and those with an agenda saying the same as now "VAR doesn't work".
Then you'll have managers, and ours would probably be the worst offender, using the inconsistencies to deflect blame from bad performances.
it's perfect!Probably a less than ideal thread to post in bud!
I’ll tell you what it needs to stop doing ... using slow mo for foul play that the ref didn’t spotSo it is definitely a huge question mark about the decision making of the officials USING THE VAR TECHNOLOGY - the process, not the system.
Anyone with a basic understanding of processes knows that the best process can be undermined by poor execution. At that point you have to amend the process of it isn't suitable for human use and/or retrain/remove users.
At present, VAR is better than no VAR - there would be more errors without it than with it.
But it seems to me that it is being overused and out of scope,which increases the risk of errors in judgement. It is still a very quick piece of analysis that has to happen, with minimal thinking time.
I think it needs to go back to significant incidents the ref DIDN'T SPOT or a request service where the ref has SIGNIFICANT DOUBT.
This needs the football world to come with it and recognise it as an ASSISTANT, not a SOLVE ALL.
It is here to improve decisions, not police the game. (The design and application by the EPL made it the later, rather than sticking to script).
Sorry for all the caps, couldn't be varsed to use bold
That was part of my point re; using as a helping tool where the ref requests further information other than the split second he gets.I’ll tell you what it needs to stop doing ... using slow mo for foul play that the ref didn’t spot
Use it for offsides but for fouls it makes everything look worse and very very subjective