• 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

VAR: Sponsored by Chelsea

Baleforce said:
same way you explain to him how any of the other laws are written
Click to expand...

And if they still get it wrong?

Human error, its part of the game, when you still have men behind the screens its near on the same as having the man on the pitch decide, its still humans running the computers so all in all just bin it
 
Baleforce said:
fair enough, remember we are irrelevant in this though, they don't care if we trust it or not

personally, I'll take that variance over a single real time view from a human
Click to expand...
I wouldn’t
I can accept humans are fallible
It’s why players make mistakes, even the best
I can accept technology being used to not inrove what already existed
 
Bedfordspurs said:
View attachment 14682

Pretty sure I posted this a long while back
Explains the farce in Var for offsides
Click to expand...

Given the above, is it really beyond the wit of VAR legislaters to come up with something that makes the appropriate allowance for margins of error? After all, cricket permits a 'not out' decision when the ball is projected to hit only the top of the bails or the edge of an outer stump.

Seems football's legislators are shooting themselves in the foot in failing to recognise the negative impact on fans of their absurd obsession with minutiae.
 
Spur of the moment said:
Given the above, is it really beyond the wit of VAR legislaters to come up with something that makes the appropriate allowance for margins of error? After all, cricket permits a 'not out' decision when the ball is projected to hit only the top of the bails or the edge of an outer stump.

Seems football's legislators are shooting themselves in the foot in failing to recognise the negative impact on fans of their absurd obsession with minutiae.
Click to expand...
Nah that’s too easy
And tolerances in sport… I mean rugby do it to a point, cricket do too… football, fudge NO we know best
 
My biggest problem with VAR and is that more goals get disallowed which hardly anyone would have queried. Only the most bias want fag paper decisions, that along with the time it takes to check "clear and obvious" errors, if it takes more than a minute to check it surely it doesnt meet that criteria.
 
Last edited:
Spur of the moment said:
Given the above, is it really beyond the wit of VAR legislaters to come up with something that makes the appropriate allowance for margins of error? After all, cricket permits a 'not out' decision when the ball is projected to hit only the top of the bails or the edge of an outer stump.

Seems football's legislators are shooting themselves in the foot in failing to recognise the negative impact on fans of their absurd obsession with minutiae.
Click to expand...

The main reason I am against it is twofold, firstly if you are going to stop games for any period of time in order to "get the big decisions correct" then you have to get them correct, regardless if thats the tech or the person behind the tech, they are one and the same. The fact that it came in with fanfare of being needed and its frankly been proven to also get things wrong makes it laughable.

Secondly where football and tech do not work together is that decisions such as handballs are open to interpretation because technology can not define intent. A frozen picture makes every handball look guilty so you need someone to make the call on the intent, thats why the same incidents are getting different decisions because its humans calling it, so really you could have just left it to the ref on the pitch to decide.

I was always one for leaving it up to refs and reinforcing a respect the refs message, there are human errors in the game, the refs were probably the least of the issues if you compare them to player mistakes or managers making shocking decisions.
 
Grays_1890 said:
The main reason I am against it is twofold, firstly if you are going to stop games for any period of time in order to "get the big decisions correct" then you have to get them correct, regardless if thats the tech or the person behind the tech, they are one and the same. The fact that it came in with fanfare of being needed and its frankly been proven to also get things wrong makes it laughable.

Secondly where football and tech do not work together is that decisions such as handballs are open to interpretation because technology can not define intent. A frozen picture makes every handball look guilty so you need someone to make the call on the intent, thats why the same incidents are getting different decisions because its humans calling it, so really you could have just left it to the ref on the pitch to decide.

I was always one for leaving it up to refs and reinforcing a respect the refs message, there are human errors in the game, the refs were probably the least of the issues if you compare them to player mistakes or managers making shocking decisions.
Click to expand...
Players mistakes
Manager errors
Ref mistakes
Crowd pressure
And players cheating …
 
I think there is a difference between participant errors, those by players and coaches, and structural errors, the pitch, the ball, the officials.
 
Baleforce said:
I think there is a difference between participant errors, those by players and coaches, and structural errors, the pitch, the ball, the officials.
Click to expand...

There isnt really, they are all human errors, which VAR is proving is still part of the game even with the help of tech.
 
Grays_1890 said:
So how will tech call questionable handball decisions? Prove intent? All decisions that require human input to decide?
Click to expand...
It won’t
It will need clear demarcation
Intent is the daftest thing now
The defender didn’t intend to block Emerson header…. So why was he on the pitch
They have taken intent out of the handball rule now for that reason
 
Bedfordspurs said:
It won’t
It will need clear demarcation
Intent is the daftest thing now
The defender didn’t intend to block Emerson header…. So why was he on the pitch
They have taken intent out of the handball rule now for that reason
Click to expand...

Its still debated though, its like questionable force and intent on tackles, how do you prove that? We are going to have such a sterile game soon because the human element is slowly being sapped out. Seeing defenders running round like victims of the vietnam war with their arms behind their backs, players brick scared of doing anything because contact looks the same on a photo every time even when a striker looks for contact, its ridiculous. And the fact it still takes, in some cases so long to decide, its a joke at games at times
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back