• 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

Grays_1890 said:
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
Click to expand...

I think it’s inevitable it will become an effectively non contact sport.
 
Spur of the moment said:
Why did VAR disallow Spurs' goal at the death?

Peter Crouch and Rio Ferdinand go step by step through Harry Kane's 95th-minute goal which was disallowed by VAR to show why it was the goal was chalked off and what they think of it.

https://www.bt.com/sport/watch/vide...why-did-var-disallow-spurs-goal-at-the-death0
Click to expand...

There are several problematic things about that VAR descision:

- The time it took. There should be a time limit. 30 seconds and you can't spot an error? Well then the decision stands.

- The drawing of lines. Royal was in the air, the ball looked like it had already left his head, but who knows. Technology is simply not good enough for lines to have any real value in these tight situations.

- The over complication of the offside rule. I've always laughed at people who couldn't understand the offside rule. It's quite simple really, or used to be. Admittedly I don't know how the offside rule has been spelled out in the rule book in the past, but I refuse to believe that it used to allow refs to give offsides when the ball travelled backwards. Hell, even our players apparently didn't know this. It defies all logic and sense for everyone who are interested in football.

- Judging intent from TV footage. This brings a totally unneccesary subjective element to an offside decision. Basically this means refs make big decisions on their interpretation of body language. And what was the Sporting player's intent? You could argue that he intended to block the path of the ball from an opponent he thought he had behind him. Either way, his intent is impossible for the refs to make an informed decision about.

I've always felt the appeal of football has been its simplicity. Complex decision making processes and rules that are increasingly difficult to understand, takes away that appeal. It alienates fans and frustrates players. It's a very dangerous path to follow IMO.
 
Robbo said:
There are several problematic things about that VAR descision:

- The time it took. There should be a time limit. 30 seconds and you can't spot an error? Well then the decision stands.

- The drawing of lines. Royal was in the air, the ball looked like it had already left his head, but who knows. Technology is simply not good enough for lines to have any real value in these tight situations.

- The over complication of the offside rule. I've always laughed at people who couldn't understand the offside rule. It's quite simple really, or used to be. Admittedly I don't know how the offside rule has been spelled out in the rule book in the past, but I refuse to believe that it used to allow refs to give offsides when the ball travelled backwards. Hell, even our players apparently didn't know this. It defies all logic and sense for everyone who are interested in football.

- Judging intent from TV footage. This brings a totally unneccesary subjective element to an offside decision. Basically this means refs make big decisions on their interpretation of body language. And what was the Sporting player's intent? You could argue that he intended to block the path of the ball from an opponent he thought he had behind him. Either way, his intent is impossible for the refs to make an informed decision about.

I've always felt the appeal of football has been its simplicity. Complex decision making processes and rules that are increasingly difficult to understand, takes away that appeal. It alienates fans and frustrates players. It's a very dangerous path to follow IMO.
Click to expand...

I think it should be referee makes a decision on the field and VAR has a minute overrule it. The original clear and obvious error.

In our case this week, the offside line on the video looks like it is in the wrong place and it still looks like Kane's head was level with the ball. The six yard line looks a good guide.
 
One reason for the delay that I was reading yesterday was that the new semi-automated technology that is going to be used in the World Cup was in use on Wednesday, but that only tracks the players. So the VAR then needed to bring in Hawkeye to get the position of the ball. So that's apparently why it took so long.
Now I have no idea how this all works and maybe it makes perfect sense, but taking snaps from two separate systems doesn't sound right to me.
I'll see if I can find the detail.
 
Glenda's Legs said:
One reason for the delay that I was reading yesterday was that the new semi-automated technology that is going to be used in the World Cup was in use on Wednesday, but that only tracks the players. So the VAR then needed to bring in Hawkeye to get the position of the ball. So that's apparently why it took so long.
Now I have no idea how this all works and maybe it makes perfect sense, but taking snaps from two separate systems doesn't sound right to me.
I'll see if I can find the detail.
Click to expand...

Using two systems that dont interface automatically sounds the perfect solution, this allows the officals every chance to fudge up the decision and still be right.
 
Glenda's Legs said:
https://twitter.com/x/status/1586016150424408066

https://twitter.com/x/status/1586087444709265408

Of course, just because someone thinks they are a VAR expert doesn't make their analysis correct (or necessarily FACTUAL, to quote), but an interesting trail.
Click to expand...
Wow, what a mess!

That kind of reminded me of when Phil Walton is asked to comment on reffing decisions on BT and no matter what he agrees with the decision!

why doesn’t he comment on the blurred image, the frame rate, or the point at which the image is stopped?
 
Gazza Dazzla said:
Wow, what a mess!

That kind of reminded me of when Phil Walton is asked to comment on reffing decisions on BT and no matter what he agrees with the decision!

why doesn’t he comment on the blurred image, the frame rate, or the point at which the image is stopped?
Click to expand...

"So, UEFA is sure the correct decision was made"
Well of course they are. What else are they going to say? He does come across as a UEFA/VAR mouthpiece. (And I am not anti-VAR).

The more I think about it, the more I'm sure that I have never seen offside 'stills' where the ball is such a blur as it was in this case.

And if the position of the ball can be key to the decision, why is the new semi-automated system that UEFA are trialling not tracking the ball as well as all the players? I mean that just seems like a no brainer.
 
Gutter Boy said:
How did football manage to destroy itself down such a Tuttle-Buttle rabbit hole? No wonder viewing figures are collapsing
Click to expand...

Its become a game promoting mediocrity. World Cups are now generally poor where there used to be a real festival fanfare feel. European trophies promote failure by allowing team to drop out into other comps and now we have VAR which constantly gets things wrong. Add to it sub par players earning top whack and you have a perfect storm
 
VAR is a good tool, but it's implemented horribly in offside situations and has become just another way to make wrong and biased decisions when needed. For referees who hasn't got the advantages the TV viewers have VAR is very useful, with all the focus on ref decisions. We could have used VAR on the Mendes goal. Not helped by the fact that 90% of footballers are cheaters, which is encouraged by the sport itself. You could use VAR for giving double suspension for protesting an obvious two-footed tackle. Booking for claiming a corner you know isn't right. Same punishmet for protesting as the offense you're claiming the opposition did. That would make VAR good.

I liked the offside suggestion from another poster: make the lines thicker. So any body part has to be visible outside the line. It works for goal line decisions.
 
SubZero said:
VAR is a good tool, but it's implemented horribly in offside situations and has become just another way to make wrong and biased decisions when needed. For referees who hasn't got the advantages the TV viewers have VAR is very useful, with all the focus on ref decisions. We could have used VAR on the Mendes goal. Not helped by the fact that 90% of footballers are cheaters, which is encouraged by the sport itself. You could use VAR for giving double suspension for protesting an obvious two-footed tackle. Booking for claiming a corner you know isn't right. Same punishmet for protesting as the offense you're claiming the opposition did. That would make VAR good.

I liked the offside suggestion from another poster: make the lines thicker. So any body part has to be visible outside the line. It works for goal line decisions.
Click to expand...

Or like goal line decision the whole body must be over the line. When I played virtually everyone thought there had to be daylight between the players, but few of us were video analyst or lawyers. I believe this whole situation with VAR bas been bought about by TV and its obsession with dissecting ever element of the game, it's not good enough for a pundit to say he played well today or that was a great game, we have to see if x would have done this and y had been here a might z may not have done this. The game is about joy, disappointment, excitement not a bloody debate on what may or may not have happened. Leave all that the people employed in the game let the fans just enjoy it.
 
Glenda's Legs said:
Is there a similar level of controversy with the VAR implementation in other countries? Or are we just employing it in a particularly ham-fisted manner?
Click to expand...

It's definitely caused lots of problems and scandal in Italy. I'm not sure about other countries.

In Italy there's been talk of changing it and instead of it being used automatically, letting teams have one 'VAR challenge' appeal per game - i.e. making it more like cricket.
 
How anyone can see all of this going on and think the issue is VAR, rather than all of the historical goals which were awarded and shouldn't have been I don't know.

The entire history of the game has asterisks against it now, how many offsides and fouls were missed, it must be thousands.

VAR is saving us from an uncomfortable truth, we need to officiate games on what actually happened, not what a human thought happened. Imagine if we still treated medical practice in the same way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back