parklane1
Tony Galvin
A year down the line and i am still hearing that old excuse.
-
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
- Thread starter Gutter Boy
- Start date
A year down the line and i am still hearing that old excuse.
Baleforce
Arthur Rowe
It’s literally been one round of first class CL games.
We’ve given the single ref system 100 years and it’s still fudging brick.
It would be mad to not try something else.
parklane1
Tony Galvin
I've always thought they should have some sort of program to get ex-pros into refereeing. Obviously, we are talking lower level pros (or semi-pro) from league 2 or whatever, who can't afford to retire. Surely they'd make much better refs? Don't most rubgy refs come from a background of playing the game? (I might be imagining that).
When that's been running for 10 years +, there should be plenty to choose from. Then get these people on the panels who decide rule changes, VAR etc. And banish the likes of Mike Dean forever.
When that's been running for 10 years +, there should be plenty to choose from. Then get these people on the panels who decide rule changes, VAR etc. And banish the likes of Mike Dean forever.
The trouble with VAR is that when referees STILL make a wrong or contentious decision with the benefit of VAR, it’s extra infuriating compared to when refs make a wrong or contentious decision without VAR. I for one am still fuming about the Man U penalty for that very reason!
So in weighing up VAR you have to weigh up the benefit of getting more decisions right vs the downsides of more delays to the game and extra fury when refs still make bad calls.
On the handball rule - I have no idea how a group of people have decided to move from ‘hand in an unnatural position’ to ‘natural silhouettes’ and ‘making yourself bigger’ - it’s just even more fudging ambiguous! And then Peter Walton, a ref of more than a decade, starts mentioning ‘not taking responsibility’ and ‘turning his back’ - nothing to do with the fudging rules! Absolute shambles.
So in weighing up VAR you have to weigh up the benefit of getting more decisions right vs the downsides of more delays to the game and extra fury when refs still make bad calls.
On the handball rule - I have no idea how a group of people have decided to move from ‘hand in an unnatural position’ to ‘natural silhouettes’ and ‘making yourself bigger’ - it’s just even more fudging ambiguous! And then Peter Walton, a ref of more than a decade, starts mentioning ‘not taking responsibility’ and ‘turning his back’ - nothing to do with the fudging rules! Absolute shambles.
nayimfromthehalfwayline
Andy Thompson
That really is the crux of it. Id happily see some delays in game if at the end of the day we got that penalty we should have and won.
Id take that all day long. I dont imagine many people go home after a bad call blissed out at the romanticism of the game, lauding the human error etc.
I like to have things as "right" as they can be. And VAR seems to be making more right calls, which can only be good.
Clearly others take a very different view, and thats basically where the argument comes from, isnt it?
Not VAR, REFS.
VAR is a tool. Its not an automated decision machine. It has that fabled human error people against VAR are so attached to, but for some reason they dont like it when it happens in the booth - only on the field.
VAR = Video Assisted Referee - VAR gets it wrong its the package. We don't like human error, we can put up with it as its better than the alternative.
Hand in an unnatural position was not in the laws of the game but in advice - the big change is they have removed the need for hand ball needing to be deliberate. It is still a shambles as different interpretations, but this is the change.
Have you got a source for that? Everything that I’ve seen says that as of right now, the written law still just says that a handball must be deliberate, and that it’s only the advice or guidance on what constitutes deliberate (e.g. unnatural position, making yourself bigger etc) that’s changed to date.
I am agreeing with what you say (just added that unnatural position was not in the laws)- that the change next year is away from being deliberate.
See my post above - it IS more infuriating when a ref makes a call you think is wrong when they’ve had the benefit of seeing multiple replays. You can forgive it a bit more when they’ve had to make the call live.
Ah I see, you mean the change from next year. Hopefully between now and then they’ll make the language clearer than it ever has been to date!
No such luck from what I have seen - it will still rely on what you consider where you have your hands without making yourself big, they are just removing the need to be deliberate.
nayimfromthehalfwayline
Andy Thompson
Its the human element of the package, the actual Referee making the call. Just as it would be on the field.
Except, as you know, it should happen much less frequently and much less blatantly given the resources of the Video Assistance.
Of course it is. It should also be far far less frequent. Id take a really bricky VAR decision like PSG and loads more correct decisions made over the consistent poor refereeing we deal with now.
I’m genuinely not sure I would, but obviously that’s just personal preference. Maybe if Spurs start to get one or two correct overturns via VAR I’ll start to change my tune
not seen this before VAR handbook - lots of detail I have not seen - https://www.knvb.nl/downloads/bestand/9844/var-handbook-v8_final
one detail - For a tippy tappy team when does an attacking move start?
For red card offences (except DOGSO), only the incident is reviewed. For goals, penalty
incidents and DOGSO offences, the referee can review the play as far back as the start of
the attacking move which led to the incident and, if relevant, how possession of the ball
was gained at the start of that phase of play.
*DOGSO -denying an obvious goal scoring opportunity
one detail - For a tippy tappy team when does an attacking move start?
For red card offences (except DOGSO), only the incident is reviewed. For goals, penalty
incidents and DOGSO offences, the referee can review the play as far back as the start of
the attacking move which led to the incident and, if relevant, how possession of the ball
was gained at the start of that phase of play.
*DOGSO -denying an obvious goal scoring opportunity
Grays_1890
Chris Jones
I tell you what would make the game more enjoyable...making VAR abit longer...that would be lovely
Grays_1890
Chris Jones
Do they add the time that is taking for VAR?
Rorschach
Sonny Walters
parklane1
Tony Galvin
A
A mate of mine is a City S/T holder and he was at the game last night, there were several incidents with VAR which held up play for 5 minutes ( according to him) yet only 2 minutes were added for extra time. If true then its another farce to add to a long list.
A mate of mine is a City S/T holder and he was at the game last night, there were several incidents with VAR which held up play for 5 minutes ( according to him) yet only 2 minutes were added for extra time. If true then its another farce to add to a long list.