• 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

Mr_B said:
Just because the ref doesn't go to his screen, doesn't mean VAR is not being used. For the penalty, the VAR refs review the incident and inform the ref if he needs to review the incident, they concurred he made the right decision so no "official" review.
Click to expand...
Then they are also brick at their job.
Again, not the tech that's the issue.
 
Im still angry about that Mendes goal that was ignored, the Lampard one that wasn’t, the red card Cahill should have had, Verts being flagged offside in his own half, I bear a grudge like Thorgrim, but I have no issue with the penalty call last night, it was the correct decision.
 
I'm sure there will be plenty of debate on VAR next season but given the stakes these days I'm in favour of having it in, will never get everything right but should mean we're getting the majority correct which can only be a good thing. I'm sure it will evolve in time as well, I wonder if they might move to some form of cricket system where teams maybe get 2 appeals for something per match for instance.
 
Anyone seen the mess the African confederation have made about a team walking off because VAR was not available? Makes the FA, UEFA and FIFA look functional.
 
Legohamster said:
View attachment 6793

Coming to the PL next season.

Sake.
Click to expand...

Clear and obvious :)

Someone here once linked to FIFAs guidelines on using VAR and one of the points was that it should be obvious when viewed in real time. I see that has gone on the window, and it's now based on slow motion and feeze frames.

I personally think that's fine if it's 100% consistent... if this level of scrutiny also applies to Man U, Liverpool , Chelsea etc. then even though it seems a bit dumb atm at least every team will be on a level playing field.

However, if the ball brushes against one of our opponents hands in the box and a penalty isn't given then the whole thing is bs.
 
nayenezgani said:
Good point. I liked the doubt though and I'm with Poch on his thoughts that VAR could really suck the magic and drama out of our beloved game.
Click to expand...
Agree. I've already stopped letting rip when we score in cup games, how sad is that.:eek:

Flipside though is there's always a chance an opposition goal will end up being disallowed, which for us vs CIty and Ajax was actually more insane than anything I've ever experienced before.

So it can cut both ways.
 
Spur of the moment said:
Problem being for offside, even when it comes down to just a couple of inches - as was the case for Lingard's disallowed goal against the Netherlands - VAR effectively annihilates the doubt.
Click to expand...
It doesn't we don't yet have the technology for it to be black and white, where the picture is recorded and frame rate are two of the big issues (there's plenty out there discussing this in detail).

For it to remove doubt and accurately measure in cm's you would need cameras with frame rates / angles like the 100m replays.
 
r-u-s-x said:
It doesn't we don't yet have the technology for it to be black and white, where the picture is recorded and frame rate are two of the big issues (there's plenty out there discussing this in detail).

For it to remove doubt and accurately measure in cm's you would need cameras with frame rates / angles like the 100m replays.
Click to expand...
I get what your saying but I'm talking about what we're shown on the screen, which is presumably the same as what the ref has to go by. To that extent it removes all reasonable doubt. Although come to think of it there was a case recently where the line was wonky so maybe you do have a point there.

The point is once you see on a screen that a boot is marginally ahead or not as the case may be, unless it IS literally millimetres (in which case the ref surely has to favour the attacker?) it's black and white and that's all there is to it.

No doubt over time the technology and camera angles will improve even further - to the point where the whole thing becomes utterly absurd - but the ref will still need to make his mind up based purely on what he is shown. Even a few millimetres would then make it black and white.
 
Spur of the moment said:
I get what your saying but I'm talking about what we're shown on the screen, which is presumably the same as what the ref has to go by. To that extent it removes all reasonable doubt. Although come to think of it there was a case recently where the line was wonky so maybe you do have a point there.

The point is once you see on a screen that a boot is marginally ahead or not as the case may be, unless it IS literally millimetres (in which case the ref surely has to favour the attacker?) it's black and white and that's all there is to it.

No doubt over time the technology and camera angles will improve even further - to the point where the whole thing becomes utterly absurd - but the ref will still need to make his mind up based purely on what he is shown. Even a few millimetres would then
make it black and white.
Click to expand...
But there is a reasonable doubt of what's on screen is a true representation, if players are moving in opposite directions the difference between the frame before the ball is struck and striking the ball can be significant... Easily account for the inches Lingard was offside by for example.

It doesn't remove doubt at those margins it just moves it to the cameras rather than the ref.
 
r-u-s-x said:
But there is a reasonable doubt of what's on screen is a true representation, if players are moving in opposite directions the difference between the frame before the ball is struck and striking the ball can be significant... Easily account for the inches Lingard was offside by for example.

It doesn't remove doubt at those margins it just moves it to the cameras rather than the ref.
Click to expand...
I know, I know, I'm not disputing that. I'm saying the ref and we the viewers will still have to go only by what we are shown on the screen.
 
Spur of the moment said:
I know, I know, I'm not disputing that. I'm saying the ref and we the viewers will still have to go only by what we are shown on the screen.
Click to expand...

I doubt Lingards goal was offside - even with VAR. I understand the screen can still show a false impression so should the refs and governing bodies so if we are doing VAR offside should also be clear and obvious imo.
 
Spur of the moment said:
Agree. I've already stopped letting rip when we score in cup games, how sad is that.:eek:
Click to expand...

Thing is, there is already something that can cut short your wild celebrations....the linesman flag, it is effectively doing the same thing you suggest VAR is doing.

So although there are more rules that VAR will stick it's nose into, it not a brand new dynamic.
 
ricky2tricky4city said:
Thing is, there is already something that can cut short your wild celebrations....the linesman flag, it is effectively doing the same thing you suggest VAR is doing.

So although there are more rules that VAR will stick it's nose into, it not a brand new dynamic.
Click to expand...
flag is immediate - I look over as soon as a goal is scored for that indication.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back