VAR

[billyblue80]

Most of those conversations stem from an ignorance of the laws of the game by paid pundits and are by far the most tedious part of football coverage. Whatever floats your boat but if you get your excitement from a close call then doesn't those few seconds of VAR review lend to the tension?
And given the number of laws that are open to interpretation, a factor that is often highlighted by VAR, then the perceived dodgy decisions will still be there.

The "could have been a different result" conversations are the clearest indicator that the subject clearly doesn't warrant a conversation. If you have to jump off into what is essentially multiverse theory based fiction to fill the minutes then maybe it's time to cut down on the coverage.




Except they've clearly continued to do so since VAR came in.



There seems to be a narrative that VAR is going to lead to the disallowing of loads of goals that would previously have been given. The fact is that many attacking moves have often been incorrectly halted by the human eye's tendency to be deceived by fast movement, the pressure on officials to make the right decision and those crucial few millimetres.

Done correctly the safety net of VAR can also encourage benefit of the doubt being given to attacking sides and for spurious offsides to have less of an impact. The offsides that aren't flagged due to that safety net may well lead to many more goalscoring opportunities developing.

Offside was orginally about advantage, if your nostril hair or small toe is ahead of the line(which is a made up line by the way) you are gaining no advantage. To me the benefit of the doubt should be with the attacker if the body is in line then it's a goal for me, the shoulder is irrelevant . The game is about goals not science.

 

[gonetomorrow]

The game's about refs not recordings!

 

[ClausThomsen]

Offside was orginally about advantage, if your nostril hair or small toe is ahead of the line(which is a made up line by the way) you are gaining no advantage. To me the benefit of the doubt should be with the attacker if the body is in line then it's a goal for me, the shoulder is irrelevant . The game is about goals not science.

Do you not think that the line official could be more inclined to play attacking advantage with the knowledge that if they're wrong then VAR will rectify the mistake if it leads to a goal or similar game changing event? We've all seen flags go up when a player is onside just because the run is so well executed that it fools the defenders and the line official.

And whether it is foot, shoulder or any other part of the body with which a goal can be scored offside is offside. Not sure what this "made up line" is? The law is about being inline with another player rather than a set or imaginary line - drawing a line on VAR is just a way to visually check whether or not they're in-line.

For what it's worth I'd like to see the law changed to be more like rules around the ball being in or out of play. For a player to be offside their entire body should be offside rather than any small part they can legally play the ball with. But even for that you'd have to draw an imaginary line at some point if it's a tight call.

 

[billyblue80]

Do you not think that the line official could be more inclined to play attacking advantage with the knowledge that if they're wrong then VAR will rectify the mistake if it leads to a goal or similar game changing event? We've all seen flags go up when a player is onside just because the run is so well executed that it fools the defenders and the line official.

And whether it is foot, shoulder or any other part of the body with which a goal can be scored offside is offside. Not sure what this "made up line" is? The law is about being inline with another player rather than a set or imaginary line - drawing a line on VAR is just a way to visually check whether or not they're in-line.

For what it's worth I'd like to see the law changed to be more like rules around the ball being in or out of play. For a player to be offside their entire body should be offside rather than any small part they can legally play the ball with. But even for that you'd have to draw an imaginary line at some point if it's a tight call.

The line VAR draws is inaccurate and affected by camera angle and the visual of when the ball is played but it's been proven that is never exact too. For me instead of arguing over tiny fractions allow the daylight rule again. If there is daylight it's offside if you are in line you are on. The offside is offside stuff is anal, it wasn't always this exacting, who cares, does having your arm offside give you an advantage to score a goal? No. We haven't even got onto subjective decisions like red cards and penalties which will always be interpretation and for me more pens will be given as var is more fussy and will look at something multiple times until you convince the ref to give it. Var doesn't clear up as much as people think it just creates more anality for me, it should have just been brought in for clear and obvious errors by the ref but they are making it ref the game now so it won't end well for football. Football is about the game not the technology.

 

[TheBigIguana]

You know what I mean people feel they have to wait to see if it has been checked before they celebrate now.

They don't. People celebrated every goal when it went into the net. They might get nervous after but they still reacted the same.

 

[billyblue80]

They don't. People celebrated every goal when it went into the net. They might get nervous after but they still reacted the same.

You were there? A city fan on 606 said it spoilt it for him as he had to wait to see as VAR checked. Even more so after Sterling's goal(yes it was a goal) was disallowed.

 

[TheBigIguana]

You were there? A city fan on 606 said it spoilt it for him as he had to wait to see as VAR checked.

Oh ok what about the other 4000 that yelled out when they scored?

 

[billyblue80]

Oh ok what about the other 4000 that yelled out when they scored?

Whatever mate I am telling you for me it could ruin it because it brings doubt into your mind every time a goal is scored. Many others too it turns goals into a pantomime between fans as the cheer rings out from home fans when it's disallowd. Football is about the thrill of goals being scored not video technology.

 

[TheBigIguana]

Whatever mate I am telling you for me it could ruin it because it brings doubt into your mind every time a goal is scored. Many others too it turns goals into a pantomime between fans as the cheer rings out from home fans when it's disallowd. Football is about the thrill of goals being scored not video technology.

If you can't still enjoy your team scoring goals because video review exists that isn't really on video review.

 

[SantaClausisanEvertonian]

VAR is going to be the main talking point week in and week out. It really is ruining the game.
Pundits won't be talking so much about which teams and which players are excelling or underperforming. They'll be spending their time analysing marginal offsides and debatable handballs.
The City game was spoiled yesterday through microscopic and time consuming analysis from various angles.
And why on earth EVERY goal needs to scrutinised is beyond ridiculous.
VAR should be binned right now.

 

[ClausThomsen]

And why on earth EVERY goal needs to scrutinised is beyond ridiculous.

That's TV coverage not VAR. Plenty of goals were just given yesterday without long pauses for reviews.

 

[Berenger]

Fan of VAR for the obvious reasons, but one overlooked reason is how it shines a light on the inconsistency in the application of the laws across referees. Before they could get away with making bad decisions 'in the heat of the moment'; now, they have time to reflect so theoretically there should be no inconsistency in application.

 

[ClausThomsen]

The line VAR draws is inaccurate and affected by camera angle and the visual of when the ball is played but it's been proven that is never exact too. For me instead of arguing over tiny fractions allow the daylight rule again. If there is daylight it's offside if you are in line you are on. The offside is offside stuff is anal, it wasn't always this exacting, who cares, does having your arm offside give you an advantage to score a goal? No. We haven't even got onto subjective decisions like red cards and penalties which will always be interpretation and for me more pens will be given as var is more fussy and will look at something multiple times until you convince the ref to give it. Var doesn't clear up as much as people think it just creates more anality for me, it should have just been brought in for clear and obvious errors by the ref but they are making it ref the game now so it won't end well for football. Football is about the game not the technology.

The highlighted points....
--------
There's never been a daylight rule has there? And even if there was what if there is just the tiniest fraction of daylight? Talk about imaginary lines all you like but daylight being the measurement for offside is just as imaginary.

If your arm is beyond the defender then you're still not offside. It's not a part of the body you can score with.

Of course there'll still be subjective decisions. No proponent of VAR argues that this isn't the case or says the decisions will be 100% correct.

It has been brought in for clear, obvious and result affecting errors. Can you point out one match were VAR has officiated every aspect of the game or even 20% of the decisions given?

During a 2 year worldwide trial....
68.8% of matches had NO review
The average game had less than 5 checks...not reviews but merely checks to see if a review was necessary
Average time "lost" to VAR accounted for less than 1% of playing time
--------

I can fully understand the argument against VAR. Overall I'm only marginally in favour of it and not to a degree where I'd be bothered about it being scrapped but many arguments against it are based entirely on fabrication and a heavily biased negative perception of what is actually happening.

 

[Tubey]

Again it saves a dodgy decision altering the game and changing the result.

MASSIVE fan of it.

 

[roydo]

Why havnt United and Liverpool been told to put screens up in their grounds?

Like if say a promoted club didnt have one, we all know they would be told to get one or stay in the Championship.

edit. I am assuming the 3 that came up have got one ffs!