VAR

[kenada_blue]

It's a women commentating

 

[kenada_blue]

We will have atleast 10 goals ruled out by VAR this season.

Against City etc and lose.

But fairs fair

 

[billyblue80]

Spot on

 

[billyblue80]

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 was 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.

I don't think daylight was a law as much as guidance at one point. Yes but Sterling still had a goal ruled out for his arm which is silly. Fair enough mate I just think refs in this country are cowards so will end up relying on it more and more. It isn't just for clear and obvious though is it? I would be in favour if it was. Also, it takes too bloody long. I don't like it personally especially the issue around celebrating a goal and the disallowing of scoring of a goal becoming a celebration I dont like that. But there you go it's happening as you say.

 

[Cool_Blue]

What I really hate is this “second phase” nonsense was perfectly highlighted by that disallowed 3rd City goal.
A massive argument raged about whether Sterling was offside by a nose, completely ignoring the fact that Jesus was about 3 yards offside when Sterling got the ball, which he then squared to Jesus to score.

How can you say Jesus wasn’t interfering with play when the pass to Sterling was made? He was clearly gaining an advantage which came to fruition a second later. If Sterling had scored himself, fine, but he didn’t. Ridiculous.

 

[Everton1970]

Sterling was offside in the images VAR shown.........but, only a part of the body that can play the ball is offside, in this case, his shoulder, not his arm.................but, there was literally millimetres in it. The vertical lines drawn down to the ground to ‘prove’ he was offside could depend on whereabouts that line started on each individuals shoulder! Sounds silly but it’s right. Also the images we were shown, the ball wasn’t in frame, so impossible to make a judgement when ball was played.

 

[Parker]

Nah, bin this thought off straight away. We dont need offsides, which are one way or the other, being subjective. You're either offside or your not. No matter how long the decision takes to arrive to, they need to get it right.

 

[kenada_blue]

Nah, bin this thought off straight away. We dont need offsides, which are one way or the other, being subjective. You're either offside or your not. No matter how long the decision takes to arrive to, they need to get it right.

The game has been fine for 100s of years without the need for someone to see it a toe is slightly in front of the last defender.

Just because technology can pinpoint 0.01 seconds of movement of the human body, doesn't mean a player has gained a meaningful advantage over someone else.

Personally it should be used to help the linesman if they've missed something not become the 2nd authentication for them. Same with the ref

 

[Parker]

The game has been fine for 100s of years without the need for someone to see it a toe is slightly in front of the last defender.

Just because technology can pinpoint 0.01 seconds of movement of the human body, doesn't mean a player has gained a meaningful advantage over someone else.

Its black or white though. If we have the technology to get it pinpoint, then why does a decision, which is either offside or not offside, need to be questioned. Their shouldn't be a grey area or margin of error when it isn't subjective.

 

[kenada_blue]

Its black or white though. If we have the technology to get it pinpoint, then why does a decision, which is either offside or not offside, need to be questioned. Their shouldn't be a grey area or margin of error when it isn't subjective.

I understand that. I've just have the problem with the implementation that should be the other way round (the refs etc go to VAR not vice versa).

The old saying of no one ever said that they could, the question is whether they should.

And fully expect "rule changes" to implement both. Technology with dictate rules rather than the game.

 

[Parker]

I understand that. I've just have the problem with the implementation that should be the other way round (the refs etc go to VAR not vice versa).

The old saying of no one ever said that they could, the question is whether they should.

And fully expect "rule changes" to implement both

But if it gets to the point where it needs to be over a certain distance to be ruled an obvious error, if you check that then you are gonna confirm if its offside or not in the process. So if they are offside but not enough to be overturned then the team on the receiving end of that decision are gonna feel aggrieved. Whereas if it remains how it is, no one should feel aggrieved as the decision is right.

In my eyes it should be like Tennis really, where you get a challenge a half, or whatever, and that's it. But even they should be purely for subjective decisions such as fouls. Not offsides where it is black or white.

 

[Connor]

"Technology will kill post-match debates"

Well, that argument is pretty dead and buried.

 

[JimmyK]

Its black or white though. If we have the technology to get it pinpoint, then why does a decision, which is either offside or not offside, need to be questioned. Their shouldn't be a grey area or margin of error when it isn't subjective.

It's still subjective though. Andy Gray did a piece on it the other day which highlights it well, that depending on which frame you use to decide when the ball was kicked, a player can move from onside to offside and vice versa. You can't perfectly define when a pass was made because it isn't instantaneous, so the decision you're making is still subjective, only now over a matter of millimetres.

 

[degsy]

Not been a problem for us...and we have bigger problems than that at the moment.
But you can be sure once we fix the on field problems and get going, VAR will kick in to pull the rug out from under us

 

[Khalekan]

"Technology will kill post-match debates"

Well, that argument is pretty dead and buried.

lol