VAR


JelavicBrate2 said:
Just scrap VAR simple as. It's ruined football completely, don't know how anyone can defend it. Deli Ali punched ball out of box and it wasn't given as a penalty. As I said on other thread, other than Clattenburgs performance most refereeing performances I've seen have been fair. Refs make wildly inconsistent decisions based on which team they're giving decisions for and against. Look at Tarkowskis goal in derby, brought to VAR just to look for any reason to disallow it. Anyone who wants VAR baffles me.
Click to expand...

VAR is just a name for the process, it is not directly making the decision. That is still a human. That is the issue. On Monday, there was the opportunity for another human who saw exactly what happened with Tarkowski's arm to say to the ref, we need to make sure we get this right, I am sending you over to have a look for yourself.

It is a video referral system, the Tarkowski goal is a great example of how it doesn't work, in its current format. The Young pen against Utd as well. It was a human controlling it, they were the ones that were looking for an angle where it showed something clear, it was a human deciding not to show the ref an angle where Young was clearly fouled.

Nobody here is defending it. By wanting improvements is not defending it. In fact it is the complete opposite, it is criticising it and I do hate how it works. Where we differ is that I think it can be used to mitigate big errors and get the right decisions on a more regular basis, if it was used by fair and non corrupt/competent people. That is the long shot, and is probably not possible in the current footballing environment but it is still my opinion that VAR itself is not a bad idea, just like the TMO is not a bad idea, just like other sports, or even different footballing leagues, where it is used to a higher competence level, and helps backup an on field officials.
 
Handball in the box should go back to how it was. If the ball hits anywhere below the shoulder it's a pen. Doesn't matter if your arm is raised, by your side or scratching your itchy arse.
 
wandyr79 said:
VAR is just a name for the process, it is not directly making the decision. That is still a human. That is the issue. On Monday, there was the opportunity for another human who saw exactly what happened with Tarkowski's arm to say to the ref, we need to make sure we get this right, I am sending you over to have a look for yourself.

It is a video referral system, the Tarkowski goal is a great example of how it doesn't work, in its current format. The Young pen against Utd as well. It was a human controlling it, they were the ones that were looking for an angle where it showed something clear, it was a human deciding not to show the ref an angle where Young was clearly fouled.

Nobody here is defending it. By wanting improvements is not defending it. In fact it is the complete opposite, it is criticising it and I do hate how it works. Where we differ is that I think it can be used to mitigate big errors and get the right decisions on a more regular basis, if it was used by fair and non corrupt/competent people. That is the long shot, and is probably not possible in the current footballing environment but it is still my opinion that VAR itself is not a bad idea, just like the TMO is not a bad idea, just like other sports, or even different footballing leagues, where it is used to a higher competence level, and helps backup an on field officials.
Click to expand...

wandyr79 said:
VAR is just a name for the process, it is not directly making the decision. That is still a human. That is the issue. On Monday, there was the opportunity for another human who saw exactly what happened with Tarkowski's arm to say to the ref, we need to make sure we get this right, I am sending you over to have a look for yourself.

It is a video referral system, the Tarkowski goal is a great example of how it doesn't work, in its current format. The Young pen against Utd as well. It was a human controlling it, they were the ones that were looking for an angle where it showed something clear, it was a human deciding not to show the ref an angle where Young was clearly fouled.

Nobody here is defending it. By wanting improvements is not defending it. In fact it is the complete opposite, it is criticising it and I do hate how it works. Where we differ is that I think it can be used to mitigate big errors and get the right decisions on a more regular basis, if it was used by fair and non corrupt/competent people. That is the long shot, and is probably not possible in the current footballing environment but it is still my opinion that VAR itself is not a bad idea, just like the TMO is not a bad idea, just like other sports, or even different footballing leagues, where it is used to a higher competence level, and helps backup an on field officials.
Click to expand...
My issue is lack of accountability, Clattenburg didn't officiate an Everton game for five years after performance against us. Officials would get demoted to Championship after bad performances. Other than penalty against Newcastle, I haven't seen VAR work in our favour. Decisions are completely inconsistent, even when refs see identical decisions. We get a penalty against Brighton for exactly same situation as, Konates handball against us.
 

Amw79 said:
Thought I’d see what Chat GPT thought. After initially playing both sides, it said No Pen. Maybe just refer all pens to chat gpt and get rid of VAR. Reckon more people would accept that over the nobs sat in the var room.

——————

Got it — no fence-sitting. If I’m the referee on the day, seeing that incident in real time, here’s my call:

❌ Not a penalty.

Here’s why:
  • Arm position: Tarkowski’s arms were tucked close to his body. That’s a natural position for a defender.
  • Body movement: Yes, he leans, but that’s part of an attempt to block with his torso, not to use his arm. His arm doesn’t create extra barrier space in a way that the law is supposed to punish.
  • Spirit of the law: The intent behind the handball rule is to stop defenders unfairly enlarging themselves with outstretched arms, not to punish unavoidable ricochets onto arms held naturally.
  • Consistency: If you start giving these, you’re effectively saying defenders must play with arms behind their back at all times, which makes normal defending impossible.
So my whistle stays down. Ball hit the arm, yes — but in a natural, tucked position. Play on.
Click to expand...
I work in IT, and I consistently fail to see applications for AI in advance of someone figuring it out ahead of me.

I agree that many would accept an AI solution to this. There is still the possibility of a thumb on the scale in favour of the sky6, but I would think that would be harder to keep secret...always the risk of prompts discovering it.

From there it is only a matter of time until we see AI refereeing the entire game, at first as an aide but eventually as the entire referee crew.

Frankly it is frightening. I put it at 50 50 I'm dead of old age first. I'm only 50, but you have to weigh in that fifa and football as a whole are dinosaurs.
 
Problem with football is it's too ingrained into people's psyche from a young age. The officials must have an interest in football to want to do the job and they will carry an inherent bias. Maybe we beat their team when they were young, or they got abuse on touchline that they carry with them.

We see far too many incorrect decisions for there not to be, or it's corruption from the very top dictating what result they expect.
 

pfim said:
It's not a penalty. It's especially bad that the referee wasn't sent to the screen considering it wasn't his call to begin with.
Click to expand...

All pens should require the ref to go to the screen

NO VAR interference or interruption

This would make it part of the “ normal process”

Meaning the ref would be able to review his decision and reverse it easier if needed.

He wouldn’t be “ stitching “ up a mate by going against their opinion etc
 
What happened in the Chelsea game last night? Commentators were saying because VAR overturned the Paqueta goal the referee Oliver would need to explain it live in the stadium, yet he didn't. I guess this is gonna be another case of selective officiating? But in one of the games I watched last week the referee explained a decision live. Just a completely flawed and open to interpretation system to enable the officials to dictate exact results.
 
GoldenToffee said:
What happened in the Chelsea game last night? Commentators were saying because VAR overturned the Paqueta goal the referee Oliver would need to explain it live in the stadium, yet he didn't. I guess this is gonna be another case of selective officiating? But in one of the games I watched last week the referee explained a decision live. Just a completely flawed and open to interpretation system to enable the officials to dictate exact results.
Click to expand...

Im still convinced as soon as Michael Oliver speaks on that Mic he'll sound like Joe Pasquale. Maybe thats why they swerved it.
 
The binman chronicles said:
Problem with football is it's too ingrained into people's psyche from a young age. The officials must have an interest in football to want to do the job and they will carry an inherent bias. Maybe we beat their team when they were young, or they got abuse on touchline that they carry with them.

We see far too many incorrect decisions for there not to be, or it's corruption from the very top dictating what result they expect.
Click to expand...
Exactly, they do not seem to understand, or want understand any kind of bias (conscious or unconscious) and would rather stick their heads in the sand and pretend it cant happen, our produce an alternate narrative
 

Welcome

Join Grand Old Team to get involved in the Everton discussion. Signing up is quick, easy, and completely free.

Register

Shop

Back
Top