VAR

[ClausThomsen]

And there is a massive need for the fans to know what is going on. It's honestly the best way to get VAR more accepted. Let the fans know what's happening.

I've been to many games without VAR where thousands of fans have been asking "What's he gave that for?". No explanation was given and life went on.

You can give fans the most detailed explanation ever but if it's against their team they won't accept it. There'll always be a counter-argument which is often based on not understanding or knowing the actual laws of the game.

 

[TheBigIguana]

I've been to many games without VAR where thousands of fans have been asking "What's he gave that for?". No explanation was given and life went on.

You can give fans the most detailed explanation ever but if it's against their team they won't accept it. There'll always be a counter-argument which is often based on not understanding or knowing the actual laws of the game.

It was fine before so we never have to change is the argument I keep getting here and I find that to be really a bad argument but whatever. We used to do a lot of things that weren't the end of the world but decided to stop doing them as we learned more. But some people aren't moving.

 

[ClausThomsen]

It was fine before so we never have to change is the argument I keep getting here and I find that to be really a bad argument but whatever. We used to do a lot of things that weren't the end of the world but decided to stop doing them as we learned more. But some people aren't moving.

But it's an established fact that decisions don't have to be explained to the crowd. And it's also a fact that the explanations will be completely disregarded anyway if it isn't what a fan wants to hear.

Football fans at the ground are not looking to hear reasoned logic and to be corrected on the actual laws of the game. Fume is fume.

 

[TheBigIguana]

But it's an established fact that decisions don't have to be explained to the crowd. And it's also a fact that the explanations will be completely disregarded anyway if it isn't what a fan wants to hear.

Football fans at the ground are not looking to hear reasoned logic and to be corrected on the actual laws of the game. Fume is fume.

Which still doesn't mean that you can't do it. I go to NFL games all the time. The referee explains something and if it goes against your team people get mad. It doesn't take away the value of actually hearing what went on.

 

[SteChallinor]

Which still doesn't mean that you can't do it. I go to NFL games all the time. The referee explains something and if it goes against your team people get mad. It doesn't take away the value of actually hearing what went on.

NFL is the worst example of why any form of replay is a good idea.

I love watching NFL, but each of the 3 offseasons before this one they had to rewrite the rules to try and clarify what a catch is - one of the keystones of the game - because replay was destroying it in super slomo.

This offseason they’ve torn up the rule books on when to use replay purely because of online backlash to an incident that affected a team that wouldn’t have even been playing in the game if a similar foul had been given against them when it should the round before.

And the new use of replay even has to have a caveat that on Hail Marys, the refs and coaches will agree not to enforce a foul, even if they see it.

I love NFL, but it’s the example of how wrong replay can go, rather than the reason we should want it in football.

We’ve seen where it can take us.

 

[kenada_blue]

Just because things are fine now doesn't mean they can't be better.

And the final in the Women's final was fine despite VAR making a decision. I disagree with that argument completely. Atmosphere is already crap 80% of the time as well. If anything listening to Mike Dean explain how Salah's dive was ok because someone scraped a fingernail on him would incite the crowd.

The point is to make the interpretation known to the fans so isn't it better than just letting things go? I'm still lost as to why the fans can't be made aware of what the ref is thinking.

Just don't think something that small would improve a already flawed system IMO

 

[kenada_blue]

But it's an established fact that decisions don't have to be explained to the crowd. And it's also a fact that the explanations will be completely disregarded anyway if it isn't what a fan wants to hear.

Football fans at the ground are not looking to hear reasoned logic and to be corrected on the actual laws of the game. Fume is fume.

Which VAR doesn't fix either

 

[TheBigIguana]

NFL is the worst example of why any form of replay is a good idea.

I love watching NFL, but each of the 3 offseasons before this one they had to rewrite the rules to try and clarify what a catch is - one of the keystones of the game - because replay was destroying it in super slomo.

This offseason they’ve torn up the rule books on when to use replay purely because of online backlash to an incident that affected a team that wouldn’t have even been playing in the game if a similar foul had been given against them when it should the round before.

And the new use of replay even has to have a caveat that on Hail Marys, the refs and coaches will agree not to enforce a foul, even if they see it.

I love NFL, but it’s the example of how wrong replay can go, rather than the reason we should want it in football.

We’ve seen where it can take us.

I just don't see it that way. NFL replay messed up what a catch was because the catch rule was bad not replay. The same way VAR is messing up what a handball is because the handball rule is bad not VAR.

The England-Cameroon game at the women's tournament would have been 1-1 instead of 2-0 on two missed decisions without VAR and I'm supposed to think that this system is a bad thing overall even if it is imperfect now? I can't do that.

 

[MikeH72]

Bin it off. Officials are too thick to make it work.

 

[Saint Domingo]

What’s this new rule change about head to head records? The reports on it seem to be confusing, is this to replace goal difference in separating the teams?

 

[Moomin]

What’s this new rule change about head to head records? The reports on it seem to be confusing, is this to replace goal difference in separating the teams?

Using VAR for it??

 

[Saint Domingo]

Using VAR for it??

Couldn’t find apropyiate fred m8.

 

[Seamus Colemole]

What’s this new rule change about head to head records? The reports on it seem to be confusing, is this to replace goal difference in separating the teams?

https://www.premierleague.com/news/1262217

If two or more clubs finish level in the table when competing for the title or European qualification, or when relegation is at stake, their records in the head-to-head matches will now be used to separate them.
In previous seasons, teams involved in these specific battles who finished with the same points total, goal difference and number of goals scored would be pitted against each other in a playoff.
But that extra match is now less likely.
In 2019/20 the team who have collected the most points in the head-to-head duels between the sides lying level on points, goal difference and number of goals scored, will take the highest finishing position, while the team with the fewest will take the lowest place.
If clubs still cannot be separated, the team who scored the most goals away from home in the head-to-head matches will get the highest position.
Only if the clubs remain level in the table after this will a playoff be arranged, at a neutral ground, with the format, timing and venue being determined by the Premier League Board.

League placing was previously decided like this :

1. points
2. goal difference
3. goals scored
4. play off

Now it's decided like this :

1. points
2. goal difference
3. goals scored
4. head to head points
5. head to head away goals
6. play off

Some reports are confusing cause they state that head to head is replacing goal difference as the decider between teams level on points but that appears to be incorrect, it's just an extra way of seperating teams before a play off.

 

[Saint Domingo]

https://www.premierleague.com/news/1262217

If two or more clubs finish level in the table when competing for the title or European qualification, or when relegation is at stake, their records in the head-to-head matches will now be used to separate them.
In previous seasons, teams involved in these specific battles who finished with the same points total, goal difference and number of goals scored would be pitted against each other in a playoff.
But that extra match is now less likely.
In 2019/20 the team who have collected the most points in the head-to-head duels between the sides lying level on points, goal difference and number of goals scored, will take the highest finishing position, while the team with the fewest will take the lowest place.
If clubs still cannot be separated, the team who scored the most goals away from home in the head-to-head matches will get the highest position.
Only if the clubs remain level in the table after this will a playoff be arranged, at a neutral ground, with the format, timing and venue being determined by the Premier League Board.

League placing was previously decided like this :

1. points
2. goal difference
3. goals scored
4. play off

Now it's decided like this :

1. points
2. goal difference
3. goals scored
4. head to head points
5. head to head away goals
6. play off

Some reports are confusing cause they state that head to head is replacing goal difference as the decider between teams level on points but that appears to be incorrect, it's just an extra way of seperating teams before a play off.

Thought so. Seems crazy to do away with goal difference.

 

[Saint Domingo]

Interim CEO of the prem saying that referees probably won’t consult the pitchside monitors when using VAR next season. So basically they’ll have Clattenburg, Moss, Atkinson watching a video monitor in a room somewhere telling the referee to give whatever decision they want to benefit the big teams and no one in the stadium will be any the wiser until after the game.