• Participation within this 'World Football' is only available to members who have had 5+ posts approved elsewhere.

VAR

Are you a FAN

  • Yes

    Votes: 126 30.4%

  • Nope

    Votes: 265 63.9%

  • What's VAR

    Votes: 3 0.7%

  • Pineapple on Toast

    Votes: 21 5.1%
  • Total voters
    415
Status
Not open for further replies.
The lack of consistency with decisions and referees/var referees blatantly choosing which decisions they want to overturn and ignore how long will it be before football clubs at the end of the seasons start to take the premier league/pgmol whoever responsible with legal action? These decisions could relegate/cost teams European football/ winning trophies and losses of multi millions of pounds. At the end of the day it's more than just a game it's a business which is what the premier league want.

This season has very much been trial and error and a write off but still there's so much at stake for those involved its a farce. I can't see how it's going to improve over time.
 

evertonandchelmsford said:
The lack of consistency with decisions and referees/var referees blatantly choosing which decisions they want to overturn and ignore how long will it be before football clubs at the end of the seasons start to take the premier league/pgmol whoever responsible with legal action? These decisions could relegate/cost teams European football/ winning trophies and losses of multi millions of pounds. At the end of the day it's more than just a game it's a business which is what the premier league want.

This season has very much been trial and error and a write off but still there's so much at stake for those involved its a farce. I can't see how it's going to improve over time.
Click to expand...

Behave, legal action? Mistakes have always been made, taking legal action in a Footy game against a referee making an error? Now that would be the end of the game. Who’s to say that thats the decision that relegated/costs them a Champions league spot when the season is over 38 games. I’m a manager. Am I gonna take legal action over my player missing a pen in the 1st game? My midfielder getting suspended in the middle of the season for an accumulation of cards that shouldn’t have been given? The ref in the 2nd game when he gave a free kick that wasn’t and they scored from it? etc etc etc etc etc etc. So many variables. Legal action. Ridiculous.
 
JamieH said:
It’s happened, twice that I can think of. Obvious handball by the RS v City, they go the other end and Fabinho scores a 25 yarder. Goal.
on Saturday too, Ings was tripped by Fabinho, 10 passes later Chamberlain scores. There’s probably more. But the penalty decisions in isolation you’d think they would be given, the home team then scores without the ball going out of play for a decision to be made, it takes a very brave ref not only to disallow the goal but award a pen against them, unfortunately we don’t have brave refs, they’re all poohouses.
Thing is, the ref can’t really stop play if he hasnt blown. He should blow for the pen and then look at it on the monitor and then make the decision but then every pen decision would have to be done that way which would make loads more stoppages. The Ings one on motd was a stonewaller, surely Stockley park can see it on the replay and inform the ref within seconds it’s a pen, why wait for a stoppage to have a review. It’s taking far too long for them to come to decisions even for the most blatant things. I don’t even know what’s a pen these days, some of the decisions that have been given/not given I don’t even think the officials do either.
Click to expand...
I don’t see why not. Play gets stopped for injuries by the ref.

I think the farce for the Aguero pen and the fact it could (should) have occurred in those to RS matches means it should be looked at.

I think the VAR ref should be able to call it quicker than they did for ageuro but I can understand them wanting to be absolutely sure, etc. But they could definitely call “this looks close. Stop the match while we look” after the first or second replay, what’s that 20 seconds?

If it’s a pen, go to the pen, if it’s not, drop ball.
 
MikeB1980 said:
I don’t see why not. Play gets stopped for injuries by the ref.

I think the farce for the Aguero pen and the fact it could (should) have occurred in those to RS matches means it should be looked at.

I think the VAR ref should be able to call it quicker than they did for ageuro but I can understand them wanting to be absolutely sure, etc. But they could definitely call “this looks close. Stop the match while we look” after the first or second replay, what’s that 20 seconds?

If it’s a pen, go to the pen, if it’s not, drop ball.
Click to expand...
They can’t stop play whilst there’s an attacking ’phase’ being played, the ref stopped it when the Spurs attack had stopped and City had possession.Cant really stop an attack to look at a review that maybe nothing and start with a drop ball.
 

JamieH said:
They can’t stop play whilst there’s an attacking ’phase’ being played, the ref stopped it when the Spurs attack had stopped and City had possession.Cant really stop an attack to look at a review that maybe nothing and start with a drop ball.
Click to expand...

Maybe I wasn’t clear. They should change the rules so you can. It’s need some common sense (which might be where it falls down) in that if there’s a clear attack in process you wait for it to finish, but plays out something like this...


A. Ref misses an incident or waves play on.
B. VAR check ensues immediately.
C. Looks likely that overturn is possible (doesn’t have to be probable).
D. Inform ref to stop match.
E. If not a clear attack stop match.
F. If clear attack, let it take lay out.
G. Give the sign and stop play if not yet out of play.
H. Review and give pen.
I. Review and give drop ball.

If the “attack” takes longer to end than a review, call it like it happened in the city match.

I personally hate VAR and would be rid of it, but as it’s not going anywhere, I think that would be a good change to it.

What’s to stop that happening in the final minute of injury time exactly how it played out in the city match, and the ball not going out of play and the VAR diva not making a decision before the final whistle?
 
MikeB1980 said:
Maybe I wasn’t clear. They should change the rules so you can. It’s need some common sense (which might be where it falls down) in that if there’s a clear attack in process you wait for it to finish, but plays out something like this...


A. Ref misses an incident or waves play on.
B. VAR check ensues immediately.
C. Looks likely that overturn is possible (doesn’t have to be probable).
D. Inform ref to stop match.
E. If not a clear attack stop match.
F. If clear attack, let it take lay out.
G. Give the sign and stop play if not yet out of play.
H. Review and give pen.
I. Review and give drop ball.

If the “attack” takes longer to end than a review, call it like it happened in the city match.

I personally hate VAR and would be rid of it, but as it’s not going anywhere, I think that would be a good change to it.

What’s to stop that happening in the final minute of injury time exactly how it played out in the city match, and the ball not going out of play and the VAR diva not making a decision before the final whistle?
Click to expand...

I can see where you’re coming from, but when is an attack a clear attack? What is a clear attack? The team in possession can pick 1 or 2 passes and turn turn defence into attack, your opening a can of worms of what is and isn’t a clear attack. There’s nothing wrong with the way it’s SUPPOSED to be now, just that the officials need to grow a set, instead of crapping out of big decisions.
I’d be pretty peeved if the ref stopped us in possession deeming it not a clear attack, only to be given a drop ball and the opposition time to reorganise, again, it comes down to interpretation of what is a ’clear’ attack and not. At least now, possession of the ball has to be given up or ball goes out. Therefore no obvious disadvantage. There’s no doubt that the decisions have to be made quicker and the officials have to be brave and disallow the goal and give the pen. Unless it’s an obvious pen and he can stop play whenever he hears the verdict.
 
JamieH said:
I can see where you’re coming from, but when is an attack a clear attack? What is a clear attack? The team in possession can pick 1 or 2 passes and turn turn defence into attack, your opening a can of worms of what is and isn’t a clear attack. There’s nothing wrong with the way it’s SUPPOSED to be now, just that the officials need to grow a set, instead of crapping out of big decisions.
I’d be pretty peeved if the ref stopped us in possession deeming it not a clear attack, only to be given a drop ball and the opposition time to reorganise, again, it comes down to interpretation of what is a ’clear’ attack and not. At least now, possession of the ball has to be given up or ball goes out. Therefore no obvious disadvantage. There’s no doubt that the decisions have to be made quicker and the officials have to be brave and disallow the goal and give the pen. Unless it’s an obvious pen and he can stop play whenever he hears the verdict.
Click to expand...
That’s why I said it would need common sense and why it probably wouldn’t work, but come on, we all know what is and isn’t an obvious attack. Refs also know, and they already play by the rule unofficially when we reach the last seconds of added time!!

But you’re wrong when you say there’s nothing wrong with it how it is. That the other day was rubbish and isn’t the game I have grown up watching.

Letting play go on for 2 minutes before coming back for something someone’s seen on the telly isn’t “nothing wrong with the way it is” in my book.

As I say, I’d bin it off completely, personally
 
MikeB1980 said:
That’s why I said it would need common sense and why it probably wouldn’t work, but come on, we all know what is and isn’t an obvious attack. Refs also know, and they already play by the rule unofficially when we reach the last seconds of added time!!

But you’re wrong when you say there’s nothing wrong with it how it is. That the other day was rubbish and isn’t the game I have grown up watching.

Letting play go on for 2 minutes before coming back for something someone’s seen on the telly isn’t “nothing wrong with the way it is” in my book.

As I say, I’d bin it off completely, personally
Click to expand...

‘I haven’t disputed that what happened the other day was wrong, if it was an obvious pen then the ref should have been informed quicker so he could stop play. But everyone goes on about them using the monitors (they should) . When do you think the ref would have stopped play? Exactly when he did is the answer.
If Spurs would have scored, he probably would have given the goal, as they have to the RS on 2 occasions this season. That’s what I mean about them growing a pair. There’s nothing wrong with the law as it is now, in theory.
If they’re gonna have a 3rd party giving decisions instead of the ref going over to a monitor they need to come to decisions quicker, as that’s why its the way it is this season, to supposedly keep stoppages to a minimum.The ref should be the only one giving decisions anyway IMO, Even some of the most obvious ones have taken minutes before they’ve been given. In that time the ref can give his judgement.But why bring another variable into the argument about whether it’s a clear attack or not.
 

riddick said:
One of these days a call isn't going to be made and then a goal scored going the other way then VAR will step in to not only reverse the goal going the other way, it gives a penalty or something.

Man it's going to go off then..
Click to expand...
Villa Bournemouth?
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

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

Register

Shop

Back
Top