VAR

[summerisle]

 

[Groucho]

I’d bin it

 

[Death]

It’s great at the moment, long may it continue.

Oh.

 

[Toast]

I was watching the Paraguay World Cup game last night.
Late on the ref went to the monitor to judge a penno call and got it right, just.

Then in injury time he sent 2 players off for a scuffle after a foul. Straight Reds.

He then went back to the monitor, reviewed the sendings off, decided one was just a yellow card and he got him back onto the pitch to carry on playing.

I can only imagine if that was a Derby at Goodison, incredible scenes.

 

[mrb85]

There's nothing dodgy about it. Everyone moaned before VAR came in that there was inconsistency in decisions. Now they're moaning that a decision is too close to call so should be ignored. Offside is offside, regardless of whether it's 1mm or 1m deffierence.

Where there was inconsistency was Pickford not being sent off but then richarlison being sent off. That seems to be due to a misunderstanding of the laws of the game. Pickford's challenge was far worse than richarlison's as well.

Maybe so, but you do realise that the offside lines we see on the screen are not magically imposed at the precise instant the pass leaves the boot of the man in possession. They are 'drawn on' by the VAR official using his best judgement as to the split second at which the pass was made. So, once again, subject to human error. Hence the 'too close to call' idea.

 

[trueblue84]

Maybe so, but you do realise that the offside lines we see on the screen are not magically imposed at the precise instant the pass leaves the boot of the man in possession. They are 'drawn on' by the VAR official using his best judgement as to the split second at which the pass was made. So, once again, subject to human error. Hence the 'too close to call' idea.

But the only people complaining about those decisions are the fans of the team on the receiving end. I've not heard anyone else come out and say "that was never offside". Even on the Mane one in the Derby, the narrative was "yes, it was offside but it was close so it's not fair". If it's applied consistently then it is fair. You're never going to get it flawless. If they change it to give the benefit to the attacking player, it makes it much more open to interpretation.

 

[trueblue84]

Liverpool vs Leicester: VAR official switched as David Coote taken off duty

VAR from Liverpool vs Everton derby last month taken off duty for Liverpool vs Leicester game in Premier League on Sunday; Premier League leaders visit third-placed champions live on Sky Sports at 7.15pm

www.skysports.com

I see the rs have influenced the premier League again, despite them backing up all of the var calls from the Derby.

Even gary "rat-face" neville has questioned the decision.

 

[Lanolin]

But the only people complaining about those decisions are the fans of the team on the receiving end. I've not heard anyone else come out and say "that was never offside". Even on the Mane one in the Derby, the narrative was "yes, it was offside but it was close so it's not fair". If it's applied consistently then it is fair. You're never going to get it flawless. If they change it to give the benefit to the attacking player, it makes it much more open to interpretation.

No that's not true at all. People complain about the principle of VAR all the time. I said to my red mates straight after the derby, I'm absolutely laughing my head off now but i'd be absolutely furious if the same thing had happened in reverse. It's perfectly possible to take your tinted specs off and look at things as a whole.

 

[trueblue84]

No that's not true at all. People complain about the principle of VAR all the time. I said to my red mates straight after the derby, I'm absolutely laughing my head off now but i'd be absolutely furious if the same thing had happened in reverse. It's perfectly possible to take your tinted specs off and look at things as a whole.

But the rule is any part of a player's body (now including the arm)... Are you saying there wasn't part of his body offside and they manipulated the line?

I'm not being biased as the image they used in making the decision was shared for everyone to see.

I get the argument that it is still a person who decides when the ball left the players boot, but with the help of the tech, that is still going to have a far higher success rate than no support at all. I thought that was well known? Didn't sky do an analysis of incorrect decisions pre and post var which backed that up?

 

[Lanolin]

But the rule is any part of a player's body (now including the arm)... Are you saying there wasn't part of his body offside and they manipulated the line?

I'm not being biased as the image they used in making the decision was shared for everyone to see.

I get the argument that it is still a person who decides when the ball left the players boot, but with the help of the tech, that is still going to have a far higher success rate than no support at all. I thought that was well known? Didn't sky do an analysis of incorrect decisions pre and post var which backed that up?

I was literally just saying it's wrong to say that the only people who moan about it are people who've just been screwed over, not sure where you've got all that from.

The simple truth is that the majority of fans (and players, and managers, and pundits) don't think things should be analysed to the nth degree, and whether someone is technically offside by a millimetre or not isn't all that important to them. Truthfully, if that goal had been given in the derby I wouldn't have been moaning saying the linesman or VAR had got it wrong. I didn't used to with very marginal decisions pre VAR either. Overturning absolute howlers is one thing, but I don't really expect clinical precision when it comes to decision making personally.

 

[Sheedy's right knee.]

I get the impression the refs want VAR to fail, and like every other rule imposed they are straight to the letter instead of applying common sense. They get away with it too because there is no one independent to scrutine when mistakes are clearly made. Every week not know and again.

 

[trueblue84]

I was literally just saying it's wrong to say that the only people who moan about it are people who've just been screwed over, not sure where you've got all that from.

The simple truth is that the majority of fans (and players, and managers, and pundits) don't think things should be analysed to the nth degree, and whether someone is technically offside by a millimetre or not isn't all that important to them. Truthfully, if that goal had been given in the derby I wouldn't have been moaning saying the linesman or VAR had got it wrong. I didn't used to with very marginal decisions pre VAR either. Overturning absolute howlers is one thing, but I don't really expect clinical precision when it comes to decision making personally.

But that's what tech gives you... We can now review to the nth degree. I'm much happier with that than blatantly wrong decisions which did seem to have a bias towards the "big" teams. Football is big business now with gambling as well so removing as much human decision as possible can only be a good thing.

Another good example is the penalty decisions this season. They've been fair across the board as opposed to past games where bigger teams have had the rub of the green.

 

[Lanolin]

But that's what tech gives you... We can now review to the nth degree. I'm much happier with that than blatantly wrong decisions which did seem to have a bias towards the "big" teams. Football is big business now with gambling as well so removing as much human decision as possible can only be a good thing.

Another good example is the penalty decisions this season. They've been fair across the board as opposed to past games where bigger teams have had the rub of the green.

All about opinions I suppose. For me VAR sucks the life out of football. Seeing Scotland's keeper make the biggest save of life and not be able to celebrate until VAR checked it was ok was just the perfect illustration of how the game has been taken away from the people who love it so that 'big business and gamblers' get the right result.

 

[trueblue84]

All about opinions I suppose. For me VAR sucks the life out of football. Seeing Scotland's keeper make the biggest save of life and not be able to celebrate until VAR checked it was ok was just the perfect illustration of how the game has been taken away from the people who love it so that 'big business and gamblers' get the right result.

Yep, agree hat the game isn't about the sport anymore, but it hasn't been for years.

 

[mrb85]

But the rule is any part of a player's body (now including the arm)... Are you saying there wasn't part of his body offside and they manipulated the line?

I'm not being biased as the image they used in making the decision was shared for everyone to see.

I get the argument that it is still a person who decides when the ball left the players boot, but with the help of the tech, that is still going to have a far higher success rate than no support at all. I thought that was well known? Didn't sky do an analysis of incorrect decisions pre and post var which backed that up?

I may be wrong but I think that is a count involving only the decisions that went to VAR. How about all those that VAR hardly addressed to any degree yet we were all puzzled as to why not when we have had the chance to look at the match film. And anyway, presumably in its assessment of offside incidents SKY was taking as gospel that the VAR line across the pitch was representing exactly when the ball was played forward even though it's accepted by everyone that the line's position will invariably be inaccurate, however small the error.