VAR

[Lanolin]

The issue with VAR is that they've wildly overestimated the impact it can have on decision making when 90% of the calls are going to be subjective anyway. If it had just been implemented as a sort of backstop to prevent absolute shockers it would be great - the Maradona/Henry type handballs, the blatantly offside goals, things like the Suarez challenge on Mirallas or the Rodwell derby red card etc just being looked at again and somebody saying ah no you've got that wrong would be brilliant - but microanalysing every single moment in the game and going looking for things is just ruining the game as a spectacle.

 

[Toffeepot]

The issue with VAR is that they've wildly overestimated the impact it can have on decision making when 90% of the calls are going to be subjective anyway. If it had just been implemented as a sort of backstop to prevent absolute shockers it would be great - the Maradona/Henry type handballs, the blatantly offside goals, things like the Suarez challenge on Mirallas or the Rodwell derby red card etc just being looked at again and somebody saying ah no you've got that wrong would be brilliant - but microanalysing every single moment in the game and going looking for things is just ruining the game as a spectacle.

They could decrease the subjectivity by making the rules less vague. If it means writing out every example of what is or isn't a foul in minute detail then so be it. Compilation should not be that difficult, cross checked against the actual factual footage leaves far less room for subjective interpretation.
And 'clear and obvious' needs to be binned immediately. Oxymoron if ever there was one

 

[Tipp blue]

They could decrease the subjectivity by making the rules less vague. If it means writing out every example of what is or isn't a foul in minute detail then so be it. Compilation should not be that difficult, cross checked against the actual factual footage leaves far less room for subjective interpretation.
And 'clear and obvious' needs to be binned immediately. Oxymoron if ever there was one

Clear and obvious was fine but should come with a time limit to make the decison, if it takes more than say 15 seconds then it's not clear and obvious so the call on the field stands.

 

[Toffeepot]

Clear and obvious was fine but should come with a time limit to make the decison, if it takes more than say 15 seconds then it's not clear and obvious so the call on the field stands.

Exactly. Either implement it in a way that proves a clear and obvious error like you suggest with a time limit or bin it.
Could you see them holding themselves to account on any time limit though? They dont even do that with injury time

 

[pfim]

The issue with VAR is that they've wildly overestimated the impact it can have on decision making when 90% of the calls are going to be subjective anyway. If it had just been implemented as a sort of backstop to prevent absolute shockers it would be great - the Maradona/Henry type handballs, the blatantly offside goals, things like the Suarez challenge on Mirallas or the Rodwell derby red card etc just being looked at again and somebody saying ah no you've got that wrong would be brilliant - but microanalysing every single moment in the game and going looking for things is just ruining the game as a spectacle.

I've said a few times they could limit its use by implementing a challenge system. You get one challenge per match, if you win that you get another. Max 2.

Subjectivity isn't going away, you can't legislate that out. Even providing a backstop adds the element of subjectivity. Put the onus on the teams to raise their hand, in a limited manner, and you'll see less mm reviews of offside etc.

 

[Lanolin]

They could decrease the subjectivity by making the rules less vague. If it means writing out every example of what is or isn't a foul in minute detail then so be it. Compilation should not be that difficult, cross checked against the actual factual footage leaves far less room for subjective interpretation.
And 'clear and obvious' needs to be binned immediately. Oxymoron if ever there was one

I don't think you can (or should really) get rid of the subjectivity side of it. Realistically there is just no way on earth you can define exactly how much force you can do something with before it becomes a foul so short of just saying it's a total non-contact sport there has to be subjectivity to the decisions.

I've said a few times they could limit its use by implementing a challenge system. You get one challenge per match, if you win that you get another. Max 2.

Subjectivity isn't going away, you can't legislate that out. Even providing a backstop adds the element of subjectivity. Put the onus on the teams to raise their hand, in a limited manner, and you'll see less mm reviews of offside etc.

Personally I'm not massively keen on the challenge idea. I get the plus points of it but I just don't really think that's how it should work, partly because of the subjectivity of it (imagine you get one challenge, use it on something like the West Ham handball where VAR says nah what are you on about it's fine and then have to just suck it up), partly because it shouldn't be up to teams to work out whether the officials have messed up it should be the officials who deal with it, and partly because it's a low scoring and relatively low incident sport, so you'll effectively just see people challenging goals for the sake of it because there's few enough of them to make it worth a try and it's not hugely likely something else will happen that would make it more worthwhile.

When I was talking about the backstop idea it's more as just a general hoovering up of absolute clangers. Someone else is watching the game and sees something the ref missed or sees a replay of something and realises it's worse/not as bad as the referee initially thought and just says sorry you're going to have to change that you've made a really bad decision. That way you're not looking at mm offsides or watching a challenge 25 times in slow motion, you're just clearing up genuinely bad decisions rather than changing decisions that nobody would ever have complained about before. You can't put the genie back in the bottle so they can't start doing it that way now, but to me that's how it should have been implemented from the start.

 

[IveGotThe]

To think Li Tie is in jail for match fixing and this lot are getting away with it every week.

 

[mahermi1]

It can't be a foul unless the balls in play. Hence why you get all the pushing and shoving on corners before the whistle goes for it to be taken. Not saying I agree with it but that's the rule. I didn't see the City game so I'm not sure if the Bernardo Silva one was before the whistle was blown but I gather that's the reason they didn't look at it

To be honest I would like to see video evidence of that, because the distance from the incident to the corner flag is a fairly large area. Besides I know we don't make the rules but if you're getting held behind around the waist for me it's a foul even before the whistle has gone, for example does that mean you are alright to boot someone as long as the whistle hasn't gone ? My point is a foul is a foul or it should be.

 

[mahermi1]

An upper cut would be classed as violent conduct so treated differently, but you surely aren't surprised to find that normal fouls committed when the ball's not in play aren't given? Have you never watched a game before? I haven't seen a proper real time replay of the Rohl one that shows when the ball came into play compared to when the foul took place so I don't know if it should be an excuse for that particular one, but as a general principle it's pretty well established.

So grabbing someone forcefully and throwing them to the ground isn't violent conduct ?

 

[DOMNOLAN]

It can't be a foul unless the balls in play. Hence why you get all the pushing and shoving on corners before the whistle goes for it to be taken. Not saying I agree with it but that's the rule. I didn't see the City game so I'm not sure if the Bernardo Silva one was before the whistle was blown but I gather that's the reason they didn't look at it

They did look at it. They said the ball wasn’t in play. The ball was in play. They got caught lying. They then changed the excuse to ‘the amount of the foul that was happening whilst the ball was in play wasn’t enough’.

They got caught lying.

 

[DOMNOLAN]

To be honest I would like to see video evidence of that, because the distance from the incident to the corner flag is a fairly large area. Besides I know we don't make the rules but if you're getting held behind around the waist for me it's a foul even before the whistle has gone, for example does that mean you are alright to boot someone as long as the whistle hasn't gone ? My point is a foul is a foul or it should be.

Ball was in play

 

[Lanolin]

So grabbing someone forcefully and throwing them to the ground isn't violent conduct ?

In context NO, and again this is pretty well established if you actually watch football. I'm not being funny saying it, I just genuinely don't understand where this angle is coming from because we're talking about stuff that happens literally every game and we all see how it plays out. Peopl edo not get sent off for grappling at corners, why are we pretending that's a thing. This whole thing just feels the same as someone saying 'oh so you're not allowed to pick the ball up now is that it?'.

 

[pfim]

I don't think you can (or should really) get rid of the subjectivity side of it. Realistically there is just no way on earth you can define exactly how much force you can do something with before it becomes a foul so short of just saying it's a total non-contact sport there has to be subjectivity to the decisions.

Personally I'm not massively keen on the challenge idea. I get the plus points of it but I just don't really think that's how it should work, partly because of the subjectivity of it (imagine you get one challenge, use it on something like the West Ham handball where VAR says nah what are you on about it's fine and then have to just suck it up), partly because it shouldn't be up to teams to work out whether the officials have messed up it should be the officials who deal with it, and partly because it's a low scoring and relatively low incident sport, so you'll effectively just see people challenging goals for the sake of it because there's few enough of them to make it worth a try and it's not hugely likely something else will happen that would make it more worthwhile.

When I was talking about the backstop idea it's more as just a general hoovering up of absolute clangers. Someone else is watching the game and sees something the ref missed or sees a replay of something and realises it's worse/not as bad as the referee initially thought and just says sorry you're going to have to change that you've made a really bad decision. That way you're not looking at mm offsides or watching a challenge 25 times in slow motion, you're just clearing up genuinely bad decisions rather than changing decisions that nobody would ever have complained about before. You can't put the genie back in the bottle so they can't start doing it that way now, but to me that's how it should have been implemented from the start.

But what is a clanger? That's obviously a subjective category. I'd class the WHU handball as a clanger, you can't just punch the ball out of bounds. Obviously two other people thought otherwise. And while that may support one of your points above, again you can only mitigate subjectivity so much. To me, at some point, it's no longer about deciding what should or shouldn't be reviewed, but just limiting the opportunities to review.

 

[MACCA75]

They could decrease the subjectivity by making the rules less vague. If it means writing out every example of what is or isn't a foul in minute detail then so be it. Compilation should not be that difficult, cross checked against the actual factual footage leaves far less room for subjective interpretation.
And 'clear and obvious' needs to be binned immediately. Oxymoron if ever there was one

Yeah I just don’t think you can get rid of subjectivity. Look at Garner pushing over Strand Larsen at the weekend. Now there wasn’t enough in that to be a penalty for me - but try writing a law that wouldn’t describe what he did as a foul.

I’d keep the goal line tech and get rid of everything else personally. I want to be able to celebrate a goal again.

 

[windymiller]

It can't be a foul unless the balls in play. Hence why you get all the pushing and shoving on corners before the whistle goes for it to be taken. Not saying I agree with it but that's the rule. I didn't see the City game so I'm not sure if the Bernardo Silva one was before the whistle was blown but I gather that's the reason they didn't look at it

The nonsense spouted was that the grappling started before the ball was in play. Despite him being pulled to the ground whilst the ball was in play. If that's the rule, then every player should be instructed to rag their man all over the shop before the ball is kicked and just keep suplexing them until the ball dribbles out of play on the opposite side.