VAR - keep out the nerds.

[Tamworthowl]

12 minutes ago, Davidioso said:

 

bizarrely a lot of fans used to applaud back passes to the keeper

there was a lot of kerfuffle when the back pass law was introduced

 

same thing when they switched from 2pts to 3pts for a win

 

massive protests against goal line technology

 

introduction of 4th official was heavily ridiculed

 

 

..what you gonna do? .....some people don't like change

 

As an older fan, I'd like to make clear that I welcomed the back pass rule, and that nearly everyone supported the change to 3points for a win.

 

Goal line technology, I was neutral, but have to agree it's been a good system. But why can't it be introduced to check if the ball goes out for a goal kick / corner (see Newport's goal)?

 

4th official? It's still ridiculed isn't it? What, of any importance, does he do? However, if introduced properly, I'd consider on-field assistant referees. A bit like American football, but not as many.

 

And I'm strongly in favour of independent time keeping. Stop the clock etc. 

 

But best of all, bring back the goal average! 

 

[billyblack]

2 hours ago, The Captain said:

Ruins the flow and atmosphere of every game.

 

VAR means that you can’t even celebrate a goal anymore.  And if this comes in, we are going to see more players surrounding the refs several times a game, putting pressure on to have decisions “reviewed”.

 

Its total böllocks and needs stamping out before it ruins the game I love.

Why cant you celebrate a goal. We are talking small percentages that would require VAR assistance.

[Westfield Owl]

8 minutes ago, billyblack said:

Why cant you celebrate a goal. We are talking small percentages that would require VAR assistance.

 

Because after every single time the ball goes in the net, fans will be thinking, “Hmm, right ok, now let’s just hang on for another 4-5 minutes while the refs analyse every camera angle going, for an offside or a foul or a handball, did anything happen in the build up further down the pitch, should a throw-in have been given when we played on 10 seconds before the ball went in the goal?”

 

This VAR crap kills the ebb and flow of the game.  I’m totally against it.

Edited January 29, 2018 by The Captain

[Musn't Grumble]

The thing that bugs me about VAR is that even when play is stopped for a review, the flow of the game will break up.

 

For instance, most people will remember Frank Simek's vital goal in the relegation battle a few years back at Millwall. Simek's goal came about because the referee gave a free kick when he adjudged Lee Bullen (who was in goal at the time) had been fouled as Millwall put the ball in the Wednesday net. The free kick was taken quickly and the play moved swiftly into the Millwall goal area whilst most of the Millwall team were still celebrating the "goal" in front of the away end. VAR could easily end the "quick free kick" because in football, even when the ball is "dead", it can come back into play in an instant either from a free kick, a corner, a throw in, goal kick, etc. Instead, the referee will take the easy route and call for VAR if only to validate their decision.

 

In cricket (which is much more amenable to technology like this), we now get umpires calling for video replay "just to make sure" when a player is run-out, hits a boundary or is bowled. That sort of check doesn't really spoil the game of cricket because there are natural breaks after each delivery when the ball is dead but one of football's great selling points is that, unlike cricket and rugby league, it is fast and free-flowing (usually!).

 

I'm not againt technology being used in football but the pressure to use technology for technology's sake is overpowering.

 

(and, as many peope have already spotted, there is still a substantial element of interpretation on what you can actually see on a TV screen - "Was he pushed or did he fall?", etc.)

[edwinowl]

4 hours ago, 0wl18 said:

So to make a challenge you have to highlIght to the 4th official why you’re making the challenge, you can’t make it on a whim. There has to be an explanation to review.

 

Which is why we are debating it, things need to change its too complicated

[jamthesun]

I don't mind if they still get some very marginal decisions wrong or decide that something is or isn't a penalty when I would disagree.

 

I welcome it because officials get too many clear-cut decisions wrong. If we can eradicate them then it will make me happy.

 

As for the delays, I don't care. Adds to the spectacle I think. 

 

[fred mciver]

And don't forget, for every Lampard 'GOAL' against Germany there's 1966.

 

(Q to 66 Soviet linesman who gave goal: Why? 'Stalingrad').

 

It balances itself out. Except in Carlos - land.

Edited January 29, 2018 by fred mciver

[pgmetcalf]

How can games be fixed if doubt is removed?

[latemodelchild]

I've gone from wanting it all to thinking it's a nightmare. Every goal that is scored will be reviewed and the instant celebrations will be muted cos people won't want to get carried away. I already look to the ref and lino when we score before letting myself go mad. This makes it worse. 

 

How about 2 refs and 4 linos all mic'd up and communicating? Or a ref and assistant on the pitch, 4 linos and assistant defer to ref. 

[asteener1867]

20 minutes ago, pgmetcalf said:

How can games be fixed if doubt is removed?

Fairly easily I should imagine

[Luke]

Just have a ref on either side of the pitch 

[31Dec1966]

5 hours ago, The Captain said:

Ruins the flow and atmosphere of every game.

 

VAR means that you can’t even celebrate a goal anymore.  And if this comes in, we are going to see more players surrounding the refs several times a game, putting pressure on to have decisions “reviewed”.

 

Its total böllocks and needs stamping out before it ruins the game I love.

Yes, yes, yes. And to those who say it should be used ONLY on certain occasions, I say, that's not how these things work. Once they start people ask, why not use it for other things and we end up with a beautiful game ruined. Subs started with one sub allowed for injury.  Immediately managers abused it by telling players to feign injury to change the game. Then we allowed tactical substitutions, then 2 subs, then 3 until we end up with 11.

Sound in the refs ear to indicate the ball has crossed the goal line is a good use of technology but anything else.....NO, NO, NO!

[asteener1867]

1 minute ago, 31Dec1966 said:

Yes, yes, yes. And to those who say it should be used ONLY on certain occasions, I say, that's not how these things work. Once they start people ask, why not use it for other things and we end up with a beautiful game ruined. Subs started with one sub allowed for injury.  Immediately managers abused it by telling players to feign injury to change the game. Then we allowed tactical substitutions, then 2 subs, then 3 until we end up with 11.

Sound in the refs ear to indicate the ball has crossed the goal line is a good use of technology but anything else.....NO, NO, NO!

Use it like the review system in cricket...Give each manager 2 reviews each...that he relays to the 4th official.....be hilarious to watch such as Mourinhio and Wenger proved wrong live on Tv..The poutin' f.ookers...

[billyblack]

6 hours ago, The Captain said:

 

Because after every single time the ball goes in the net, fans will be thinking, “Hmm, right ok, now let’s just hang on for another 4-5 minutes while the refs analyse every camera angle going, for an offside or a foul or a handball, did anything happen in the build up further down the pitch, should a throw-in have been given when we played on 10 seconds before the ball went in the goal?”

 

This VAR crap kills the ebb and flow of the game.  I’m totally against it.

They wouldnt use VAR for every action or goal in a game. Just for the odd incident where it wasnt clear. Someone scores a screamer from 30 yds they arent going to play it back unless its just to see how good it was.

[billyblack]

3 hours ago, 31Dec1966 said:

Yes, yes, yes. And to those who say it should be used ONLY on certain occasions, I say, that's not how these things work. Once they start people ask, why not use it for other things and we end up with a beautiful game ruined. Subs started with one sub allowed for injury.  Immediately managers abused it by telling players to feign injury to change the game. Then we allowed tactical substitutions, then 2 subs, then 3 until we end up with 11.

Sound in the refs ear to indicate the ball has crossed the goal line is a good use of technology but anything else.....NO, NO, NO!

Works fine in other sports. Dont get the fuss myself. Beautiful game..... if thats what you call moaning about goals that shouldnt have been or goals that should have. Or players rolling around like they have been shot when noone is stood within 10 feet. Bring it in. Just use it right. Get the refs mic'd up. Let everybody hear. Stop the players gobbing off every 5 secs too.

[trask43]

6 minutes ago, billyblack said:

They wouldnt use VAR for every action or goal in a game. Just for the odd incident where it wasnt clear. Someone scores a screamer from 30 yds they arent going to play it back unless its just to see how good it was.

 

Thats not how it panned out in the liverpool west brom game, given the fuss caused early on by VAR and the pressure applied by the players the ref soon has to check every goal just to be on the safe side. It would certainly be used for every goal scored from a forward pass where there is even the slightest possibility of offside and any goal from a corner where there is always potential for a shirt pull or a block on the keeper. 

[papalazarowl]

It is rubbish and slow at the moment because of the ineptitude of the FA.

 

They have implemented their own system,

The VAR doesn't see the same pictures as we see at home on Sky or BT etc.

Sky and BT have a small army of minions instantly replaying incidents from all angles.... the VAR has only 2.

The FA hasn't consulted the people who run the systems in Rugby/Cricket etc for advice.

 

Typical FA.. we will do it our way wether it works or not.

 

 

[Peake]

The debate should be on how it can be improved and made more efficient. Not whether it should be introduced or not. There’s simply too much riding on decisions these days so it will happen. 

 

Personally I think there should be a screen so fans could see what’s going off. It should only be used for dubious goals, offside goals and penalty decisions imo but I know it can get messy when the game plays on then gets brought back. 

[billyblack]

49 minutes ago, trask43 said:

 

Thats not how it panned out in the liverpool west brom game, given the fuss caused early on by VAR and the pressure applied by the players the ref soon has to check every goal just to be on the safe side. It would certainly be used for every goal scored from a forward pass where there is even the slightest possibility of offside and any goal from a corner where there is always potential for a shirt pull or a block on the keeper. 

It will be shaky to start with. Will take a while for it to settle and find a medium. Wont be great at the beginning.

[Mystic Neg]

14 hours ago, fred mciver said:

Ok , I know we have loads o young, bright teckies that populate this great site but can I appeal to all to drown our the noise from those like Staton on Radio Sheffield calling for VAR to be brought in.

 

If nothing else, this weekend's tech disasters should end this daft experiment.

 

And before you go on about its infancy, not in Europe it aint. VAR is more mature there and still a disaster.

 

Why? Because it still relies on humans and - guess what - we make errors. 

 

Otherwise , why not replace Rhodes with a robot and have done with it. 

 

No, football flows and that's why it's most popular sport ever.

 

Most other games have regular , natural breaks.  It won't work, short of 2 hour matches (tell that to Sky, Virgin trains, etc).

 

So, any opportunity to influence , please banish help these nerds back to their video games. 

 

Cheers. 1- 2 at Boro, Rhodes ' revenge with a brace. 

 

 

Football is not like any other sport. I will agree with you there.

 

A sport where it's still OK to bully the ref and generally act like big children with very little consequence.

 

The more I watch managers or players behave like Pep Guardiola and his charges did at the weekend when the assistant and the refs got a marginal decision wrong makes me want to see decisions become more matter of fact rather than guess work. It puts me off football seeing all the hysterical theatrics - it is arrogance and it is attention seeking. Football only became like this with the millions on offer and the huge technological advancements that came with SKY in the early 90s. Not saying players weren't passionate before, they were, but they certainly weren't pampered, soft or as prone to cheating. They were making headlines mainly for the right reasons, not the wrong ones.

 

VAR is only in its infancy, like it was in rugby, cricket and tennis before it and I believe there will be a way to make it work but it's not ready yet. I also don't think it's fair to have it at some FA Cup 4th round ties but not the Sunday matches, what's the problem, is VAR religious or something?

 

It will never resolve all controversial decisions so we will still have plenty to argue about but it can quickly eradicate the obvious blunders. I'd like to see it used for citing as well because we'd have a lot less diving and backchat in the games. As a cricket, tennis and rugby fan, a sports fan in general, it has improved the integrity of the game in all aspects without ever being perfect.

 

If you think it will spoil the beautiful game, I would argue that the beautiful game is already lost and this might be one way of getting back to a respectable spectacle.