VAR - keep out the nerds.

[Mystic Neg]

13 hours ago, matthefish2002 said:

I am against use of VAR, think will stop flow of games as happened in Liverpool v WBA.

But if they are going to use it why wasn't it trailed in something like pre season games so a few things could have been ironed out first.

 

1 problem I can foresee is something's like penalty decisions are so borderline that even after I have seen them 5 times from different angles and slow motion replays even I am not sure.

 

 

In that case the ref should give a soft signal on whether or not he thought it was a penalty. A video ref watches it and looks for substantial evidence to overturn the decision. If it isn't there he sticks with the ref. Like cricket.

[Mystic Neg]

14 hours ago, Southie_Owl said:

VAR should not be used for subjective decisions but for matter of fact incidents, like offside. 

 

There’s not been many wrong decisions in football that have effected the final results as usually the best team win the league/cups and the worst teams get relegated. It’s not often teams can look back and say they were lucky/unlucky with refereeing decisions was the reason for their season. We have goal line technology which was the most important thing

 

I think they should focus more on retrospective action and punish people harsher after games, to try and prevent players from wanting to do bad things during matches 

 

I see your point but if we'd had it for Hand of God England fans might not still be singing about 1966.

[Mystic Neg]

1 hour 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. 

 

That brings an argument that football isn't intelligent enough to successfully implement VAR.

 

I hadn't considered that.

[Manila_Owl]

16 minutes ago, OutspokenTom said:

 

I see your point but if we'd had it for Hand of God England fans might not still be singing about 1966.

 

Add 2005 PO Final to that. State of that penalty and red card. VAR would have kept us down. For every loser there's a winner.

 

I'm not a fan myself unless at the very least replays are shown live at stadium and the referee has to explain decision to crowd who don't know what the fluff is going on.

 

 

[Mystic Neg]

3 minutes ago, Manila_Owl said:

 

Add 2005 PO Final to that. State of that penalty and red card. VAR would have kept us down. For every loser there's a winner.

 

I'm not a fan myself unless at the very least replays are shown live at stadium and the referee has to explain decision to crowd who don't know what the fluff is going on.

 

 

 

I understand that too, imagine the ref explaining an unpopular marginal decision to tens of thousands of baying football fans! They would need very thick skin and it will require them to no longer hide behind the FA who defend them rigorously regardless.

[tarn owl]

VAR is coming and it will help reduce the amount of ridiculously bad decisions. It won’t be perfect but it will help, they will tweak the system and make it better. Apple don’t scrap an invention based on 1 bad test, or 20 bad tests. They work until it’s right. It should be used to rectify clear and obvious mistakes. Anything that is 50/50 is left for the ref, there will be still plenty to debate after a match. Be patient. 

[daleblue]

20 hours ago, hasthagotanycheese said:

VAR should be used only as an appeal system.

 

Each team should have 1 appeal per half. If upheld then they retain their appeal then if not they lose it.

What happens if they then get their second appeal wrong? 

The other team get their first appeal wrong. 

So both teams got an appeal wrong but one side has 2 bites at the cherry. 

Fair? 

PS. Just for arguments sake the team who got their first appeal wrong was to get their second appeal right if allowed to do so. 

Edited January 30, 2018 by daleblue

[latemodelchild]

The problems come when the ball isn't dead and players appeal. Does the ref wait for a break or stop the game? A goal could be scored between the appeal and the stoppage if he waits for a natural break. 

 

I agree with 1 appeal per half or per game, lose it if you're wrong, keep if upheld. After all, it's about getting things right, not gaining an advantage. Only the manager or captain can appeal and any players that ask the ref directly get a yellow card, maybe a red if the yellow isn't a deterrent. Still the point above stands about when to stop play but it'd cut those incidents down. 

 

Still concerned that goals will be contested as a matter of course therefore ruining goals live at games. Celebrating, seeing the ref signal then even if goal given its a muted celebration. 

 

As you can see, it's not easy. 

[Aingarth]

With some of the dreadful referee performances at Hillsborough, we desperately need to use video evidence for crucial decisions. If they used our big screen for controversial moments I am convinced we would have had some better results and even without the screen, nearly every supporter can remember clear mistakes made by the officials. The main problem with VAR is training the referee team to use it properly- the technology is not the problem. 

[fred mciver]

Wait while Rhodes scores the winner in this year's cup final or next season's play off final only for it to be ruled off - side 2 minutes later because VAR operator interprets it different, saying one of our players move slightly during build up.

 

In fact, he just stumbled a little on well - worn turf.

 

Ref and linesman had ruled play on as not interfering.

 

No, let's get rid of this nonsense after trial period. 

[hasthagotanycheese]

7 hours ago, daleblue said:

What happens if they then get their second appeal wrong? 

The other team get their first appeal wrong. 

So both teams got an appeal wrong but one side has 2 bites at the cherry. 

Fair? 

PS. Just for arguments sake the team who got their first appeal wrong was to get their second appeal right if allowed to do so. 

 

I think that might be vexatiously over complicating it by a conflagration of the hypothetical possibilities that may happen in any given scenario. 

[daleblue]

4 hours ago, hasthagotanycheese said:

 

I think that might be vexatiously over complicating it by a conflagration of the hypothetical possibilities that may happen in any given scenario. 

 

And there in a nutshell is their complaint.

[Prendo's boots]

Bloody hate technology...get the real game back...'goal line technology' can bugger right off too...get the refs n lino's fitter and leave it like that...even reduce the number of cameras at games too...I want my old proper 'togger' back!! 

Edited January 30, 2018 by Prendo's boots

[trevdi9]

all these changes will soon make football into a shadow of what it once was ,bad decisions good decisions whatever they are adds to the nature of the game take that away and sadly football will be the loser