VAR

[HIGHERSTATE]

It killed the game for me.  Leicester couldn't lose after that.  The game never really took off anyway apart from the goal, which was handball anyway.

 

I thought bringing on Wes Morgan as (which felt like) a sentimental substitute for such a big game would backfire on them.  And it very nearly did.

 

Looking it objectively how fkin stupid was that 2 minutes of football. Going from Chelsea fans going mental to 'soz you aint got a goal, play on Leicester'

 

 

 

 

[poite]

I was sat watching the FA Cup final today in Leicester (at home) and really wanted them to win. The love for football here and the club is extraordinary. They've had an amazing amount of success and their owner is a legend in these parts. That love for him seen on the pitch is as genuine as it gets. 

 

But when Chelsea scored I shouted 'No, no f-in way!" It was a heartbreaking moment even for me as a wednesday can who just likes Leicester because I live here. I was heartbroken for the friends here who live and breathe the club and it hit hard. 

 

But when the goal went and got disallowed I didn't feel any relief or sense of joy. I just felt....nothing. the feeling of heartbreak was genuine and in all the years I've loved this sport it's been as important as any other emotion I've felt in times of celebration. 

 

VAR, or rather the use of it has ripped the heart and soul out of the game at this level. I've refused to watch Premier League football since VAR came in and the Fa Cup final today just went further to show me why that is. Yes, I get it that technically under the rules it was offside but I simply have no interest in having defining moments of a game which trigger such passionate emotions in me removed because after 5mins of someone drawing a multitude of lines on a screen shows that someone's elbow was offside. 

 

The use of VAR, not VAR itself, simply has to change. 

[Emerson Thome]

I agree with the majority of sentiments on here. VAR is a crock of shít.

 

Already had a World Cup final ruined by it, and now an FA Cup final (and yes, I wanted Leicester to win too, but not like that).

 

Sums up the nature of modern football officials, who want to be the centre of attention at all times. They love these rules changes, as VAR has allowed them to invent imaginary handballs and destroyed the concept of a player being level. More time spent watching officials and less time watching football. We already have to watch defenders standing with their hands behind their backs like a bunch of paraplegics thanks to this rule creep from Mike Riley and Collina.

 

What's more, those stupid lines they draw are often wrong. The ball when they freeze the frame is simultaneously touching the players foot and a blur that stretches 3 feet across the screen. So how can they claim to make a decision to less than 5 cm when the ball is simultaneously in two places at once?

 

It's all very funny seeing Chelsea get robbed like this, but wait until it happens to England in the last minute of the Euros.

[HOOTIE AND THE SHIT TU]

7 minutes ago, Emerson Thome said:

I agree with the majority of sentiments on here. VAR is a crock of shít.

 

Already had a World Cup final ruined by it, and now an FA Cup final (and yes, I wanted Leicester to win too, but not like that).

 

Sums up the nature of modern football officials, who want to be the centre of attention at all times. They love these rules changes, as VAR has allowed them to invent imaginary handballs and destroyed the concept of a player being level. More time spent watching officials and less time watching football. We already have to watch defenders standing with their hands behind their backs like a bunch of paraplegics thanks to this rule creep from Mike Riley and Collina.

 

What's more, those stupid lines they draw are often wrong. The ball when they freeze the frame is simultaneously touching the players foot and a blur that stretches 3 feet across the screen. So how can they claim to make a decision to less than 5 cm when the ball is simultaneously in two places at once?

 

It's all very funny seeing Chelsea get robbed like this, but wait until it happens to England in the last minute of the Euros.

Chelsea got robbed?

 

What game was you watching, the player was off side, the officials missed it

 

Thank god for VAR

[Big Jack]

Give me human error any day that has always been part and parcel of the game. Before var no one would have complained about a decision too close to call. As others have said glad it happened to Chelsea, bit of karma from super league fiasco. 

[Tommy Crawshaw]

17 minutes ago, Emerson Thome said:

What's more, those stupid lines they draw are often wrong. The ball when they freeze the frame is simultaneously touching the players foot and a blur that stretches 3 feet across the screen. So how can they claim to make a decision to less than 5 cm when the ball is simultaneously in two places at once?

 

 

Exactly... The technology is not accurate enough to judge offsides in millimetres or even a few centimetres.

 

The cameras are never exactly in line with the attacker and last defender so the lines they draw are decided by a computer.

A frame of video is 1/25th of a second so it's virtually impossible to stop it at the exact moment the ball is played forward. 

If it's not absolutely a clear offside the attacking team should get the benefit of doubt.

 

[harleyman]

VAR, to my mind, started in the U.S.A., during the 1970's;  we called it "instant-reply" back in those days.  This scourge has made itself present in English Football, only recently...

 

All it does is move the debate concerning a  decision made on the pitch, to a debate concerning a decision made by second-guessing via video-cameras.   

 

I like real-time decisions, made by humans,  it's part of the game, and if it was "controversial" in real-time, it will be the same in "instant-replay."
 

[Plonk]

Which do you prefer?

1. The moment ball hits the back of net.

2. The moment “ goal” comes up on the scoreboard three minutes later.

[Silkstone Owl]

11 hours ago, wakefieldowl said:

I thought var was brought in to make sure that clearly wrong decidions were overturned. Today wasnt that. He was in line, but his left toe was 2 inch offside. Its an absolute shambles and makes the game a joke.

 

Like everyone though i laughed when it was disallowed. Great to see anyone but the same boring teams winning

So by your on admission he was offside (whether it be 2 inches or whatever).  I suppose the whole issue with offside is it gives the player a clear advantage, which I don’t think was the case.  
 

the debate continues 

 

I don’t think it’s done much for the game tbh, and certainly questionable to be carried on.  
 

[latemodelchild]

Every time I discuss var I come back to this question. When is the ball considered 'played'? Is it when it's fully left the players foot? Is it when it's started to leave the players foot? Is it when it's touching his foot for the first time? Cos a ball, when you strike it, compresses then reshapes to move forward. That process takes time, and that time when players are moving further up field can be the difference between offside or not. It's like they put all the focus on the lines down to a few mm but we never see when the ball is actually played. It could be an arbitrary frame of video. 

[Loppy]

After experiencing the joys of VAR in stadium ironically against Chelsea a couple of years ago, I came to the conclusion it's purely a TV gimmick that adds nothing to the match going fans experience. Can't celebrate until approved, no idea what's being looked at, inconsistent. Give it time and they'll start putting an ad break on while the checks are ongoing. 

[Onge]

9 hours ago, Emerson Thome said:

I agree with the majority of sentiments on here. VAR is a crock of shít.

 

Already had a World Cup final ruined by it, and now an FA Cup final (and yes, I wanted Leicester to win too, but not like that).

 

Sums up the nature of modern football officials, who want to be the centre of attention at all times. They love these rules changes, as VAR has allowed them to invent imaginary handballs and destroyed the concept of a player being level. More time spent watching officials and less time watching football. We already have to watch defenders standing with their hands behind their backs like a bunch of paraplegics thanks to this rule creep from Mike Riley and Collina.

 

What's more, those stupid lines they draw are often wrong. The ball when they freeze the frame is simultaneously touching the players foot and a blur that stretches 3 feet across the screen. So how can they claim to make a decision to less than 5 cm when the ball is simultaneously in two places at once?

 

It's all very funny seeing Chelsea get robbed like this, but wait until it happens to England in the last minute of the Euros.

Excellent post.

 

VAR should only intervene for clear and obvious errors. With the naked eye you could not say the Chelsea player was clearly offside, so the on-field decision should have stood.

 

I very rarely watch matches where VAR is used but every time I do I wish it didn't exist. And you know when they give a terrible penalty in a World Cup final they are not interested in using the tech for the benefit of the game.

 

I've no doubt my enjoyment of the Euros will be severely affected by VAR... even if some vital, dubious decision goes in England's favour.

[Sambo89]

11 hours ago, Mike Hunt said:

Should be judged on where the feet are not a leading arm or shoulder etc 

Exactly this, I thought at one point you were only offside if a part of your body that you could score with was in front of the defender, or have I dreamt it?

[longreach]

9 hours ago, Tommy Crawshaw said:

 

Exactly... The technology is not accurate enough to judge offsides in millimetres or even a few centimetres.

 

 

 

So, in your opinion, how far in front of the last defending player is off side?

[longreach]

9 hours ago, Tommy Crawshaw said:

 

 

 

 

A frame of video is 1/25th of a second so it's virtually impossible to stop it at the exact moment the ball is played forward. 

 

 

VAR uses cameras than run at 50 frames per second, with one picture taken every 0.02 seconds. When an offside decision is being deliberated, VAR must choose the frame which proves with certainty that the ball has been touched.

Edited May 16, 2021 by longreach

[Yorkowl.74]

VAR. another chapter to add into the book of football and it’s demise.

[0wl18]

12 hours ago, LondonOwl313 said:

Well in terms of offside people might not like it but it’s consistent and it works. You’re either on or you’re off and have to draw the line somewhere. If you’re going to build in a margin of error then how much should that be, and won’t that just make the decision making more erratic and shift the offside line by a few inches 

 

He was clearly offside in that you could see on the lines that part of his body was nearer the goal than the defender. 

If the technology was able to definitively indicate when the ball was struck, I’d agree. The technology isn’t capable of that so, they’re ultimately guessing. 
 

The offside rule already has a caveat where the attacker should be given the benefit of the doubt. The officials are just inept. They’re trying to use a perfect science when, the tech doesn’t support it! Freeze the screen when you think the ball has been kicked, if the player looks offside, he’s offside, if he looks level, he’s on. 
 

Referees are the issue not VAR. 

[whatevertrevor]

12 hours ago, wakefieldowl said:

I thought var was brought in to make sure that clearly wrong decidions were overturned. Today wasnt that. He was in line, but his left toe was 2 inch offside. Its an absolute shambles and makes the game a joke.

 

Like everyone though i laughed when it was disallowed. Great to see anyone but the same boring teams winning

 

The thing is, how much leeway is the right amount of leeway? If 2 inches offside shouldn't be offside, then what about 4 inches? Then, if we say there is a 4 inch leeway, then what if someone is over that 4 inch by half an inch, would we allow leeway on the leeway? 

[fpowl]

Var is over policed it should be used more conservative like in other sports then it would become part of tactics.

 

take cricket and apply to football

if the captain or manager challenges a decision it goes to VAR if it’s deemed they was right they keep their appeal 

 

if they are wrong they get no more appeals 

 

you wouldn’t be betting VAR involved for everything little thing early doors abs the game will flow more 

 

only big decisions would get appealed and only if they thought they was right to speak or the game was nearly over 

[0wl18]

4 minutes ago, whatevertrevor said:

 

The thing is, how much leeway is the right amount of leeway? If 2 inches offside shouldn't be offside, then what about 4 inches? Then, if we say there is a 4 inch leeway, then what if someone is over that 4 inch by half an inch, would we allow leeway on the leeway? 

You can only measure it if you’re using the stupid line. Use the naked eye. It’s a matter of opinion like every other decision but, the amount of times I’ve seen the VAR official place the line in the wrong position is embarrassing.

 

Technology works in every other sport. Football, as always, manages to find a way to shoot itself in the foot. People argue tech shouldn’t be used because football is too fast and, there aren’t many natural breaks in play. It’s a load of rubbish.
 

The officials are poor and, don’t like accountability. There’s a lack of respect between both the officials and, players at all levels. VAR is fine. The implementation is a crock of poo.