VAR - what needs to change?

[MacBoyd 5,506]

I thought ruling out danilos goal was extremely harsh. It has completely changed the game for the worse.

[Stunels 1,252]

VAR has helped us a lot in Europe and my issue isnt how shit it feels when it goes against you - its how badly it breaks up the game.  Whenever you score youre waiting for it to get chopped off and whenever you lose a goal youre sitting praying it was slightly offside.  Completely changed the viewing experience for the worse, and makes you feel like a tit for celebrating a chopped off goal.

[OrangeRab 2,823]

9 hours ago, theiconicman said:

I don't think it needs to - the rules were not developed for computer technology but for a guy running alongside the players and looking across the pitch. If you want to bring computers into it then you need to clarify the rules. I also like the idea you don't slowmo and freeze frame for decisions, if it takes that level of scrutiny then move on. It creates differences in rules being applied - VAR is forensic while anything not VAR is dealt with by the ref, once, at full speed. It's mental.

But again this is still all grey area. At some point you still need to define what’s offside or not and you’re going to have controversy however you define or draw the lines.

And who decides what the appropriate level of scrutiny is. 

For me it doesn’t seem to have reduced controversy. And for how shite it’s making the viewer experience the benefits just don’t outweigh it. We have 4 officials live. That’s plenty. If all 4 miss an incident then we move on.

And fwiw I think it’s absolutely ruining rugby. Most rugby fans hate how it’s being used now.

[OrangeRab 2,823]

1 hour ago, Stunels said:

VAR has helped us a lot in Europe and my issue isnt how shit it feels when it goes against you - its how badly it breaks up the game.  Whenever you score youre waiting for it to get chopped off and whenever you lose a goal youre sitting praying it was slightly offside.  Completely changed the viewing experience for the worse, and makes you feel like a tit for celebrating a chopped off goal.

100% this ^^

[McEwan's Lager 30,663]

1 hour ago, MacBoyd said:

I thought ruling out danilos goal was extremely harsh. It has completely changed the game for the worse.

If that was us defending you would be spewing if a goal was given.

Small unintentional clips like that are given as fouls all over the pitch.

[RFC55 109,394]

3 minutes ago, McEwan's Lager said:

If that was us defending you would be spewing if a goal was given.

Small unintentional clips like that are given as fouls all over the pitch.

Aye absolutely no complaints on that last night, he’s looking at the ball the whole time but it’s a foul

[TheKingObv 10,647]

1 hour ago, MacBoyd said:

I thought ruling out danilos goal was extremely harsh. It has completely changed the game for the worse.

Intention is irrelevant 

[TheKingObv 10,647]

11 hours ago, Perth_Campsie_Ger said:

Id make it like tennis, each team gets 3 uses, once you have used your 3 them tough shit even if its a blatent wrong decision

Wouldn't work. How would a manager (or equivalent decision maker) know whether to challenge an incident he was 60 yards away from?

Really isn't practical like it is in tennis.

[theiconicman 2,992]

21 minutes ago, OrangeRab said:

But again this is still all grey area. At some point you still need to define what’s offside or not and you’re going to have controversy however you define or draw the lines.

And who decides what the appropriate level of scrutiny is. 

For me it doesn’t seem to have reduced controversy. And for how shite it’s making the viewer experience the benefits just don’t outweigh it. We have 4 officials live. That’s plenty. If all 4 miss an incident then we move on.

And fwiw I think it’s absolutely ruining rugby. Most rugby fans hate how it’s being used now.

We've lost sight of what the problem was and instead have created new ones.

We all sympathised that Refs only get one chance to see it while we watching at home got the benefit of replays. We all accept that the Ref is human and makes decision depending on how HE see's it, we might not agree. Now we've got forensic slow mo, going back through every slight contact and brush of the fingers and turned a sport into a legal argument, fuck that.

Give the ref a chance to review the call (offside/ violent conduct) and perhaps allow a challenge from managers but we need to stop the second review of everything and the forensic analysis.

[theiconicman 2,992]

11 hours ago, rossco87 said:

This. I can’t understand why football have looked at all the other sports and not seen this would be the best way to implement it.
 

There is probably some merit in stuff that can normally be definitively checked (eg offside or was the ball out of play) and where the replays are not conclusive the on field decision stands. Everything else is up to the manager / captain to challenge.

 

The problem with “clear and obvious” is that in itself it is subjective. I keep going back to Desser’s goal vs them. The way it is currently set up I can understand why VAR have flagged it up by the letter of the law but at the time the ref hadn’t seen anything wrong and (from what I can remember) they weren’t claiming for a foul so in my opinion that is not clear and obvious.

 

Making it a challenge based system would take away the needlessly looking to see if there are any fouls.

It would also put the power where it belongs, to the contestants who are impacted by the result, not someone sitting in a room miles away.

[theiconicman 2,992]

5 minutes ago, TheKingObv said:

Wouldn't work. How would a manager (or equivalent decision maker) know whether to challenge an incident he was 60 yards away from?

Really isn't practical like it is in tennis.

He could use his eyes and his players reactions.

[TheKingObv 10,647]

14 minutes ago, theiconicman said:

He could use his eyes and his players reactions.

We both know this wouldn't work 

[theiconicman 2,992]

48 minutes ago, TheKingObv said:

We both know this wouldn't work 

I think it would clearly work and indeed would limit the calls to blatant decisions, rather than the minutiae we have at present.

[TheKingObv 10,647]

Just now, theiconicman said:

I think it would clearly work and indeed would limit the calls to blatant decisions, rather than the minutiae we have at present.

Break down how it would clearly work if managers etc can't actually see the incident?

How do players nearer the incident quickly get their thoughts across to the manager/decision maker whilst play continues to go on?

Can't just stop play like you would in tennis as this would then be used tactically. 

 

 

[TheKingObv 10,647]

I honestly think VAR is fine 

It's the enforcement of questionable laws (i.e handballs) which is the issue.

Fix the laws then a lot of the VAR discussion will end.

[Lord Lockin 3,913]

Said previously the game is not being refereed by the ref on the park but by someone watching television screens - watched the Spurs v Chelsea game, started at 8pm and because of VAR intervention didn't finish until 10.05. pm.

[Perth_Campsie_Ger 18,032]

1 hour ago, TheKingObv said:

Wouldn't work. How would a manager (or equivalent decision maker) know whether to challenge an incident he was 60 yards away from?

Really isn't practical like it is in tennis.

Its a chance you take, I guess it would be upto the captain on the pitch and you would have less dives etc because the player would then take onus if they used one of their 3 that could cost them a genuine decision later in the game

[Real Ranger 3,195]

Was all in favour of VAR coming in but now totally against it. It’s took that feeling of sheer joy out when the ball hits the back of the net.

A look at the ref and linesman for a brief second used to be enough to know the goal was given or disallowed, now every time we score there’s the fear that some inconspicuous incident has been noticed that will see it ruled out.

The fact is it hasn’t taken any controversy out of the game. I have to be honest, we’ve been done a few times, the recent old firm game being one of them.
Even though I watched the Athletico game and took almost as much delight in seeing Maeda’s sending off as I did at Hartson’s  reaction, for me the ref got it right with the yellow. When you see the entire incident at real speed it wasn’t anywhere as near malicious as it looked it the still shot.

 

[theiconicman 2,992]

3 hours ago, TheKingObv said:

Break down how it would clearly work if managers etc can't actually see the incident?

How do players nearer the incident quickly get their thoughts across to the manager/decision maker whilst play continues to go on?

Can't just stop play like you would in tennis as this would then be used tactically. 

 

 

VAR doesn't stop the game at the moment, so at the next stop in play (or immediately if the game was stopped by the referee) the manager can tell the 4th official.

[RFC55 109,394]

2 hours ago, Real Ranger said:

Was all in favour of VAR coming in but now totally against it. It’s took that feeling of sheer joy out when the ball hits the back of the net.

A look at the ref and linesman for a brief second used to be enough to know the goal was given or disallowed, now every time we score there’s the fear that some inconspicuous incident has been noticed that will see it ruled out.

The fact is it hasn’t taken any controversy out of the game. I have to be honest, we’ve been done a few times, the recent old firm game being one of them.
Even though I watched the Athletico game and took almost as much delight in seeing Maeda’s sending off as I did at Hartson’s  reaction, for me the ref got it right with the yellow. When you see the entire incident at real speed it wasn’t anywhere as near malicious as it looked it the still shot.

 

He’s went through him with enough force to sprain his knee. It was a red. High and reckless, it’s a red card all day 

[theiconicman 2,992]

12 minutes ago, RFC55 said:

He’s went through him with enough force to sprain his knee. It was a red. High and reckless, it’s a red card all day 

Lilterally no cunt is saying it wasn't red, or that VAR got it wrong. People are just talking about VAR in general. Move on. I laughed when he got sent off, I laughed when they got pumped and it was a cherry on top now that he's out for 6 weeks, can only help us.

[Lord Lockin 3,913]

2 hours ago, Real Ranger said:

Was all in favour of VAR coming in but now totally against it. It’s took that feeling of sheer joy out when the ball hits the back of the net.

A look at the ref and linesman for a brief second used to be enough to know the goal was given or disallowed, now every time we score there’s the fear that some inconspicuous incident has been noticed that will see it ruled out.

The fact is it hasn’t taken any controversy out of the game. I have to be honest, we’ve been done a few times, the recent old firm game being one of them.
Even though I watched the Athletico game and took almost as much delight in seeing Maeda’s sending off as I did at Hartson’s  reaction, for me the ref got it right with the yellow. When you see the entire incident at real speed it wasn’t anywhere as near malicious as it looked it the still shot.

 

Really, doesn't  matter if it was still frame, slowed down or real speed it was a sending off, he was late, high and endangering an opponent.

[RFC55 109,394]

8 minutes ago, theiconicman said:

Lilterally no cunt is saying it wasn't red, or that VAR got it wrong. People are just talking about VAR in general. Move on. I laughed when he got sent off, I laughed when they got pumped and it was a cherry on top now that he's out for 6 weeks, can only help us.

Excerpt the “cunt” I just quoted who said it wasn’t a red card 

[folkestoneger 8,212]

4 hours ago, TheKingObv said:

I honestly think VAR is fine 

It's the enforcement of questionable laws (i.e handballs) which is the issue.

Fix the laws then a lot of the VAR discussion will end.

No it won’t. The whole idea of re scrutinising every bloody big decision has completely ruined what is meant to be a spectator sport.

So refs made mistakes, who doesn’t. Players make more mistakes than any ref.

[Smile 26,610]

Brendan doesn't like it either poor Brendan.