WestBrom.com

Off Topic => General Football & Sports => Topic started by: tuamigos on January 28, 2018, 06:58:50 AM

Title: VAR
Post by: tuamigos on January 28, 2018, 06:58:50 AM
Well we've seen it in action.
What do you think.
After last night it should be called Scouse TV.
Farcical IMO, total miss use of the system.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: Atomic on January 28, 2018, 07:23:20 AM
It led to correct decisions but it also ruined the spectacle first half. The game being stopped numerous times was ridiculous. You had fans celebrating a goal then having to wait minutes before it being confirmed. It completely ruins the moment and distances the fans, diluting the enjoyment.

The penalty we conceded was a foul by Livermore but Salah went down like he was shot. On another day or had it been us on the receiving end of that "foul" it would probably have been deemed there not enough contact to create the fall and the penalty probably wouldn't have been given.

Does VAR solve everything? No.

Personally rather than have VAR like it was last night I'd rather have the referee make his decision and get on with it. VAR last night was unsatisfactory and I personally don't want to see the game interfered with like that.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: Greenock Baggie on January 28, 2018, 07:47:59 AM
The decisions were ALL proved to be correct but the time taken and the communication of them was an utter shambles. People at home new the decisions before the people in the stadium....... and that cannot be right !! VAR.......No thank you !!
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: BigFrank20 on January 28, 2018, 07:55:08 AM
How much of the whole farrago was because they put a seal in charge of it, a seal who's not supposed to come within a hundred miles of a Baggies game!  >:(
Oh he wasn't was he? He was hiding in a studio in London  :-X
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: darbolina on January 28, 2018, 08:00:08 AM
I don't like it at all. Danny Baker summed it up, it feels likes you're taking away a live element of the game at the most important time. It seems like another way to help the richer teams - at least we currently have the chance of human error of the refs on our side against the rich teams!

If this takes hold , football will begin to resemble the start and stop of NFL more and more (shudder)
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: boinging_along on January 28, 2018, 08:11:07 AM
My issue with the pen was you'll see those awarded at every corner and you can't have players appealing for the use of VAR .
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: Barrington on January 28, 2018, 08:19:01 AM
Needs to be something like a maximum of 3 appeals for each team in each game by the captain/manager and when an appeal is made to go to VAR there is a loudspeaker announcement and/or visuals on a large screen almost immediately so fans in the ground are aware. That would make it a lot better very quickly. No need to write off the whole concept because of the shambles in one game.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: WBArgo on January 28, 2018, 08:29:02 AM
Sorry but it wasn't a penalty. Livermore barely touched him for all of 1 second, if one of our players did that then it's pathetic. If ever you've done something like Judo or wrestling then humans don't fall down like that with such ease, it's absolute nonsense but part of the modern game - doesn't make it right and if one of ours dived like that then I'd be embarrassed.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: ashdoy on January 28, 2018, 08:31:14 AM
Should have 2 challenges each team per game.

Difficult to have screen replays as not all grounds have them, even a ground the size of Anfield will struggle as I have no idea where they’d put them.

The concept is right; imagine if we went down t a Frank Lampard 2010 style decision, but this format doesn’t work.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: hardtobeat on January 28, 2018, 08:38:57 AM
Several improvements need to be implemented before it can be in everyday use
1) transparency: Everybody watching needs to know and be able to see what the issue under review is

2) Only the on field ref should be calling for a review, the bloke in the studio should not be whispering in his ear and players should have absolutely no say in its use

3) the sighting of the monitor should be no where near the dug outs/technical areas

4) limit what it is used for:  we cannot have everything going to review because refs become scared of making a decision . let's stick to incidents where a goal is scored or disallowed at first for the rest leave it to the bloke on the pitch

Other tweaks will be required but start with these and keep it simple
Finally I don't think it did get all decisions correct last night as Barry was clearly pushed before he became offside and therefore should have been a penalty if not a goal
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: sing on our own on January 28, 2018, 08:42:32 AM
It should just be used imo to check if a goal was offside when the ball is dead. It’s the beginning of the end mark my words it won’t be long until managers and players are going mad and appealing for VAR to check throw ins and corners and it will be used as refs don’t want the grief. Cricket umpires who barely got anything wrong refer obvious decisions now just to guarantee they’re aren’t the villain.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: KYA on January 28, 2018, 08:43:32 AM
Needs major improvement like Tennis you get three shouts maximum and the decision is by the captain  not the ref like last night.
It's surely best used where the ref as made a plunder last night it was made on very tight decisions which would otherwise have gone unnoticed, keep doing that and games will last 2hrs plus and be totally ruined killing the game as a spectator sport.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: Adder on January 28, 2018, 08:44:23 AM
Several improvements need to be implemented before it can be in everyday use
1) transparency: Everybody watching needs to know and be able to see what the issue under review is

2) Only the on field ref should be calling for a review, the bloke in the studio should not be whispering in his ear and players should have absolutely no say in its use

3) the sighting of the monitor should be no where near the dug outs/technical areas

4) limit what it is used for:  we cannot have everything going to review because refs become scared of making a decision . let's stick to incidents where a goal is scored or disallowed at first for the rest leave it to the bloke on the pitch

Other tweaks will be required but start with these and keep it simple
Finally I don't think it did get all decisions correct last night as Barry was clearly pushed before he became offside and therefore should have been a penalty if not a goal
I'm not sure about point 2 because the VAR ref could spot something significant in the build up to a goal or penalty which the officials miss - it happens in ruby the TMO will occasionally alert the ref to something.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: hardtobeat on January 28, 2018, 08:51:31 AM
I'm not sure about point 2 because the VAR ref could spot something significant in the build up to a goal or penalty which the officials miss - it happens in ruby the TMO will occasionally alert the ref to something.
The fourth official as well as linos are allowed to do this now we don't need another one . The decisions in Rugby are generally off the ball incidents which when translated to football would not directly affect the scoring of a goal and again the Fa have a panel which metes out punishments for incidents mixed by the ref so again no need
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: KYA on January 28, 2018, 08:59:09 AM
Several improvements need to be implemented before it can be in everyday use
1) transparency: Everybody watching needs to know and be able to see what the issue under review is

2) Only the on field ref should be calling for a review, the bloke in the studio should not be whispering in his ear and players should have absolutely no say in its use

3) the sighting of the monitor should be no where near the dug outs/technical areas

4) limit what it is used for:  we cannot have everything going to review because refs become scared of making a decision . let's stick to incidents where a goal is scored or disallowed at first for the rest leave it to the bloke on the pitch

Other tweaks will be required but start with these and keep it simple
Finally I don't think it did get all decisions correct last night as Barry was clearly pushed before he became offside and therefore should have been a penalty if not a goal

Point 2 i would  say the captains make a decision not the ref as in cricket,a ref makes a split second decision that should stand to avoid overuse of the VAR and limit it to 3per side in a game thus avoiding misuse of the system and spoiling the game.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: Atomic on January 28, 2018, 09:03:16 AM
Point 2 i would  say the captains make a decision not the ref as in cricket,a ref makes a split second decision that should stand to avoid overuse of the VAR and limit it to 3per side in a game thus avoiding misuse of the system and spoiling the game.


Three per side is too many. That is potentially six calls per game. I think the captain or the manager of each club should be able to make two calls per match.

I don't think the referee should make a call it could get to the stage where refs are scared to make a decision without using VAR as back up.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: Barrington on January 28, 2018, 09:14:36 AM
I did initially post that it should be a maximum of 3 calls for each team in each game. In retrospect, I also think 2 each for major calls could suffice for a football match.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: KYA on January 28, 2018, 09:22:52 AM
I did initially post that it should be a maximum of 3 calls for each team in each game. In retrospect, I also think 2 each for major calls could suffice for a football match.

No more than 3 agreed with a limit clubs would only use these where the ref as missed something blatant leading to a goal/ goal disallowed for instance.
The downside as in Tennis is when the losing side have nothing to lose and would use up their quota  at the end of a game just at random.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: LiamTheBaggie on January 28, 2018, 09:43:11 AM
Meh.

First point is that all the decisions was correct and that's the main thing.

First gripe - the decision to disallow the Dawson goal. This happens most weeks and will see a lot of goals chalked off. Furthermore, Mignolet pushes Gareth Barry so should a penalty be awarded before the offside? I want VAR to solve those really contentious decisions, not go searching and creating more.

The second decision is likely to be a penalty in a literal sense but lets look at the scenario. Salah theatrically throws himself to the ground knowing full well he will not get on the end of a cross. It has not denied him a scoring opportunity and has created another contentious issue. That sort of contact happens at every corner and at this rate we'll have 20 penalties a game.

As for the third goal - the fact it needed checking is just poor officiating.

The system can work well - however there are a few things which need to be ironed out
- length of time it takes to make decision
- the types of decision to be referred
- who calls for these decisions to be referred
- importance of notifying fans, players and coaches
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: leeiswba on January 28, 2018, 09:55:32 AM
The one thing that does annoy me is it’s either used in every game in a tournament or none at all. I don’t think it’s fair that a team could be playing at 3pm and get through with a dodgy goal that should have been disallowed as there is no VAR yet a team at 7:45 could potentially go out because of a VAR overturn.

Overall the decisions were correct but it’s not fan friendly at all at the moment, we had scored a third goal at anfield before half time and it should just be pure joy yet I was half bouncing half looking at the ref to confirm it as a goal which took around 30 seconds so the celebration isn’t quite the same.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: Standaman on January 28, 2018, 10:02:44 AM
My take on it is simple.

If you don't have VAR you have to accept the fact that referees get big decisions wrong and sometimes horribly wrong and shut up. Don't complain don't replay every decision from 6 different angles in supper slow motion to reach a conclusion that the referee got it wrong or right.

There is also the culture of undermining refs at every turn abusing them and pushing the very limits of the rule book which needs to be stamped out.

On balance I would rather support the refs with VAR but the guy in booth should make the call so we don't have the farce of the ref trotting over to the sideline to review the footage, that' just silly.

Indecently footballers will have to learn that the all seeing eye will catch them out. Let's face it Livermore might well have got away with that level of contact because it was very difficult for the referee to be sure. 
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: iwastherein68 on January 28, 2018, 10:20:53 AM
Cowardly referees will just leave everything to someone sitting in a studio. Without VAR and a Villa tw@t assessing, Dawsons header would have been allowed. There was no appeal from Liverpool players, and I fail to see that VAR proved anything. Just a decision made by someone off the field, proven by the fact that the Referee did not consult the video personally, but he did view for the penalty decision. Yet more inconsistency from the referee.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: NathWBA on January 28, 2018, 10:32:23 AM
Who makes the decision to review? Does the ref ask for it or does the VAR ref get in his ear if he wants to review it? I still don’t understand how marriner was allowed to be VAR ref last night, he’s be able to officiate our games since 2013, would a different ref have intervened as many times as he did?
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: miggybaggy on January 28, 2018, 10:52:45 AM
Football is all about pure raw emotion; especially at the moment of a goal (or not). The use of VAR takes away the immediacy of all the emotions surrounding a particular moment.....that moment cannot be re-lived in its purest form. Interruptions to use VAR will kill the most important aspect of the game IMO. Its a no from me.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: Standaman on January 28, 2018, 10:56:15 AM
Cowardly referees will just leave everything to someone sitting in a studio. Without VAR and a Villa tw@t assessing, Dawsons header would have been allowed. There was no appeal from Liverpool players, and I fail to see that VAR proved anything. Just a decision made by someone off the field, proven by the fact that the Referee did not consult the video personally, but he did view for the penalty decision. Yet more inconsistency from the referee.

Sorry the decisions were right. The way that they were implemented was clunky. The authorities want the ref on the field to be the final arbitrator but the VAR alerts the ref to incidents that he might have missed. The VAR ref has a better chance of seeing something it is crazy to pretend otherwise. For the ref to go to the side of the pitch to review the video adds nothing but obviously prolongs the process. 
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: iwastherein68 on January 28, 2018, 11:25:40 AM
Sorry the decisions were right. The way that they were implemented was clunky. The authorities want the ref on the field to be the final arbitrator but the VAR alerts the ref to incidents that he might have missed. The VAR ref has a better chance of seeing something it is crazy to pretend otherwise. For the ref to go to the side of the pitch to review the video adds nothing but obviously prolongs the process.
I stand corrected
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: Westie on January 28, 2018, 11:29:03 AM
VAR should be used to overturn ‘howler’ decisions by the ref. Allowing the Dawson goal would not have been a howler. Not giving a penalty for the Salah dive would not have been a howler. In cricket, LBW decisions often stand by the umpire’s call, where less than half the ball is hitting the stumps. Last night, there is no way that the contact on Salah was enough to put him down, he dived, also, just because there was contact, does not mean that a foul was committed, it is a contact sport; the ref’s decision was a reasonable one in not originally awarding a penalty. So, for me, there is no way that a penalty should have been awarded. As for the Dawson ‘goal’, also not a ‘howler’ and given that it was looked at on review, we should have had a penalty. So was VAR a success? No, it wasn’t. It is also wrong that the system is used for some games and not others, all or none, and if for all, then only to eliminate howlers.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: silver surfer on January 28, 2018, 11:44:58 AM
Can't agree with the penalty decision blatant dive.
Looks like the video ref tried his best to stitch us up.
Gave them a shabby pen
Disallowed a goal
Tried to rule out the 3rd goal
I can see the top teams getting it banned if it means refs can't be influenced by the big teams in the heat of the moment.
Danny Murphy on motd saying it disrupted Liverpools rhythm when it was Albion who scored 4 1st half goals.
Laughable and so I did 😂
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: 17GD on January 28, 2018, 11:52:19 AM
Well you only have to look at the Chelsea game the other day to see how it does not help reach the right decisions. Chelsea should have had a pen in the second half but even after review they said he dived, when there was clear contact.

With last night, it was much the same. Salah is a top player but to go down that easy to win a pen is just scandalous. But then again, that's Liverpool. And my issue with it is if you give a pen for that, then we'll start having 15 pens a game, as football is a contact sport. Take the contact out and you have basketball.

Dawson's goal should have stood. Again, yes there was contact but the player underneath ducks down. Years ago goal keepers used to get proper challenges but that's been taken out of the game. Now, contact in all other areas of the pitch are being taken away.

You see players jostling at corners, are we going to start seeing a rise in pens from corners due to this? A player goes down in the box, are players now going to demand var when they disagree with the decision? Var is going to cause WAY more trouble than prevent it.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: tommcneill on January 28, 2018, 11:54:02 AM
I still think the Dawson goal should have stood personally nothing wrong with it at all

Not a fan of VAR if I’m honest
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: Black Country Pride on January 28, 2018, 11:54:44 AM
Sorry but it wasn't a penalty. Livermore barely touched him for all of 1 second, if one of our players did that then it's pathetic. If ever you've done something like Judo or wrestling then humans don't fall down like that with such ease, it's absolute nonsense but part of the modern game - doesn't make it right and if one of ours dived like that then I'd be embarrassed.

If Mo Salah was at the cash point and I brushed his arm would he collapse to floor and surrender his wallet? I thought it was very poor decision and if you give that you might as well do with corners / free kicks outside the box altogether - just give a penalty in advance.

VAR also destroys the rhythm of the match and I know it is very unpopular in Germany, where they've had it for a while. I would much rather we just kept it as it is and accept that on occasion refs will make howlers (part of the joy of football is moaning about officials after all).

On the subject of rules, does anyone else think they should revert back to the old offside rule? Far simpler, far less 'subjective'.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: caravanc58 on January 28, 2018, 12:00:47 PM
if we are going to use var for incidents such as the penalty then you could call it into action on almost every corner in every match where pulling and pushing goes on. it was quite pathetic that it was used on the disallowed Dawson goal,it really did spoil what was a thrilling end to end football match.How did they get 4 minutes of added time on the second half after we had only had 5 in the first half with all that var going on?
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: baggie82 on January 28, 2018, 12:02:56 PM
The posters on here moaning about the penalty need a realty check. Livermore dragged Saleh down, that he exaggerated his fall to get the refs attention matters not. The only problem with VAR last night was how slow the officials were to review the footage. It’s used every game in Seria A and works well. The officials need to get their act together. As soon as the VAR ref says it looks like Saleh was dragged down the ref should be straight across to the TV screen to review. Instead we had a bizarre 2-3 minutes before that even happened. System is progress, UK refs just need to be a bit quicker. It will help cut out injustices. Remember that dive against us at Chelsea in injury time under Clarke? Couldn’t happen with VAR.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: The Black Pearl on January 28, 2018, 12:06:37 PM
I was open minded about it before last night, but now I'm probably against it.

If it must exist then there should just be one appeal per team per half, overall I would rather accept the odd referee mistake.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: Black Country Pride on January 28, 2018, 12:08:35 PM
The posters on here moaning about the penalty need a realty check. Livermore dragged Saleh down, that he exaggerated his fall to get the refs attention matters not. The only problem with VAR last night was how slow the officials were to review the footage. It’s used every game in Seria A and works well. The officials need to get their act together. As soon as the VAR ref says it looks like Saleh was dragged down the ref should be straight across to the TV screen to review. Instead we had a bizarre 2-3 minutes before that even happened. System is progress, UK refs just need to be a bit quicker. It will help cut out injustices. Remember that dive against us at Chelsea in injury time under Clarke? Couldn’t happen with VAR.

He wasn't 'dragged down'. It was a blatant, comically cynical dive. Do you really think that would have been given down the other end? Anyway, justice was done  ;D
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: Nathan on January 28, 2018, 12:12:52 PM
Scrap it right away. Football is a sport played by humans, watched by humans and refereed by humans. We all make mistakes, it's part of life. If we've managed nearly 160 of the game without this we can damn well do without it now. If this is continued we will just see the higher profile players and clubs using this to manipulate the on-field ref in an attempt to get their own way and my guess is that they will. the video clears nothing up anyway, it's still comes down to opinion whether it's the opinion of a ref on the pitch or the opinion of a ref in the studio surrounded by technology. The foul on Salah was no more or less of a foul than the one on Morata during the Chelsea v Norwich game. Both involved a hand/arm on shirt/body. One's given, one isn't. Salah went down like a sack of s**t when he realised the ball was sailing well over the top of his head and that he had no chance of reaching it. VAR solves nothing. The lack of transparency is also ridiculous, we had no idea in the ground of what the f**k was going on. It comes to something when I'm there in the ground and have had to text my mate sat at home to find out why Dawson's goal was disallowed.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: Atomic on January 28, 2018, 12:13:52 PM
"Dragged down?"  :o

No way was Salah dragged down. Yes Livermore pulled him but not with any force. Salah flung himself to the ground.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: paulosull on January 28, 2018, 12:18:48 PM
the ref was weak last night and looked like a rabbit caught up in the head lights, that is problem with vars going forward. Before vars refs decision was final even ricketts, with vars refs decision isnt final so thy have lost most of their powers on the pitch.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: Hunnington Baggie on January 28, 2018, 12:36:14 PM
Should have 2 challenges each team per game.

Difficult to have screen replays as not all grounds have them, even a ground the size of Anfield will struggle as I have no idea where they’d put them.

The concept is right; imagine if we went down t a Frank Lampard 2010 style decision, but this format doesn’t work.

that is what Hawkeye is for, and that worked as intended almost immediately.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: baggie82 on January 28, 2018, 12:40:17 PM
"Dragged down?"  :o

No way was Salah dragged down. Yes Livermore pulled him but not with any force. Salah flung himself to the ground.

I suspect you would have a different opinion if the same incident happened to an Albion player in the Liverpool box. You acknowledge Livermore pulled him, which isn’t legal and is stupid. Every neutral journalist and pundit has said all three VAR decisions were correct. I agree with them. It’s understandable to support your own team but fans need to look past their own bias.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: Atomic on January 28, 2018, 12:42:40 PM
I suspect you would have a different opinion if the same incident happened to an Albion player in the Liverpool box. You acknowledge Livermore pulled him, which isn’t legal and is stupid. Every neutral journalist and pundit has said all three VAR decisions were correct. I agree with them. It’s understandable to support your own team but fans need to look past their own bias.


If you read my posts you will see I have always said the decision was correct it was a penalty.

I just object to your definition of "dragged down", he wasn't he was pulled nowhere near enough to go down like he did but yes it was a foul.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: baggieboyfred on January 28, 2018, 12:52:43 PM
overall I think its a good thing , I think it got all the decisions right eventually, but it needs to be much quicker and it needs to be shown on the stadium screens during the review so that the crowd can see  whats going on ,last night it went liverpools way twice , on another day it will go ours
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: Mo on January 28, 2018, 01:34:35 PM
The only clubs it will suit long term are the top six who through the use of initimidation will get it used to their advantage against clubs like ours who are supposed to turn up and accept defeat .

In truth we are extras in the pantomime last night the coverage from that awful channel was so poor they were willing Liverpool on . 

 If the Livermore incident was a Liverpool player doing that against us it wouldn't have even been flagged up .

I've watched football for 30 years but there was something fundamentally wrong with that last night I really don't want to see it whoever is playing.

Title: Re: VAR
Post by: baggiejohn on January 28, 2018, 01:55:03 PM
Personally, I think it shows that refs get most decisions right. I'm of the view, that you get the rub of the green over the season.

Do the advantages of var outweigh the disadvantages? IMO no, I'd keep the goal line technology, but kick the incident reviews into touch.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: NathWBA on January 28, 2018, 02:07:52 PM
Can't agree with the penalty decision blatant dive.
Looks like the video ref tried his best to stitch us up.
Gave them a shabby pen
Disallowed a goal
Tried to rule out the 3rd goal
I can see the top teams getting it banned if it means refs can't be influenced by the big teams in the heat of the moment.
Danny Murphy on motd saying it disrupted Liverpools rhythm when it was Albion who scored 4 1st half goals.
Laughable and so I did 😂
this is my view on it. The contact is so minimal for the pen it’s just not enough to send him down. I work with a Liverpool season ticket holder and even thought the Dawson goal and the penalty were harsh decisions
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: Scooby Doo on January 28, 2018, 02:45:55 PM
By the letter of the law Livermore fouled Salah. HOWEVER how often is such contact seen in the penalty box? Salah was theatrical and made it look like he'd been shot but Livermore should never have hold of his shirt.

In all it was a farcical use of the new technology.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: Albion79 on January 28, 2018, 03:08:48 PM
Its obviously going to stay, there are teething problems right now but its here to stay whether we like it or not.

My issue is the consistency, the decisions last night were proved correct, no problem with that but they set a precedent, like i said in another post, every player who is grabbed now it has to be a foul whether inside or outside the box, thats the rules.

Livermore barely touched Salah but ultimately he did, therefore that type of decision has to be made all over the pitch, the problem is had it been in front of the kop in Albions favour, i dont think for a second it would of been given.

The final decision falls on the ref, they are going to be under more scrutiny than ever, once VAR is in then the next time an Albion player is touched (no matter how slight) in the box and goes down then based on last night, a penalty has to be given, no ifs, no buts, its a penalty, no room for human opinion and the same if an opposition player does too, there is no human contact allowed which is a shame as thats football.

The opinion seems to be thats the official rules and they have to be stuck too, we will be looking at 5-10 penalties a game as soon as a setpiece comes in, any player trying to block someone off, shirt pulling, etc it now has to be a penalty based on last night, common sense goes out the window.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: baggie82 on January 28, 2018, 03:39:29 PM
The only clubs it will suit long term are the top six who through the use of initimidation will get it used to their advantage against clubs like ours who are supposed to turn up and accept defeat .

Sorry this is utter nonsense. Under VAR goals that are offside will not be allowed and penalty decisions will be reviewed which will cut out a lot of the diving. Not sure how you seriously think that helps the top six. What it does do is result in more of a level playing field. So quite the opposite.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: TheJacko2000 on January 28, 2018, 03:41:34 PM
Sorry this is utter nonsense. Under VAR goals that are offside will not be allowed and penalty decisions will be reviewed which will cut out a lot of the diving. Not sure how you seriously think that helps the top six. What it does do is result in more of a level playing field. So quite the opposite.


Agreed, it just happened to help one of the top 6 yesterday, though not enough... Let's take heart, if that had been a League or non televised Cup game we'd have been 4-1 up at Anfield at half-time!!!  ;D
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: Adder on January 28, 2018, 04:01:37 PM
Sorry this is utter nonsense. Under VAR goals that are offside will not be allowed and penalty decisions will be reviewed which will cut out a lot of the diving. Not sure how you seriously think that helps the top six. What it does do is result in more of a level playing field. So quite the opposite.
Penalty decisions and diving are going to be the really contentious ones....there are some cases where you can look at replays for a week and you won't know if there was actual contact. (in the absence of perfect accurate 3d replays...maybe with the equivalent of hot spot and snicko from the cricket) ::)

Was there contact ?
Did he dive...yes but was there contact ?
Was he diving to avoid getting clattered by a wild challenge ?
The defender dives in misses the ball but attacker has to jump over him and the chance is gone - penalty ?

All possibilities for long VAR delays...there will be some interesting cases and reactions for sure.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: TheBrom on January 28, 2018, 04:19:45 PM
The main gripe I've got with it is that those at the game don't have any idea of what's being looked at. I think the fact they don't want to show it on the big screens in case it's controversial sums up the confidence that must be held by those in charge of the system. Even on the TV it's difficult to understand why things have been given or not given, hiding the VAR person away and not having them talk through their decision seems to add to the controversy to me.

Again it's also inconsistent just like the normal referees anyway. Salah gets a penalty for a slight tug up one end, and their keeper goes unpunished for a blatant push on Barry, where we actually end up with the goal disallowed!

As someone else mentioned, whilst it got decisions correct, I feel it was used incorrectly last night. The officials seemed to be looking for any excuse to use it rather than making calls for themselves and being agreed with/corrected by it.

I've likened it to the system they use in American Football before, where they had to change some of their rules to make them more black and white in terms of what is an offence. Unfortunately there are too many instances of grey-area decisions to make in football for VAR to work properly as it does in other sports, unless the rules are modified to more black and white versions.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: Foster#1 on January 28, 2018, 04:31:52 PM
Absolute **** up by the ref and linesman denying city a goal at Cardiff. No var at the game . If there was the goal would of been given

Cracking goal too
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: mulliganstired on January 28, 2018, 04:51:33 PM
they're obviously misusing it, if it had been looking at the back of the stands it might have caught the sniper who picked off Salah
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: VVVAlbion on January 28, 2018, 04:57:00 PM
VAR will get better but for me was badly used last night and favoured Liverpool. By the letter of the law Salah was fouled in the box (despite not being anywhere near the ball and making an exhibition out of it) as was Barry before he was deemed offside (which I'm not convinced of.. clear and obvious?).
Early days and nearly spoiled the game and definately took a lot away from the performance and result.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: seteefeet on January 28, 2018, 04:57:47 PM
Happy to crack on without it. Got decisions right, eventually, probably, but still!l too much contention.
Bring it back when its fit for purpose and is more transparent.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: KYA on January 28, 2018, 06:14:44 PM
Sorry this is utter nonsense. Under VAR goals that are offside will not be allowed and penalty decisions will be reviewed which will cut out a lot of the diving. Not sure how you seriously think that helps the top six. What it does do is result in more of a level playing field. So quite the opposite.
I agree with mo, most of us are of the opinion that refs favour the big clubs , they are the ones who seem to get the soft penaltys etc  how would a ref off the pitch make it a level playing field?
 
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: baggie82 on January 28, 2018, 07:14:59 PM
I agree with mo, most of us are of the opinion that refs favour the big clubs , they are the ones who seem to get the soft penaltys etc  how would a ref off the pitch make it a level playing field?

Remember when Gary Neville took Dorrans out when he was 1-1 at the Hawthorns in 2011? The ref Chris Foy bottled an obvious decision to award a penalty and send the player off. With VAR that could not happen. It would go upstairs and the correct decision would then be applied.

Remember when Ramires dived in injury time at Stamford Bridge in 2013 and Andre Marriner was gullible enough to give a penalty? Mike Riley then apologised. Well with VAR that would go upstairs, obvious dive on the replay, Ramires would be booked and no penalty and we would win.

Do you think Hazard and other players at the top six clubs who are prone to throwing themselves to the ground are going to get away with as much with VAR in place?
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: adamw1109 on January 28, 2018, 07:46:59 PM
The only people that should be allowed to appeal should be captains only, when 22 players and their managers are getting involved it's too much pressure on any referee and a complete shambles.

VAR should only be used if a referee feels like he isn't 100%... for players to be able to appeal at every single chance because they have conceded or fell over is ridiculous.... and if a referee misses it constantly he should be made to prove he is capable at the level he is involved in.

The standard of the officials recently have been very very poor... they really should address that before giving them even more responsibility.... especially for Liverpool's penalty last night, salah had his shirt 'tugged' yet his legs went like he was hit in the back of them with a baseball bat.

Give it a couple of more season's and there will be no contact at all allowed when tackling.

Title: Re: VAR
Post by: TheJacko2000 on January 28, 2018, 07:49:54 PM
The only people that should be allowed to appeal should be captains only, when 22 players and their managers are getting involved it's too much pressure on any referee and a complete shambles.

VAR should only be used if a referee feels like he isn't 100%... for players to be able to appeal at every single chance because they have conceded or fell over is ridiculous.... and if a referee misses it constantly he should be made to prove he is capable at the level he is involved in.

The standard of the officials recently have been very very poor... they really should address that before giving them even more responsibility.... especially for Liverpool's penalty last night, salah had his shirt 'tugged' yet his legs went like he was hit in the back of them with a baseball bat.

Give it a couple of more season's and there will be no contact at all allowed when tackling.


Shirt pulling isn't tackling and I hope VAR eradicates it. Now the dust has settled it was clearly a foul. Soft but stupid from the abject Livermore.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: KYA on January 28, 2018, 07:54:41 PM
Sorry the decisions were right. The way that they were implemented was clunky. The authorities want the ref on the field to be the final arbitrator but the VAR alerts the ref to incidents that he might have missed. The VAR ref has a better chance of seeing something it is crazy to pretend otherwise. For the ref to go to the side of the pitch to review the video adds nothing but obviously prolongs the process.
You have a point but call me a cynic yes those blatant decisions may well go our way but the two for Liverpool last night were hairline decisions which if  happened the other way around and favoured the smaller clubs i doubt would be picked up and really such decisions should be down to the ref it is the blatant mistakes by refs that this system should be used for otherwise it will become a joke.
This should be a reply to 82 a human error!.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: zippyandbungle on January 28, 2018, 08:14:16 PM
Remember when Gary Neville took Dorrans out when he was 1-1 at the Hawthorns in 2011? The ref Chris Foy bottled an obvious decision to award a penalty and send the player off. With VAR that could not happen. It would go upstairs and the correct decision would then be applied.

Remember when Ramires dived in injury time at Stamford Bridge in 2013 and Andre Marriner was gullible enough to give a penalty? Mike Riley then apologised. Well with VAR that would go upstairs, obvious dive on the replay, Ramires would be booked and no penalty and we would win.

Do you think Hazard and other players at the top six clubs who are prone to throwing themselves to the ground are going to get away with as much with VAR in place?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but going to the VAR is up to the ref?
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: Mo on January 28, 2018, 08:40:02 PM
Sorry this is utter nonsense. Under VAR goals that are offside will not be allowed and penalty decisions will be reviewed which will cut out a lot of the diving. Not sure how you seriously think that helps the top six. What it does do is result in more of a level playing field. So quite the opposite.

Because as I said they will intimidate the referee by however they choose , if one of ours went down in their penalty area like Salah did in ours I do not for one second think VAR would have been called .
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: baggie82 on January 28, 2018, 08:43:06 PM
Correct me if I'm wrong, but going to the VAR is up to the ref?

No. That would be pointless.

The VAR ref is always watching the game and replays. When a key incident happens, a penalty decision for example he reviews and if he thinks the ref on the field has made a mistake he tells him. The ref on the field then reviews the video himself and decides if the decision is to be changed or not.

So when a ref gives a penalty for a blatant dive or fails to give a penalty for a clear foul then with VAR the decision is always going to be overturned. It was pretty obvious to me last night that Liverpool were going to get a penalty as soon as I saw Livermore pull Salah's shoulder. My only surprise was the delay before the ref was told he needed to review the TV monitor himself.

Conversely with offsides the VAR ref checks and tells the ref the decision as no need for the on pitch ref to review.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: caravanc58 on January 28, 2018, 09:06:28 PM
No. That would be pointless.

The VAR ref is always watching the game and replays. When a key incident happens, a penalty decision for example he reviews and if he thinks the ref on the field has made a mistake he tells him. The ref on the field then reviews the video himself and decides if the decision is to be changed or not.

So when a ref gives a penalty for a blatant dive or fails to give a penalty for a clear foul then with VAR the decision is always going to be overturned.
It was pretty obvious to me last night that Liverpool were going to get a penalty as soon as I saw Livermore pull Salah's shoulder. My only surprise was the delay before the ref was told he needed to review the TV monitor himself.

Conversely with offsides the VAR ref checks and tells the ref the decision as no need for the on pitch ref to review.
VAR cannot be called on if play has restarted so all decisions will need to be made quickly.
FA Rules.

The referee may only change a decision on realising that it is incorrect or on the advice of another match official, provided play has not restarted or the referee has signalled the end of the first or second half (including extra time) and left the field of play or terminated the match.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: hardtobeat on January 28, 2018, 09:26:44 PM
with or without VAR one thing that has to happen is the on field refs need to improve drastically, Mason and his team were very poor today
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: baggie82 on January 28, 2018, 09:29:39 PM
VAR cannot be called on if play has restarted so all decisions will need to be made quickly.
FA Rules.

The referee may only change a decision on realising that it is incorrect or on the advice of another match official, provided play has not restarted or the referee has signalled the end of the first or second half (including extra time) and left the field of play or terminated the match.

I'm not sure what point you are trying to make? Correct VAR is dealt with before the play restarts. Which is why the ref on the field often holds up play whilst the VAR ref is reviewing footage and discussing an incident with him. The VAR system is used week in and week out in Seria A to very good effect. The responses on here to VAR getting three decisions all correct is hysterical.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: east-stand-nick on January 28, 2018, 10:27:06 PM
It needs tweaks, but the Pawson was overusing it yesterday. There was really no need to use it when Brunt was clearly 10 yards offside. Might as well just bin the ref completely if that's going to be happening every week.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: Baggie50 on January 28, 2018, 10:45:01 PM
MOTD analysis following the parallel universe non-VAR Liverpool v WBA cup tie

Gary: So a 4-2 win for West Brom, but you'd have to say Dion that the major decisions all went the way of the baggies.

Dion: Well that's right Gary. Albion's 2nd goal shouldn't have stood and within a minute Liverpool were denied a clear penalty. 1-3, but it should have been 2-2 and then it would have been a different game.

Gary: Did Liverpool react in the right way, Danny?

Danny: I can't believe how unlucky Liverpool were tonight. Even West Brom's injuries favoured them. I feel sorry for Jurgen Klopp. He should rightfully been celebrating a spot in the fifth round. They were actually my favourites to win the competition.

Gary: I suppose it's possible Firminho might have missed the penalty and West Brom would have gone on to win anyway?

Danny: Don't talk bow locks Gary
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: tylerm on January 28, 2018, 10:46:45 PM
It needs tweaks, but the Pawson was overusing it yesterday. There was really no need to use it when Brunt was clearly 10 yards offside. Might as well just bin the ref completely if that's going to be happening every week.

Agreed,or when Dawson put one in the net and all of our players except Foster were offside
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: adamw1109 on January 28, 2018, 11:52:34 PM

Shirt pulling isn't tackling and I hope VAR eradicates it. Now the dust has settled it was clearly a foul. Soft but stupid from the abject Livermore.

But salah clearly dived.... that's what needs stamping out... my point is if you walk past someone and pull their shirt... they are not going to drop like they've been taken out by the American sniper.

Regardless if play was interrupted or not... a 'dive' is still a dive and needs stamping out of the game.

If VAR is going to be used, it should be used correctly, effectively and quick enough so it doesn't kill the pace of the game every 10 minutes.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: Aixelsyd on January 29, 2018, 12:03:45 AM
But salah clearly dived.... that's what needs stamping out... my point is if you walk past someone and pull their shirt... they are not going to drop like they've been taken out by the American sniper.

Regardless if play was interrupted or not... a 'dive' is still a dive and needs stamping out of the game.

Then the rules need to be changed... adding that a player must be always "trying to stay on their feet"
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: adamw1109 on January 29, 2018, 10:24:29 AM
Then the rules need to be changed... adding that a player must be always "trying to stay on their feet"

Not really.

If it's a tackle and he dives then it can be up for debate.... but for him to go down in the way he did after a soft tug of his shirt/arm... which was then watched over and over again... clearly shows salahs intention was to dive.

The rules are the rules but the way grown men are falling to the ground is pathetic.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: Regis Rocket on January 29, 2018, 10:44:10 AM
MOTD analysis following the parallel universe non-VAR Liverpool v WBA cup tie

Gary: So a 4-2 win for West Brom, but you'd have to say Dion that the major decisions all went the way of the baggies.

Dion: Well that's right Gary. Albion's 2nd goal shouldn't have stood and within a minute Liverpool were denied a clear penalty. 1-3, but it should have been 2-2 and then it would have been a different game.

Gary: Did Liverpool react in the right way, Danny?

Brilliant, this is so funny  ;D....but could of also so easily have been the case or similar :o
Danny: I can't believe how unlucky Liverpool were tonight. Even West Brom's injuries favoured them. I feel sorry for Jurgen Klopp. He should rightfully been celebrating a spot in the fifth round. They were actually my favourites to win the competition.

Gary: I suppose it's possible Firminho might have missed the penalty and West Brom would have gone on to win anyway?

Danny: Don't talk bow locks Gary

Brilliant, this is so funny  ;D....but could of so easily been the case or similar  :o
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: boinging_along on January 29, 2018, 11:13:37 AM
The problem is, as we saw against Liverpool, all this does is encourage players to throw themselves to the ground theatrically under the slightest contact.  Why not when it's something like that that will attract the VAR official's eye?

Most 'dives' you see aren't ones where there's no contact at all, it's where there's the slightest touch but someone uses it to fling themselves to the ground.  I'd expect the number of these will increase now.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: Atomic on January 29, 2018, 11:21:22 AM
The problem is, as we saw against Liverpool, all this does is encourage players to throw themselves to the ground theatrically under the slightest contact.  Why not when it's something like that that will attract the VAR official's eye?

Most 'dives' you see aren't ones where there's no contact at all, it's where there's the slightest touch but someone uses it to fling themselves to the ground. I'd expect the number of these will increase now.


Yes and you get the pundits spouting absolute rubbish that when running at top speed the lightest touch can bring you down.

The slightest touch never brought Cyrille down.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: Backofthenet on January 29, 2018, 01:05:50 PM
Isn't it odd that there's an 'enquiry' into the use of VAR and that's all that the papers and those bigger clubs seem interested in.
I wonder if it would have received the same publicity and seemingly outrage if Liverpool had won.
Oddly this always seems to happen and forgive my bias but I really don't give a t**s about VAR as it has plusses and minuses. What I am bothered about is the fact that we won because we played better, had better finishing, had a plan that worked and showed (again) what Liverpool are and how we play against it. I have said previously that Klopp is a one trick pony and again that's been proved right. Attack like mad - hoof balls into our box - I bet Hegazi and Dawson loved that, no defending and a useless keeper. When he brought on Henderson, Milner and Ings I knew we would win. That was desperate  All 3 of them don't compare to Yacob !!
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: caravanc58 on January 29, 2018, 04:26:00 PM
if this claim is true by Klopp i wouldn't be surprised.
http://c.newsnow.co.uk/A/921714624?-11200:789
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: TheJacko2000 on January 29, 2018, 04:30:22 PM
if this claim is true by Klopp i wouldn't be surprised.
http://c.newsnow.co.uk/A/921714624?-11200:789 (http://c.newsnow.co.uk/A/921714624?-11200:789)


In the ground we were expecting 8 or 9 minutes at the end of the first half.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: Barrington on January 29, 2018, 04:44:38 PM
Mentioned it in the 'in game' thread before half time the other night. If pressed there is no way that the match officials can deny that they disregarded the actual amount of time of stoppages and just made up their own number. I doubt you'll ever get them to admit that it was on the orders of a TV company though. I'd love to see Klopp's complaint followed through with as it does my head in all the time in many games.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: Big Al on January 29, 2018, 04:54:57 PM
My concerns are
1. If the use is for clear and obvious errors by the officials then if the ref in the studio cannot be sure then it is not an obvious error. The pitchside onitor needs scrapping.

2. As they get better at using the system the officials will rely on it more and more and will then interrupt the game continually. This has happened in both cricket and rugby.

3. The crowd needs to understand what has happened for the original decision to be changed.

Needs more work to make its use easier
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: caravanc58 on January 29, 2018, 04:55:33 PM
what made it look worse was just a single minute difference between added time in the two halves.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: caravanc58 on January 29, 2018, 04:58:26 PM

In the ground we were expecting 8 or 9 minutes at the end of the first half.
in fairness that wouldn't be far off what should've been added. but me being biased and us winning at the time I won't shed any tears.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: ashdoy on January 29, 2018, 06:19:03 PM
Still don’t see how this works in football. Had a few days to think about it, still so many decisions being left to opinion.

With tennis, it’s in or out.
Cricket it’s hitting the stumps or it isn’t.

With football, as with the Salah’s “penalty” it’s still differences in opinion.

Title: Re: VAR
Post by: ronnie_allen on January 29, 2018, 06:27:37 PM
Still don’t see how this works in football. Had a few days to think about it, still so many decisions being left to opinion.

With tennis, it’s in or out.
Cricket it’s hitting the stumps or it isn’t.

With football, as with the Salah’s “penalty” it’s still differences in opinion.


Best comparison is probably to the two rugby games. Where a multitude of decisions in relation to potential scores and serious foul-play could be reviewed. Again can give the referees extra angle and viewpoints but a lot of decisions can still come down to interpretation.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: mifos on January 29, 2018, 06:36:26 PM
Sorry but it wasn't a penalty. Livermore barely touched him for all of 1 second, if one of our players did that then it's pathetic. If ever you've done something like Judo or wrestling then humans don't fall down like that with such ease, it's absolute nonsense but part of the modern game - doesn't make it right and if one of ours dived like that then I'd be embarrassed.
Agree with this. One of the problems with VAR is reviewing something in slow motion  gives a false impression. A momentary touch of a shirt is prolonged. Coupled with a dramatic fall to the floor looks a lot worse. VAR is supposed to address clear and obvious errors. It took 2 refs 3 minutes to decide with the benefit of replays, so it couldn't have been clear and obvious.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: BigFrank20 on January 29, 2018, 06:53:01 PM
But salah clearly dived.... that's what needs stamping out... my point is if you walk past someone and pull their shirt... they are not going to drop like they've been taken out by the American sniper.

Regardless if play was interrupted or not... a 'dive' is still a dive and needs stamping out of the game.

If VAR is going to be used, it should be used correctly, effectively and quick enough so it doesn't kill the pace of the game every 10 minutes.
I'm with you mate Livermore tugged his sleeve and he went down like a beast in a slaughterhouse that had just had a bolt to the head! Since when does tugging a sleeve cause your legs to buckle and make you go straight down in a heap?
VAR should have seen it as a dive 
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: boinging_along on January 29, 2018, 07:00:08 PM
I'm with you mate Livermore tugged his sleeve and he went down like a beast in a slaughterhouse that had just had a bolt to the head! Since when does tugging a sleeve cause your legs to buckle and make you go straight down in a heap?
VAR should have seen it as a dive

That's what would have happen in a normal game too.  Pundits would look at it and go "he's gone down too easily, the ref will never give that" and we'd move on.  Would hardly be a talking point.

Now it's "ooh, there's a bit of contact, definitely a foul". 

It will be mayhem if this system is rolled out as it is.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: Droitwich Baggie on January 29, 2018, 07:06:05 PM
I'm with you mate Livermore tugged his sleeve and he went down like a beast in a slaughterhouse that had just had a bolt to the head! Since when does tugging a sleeve cause your legs to buckle and make you go straight down in a heap?
VAR should have seen it as a dive
I think that is why the ref didn't award a penalty straight away.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: geoff on January 29, 2018, 09:50:26 PM
Simplify it to 1apeal each team
If the ref & linesman are unsure
The ref may call for a video replay
NO other person should be in the ref ear
saying you should look at this.
I may be wrong but it seemed someone
was making the call for var to be look at.
VAR should be their to ASSIST the ref not to overrule him
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: zippyandbungle on January 30, 2018, 09:20:13 AM
It needs tweaks, but the Pawson was overusing it yesterday. There was really no need to use it when Brunt was clearly 10 yards offside. Might as well just bin the ref completely if that's going to be happening every week.
See now this is confusing
I said earlier that VAR use was down to the ref, a poster said no its the person in charge of VAR who decides ......so it can't be the ref over using it?
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: geoff on January 30, 2018, 11:38:30 AM
See now this is confusing
I said earlier that VAR use was down to the ref, a poster said no its the person in charge of VAR who decides ......so it can't be the ref over using it?

And if correct their Lye's the problem it must be down to the ref & the ref in the 1 st place & after a trial run Maybe slow each captain one federal each, maybe.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: Albionic on January 30, 2018, 11:58:52 AM
And if correct their Lye's the problem it must be down to the ref & the ref in the 1 st place & after a trial run Maybe slow each captain one federal each, maybe.

prescriptive taxt strikes again, no idea what that means
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: geoff on January 30, 2018, 01:42:33 PM
prescriptive taxt strikes again, no idea what that means

Lol.
What I'm trying to say is that during the trail run only the ref should have the power ask for var assistant not some old ref monitoring some screen telling him to look again.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: wba_1996 on January 30, 2018, 03:44:14 PM
If we are going to keep VAR, which I expect we will, then the following needs to happen:

1. The referee has no power to call for VAR, he makes a decision as the game is being played as has always been the case. Giving the ref the power to call upon VAR will lead to an over-reliance on it's use and refs will be afraid to make decisions themselves.

2. Each team's captain/manager starts with the ability to call upon VAR twice per game, once they are out of appeals then they can not make another appeal - from then on it will be solely down to whether the incident is spotted by the VAR assistant.

3. VAR assistant has the ability to call for a review at any time if he spots a potentially game-changing mistake (penalty decision, offside goal, red card, handball leading to goal etc.).

4. Referee has no bearing on the overturning of a decision by VAR. No touchline monitors, no players shouting in his face, no fan/manager pressure etc. If VAR is called for, it is solely down to the VAR assistant in the studio, who must decide whether there is a clear reason to overturn a decision based on the video review.

5. Big VAR screens at every ground to let the fans know exactly what is being reviewed and what the outcome is.

Title: Re: VAR
Post by: geoff on January 30, 2018, 05:02:47 PM
Get rid of the ref on the pitch & let the ref in the monitoring center make all the call then
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: Wollastonbaggie on January 31, 2018, 07:02:09 AM
If it's down to the VAR ref every corner will result in either a penalty or free kick the other way unless players stop all the  wrestling that goes on. Compared to what goes on at every corner what Livermore did on Saturday was nothing.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: PsalmXXIII on January 31, 2018, 09:18:31 AM
VAR should be used for offside decisions, unclear penalty situations and off the ball incidents.

It shouldn't be used for things like jostling in the box or checking every single goalbound shot for someone in an offside position who may or may not have been in the goalkeeper's way.

On top of that do away with any non clear cut rules. The offside rule used to be a player in an offside position couldn't receive the ball in an offside position. Then it changed they could get the ball if they came back onside to receive it. Then it changed they couldn't be offside at all whether they received it or not. Now it's they can be offside but can't be seen to influence the play in any way including blocking people's VIEW.

Jesus - change it back to not being able to receive the ball in an offside position and be done with it. Anything purely subjective like 'blocking vision' is so ambiguous.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: barnestormer on March 01, 2018, 10:21:20 AM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/43234569
latest controversy.for me the right descision it gives the kicker an unfair split second advantage over a keeper who may in that same split second commited himself to which way he dives.A penalty kick for me should be a straight unstuttered run up and this kind of kick is just another instance bought in by foreign players like with the diving and have been allowed to get away with it far too long
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: zippyandbungle on March 01, 2018, 11:12:02 PM
Was in the car listening to talk5hit3 when Spurs won 6-1

Some of the rubbish they were coming out with, and this rule I'd never heard of
*if a player starts to be fouled outside the box then the contact carries on in to the box it's a penalty

I have NEVER heard that before, tell me folks have you?

On the VAR ,a lot has been made about the delay, surely the dingbat 2000 miles away with his 34 monitors can just tell the ref, rather than the ref needing to go watch the TV ?
The ref is never going to overrule the VAR monkey anyway.

Football is ruined
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: baggie82 on March 01, 2018, 11:38:39 PM
Was in the car listening to talk5hit3 when Spurs won 6-1

Some of the rubbish they were coming out with, and this rule I'd never heard of
*if a player starts to be fouled outside the box then the contact carries on in to the box it's a penalty

I have NEVER heard that before, tell me folks have you?

On the VAR ,a lot has been made about the delay, surely the dingbat 2000 miles away with his 34 monitors can just tell the ref, rather than the ref needing to go watch the TV ?
The ref is never going to overrule the VAR monkey anyway.

Football is ruined

Nope never heard of the weird penalty rule either. The only problem with VAR in England is how slow the ref on the pitch and the VAR ref have been to make a decision, down to their incompetence. VAR works very well in Seria A. Rare you have lengthy delays. No English refs at the WC this summer as they are incompetent and inferior to European refs. Same with VAR trial. Premier League should have already implemented VAR but we’re backward and full of moaning simpletons.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: SmethDan on March 02, 2018, 12:37:19 AM
Was in the car listening to talk5hit3 when Spurs won 6-1

Some of the rubbish they were coming out with, and this rule I'd never heard of
*if a player starts to be fouled outside the box then the contact carries on in to the box it's a penalty

I have NEVER heard that before, tell me folks have you?

On the VAR ,a lot has been made about the delay, surely the dingbat 2000 miles away with his 34 monitors can just tell the ref, rather than the ref needing to go watch the TV ?
The ref is never going to overrule the VAR monkey anyway.

Football is ruined

Forget the rule or no rule aspect of this.

The incident has proven that players are capable of staying on their feet when contact is initiated.

Just remember that when the condescending idiots pontificate the worth of the next penalty award given for the merest of touches.

Hypocritical w@nkers will be all over it  ;) .

Football was ruined years ago, endless coverage and associated shock value 'opinions' geared to boost listener-ship accentuate the decline.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: baggiejohn on March 02, 2018, 08:37:41 AM
Forget the rule or no rule aspect of this.

The incident has proven that players are capable of staying on their feet when contact is initiated.

Just remember that when the condescending idiots pontificate the worth of the next penalty award given for the merest of touches.

Hypocritical w@nkers will be all over it  ;) .

Football was ruined years ago, endless coverage and associated shock value 'opinions' geared to boost listener-ship accentuate the decline.

There are no rules any more, just guidelines.

Most of the so-called rules now start with the phrase "in the opinion of the referee"
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: Adder on March 02, 2018, 11:00:26 AM
Just use it for offsides and blatant foul play incidents / blatantly incorrect penalty decisions.

Some penalty decisions you can look at for a week and you're still not sure about contact / simulation (becomes a matter of interpretation).

If they can't come to a decision within 90 seconds the refs decision stands.

 
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: caravanc58 on March 02, 2018, 11:15:54 AM
let's just cook it off and stick with what we've used for over 100 years, how about improving the officials and give said officials a pair of balls with the whistle to stop cowering in fear to the top clubs
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: TheJacko2000 on March 03, 2018, 06:00:17 AM
VAR will be voted in today. It's here to stay we just have to hope they can refine the process. This is only a testing stage so it's certainly not the finished article.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: barnestormer on March 03, 2018, 11:29:32 AM
VAR will be voted in today. It's here to stay we just have to hope they can refine the process. This is only a testing stage so it's certainly not the finished article.
Yep,hopefully it will stop the blatant cheating and by that fact will be summoned up to be used far less
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: BaggieBoy04 on March 03, 2018, 12:47:23 PM
Just heard on Football Focus it might be at the World Cup I think it is a waste of time Rugby There video technology works and you can see it on big screens and your TV VAR you can't meaning you can't debate it or discuss it or see why a goal might have not been allowed I thint it is being abused as in the Tottenham game on Wednesday
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: Droitwich Baggie on June 24, 2019, 06:40:02 PM
Causing a bit of a controversy, but I am sure once the length of time to view and sort things out is dealt with, this is the way to go.
It will show a few "big" teams who will not be able to get away with things and possibly stop a few "homer" refs in their paths too.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: TheJacko2000 on June 24, 2019, 06:41:35 PM
Causing a bit of a controversy, but I am sure once the length of time to view and sort things out is dealt with, this is the way to go.
It will show a few "big" teams who will not be able to get away with things and possibly stop a few "homer" refs in their paths too.


USA just got an incredibly soft penalty, I dread to think how many pens will be given in the PL next season.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: Droitwich Baggie on June 24, 2019, 06:52:58 PM

USA just got an incredibly soft penalty, I dread to think how many pens will be given in the PL next season.
Without VAR, it would have been a penalty called anyway. It was blown up and until it was viewed on VAR, it still stood anyway.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: TheJacko2000 on June 24, 2019, 06:59:24 PM
Without VAR, it would have been a penalty called anyway. It was blown up and until it was viewed on VAR, it still stood anyway.


They are giving everything though, knowing they can fall back on the pictures.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: Droitwich Baggie on June 24, 2019, 07:04:02 PM

They are giving everything though, knowing they can fall back on the pictures.
Not really.
Look at the Cameroon match. After initially giving things, the VAR changed the officials' minds and calls.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: elmo_in_swansea on June 24, 2019, 07:17:33 PM
In the Eng/Cam game if those decisions stood as originally given, no one would have batted an eyelid. Yes it got corrected but 'not an obvious error' 6 inches at most, not as if they were a yard offside.
It will get like rugby where the ref is pooh scared to give a decision so leaves it to the TMO.
Football has managed for 100 years without it, personally I don't want it
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: TheJacko2000 on June 24, 2019, 07:45:54 PM
Not really.
Look at the Cameroon match. After initially giving things, the VAR changed the officials' minds and calls.


Irrespective of the final outcome they are giving the easy decision safe in the knowledge it will be overturned if necessary.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: hardtobeat on June 24, 2019, 08:07:37 PM
In the Eng/Cam game if those decisions stood as originally given, no one would have batted an eyelid. Yes it got corrected but 'not an obvious error' 6 inches at most, not as if they were a yard offside.
It will get like rugby where the ref is pooh scared to give a decision so leaves it to the TMO.
Football has managed for 100 years without it, personally I don't want it
Has been same in cricket for many years
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: nick_wba on June 25, 2019, 09:48:22 AM
The officials, especially at football league level, seem to be getting more incompetent. They are getting decisions wrong that can cost teams their season. I think VAR is an absolute must.

Nothing leaves a more sour taste in my mouth than losing a game as a result of cr@p officiating. The technology is there to stop this from happening. Use it.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: Mister AT on June 25, 2019, 09:55:09 AM
The one thing I think VAR takes away from the game is the instant celebration from scoring.

Imagine scoring a last minute winner against the villa, only to have to stop and wait for the ref to check if the goal stands for a couple of minutes before then continuing to celebrate.

It's good in terms of getting the right decision, but as Jacko said, I dread to think how many penalties will be awarded next year in the prem.

Title: Re: VAR
Post by: BoingFlyer on June 25, 2019, 10:05:34 AM
The one thing I think VAR takes away from the game is the instant celebration from scoring.

Imagine scoring a last minute winner against the villa, only to have to stop and wait for the ref to check if the goal stands for a couple of minutes before then continuing to celebrate.

It's good in terms of getting the right decision, but as Jacko said, I dread to think how many penalties will be awarded next year in the prem.

More goals can't be a bad thing. I can see set-pieces becoming a bigger part of the game and more analyses like American Football restarts with VAR.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: Mister AT on June 25, 2019, 10:13:48 AM
More goals can't be a bad thing. I can see set-pieces becoming a bigger part of the game and more analyses like American Football restarts with VAR.

Can see players being more 'tactical' on set pieces now. Any tug on the shirt and the player goes down, if it gets review in slow motion it will always look like the player is being brought down.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: BoingFlyer on June 25, 2019, 10:28:12 AM
Can see players being more 'tactical' on set pieces now. Any tug on the shirt and the player goes down, if it gets review in slow motion it will always look like the player is being brought down.

Gareth Southgate had worked this out when we went to the world cup, more of the same in the premier league.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: ronnie_allen on June 25, 2019, 12:42:43 PM
The one thing I think VAR takes away from the game is the instant celebration from scoring.

Imagine scoring a last minute winner against the villa, only to have to stop and wait for the ref to check if the goal stands for a couple of minutes before then continuing to celebrate.


Actually one of my favourite type of celebrations (pre-VAR) is when someone thinks they scored; only to get it overturned by a late flag or a delayed refereeing decision. So if VAR gives us a chance for Villa to score what they think is a late equaliser only to be overturned 'because Jack Grealish's loose toe end on his old boot is 2mm in front Hegazi's hair then I will happily enjoy the celebration.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: Droitwich Baggie on July 21, 2019, 11:48:52 AM
The premier prima donnas who dive etc. will find themselves looking at a booking this season.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: Hunnington Baggie on July 21, 2019, 12:27:45 PM
The premier prima donnas who dive etc. will find themselves looking at a booking this season.
so Grealish is worthless now? he'd be sent off 3/4 times a game.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: Droitwich Baggie on July 29, 2019, 03:52:55 PM
https://www.itv.com/news/2019-07-29/five-matches-that-show-how-different-premier-league-history-would-be-if-we-d-had-var/

Needed.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: johnnyg on August 19, 2019, 09:32:04 PM
It may be needed, but in my opinion, it is rapidly spoiling and ruining football as we know it.
Fine, if people are prepared for these stop/start games and loss of spontaneity, curtailment of celebrations etc. then great.
Personally, from what I've seen of VAR at the womens world cup and in the first 2 weeks of the new season, its going to be a disaster from an entertainment and flow-of-the-game viewpoint.
Its going to have to be tweaked again to give the refs more autonomy, while maintaining it for certain very limited things.


 
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: divinewind on August 20, 2019, 01:58:33 PM
It's not VAR that's the problem, it's the officials who interpret it. A camera will only show what happens it doesn't decide what decision is then made.
If there had been VAR in our game against Rotherham in 2002 then we would have been promoted before the Palace game. It's frightening to think that "goal"  that was seen by everyone in the ground bar the referee could have cost us not only promotion but the last 17 years history.
Firmly for VAR me.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: Droitwich Baggie on November 04, 2019, 11:59:36 PM
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/50295529
Referees are in sheer panic at video decisions.

Basically they are afraid of being shown up.
They are the in the front line, but don't want to shown up as idiots.
Unfortunately they will be by using VAR.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: royhan on November 05, 2019, 03:59:37 AM
VAR should be restricted to rule on whether or not the ball has crossed the goal line or whether the referee or his assistants have spotted an incident which they believe, but are not positive, merits a red card.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: ronnie_allen on November 11, 2019, 10:34:18 AM
My understanding of off-side is that a scoring part of the attackers body (i.e. excluding hands, arms) need to be behind any part of the second last defender. So if a defender has an arm outstretched towards his goal and an attacker is behind the arm, then he is onside.

However, watching the protractor on Match of the Day there was a case where the defenders arm which was closest part to goal was not used as offside line.

Sorry for the convuluted post but am I misinterpreting something? Read the specified rule and this is how I interpreted it.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: Political Cake on November 11, 2019, 05:40:47 PM
My understanding of off-side is that a scoring part of the attackers body (i.e. excluding hands, arms) need to be behind any part of the second last defender. So if a defender has an arm outstretched towards his goal and an attacker is behind the arm, then he is onside.

However, watching the protractor on Match of the Day there was a case where the defenders arm which was closest part to goal was not used as offside line.

Sorry for the convuluted post but am I misinterpreting something? Read the specified rule and this is how I interpreted it.

It goes both ways - arms (of either team) don't count for any offside ever.
As an AR you're taught - lower limbs, torso and head only. Notably: this includes both goalkeepers!
So, for instance (having heard the phrase a lot), 'playable part of the body' isn't really correct.

Also, the law doesn't say 'behind'... level is fine! (Or rather, same distance from the goal-line).
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: Hull Baggie on November 11, 2019, 05:54:41 PM
VAR should be restricted to rule whether or not the ball has crossed the goal line or whether the referee or his assistants have spotted an incident which they believe, but are not positive, merits a red card.

we already have other tech that does that. It's been in the Prem for 3 or 4 seasons now.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: elmo_in_swansea on November 11, 2019, 06:04:04 PM
I thought it was for obvious mistakes and errors only. How on earth can millimetres be classed as an error/mistake god only knows, if its a foot offside fair enough. Yes its difficult for linesmen as it is but these marginal decisions are part and parcel of the game, win some lose some - just get on with it ffs
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: Albionic on November 11, 2019, 06:09:01 PM
I thought it was for obvious mistakes and errors only. How on earth can millimetres be classed as an error/mistake god only knows, if its a foot offside fair enough. Yes its difficult for linesmen as it is but these marginal decisions are part and parcel of the game, win some lose some - just get on with it ffs

exactamundo, completely farcical now. Needs to be canned for a while until the FA / League sort it out.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: AlbionFan on November 11, 2019, 08:46:33 PM
How about switching from VAR to TMO, that works brilliantly in Rugby Union  8)
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: Adder on November 11, 2019, 10:35:57 PM
It does need a little pod or something where the ref can go and have a couple of looks while he's talking to the VAR ref. The match ref can then take more responsibility for correcting or otherwise.

Unfortunately in football I don't think we can have the ref looking at the big screens - the players would never keep out of it and likewise the managers and coaches if the ref was looking at a screen on the side of the pitch.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: caravanc58 on November 11, 2019, 10:44:46 PM
it should be shoved up the rear end of whoever invented the stupid thing. mistakes were made before it, mistakes are made with it so what s the point?
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: ronnie_allen on November 12, 2019, 12:40:51 PM
It goes both ways - arms (of either team) don't count for any offside ever.
As an AR you're taught - lower limbs, torso and head only. Notably: this includes both goalkeepers!
So, for instance (having heard the phrase a lot), 'playable part of the body' isn't really correct.

Also, the law doesn't say 'behind'... level is fine! (Or rather, same distance from the goal-line).

Thanks for the clarification. The rules I was reading only referenced scoring part of the body in relation to the attacking player.

Also correct on the behind or level. That was my bad shorthand.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: seteefeet on November 12, 2019, 12:56:09 PM
exactamundo, completely farcical now. Needs to be canned for a while until the FA / League sort it out.
Needs a time limit of 30 seconds. If it's not clear enough in that time then original decision stands. You could have a countdown in the stadium, at least then it would involve the fans.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: LiamTheBaggie on November 12, 2019, 01:36:51 PM
Pundits are ridiculous.

Moaned and cried for the introduction of VAR and technology.

When the aforementioned technology is introduced, they continue to moan and cry, stating that its ruining the game.

You reap what you sow.

All the game needed was goal-line technology, the raw emotion of celebrating a goal, bemoaning a refereeing decision and the fast-paced element of a football has been destroyed.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: TheJacko2000 on November 12, 2019, 02:04:33 PM
My main issue with VAR is that surely offside can be computer generated with a Hawkeye type system? This as opposed to some 2nd rate ref trying to do geometry on a laptop himself.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: AlbionFan on November 12, 2019, 02:16:36 PM
I accept that the use of technology in games such as Cricket and Rugby that are, to all intense and purposes, played at a slower pace and that it does provide some benefit.

But I query how this version of VAR really benefits the flow of a game played at pace like football is. It can break the game up, while everyone involved waits around to see an outcome of, well any incident really and it ruins the spectacle, the thrill, the excitement etc. for supports. Refs get decision wrong and they get them right as does VAR. So?
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: Hunnington Baggie on November 12, 2019, 03:07:12 PM
My main issue with VAR is that surely offside can be computer generated with a Hawkeye type system? This as opposed to some 2nd rate ref trying to do geometry on a laptop himself.
without understanding the tech to a decent level, can Hawkeye or a derivative track multiple objects at once? As it would need to predict at least 5 objects (4 defenders and an attacker) at any given time. It’s use on the goal line is already validated but would the cost to cover such a large area as two halves of a pitch make it restrictive to implement?
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: costa blanca baggie on November 12, 2019, 07:21:41 PM
Pundits are ridiculous.

Moaned and cried for the introduction of VAR and technology.

When the aforementioned technology is introduced, they continue to moan and cry, stating that its ruining the game.

You reap what you sow.

All the game needed was goal-line technology, the raw emotion of celebrating a goal, bemoaning a refereeing decision and the fast-paced element of a football has been destroyed.
I thought the system was adopted in order to help referees that had doubts about penalty decisions, or whether there was an infringement that he was unsure of during a goal being scored. He would then ask for a replay, view it, then make a decision. It now seems like a fifth official is pointing out borderline infringements ,and making a decision for him. I can’t remember the last time a referee checked a replay and concurred with any decision. It has become farcical in a very short space of time.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: AlbionFan on November 12, 2019, 08:33:45 PM
In theory VAR sounds great, in practice it’s questionable
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: Windmill Baggy on November 12, 2019, 11:01:43 PM
The problem is of course the definition of 'clear and obvious' when it comes to overturning a decision or pointing out an infringement missed by the referee.

The toe of a players boot 'playing' an attacker onside is not a 'clear and obvious error' surely, as due to the speed the game is played at it's more or less impossible to spot as it happens in the first place. It's absolutely ridiculous.

The phrase needs rewording to be more specific, at the very least.

I think there also needs to be a limit on how many checks can be made per half. Years before VAR was introduced I always felt a '1 claim per team per half' rule, or something similar would be a pretty decent system.

I'm all for video technology being used to an extent, but the way it is implemented at the moment is beyond a joke.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: alex1 on November 12, 2019, 11:12:57 PM
Depends also at which split second the image is taken. Half a second earlier or later would make a significant difference. Needs to have reliable guy taking the images. 
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: TheJacko2000 on November 13, 2019, 04:21:17 AM
Depends also at which split second the image is taken. Half a second earlier or later would make a significant difference. Needs to have reliable guy taking the images.


Offside is a binary decision so clear and obvious error shouldn't come into it. Regards this post I've quoted Sky shoot in 50 frames per second so the accuracy of VAR regards contact when the ball is played is within 2 hundredths of a second.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: Adder on November 13, 2019, 07:26:58 AM
The problem is of course the definition of 'clear and obvious' when it comes to overturning a decision or pointing out an infringement missed by the referee.

The toe of a players boot 'playing' an attacker onside is not a 'clear and obvious error' surely, as due to the speed the game is played at it's more or less impossible to spot as it happens in the first place. It's absolutely ridiculous.

The phrase needs rewording to be more specific, at the very least.

I think there also needs to be a limit on how many checks can be made per half. Years before VAR was introduced I always felt a '1 claim per team per half' rule, or something similar would be a pretty decent system.

I'm all for video technology being used to an extent, but the way it is implemented at the moment is beyond a joke.
Re the clear and obvious error on offsides, I think at the moment, the assistant ref is supposed to keep his flag down unless it's glaringly obvious offside so that play doesn't stop. So even if he thought it was offside and in previous years would have put his flag up, he now doesn't. So now when the VAR ref gets involved the flag hasn't gone up (what I'm trying to say is nobody has actually judged it offside although they might well have without the instruction to keep the flag down).

Re the 1 appeal per half. I generally like that approach. Man City though would have appealed the Alexander-Arnold hand ball on Sunday and still had it rejected (and lost their appeal into the bargain).

Think there has to be a development where match refs go straight to a pod, watch it back, talk to the VAR ref and the match ref takes total responsibility for the resulting decision. I repeat that because of the way football works with player and managerial behaviour, the ref has to go off to a pod or refs room where he's not going to be harangued while making his decision....all takes time of course.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: Atomic on November 13, 2019, 09:00:36 AM
VAR is rubbish isn't it? Lets be honest about it it's rubbish.

It was introduced to be fair to ensure the big decisions were right but officials are still getting them wrong even after closer inspection. No-one can convince me the Alexander-Arnold handball was not handball. If that was an Albion player at Anfield that would be given every single time.

The rules are still open to abuse / interpretation so I really don't see the point in VAR.

It should be scrapped and the people that brought it in should admit defeat but they won't because a) the money spent on it and b) because they will be too arrogant to go back on it now.

VAR will be here to stay and instead of improving the game it will go on making it worse. When teams can't celebrate scoring a goal it is drastically wrong.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: AlbionFan on November 13, 2019, 09:10:16 AM
The Offside rule has changed many times of the years because it is such a contentious rule. So, how about we scrap it altogether to avoid all the controversy that it breads.

There job done, VAR is great, long live VAR!  ;D
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: hardtobeat on November 13, 2019, 09:37:59 AM
Biggest problem for me is they are trying to have a Bob each way. E.G.if Ref gives City a penalty on Sunday VAR would not have overruled him despite the fact that no penalty was given by Var on review ! This smacks to me and many others of just backing the ref not enforcing the facts !
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: gerry m on November 13, 2019, 09:39:35 AM
VAR is rubbish isn't it? Lets be honest about it it's rubbish.

It was introduced to be fair to ensure the big decisions were right but officials are still getting them wrong even after closer inspection. No-one can convince me the Alexander-Arnold handball was not handball. If that was an Albion player at Anfield that would be given every single time.

The rules are still open to abuse / interpretation so I really don't see the point in VAR.

It should be scrapped and the people that brought it in should admit defeat but they won't because a) the money spent on it and b) because they will be too arrogant to go back on it now.

VAR will be here to stay and instead of improving the game it will go on making it worse. When teams can't celebrate scoring a goal it is drastically wrong.

To be honest Atomic looking at it again i thought it was more ball to hand. Pep managed to get away with his sarcastic 'Thank you so much' comments to the officials.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: Atomic on November 13, 2019, 09:53:57 AM
To be honest Atomic looking at it again i thought it was more ball to hand. Pep managed to get away with his sarcastic 'Thank you so much' comments to the officials.


Well there you have it Gerry we disagree and if we disagree then you are always going to find officials that disagree unless you have a clear black and white situation i.e. hits a hand / arm it's handball no matter what. If you go down that route you open up more cans of worms (player deliberately kicks ball at hand from a yard etc) .....

So again what is the point?
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: Political Cake on November 13, 2019, 10:00:06 AM
I thought it was for obvious mistakes and errors only. How on earth can millimetres be classed as an error/mistake god only knows, if its a foot offside fair enough. Yes its difficult for linesmen as it is but these marginal decisions are part and parcel of the game, win some lose some - just get on with it ffs

At the moment:
"Factual decisions such as whether a player is onside or offside, or inside or outside the penalty area, will not be subject to the clear and obvious test."  (from PL's VAR protocol)

They decided (as they must) to make it the same definite, binary result à la if the ball has entered the goal.
The Book says this is absolutely correct, of course. Someone is either onside or offside... the only 'marginality' is about how well you're able to see it!

Mind you - it is a lot more difficult to see offside correctly compared to a static goal-line and a ball. I'd quite like there to be room for manoeuvre but the old thought that "benefit should be given to the attacking team" was nonsense that never existed in the Laws and probably came from some Rugby or, more likely, from referees themselves as you MUST be certain the offence has occurred for you to give it. It is hard to correctly call a near offside.

When you introduce these god-like all-seeing powers, you're effectively making ARs more redundant as the things they will assist with (except fouls) and can be 'looked at' by the VAR are factual decisions. So what are you left with? Calling throw-ins, corners and goal kicks?

So I guess there are two feasible solutions:
  - Change how video is used for offsides (involving a margin of error, contentious with the above, but workable with automated technology eventually)
  - Change Law 11 (Offside). Not like this hasn't been done before for the good of the game.



My main issue with VAR is that surely offside can be computer generated with a Hawkeye type system? This as opposed to some 2nd rate ref trying to do geometry on a laptop himself.

This is... tricky. The goal line is stationary, any particular 'offside line' can continuously change position. What they use for now is calibrated really very well with many cameras in a stadium, admittedly. I've seen them placing fake limbs, heads and football boots on stands to make sure it's working correctly!
All it needs is someone to correctly identify what parts of two specific people (or the ball!) is closest to the goal line; that's the bit we haven't automated successfully yet.

Bear in mind, all of your otherwise successful HawkEye developments all use ball-tracking alone (the DRS in cricket, goal decisions here, line calls in tennis, points in hurling, etc). Trying to determine offside, however, is usually without having the consider where the ball is! You need all of:
 - the moment the ball was struck (and knowing the 'correct' person did it)
 - which part of the specific attacker in question is closest to the goal line
    - and then the perpendicular plane that point makes with the pitch (I hope the field is level..)
    - So you need to first identify, then triangulate; not the other way round. Trial and error, basically, until you exhaust possibilities.
 - repeat for the part of the specific second defender closest to the goal line (don't forget we're not counting arms...!)
...and suddenly this doesn't sound very easy at all.

It can be done but it's generally not very accurate thus far... it was easier (and quicker!!) to get a human to pick the relevant parts.
Ask seismologists about picking first arrivals on a seismograph; it's really a simple thing if I'm honest, but it took ages and a LOT of investment to make it feasible for computers back in the day.
To demonstrate this very well, we haven't seen one yet, but a near offside decision determined by the halfway line will be decided ultra-fast in comparison. I reckon if the VAR is given an arbitrary margin for error with offsides, you'd see it being done automatically pretty soon...

Also; the Premier League actually contract HawkEye to survey and implement the technology already. So if they're supposedly the industry leaders - why haven't they innovated this yet? (They've come up with some good stuff on this end very recently, to be fair)



All the game needed was goal-line technology, the raw emotion of celebrating a goal, bemoaning a refereeing decision and the fast-paced element of a football has been destroyed.

I agree.
I'm not enthralled the application of VAR as it will stand this season. It's too slow. It's difficult to show the accuracy regarding offsides. The only real point of it was to try to protect referees. What it's actually doing is making people realise the game isn't as nice as they thought it was. People generally need things to blame and suddenly, if it's not the referees in the middle, what's it going to be? IFAB are stubborn on this.


What would I do if we really DID want video assistance? (Oh man; ignoring IFAB and FIFA, giving full power to change...)
 - I'd make the VAR only chirp up automatically if it's a missed incident or mistaken identity (ie; the two BIG ones that must never happen).
 - I assume we're all happy with goal-line technology as it's shown with nice graphics, is identified almost immediately, and its accuracy is known.
 - I'd like the assistance for offside changed as above, when it's ready. Automated, out of people's hands, decent margin of doubt, make it decided in less than 15 seconds.
 - For 'everything else' which is contentious, let's make the fourth official more useful. A nominated person (ie; manager etc) can ask them for the referee to review some big incident himself with VAR assistance, the next time the ball is out of play / neutral, and before play is next restarted. In effect, being allowed to 'challenge' a big decision. Maybe give one chance without being incorrect.

I'd suggest that, while this would give the coaches more excuse to time waste, it would crucially put more weight on THEM rather than the referees, freeing up the rest of the game to be run as normal. Fans would know it's the manager responsible for questioning the decision and causing the stoppage and not some extra official far away from the ground. After all, we see the managers barracking the fourth official pretty much constantly don't we...

Making the referee, as a result, step up to have a look again themselves will allow the fans to easily re-understand who to jeer and who to celebrate again. Referees will always be villains to everyone, but now coaches can also take acclaim or ignominy from the sidelines.

Any decision not really questioned until much later or even after the game isn't really worth it - that's what we expect from the game. While this won't remove all the arguments about what's a foul and what's not (which will never go away), it would at least remove the horrible bit of VAR we seem to not like about it 'taking over the game' and introduce a different, more positive drama which the teams themselves can attempt to play it. This would surely be more fitting for a supposedly entertaining elite sport?

Other ideas include stuff like allowing the discussion between referees to be heard and to show what's being looked at to the crowd (again, IFAB have been ultra-negative towards this for fear of negative reactions in dodgy crowds). I'd also introduce changes to how the game is timed but that's enough for now...



Needs to be canned for a while until the FA / League sort it out.

One final note is very important right now - how it's done for the rest of the season cannot now be materially changed without it being unfair on the league. Its use was agreed at the start and its use should not be changed until after the conclusion. SO they're stuck with it.

I hope, come May, fans will long to return to just having the referee alone to contend with, rather than shadow eyes elsewhere...
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: seteefeet on November 13, 2019, 10:18:47 AM
The only way VAR can work, from a fan's perspective, is to be quick. If it takes 4/5 minutes to make a decision it kills the atmosphere, even if 100% accurate (which it doesn't appear it can be, in it's current form).
As I said before, limit the check to 30 seconds, which, if it is a clear and obvious error, should be enough. If not, get on with the game.
If you get the decision you are ecstatic, if you don't you are fired up, either way it would enhance the atmosphere rather than destroy it.
As the technology improves they can look at making it more accurate, but for now, this would suffice as it should capture someone who's a yard offside or a clear penalty. If it's debatable, get on with the game and we can argue about it in the pub after the final whistle.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: MarkW on November 13, 2019, 11:38:02 AM
Great post, Political Cake. I have a question you may be able to answer. Actually the question comes in two parts.

First, is the instance when the lines are drawn for offside the point when the ball and the attacker make first make contact, or the final point of contact with the attacker? I mean, if an attacker "scooped" the ball using their foot, when are the lines draw?

Second, rather than drawing the lines on relatively manually, I wonder if Machine Learning or similar could be used to create a translucent plane that starts at the goal line and moves towards the halfway line. After it passes each defender it changes colour, so as it moves past the goalkeeper it changes, and then approaches the defender/attacker, you can see which parts of the body break the plane, and then it might be easier to distinguish if a player is on or offside.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: Adder on November 13, 2019, 11:38:48 AM
To be honest Atomic looking at it again i thought it was more ball to hand. Pep managed to get away with his sarcastic 'Thank you so much' comments to the officials.
Got  to say, due to him being a reasonable distance from Silva and the ball not going that quickly he should have had loads of time to react and pull his arm away....if anything his arm twitched closer to the line of the ball. These are young highly tuned athletes who should have pretty speedy reactions.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: TheJacko2000 on November 13, 2019, 12:43:38 PM
It came off Silva's hand so makes no difference, would have been overturned by VAR due to accidental handball in build up.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: hardtobeat on November 13, 2019, 01:40:56 PM
It came off Silva's hand so makes no difference, would have been overturned by VAR due to accidental handball in build up.
Apparently not if the penalty had been given but yes if  Trent Arnold hadn't handled and City had gone onto score !!
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: alex1 on November 13, 2019, 03:47:59 PM
Watching a fair amount of Bundesliga, I don't think I've yet seen a decision made by the VAR officials. They give the initial buzz in the ref's ear, but its the ref who then goes over to the monitor at the side of the pitch and makes the decision. The monitors are usually some distance from the coaching staff. That system does seem to cut down the amount of delay and everyone knows the ref has taken responsibility for the decision.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: Hunnington Baggie on November 13, 2019, 03:51:43 PM
Watching a fair amount of Bundesliga, I don't think I've yet seen a decision made by the VAR officials. They give the initial buzz in the ref's ear, but its the ref who then goes over to the monitor at the side of the pitch and makes the decision. The monitors are usually some distance from the coaching staff. That system does seem to cut down the amount of delay and everyone knows the ref has taken responsibility for the decision.
they started with the same system as us and the Germans HATED it. I believe the Italians like the default system though.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: Adder on November 13, 2019, 05:05:47 PM
Watching a fair amount of Bundesliga, I don't think I've yet seen a decision made by the VAR officials. They give the initial buzz in the ref's ear, but its the ref who then goes over to the monitor at the side of the pitch and makes the decision. The monitors are usually some distance from the coaching staff. That system does seem to cut down the amount of delay and everyone knows the ref has taken responsibility for the decision.
Yes that is the only sensible way as far as I'm concerned. The match ref has to take far more overall responsibility which means he has to view it again.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: Albionic on November 13, 2019, 05:53:20 PM
A bit off piste, but does anyone else share my grudging admiration for Germany, from VAR to absorbing east Germany it just seems like they make sensible decisions and get on with implementation, whereas .....
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: MarkW on November 13, 2019, 06:12:06 PM
A bit off piste, but does anyone else share my grudging admiration for Germany, from VAR to absorbing east Germany it just seems like they make sensible decisions and get on with implementation, whereas .....

Don't want this going too off topic, but not always:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-48527308
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: johnnyg on January 10, 2020, 10:03:11 PM
Another completely farcical decision in tonights game.  Complete shambles at this stage.
New rules ?? FFS, the whole VAR system should be ****** out completely.
Its ruining the game.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: gazberg on January 10, 2020, 10:07:43 PM
They just need to apply common sense to these decisions. Then it would be really useful but at the moment it's a sham.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: beechyboy90 on January 10, 2020, 11:20:13 PM
They just need to apply common sense to these decisions. Then it would be really useful but at the moment it's a sham.

Only way it can work is make it like the cricket and number the amount of reviews each game.

Probably help tidying up handball and offside rules as they are both shockingly bad and vague
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: gazberg on January 10, 2020, 11:53:49 PM
I think it's been said that for offside next year there has to be clear daylight rather than a computer saying '1mm off -no goal' so that should improve that.

Also yes the handballs need to be reviewed by the referees as they are the match officials, they should have final say. No way could Rice get out of the way of that so to scrub out that goal is insane.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: Baggies on January 11, 2020, 12:33:00 AM
Another completely farcical decision in tonights game.  Complete shambles at this stage.
New rules ?? FFS, the whole VAR system should be ****** out completely.
Its ruining the game.

VAR was perfectly in the right tonight though.

You could change VAR all you want, bring in a cricket/hockey style review system, create a thicker offside line, remove offside from VAR's jurisdiction completely or give the advantage to the attacking team on borderline decisions, but tonight, the ball hit Declan Rice's arm/hand and bounced perfectly in front of him and West Ham benefited from it. The FA made the law based on the Boly decision last season and I agree with them.

If the law was not in place, and the goal had stood, everyone would have pointed out the handball. The FA can't win.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: Standaman on January 11, 2020, 10:48:22 AM
Entering the VAR debate for the 1st time here. As with everything new it takes time for it to settle and a lot of the noise around the subject is made by empty vessels that as we are all aware of make the most noise.

With half a season gone I think there are 3 key issues.

1. To what extent VAR referees the game

The doctrine of "Clear and Obvious Error" was meant to keep VAR interventions to a minimum. This begs the question what is a clear a "Clear and Obvious Error". Well if it takes 6 replays from 3 different angles to sort it out it is not a clear and obvious error. However as the season has progressed the bar has been lowered because Managers and pundits with the benefit of the aforementioned replays or in the case of Managers looking for something to deflect attention from their teams performance have complained about VAR not picking up incidents.

2. The laws of the game in a VAR world

The offside rule has not changed but in the pre VAR world there were countless goals that were technically offside that were not disallowed because no assistant referee could spot a forward's big toe being slightly ahead of the defender when the ball was played at a distance of 25 yards. Now of course we have a technology that can and the rule is black and white it is implemented and we don't like it.

The other major controversy seems to be handball. Again this is something that is more likely to be picked up by VAR than a ref working in real time but it is compounded by taking an interpretive rule i.e. handball being deemed as being a foul if it was deliberate and turning it into an absolute rule but only on one side of the play which is a bad rule, but if it is a black and white rule you want and you back it up with VAR this is the outcome you are going to get.

3. The fan experience.

I have not watched a VAR game live. Generally on TV I am watching games with little or no emotional investment and as such VAR has barely impacted on my enjoyment of the game. TV commentators wittering on about it endlessly is irritating but then again picking apart refereeing decisions was equally irritating in the pre VAR world but someone invented the TV mute button for a reason. 

In stadium is a different kettle of fish. As ever the communication to the fans in the ground  is lacking and the time delays in decisions takes a lot of the spontaneity out of the experience.   

How to proceed?

Scrap it but in doing so acknowledge that refs make mistakes that a lot of the rules of the game are interpretive and stop dissecting every decision they make from 10 different angles in super slow motion. Move on accept you don't want to lose the flow of the game you might have wanted perfection in decision making but now you have it you don't like it.

Too much time and effort has been invested in this and football authorities won't want to lose face so in all likelihood we are stuck with it.

To improve matters they need to retreat back to the doctrine of "Clear and Obvious". So offsides are only overruled if it could be spotted by officials in real time so Pukki's big toe at 25 yards is not ruled out. The VAR ref has one replay and if they can't say on that replay then they don't overrule the on pitch official. As a separate issue they need to make up their mind on handball either it is interpretive or absolute, but that rule needs to be applied to both defenders and attackers and all parts of the pitch.

If there were fewer interventions then VAR would have less of an impact on the fans in the stadium but where there is a VAR decision there needs to be better communications.

Title: Re: VAR
Post by: BaggieBoy04 on November 21, 2020, 09:50:49 PM
After Tonight get rid of it Clearly biased
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: BoingFlyer on December 26, 2020, 11:24:27 AM
How VAR decisions have affected every Premier League club in 2020-21 website: https://www.espn.co.uk/football/english-premier-league/story/4182135/how-var-decisions-affected-every-premier-league-club-in-2020-21

As expected we are one of the clubs with the biggest loss from VAR, the other unexpectedly is Liverpool.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: Droitwich Baggie on February 13, 2023, 02:16:17 PM
Referees chief, Howard Webb is calling a meeting for Premier League officials after offside errors.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: Bilston Dan on February 13, 2023, 03:33:45 PM
I don't know why they cant use VAR like they use the DRS system in cricket. You have a limited number of times you can use it, though maybe there are too many moving parts...I dunno.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: Barrington on February 13, 2023, 04:11:42 PM
Firstly, it just needs to be manned by better quality operators. I think our referees have had long enough now and have proved to be incompetent or potentially corrupt. Get rid of the idea of on-field referees also operating VAR when they're not doing on-field officiating. Employ (on a good wage) a panel of people whose only job is to work in a VAR room, so they have no affiliation with the referees on the pitch. After (or during) each game when a VAR decision is made that overturns an on-field decision, the VAR panel explain how they came to the decision for transparency purposes. Anyone on the panel found to have made 2 major errors in a certain period of time is permanently eliminated from the panel, losing their job. There needs to be accountability and transparency.

Secondly, this 'clear and obvious error' rubbish needs to stop. It just needs to be that if VAR look at a passage of play, they just make a black and white decision on what the correct decision is. It shouldn't matter what the on-field referee has or hasn't decided on. Absolutely no need for this 'clear and obvious error' stuff apart from to occasionally save face of the referees. It can lead to inconsistency in decisions by VAR from one game to the next on identical in game incidents. VAR should be there to just get the correct decision no matter what the on-field referee has already decided.

Thirdly (is that even a thing), if an offside decision is so close that it's almost impossible to get a 100% correct decision, the benefit of the doubt goes to the attacking player.
Title: Re: VAR
Post by: Adder on February 13, 2023, 05:31:31 PM
Firstly, it just needs to be manned by better quality operators. I think our referees have had long enough now and have proved to be incompetent or potentially corrupt. Get rid of the idea of on-field referees also operating VAR when they're not doing on-field officiating. Employ (on a good wage) a panel of people whose only job is to work in a VAR room, so they have no affiliation with the referees on the pitch. After (or during) each game when a VAR decision is made that overturns an on-field decision, the VAR panel explain how they came to the decision for transparency purposes. Anyone on the panel found to have made 2 major errors in a certain period of time is permanently eliminated from the panel, losing their job. There needs to be accountability and transparency.

Secondly, this 'clear and obvious error' rubbish needs to stop. It just needs to be that if VAR look at a passage of play, they just make a black and white decision on what the correct decision is. It shouldn't matter what the on-field referee has or hasn't decided on. Absolutely no need for this 'clear and obvious error' stuff apart from to occasionally save face of the referees. It can lead to inconsistency in decisions by VAR from one game to the next on identical in game incidents. VAR should be there to just get the correct decision no matter what the on-field referee has already decided.

Thirdly (is that even a thing), if an offside decision is so close that it's almost impossible to get a 100% correct decision, the benefit of the doubt goes to the attacking player.
That's reasonable enough.....the tricky one is point 2 though. Firstly both cricket and rugby use the on-field decision and reasons to overrule it in certain circumstances - cricket when it's a question of whether it's a clean catch i.e. the ball hasn't hit the ground first (umpire gives on-field 'soft signal' DRS checks if there is clear evidence to overturn that soft signal). In rugby, decisions on grounding the ball properly for tries - the ref will give the on-field decision and the TMO will look for definite reasons for over-turning the on-field decision.
In football you just can't get away from the fact that there will always be some decisions where individual interpretation comes into it e.g was there contact ? or was there enough contact for the attacker to go down ? Here the ref and on-field officials are the only ones with a 3D view of things (assuming there's been a good view of the incident). VAR have the 2D nature of TV screens. They may have multiple angles but in some cases even that is inconclusive (and there's the pressure for some speed in the decision). It's hard to imagine rules where there won't be some inconsistency in these types of decision and I think it does make sense for VAR to look for clear and obvious evidence to overturn the on-field decision.