VAR

[Brammie Steve]

As warfarin is to rats, so is VAR to excitement in the game of football

[TimRam]

Everton v Arsenal. Penalty! No it's not...it's not even a foul after about 5 hours and the ref running off the pitch to check the screen. Daft.

[RadioactiveWaste]

Is it now time to humanely euthanise VAR using a mixture of opioid painkillers and violent assult with kitchen utensils?

[Mick Brolly]

I'm finding var hilarious all the winging moaning managers careful what you wish for ?? 

[Mafiabob]

30 minutes ago, Mick Brolly said:

I'm finding var hilarious all the winging moaning managers careful what you wish for ?? 

Absolutely 

[uttoxram75]

Its amazing how VAR has made it worse. So many horrendous decisions just today. Why didn't VAR pick up the two handed push on Andy Carroll. I know referees will not give decisions in favour of physical centre forwards but have they programmed VAR to do the same?

The offside decisions when an elbow or shoulder make the difference is an absolute disgrace. Spoils the game more than a biased ref imo. We sort of accept weak refs as human decisions based on what they feel instead of what they see, but VAR should take that human bias out of the game. Instead we use it to give ridiculously close offsides and allow blatant fouls....

[RamNut]

I still don’t see why offside can’t be determined by computer. 

The position of the ball, and the moment of the strike of the pass can be determined, and the relative position of the players by virtue of the gps sport bras that they wear. Let the position of the torso be relevant. Ignore feet, arms, elbows etc. And don’t set the tolerance to millimetre accuracy. Define level as within six inches or even more. 

A computer can make an instant decision, the same as the goal line technology. 

Var is wiping out some great goals because the technology is fundamentally crap. 

[Sith Happens]

I just can't see how Pukki goal was offside. 

Or if it was cannot see how someone with 100% certainty can rule it offside,  surely there is some guessing going on.

Pure farce.

[Carnero]

1 minute ago, Paul71 said:

I just can't see how Pukki goal was offside. 

Or if it was cannot see how someone with 100% certainty can rule it offside,  surely there is some guessing going on.

Pure farce.

Yep it's open to guesswork, normally in the favour of the bigger club.

If you can't see it's "offside" when the action is paused, without using those crappy manipulated lines, then it shouldn't be offside.

[Dimmu]

58 minutes ago, Paul71 said:

I just can't see how Pukki goal was offside. 

Or if it was cannot see how someone with 100% certainty can rule it offside,  surely there is some guessing going on.

Pure farce.

For me, perfectly good goal as well. I think it was similar than this one some time a go:

[Sith Happens]

3 minutes ago, Dimmu said:

For me, perfectly good goal as well. I think it was similar than this one some time a go:

Perhaps they get paid for every time they make a decision. 

[FlyBritishMidland]

It is ridiculous.  There were three disallowed goals yesterday due to VAR and none fit the definition of clear and obvious.

[Dimmu]

Just now, Paul71 said:

Perhaps they get paid for every time they make a decision. 

It's even worse. There is a another ref making the decision. A colleague, who is bound to have a bias. Get the human out of the control and it might actually work as a decisions would be instant and same for everyone. 

As such, it's simply horrible. What if these lost points causes Norwich's relegation? It's not that I really care but what if that would happen Derby?

[Wolfie20]

10 minutes ago, Coolascustard said:

It is ridiculous.  There were three disallowed goals yesterday due to VAR and none fit the definition of clear and obvious.

Clear and obvious doesn't apply to offside. However, I would argue that from the pictures shown on tv and assuming that's what the VAR official was seeing, the Norwich goal didn't actually show Pukki as being offside.

[AdamRam]

1 hour ago, Wolfie20 said:

Clear and obvious doesn't apply to offside. However, I would argue that from the pictures shown on tv and assuming that's what the VAR official was seeing, the Norwich goal didn't actually show Pukki as being offside.

The line for Pukki showed him in front of the Tottenham defender, hence it was ruled offside. If the linesman puts his flag up and there was no VAR, same result, disallowed goal.

Not sure why everyone is blaming the technology when it is just ensuring the rules implemented are effective. VAR enables the linesperson to keep their flag down in thought situations, something they couldn't do previously and helps eliminate human error.

The rules however for me need looking at, should be based upon the players feet imo.

[Mafiabob]

40 minutes ago, AdamRam said:

The line for Pukki showed him in front of the Tottenham defender, hence it was ruled offside. If the linesman puts his flag up and there was no VAR, same result, disallowed goal.

Not sure why everyone is blaming the technology when it is just ensuring the rules implemented are effective. VAR enables the linesperson to keep their flag down in thought situations, something they couldn't do previously and helps eliminate human error.

The rules however for me need looking at, should be based upon the players feet imo.

At last someone who gets it. VAR is here because people expect refs to be robots. The win at all costs mentality is why we have it now. This is all on managers, players and especially in my view..... football pundits. 

[Wolfie20]

55 minutes ago, AdamRam said:

The line for Pukki showed him in front of the Tottenham defender, hence it was ruled offside. If the linesman puts his flag up and there was no VAR, same result, disallowed goal.

Not sure why everyone is blaming the technology when it is just ensuring the rules implemented are effective. VAR enables the linesperson to keep their flag down in thought situations, something they couldn't do previously and helps eliminate human error.

The rules however for me need looking at, should be based upon the players feet imo.

Isn't that the crux of the problem - we both saw the images on tv yet we have different opinions on whether he was off or on? How certain are they of the exact timing of the ball leaving the person of the attacker - a tenth of a second too early or too late can be signigicant in player movement.

I understand the thinking about VAR being able to determine offsides but when there are 2 movements and only 1 is measured then there's an element of fallibility about the process. It's an absolute minefield that's for sure.

[AndyinLiverpool]

37 minutes ago, Mafiabob said:

At last someone who gets it. VAR is here because people expect refs to be robots. The win at all costs mentality is why we have it now. This is all on managers, players and especially in my view..... football pundits. 

Last night, Gary Lineker even had the nerve to tweet, 'stop undermining the on-field officials'. 

The stench of hypocrisy throughout the pundit gravy train is overpowering.

[RadioactiveWaste]

1 hour ago, Mafiabob said:

At last someone who gets it. VAR is here because people expect refs to be robots. The win at all costs mentality is why we have it now. This is all on managers, players and especially in my view..... football pundits. 

I slightly disagree. I think the money people were the ones that really made VAR happen, or rather, without the financial backers of the game wanting it, the players, coaches, pundits, fans etc can shout what they want without making a difference.

[Mafiabob]

1 hour ago, RadioactiveWaste said:

I slightly disagree. I think the money people were the ones that really made VAR happen, or rather, without the financial backers of the game wanting it, the players, coaches, pundits, fans etc can shout what they want without making a difference.

Disagree, they made this happen with the win at all costs mentality for me...... and you’ll still see refs getting abuse and stick . Massive bug bear of mine, blaming officials for not being right all the time