VAR

[EtoileSportiveDeDerby]

Get rid. Players make mistakes. Ref make mistakes. People make mistakes. Goals disallowed because big toe or arm pit was in front of last defender???? Totally bonkers.

My 90 year old aunt always say nobody's perfect, the only one who may have been we put him on a cross.

[Premier ram]

its ruining the Premier League , the decisions at Spurs and Liverpool were laughable , a big toe offside , ridiculous , and the handball before the first goal was costly for City , think it would have been a different game if City had won and scored the penalty , with the offside decisions at the minute Luis Suarezs teeth would have been offside every Liverpool attack

[Red_Dawn]

Absolute shyte. Not only is it getting decisions wrong on a consistant basis, it seems its primary use at the moment is to disallow goals. 

Thats not good for football in general, you have to give the attackers the benefit of the doubt. Having an armpit hair in an offside position doesn't mean goals should be ruled out. 

Can't see the EFL rolling it back, but its really but a foul taste on the premier league this season. 

[Srg]

10 minutes ago, Red_Dawn said:

Absolute shyte. Not only is it getting decisions wrong on a consistant basis, it seems its primary use at the moment is to disallow goals. 

Thats not good for football in general, you have to give the attackers the benefit of the doubt. Having an armpit hair in an offside position doesn't mean goals should be ruled out. 

Can't see the EFL rolling it back, but its really but a foul taste on the premier league this season. 

It's causing more controversy than it's designed to remove.

When you consider the usage at the moment, what is essentially happening is they're doubling down on either bad or debatable decisions.

Previously, you get a bad decision and everyone can slate it, but at least you can then say it's human error and the referee has had a shocker. Whereas now, you get the bad human error, and now you get mysterious magic machine strolling in and saying that the bad decision was definitely correct when everyone can see it wasn't.

It's making everyone more angry than ever.

[Spanish]

14 hours ago, G STAR RAM said:

Agreed. Another step closer to destroying the game for the paying spectator. Who cares though as long as it gives the armchair Sky generation something to talk about.

I've cancelled my Sky Sports subscription. Want nothing more to do with this circus. Only seen one live Premier League game this season and I dont miss it one bit.

me too

[RoyMac5]

1 hour ago, Premier ram said:

its ruining the Premier League , the decisions at Spurs and Liverpool were laughable , a big toe offside , ridiculous , and the handball before the first goal was costly for City , think it would have been a different game if City had won and scored the penalty , with the offside decisions at the minute Luis Suarezs teeth would have been offside every Liverpool attack

Except for the fact VAR also missed the handball off the City player before it came of the Liverpool player (mentioned once by G Neville in the post match talk)! It would all be laughable if it wasn't for the fact it's ruining the game. The media don't care it gives them more to go on (and on) about.

[AndyinLiverpool]

Part of the problem, directly associated with the handball is that people don't know the law and its wording, which is this:

It is an offence if a player: 

• deliberately touches the ball with their hand/arm, including moving the hand/arm towards the ball
• gains possession/control of the ball after it has touched their hand/arm and then:
• scores in the opponents’ goal
• creates a goal-scoring opportunity
• scores in the opponents’ goal directly from their hand/arm, even if accidental, including by the goalkeeper

 

It is usually an offence if a player:

touches the ball with their hand/arm when:

the hand/arm has made their body unnaturally bigger

the hand/arm is above/beyond their shoulder level (unless the player deliberately plays the ball which then touches their hand/arm)

The above offences apply even if the ball touches a player’s hand/arm directly from the head or body (including the foot) of another player who is close.

Except for the above offences, it is not usually an offence if the ball touches a player’s hand/arm:

• directly from the player’s own head or body (including the foot)
• directly from the head or body (including the foot) of another player who is close
• if the hand/arm is close to the body and does not make the body unnaturally bigger
• when a player falls and the hand/arm is between the body and the ground to support the body, but not extended laterally or vertically away from the body
•  

One might argue that the handball created a goalscoring opportunity, which would be pushing it, as there is another 100m or so and touches by opposition players before it goes in, but I can't see how any of that applies to the incident.

This is not, much to my chagrin, a VAR issue. It's a pundits / players / managers not knowing the lawas of the game issue.

[EtoileSportiveDeDerby]

VAR is trying to solve a problem which was not a big problem and actually made it worse as i see it.

When they review it first of all it should be put to the refs, you are the experts, is it really helping you ? 

Then the players and coaches what do you make of it ?

Then the paying spectators has it affected the atmosphere or your enjoyment of the game.

Last of all the TV companies who I suspect are loving it, all the debates is it worth it, is it not, is it , is it used the right way, how should it be used, pundits have something else to talk about.

Klopp in his post match interview yesterday said himself I did not really celebrate just in case it is chalked off,  that I think tells its own story.

If they carry on like Next we'll get an anouncement please do not celebrate yet VAR is checking the validity of goal followed some minutes later by VAR has allowed the goal please celebrate.

[AndyinLiverpool]

2 minutes ago, EtoileSportiveDeDerby said:

VAR is trying to solve a problem which was not a big problem and actually made it worse as i see it.

When they review it first of all it should be put to the refs, you are the experts, is it really helping you ? 

Then the players and coaches what do you make of it ?

Then the paying spectators has it affected the atmosphere or your enjoyment of the game.

Last of all the TV companies who I suspect are loving it, all the debates is it worth it, is it not, is it , is it used the right way, how should it be used, pundits have something else to talk about.

Klopp in his post match interview yesterday said himself I did not really celebrate just in case it is chalked off,  that I think tells its own story.

If they carry on like Next we'll get an anouncement please do not celebrate yet VAR is checking the validity of goal followed some minutes later by VAR has allowed the goal please celebrate.

There is no way that this situation will not be exploited by marketing people.

[Ghost of Clough]

First Liverpool goal wasn’t handball. 
Second Liverpool goal may have been offside. 
Man City probably should have had a penalty for handball late on (for the chance of going 3-2)

[FlyBritishMidland]

On 10/11/2019 at 01:38, BondJovi said:

Offside can never be as precise as goal line technology. Why are we trying to judge it down to mms? Do the lines drawn factor in any margin for error? 

If a linesman couldn't make the call then advantage to the attacker. Taking over 3 mins to decide a mm is just inept. Why not just say, there is a 5 cm margin for error and all offsides are based on the furthest forward foot of the attacker. 

All that has happened is that no one talks about refs much, we just talk more about var. It could be a very useful tool, sadly it is being operated by tools.

 

Spot on.  If it takes nearly 4 mins how can it be clear and obvious?  I thought Lineker made a good point on MOTD.  Give them a time limit, say 30 secs.  If it takes longer than that it’s not clear and obvious so the refs decision stands.  Before VAR the benefit of the doubt was always given to the attacker when it came to offside.  This has flipped it on its head and it seems VAR’s sole purpose is to disallow goals!!

[G STAR RAM]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/50380641

Wow, they think it is going well!!

Its improved correct decision making in big incidents from 82% to 90%.

If its not going to improve it to 100% then it should be scrapped.

[Spanish]

20 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/50380641

Wow, they think it is going well!!

Its improved correct decision making in big incidents from 82% to 90%.

If its not going to improve it to 100% then it should be scrapped.

god that's awful reading.  not going to improve whilst there is a self satisfied bamford in charge.  No drive there for self criticism in order to improve it.  In 2 years things will get better?  I think we need to go back to the clear obvious mistake because he clearly is not following it

Offside: Swarbrick said the one-pixel lines used by VAR were magnified for TV broadcast which could make decisions seem more marginal than they are. "We are held by the laws of the game. Once we have made that decision with the lines, there's no interpretation, no tolerance band. It's either onside or offside."

[G STAR RAM]

13 minutes ago, Spanish said:

god that's awful reading.  not going to improve whilst there is a self satisfied bamford in charge.  No drive there for self criticism in order to improve it.  In 2 years things will get better?  I think we need to go back to the clear obvious mistake because he clearly is not following it

Offside: Swarbrick said the one-pixel lines used by VAR were magnified for TV broadcast which could make decisions seem more marginal than they are. "We are held by the laws of the game. Once we have made that decision with the lines, there's no interpretation, no tolerance band. It's either onside or offside."

One things that stood out for me:-

"At the moment, the feedback we are getting back from the clubs, managers, players etc is they are quite comfortable in how we are operating"

A complete lack of regard for the paying consumer.

[Srg]

Just now, G STAR RAM said:

One things that stood out for me:-

"At the moment, the feedback we are getting back from the clubs, managers, players etc is they are quite comfortable in how we are operating"

A complete lack of regard for the paying consumer.

Struggling to see how that's true when they're giving interviews week in week out about how bad it is.

[AndyinLiverpool]

1 minute ago, G STAR RAM said:

One things that stood out for me:-

"At the moment, the feedback we are getting back from the clubs, managers, players etc is they are quite comfortable in how we are operating"

A complete lack of regard for the paying consumer.

Sky? BT? They are loving all this.

[SSD]

It worked really well at the last World Cup because the referee still had control of the matches. It's these PL monkey officials who can't use the technology properly. Where's the communication between the ref on the field and VAR guys in Stockley Park? It seems like the referees won't question the decisions given in the control room, which is wrong. The referee on the pitch has to get a grip of an incident. Just because VAR interpret an incident one way doesn't make it correct. I thought VAR was to advise the referee, this is why I was in favour of bringing the tech in. It turns out Stockley Park are controlling the matches and the referee's haven't got the guts take charge. 

And for Christ sake, give the attacker the advantage on offside calls, not the other way around. An armpit does not determine someone being offside. It's a joke. Sort it out Premier League. 

[rynny]

12 hours ago, Coolascustard said:

Before VAR the benefit of the doubt was always given to the attacker when it came to offside.  This has flipped it on its head and it seems VAR’s sole purpose is to disallow goals!!

I can't agree with this. The benefit of the doubt is rarely given to the attackers, all marginal calls favour the defence. 

[Mucker1884]

Not sure this is the right place, as strictly speaking it's not VAR related as such, but I'd like to see a change in the offside rule... giving the attacker a true advantage... by only being offside if there is "daylight" (10mm or more gap!) between the rearmost part of the attacker, and the forward most part of the defender!

Would hopefully be easier to spot, both for the lino's eyes, and on a freeze frame screen.
Would give an advantage to the attacker, given him "a stride head start".  Let's face it, scoring goals is the main point of football!
Would hopefully mean the defence hangs back a bit, due to the risk, and ultimately less off-sides given?

 

Meh... What do I know!

 

 

[Angry Ram]

Feel for Swarbrick a little on the offside, only in as much as he has to play within the rules are they are. Personally, I hate it, every bit of it, I like imperfect, I might hate it at the time, if it goes against you, but at the end of the day these imperfections bring out the passion in football.