What if your whole foot is just one-millimeter ahead of the defenders trailing foot? It would be the same complain, the only difference is the reference point is changing.
Get rid of VAR NOW! We want our game back! (...or not, some are happy)
- Thread starter RedFish
- Start date
Then its less of an issue because a large portion of his foot is ahead anyway. But as I said in a later post, when its that tight it should come down to the linesman's original onfield decision.
1) It won't increase IMO.
2) I would add also the fouls in the last 25m of the pitch, and bad fouls which deserve a yellow card. In both cases (and offsides too), the decision to be made from VAR referee, while the big decisions (penalties, goals and red cards) to be made from the main referee (who watched the incident in the replay).
Dunno, to me it looks like just changing the offside rule (which can be done), but it doesn't solve the problem. It will still be a binary decision, and when it is a corner case, people will complain anyway.
I also don't see why it has to stand to linesman's original decision, when obviously the easiest thing for him to do is to allow the game continue, and then raise the flag in order for VAR to decide. I think that offsides is one of the easiest thing to do right in VAR, cause it is either offside, or not offside. Pens are more problematic cause it is still subjectivity, though now refs have more time to make the correct decisions.
As I stated in my previous posts I am not against VAR being used to make the decisions in the situations where the resolution of the situation always based on a be subjective decision. (penalty decisions, diving, deliberate handball, yellow and red cards etc.). In situations where you need to determine whether the ball crossed the line or whether the play was offside you need 100% objective decisions. So we came with Goal Line Technology and hopefully in the future we will come up with a solution for an offside problem.
One common criticism of VAR is that "beacause of it you can't instantly celebrate a goal because you think that the VAR will reverse the decision". I can't agree with that one. I always celebrate the scored goal if I think that the player who scored the goal was onside. For example when Rashford scored United's 3rd goal vs Chelsea I instantly celebrated it because by watching that moment in real time I thought that Rashford was onside. If he head been in offside position the goal wouldn't have been count but does it matter whether the goal would be called of by the linesman rising his flag or by VAR. No difference for me.
One common criticism of VAR is that "beacause of it you can't instantly celebrate a goal because you think that the VAR will reverse the decision". I can't agree with that one. I always celebrate the scored goal if I think that the player who scored the goal was onside. For example when Rashford scored United's 3rd goal vs Chelsea I instantly celebrated it because by watching that moment in real time I thought that Rashford was onside. If he head been in offside position the goal wouldn't have been count but does it matter whether the goal would be called of by the linesman rising his flag or by VAR. No difference for me.
But it's not easy to do right whilst the technology isn't up to scratch for the incredibly tight calls.
That's why I reckon the play carries on, the goal is scored and if the linesman thinks its offside he raises his flag (and if he doesn't he keeps it down) and then in the VAR check, if its too tight to call (maybe a 5cm margin for error or something) then the decision reverts back to the original linesman decisions. That way you're not altering a "clear and obvious error" as if it's offside/not offside by 5cm then that isn't clear or obvious.
I don’t even think that goal line tech has added to the game. It’s improved accuracy and is acceptable as a decision point.
But it’s also not as accurate as it pretends to be, and the ‘did it or didn’t it cross the line’ is still an objectively better spectacle than ‘let’s look at this faux cartoon representation and check.
I'd like them to make an announcement as to why the VAR decision has been made so there is complete clarity. Just putting GOAL or NO GOAL etc. still creates a bit of controversy. If you're doing this to cut out that then completely cut it out, don't just half arse it.
They should do it, completely agree.
They will definitely do it. The referee will be mic’d up to the stadium and take a moment to explain the decision. Don’t watch enough to be sure, but isn’t Germany doing this or working towards this?
No time in football for that. That’s more delay
Agree. One of the unquestionably bad things about VAR from the very start has been how badly they explain their decisions. During the WC I would have been at a loss with many decisions if I wasn't tuned in to various journalists online and even then you had to do some guesswork.
For example, the idea that a foul on a attacker doesn't count if the attacking team has commited a foul at the same time or before. Unless you explain that the foul wasn't given for that reason people will be perplexed as they might not even notice the attacking team's foul. They'll just see a blatant penalty not given.
How? You can continue the game with the decision made. Just after the decision is made you explain it in an announcement.
That's one of the reasons, yeah. I was listening to Sunday Supplement and there was a journo on there basically saying how you'd go into a pub after a game 20 years ago and everyone would be asking you for info about the game. Nowadays you know less about the game by watching it live than you do watching it on TV or in the pub.
Your posts should come with a dramatic Hans Zimmer tune.
Funny quip..well done.
How about discussing the post though? It’s obviously the road we’re going down, with more incidents being reviewed & VAR CANNOT get quicker- it’s another bloke looking at a replay. You can’t speed that up.
But of course you can’t discuss the actual point of the post as you’re so pro VAR & entrenched in your view you’ll defend it to the end now regardless
They should give each team 3 VAR calls instead of reviewing all goals and offsides. That would maybe stop these guys from crying.
3 is overkill, but several of us have suggested something along these lines anyway. Far from crying innit, dope.
Would be interesting to see how a challenge system works in comparison, alright.
Though the obvious problem with that would be the tactical use of challenges to waste time. You could imagine a lot of 1-0 games ending with a flood VAR challenges on the winning team's part to go along with the usual substitutions and general time wasting.
Plus while there would be fewer VAR incidents the VAR incidents that do happen would take longer as it would presumably have to be looked at first by the team who may want to challenge it (to decide if it's worthwhile) and then by VAR (to decide if it stands).
Well you'd say they can only be for certain things (Penalties / Red Cards / Goals / Free kicks within 30 yards of your goal) so they can't just try challenge a corner or random foul or something like that.
True, but now they throw themselves to the floor instead. Maybe they need to be stricter on time wasting and penalise players faster for it.
How do you stop a team from claiming that any challenge is a potential red card challenge in that scenario though?
Even if it is quickly dismissed out of hand it's still another break in momentum. Imagine three of them in injury time along with a substitution or whatever.....
This aswell.
Anyway, I'm sure they'll iron the issues out of it in time, to try and keep everyone happy.
It would certainly be worth trying out in some random cup competition to see how it works. I wonder if they ever said what their thinking was in opting against a challenge system? There presumably must be some reason nobody has tried it.
There's no need for "VAR complete"
Probably talked about in these 20+ pages, but is it weird to not completely trust the VAR with these minuscule offsides? Tech is not that good yet to determine when the pass was made and to calculate distances of attackers and defenders from that exact moment?
No it's perfectly valid and fair criticism. When you account for frame rate and human error, the technology isn't yet good enough
That will never happen. The whole concept of offside relies on drawing a line. You can't just allow the referee to decide what offside is and isn't on a whim as they feel fit. All that would do is bring the game into disrepute. If you think complaints about offside are bad now, the whole place would be a complete shit show if refs just chose what is offside whenever they feel like. Thankfully that will never be voted into use.
It’s all becoming a bit too sanitized for my liking. Nothing wrong with “play to the whistle” in my opinion.
I have to say, until you get bogged down in the tedious, wanting everything to be right, detail all of the time. This seems like quite a good post to me.
I almost dread to say - being like, really opposed - but it's amost getting into the 'challenge' territory - where you leave it like it is, but the absolute rubbish is scrubbed out. OK, I don't actually believe that, but it was the original aim, I think.
I don't see that there is an argument that says OLD is better than NEW here, really. If you use it for anything, offside is first choice for me. Same for both sides etc etc.
1)Decrease because refs will get used to it. Future players will grow up with VAR. Because of that defending will change, strikers also will change because they can't play the way Inzaghi for instance played. He was offside allot and would get away with it sometimes, so it was worth the risk. There will be less diving because it will not be rewarded.
VAR itself will also be fine-tuned over time.
People focus allot on how refs and players deal with VAR in the transition period, and are not taking into account how it will influence refereeing, coaching and young players development in the game with VAR present.
2) Only game changing decisions.
VAR art thou? 
VAR art thou?
VAR doesn't check whether the keeper stays on the line.
That's been confirmed for PL games but not European as far I know...
Why not?
It would make far too much sense.
No idea. I'm pretty sure they did in some other tournaments so maybe it was just too finicky?
And that's the point me and many are trying to make. If you pick and choose on what to use technology for and leave gaps, then this whole point about making the game fairer makes no sense.
Can’t tell from a still. It looks like the ball had already been kicked in the image.