Get rid of VAR NOW! We want our game back! (...or not, some are happy)

[sullydnl]

My point is, if it takes ages and quite literally counting pixels sometimes, it’s anything but clear and obvious and should stick with whatever decision refs made.

That just ends up being the worst of both worlds though. You still get the disruption but you also get the wrong decision, along with accusations of bias. "The decision against us was obviously offside and they didn't correct it but they were happy to correct the offside for Liverpool, even though that was less clear." Or, "the useless VAR didn't want to make a tough call against Liverpool so just waited out the 10 seconds".

That strikes me as a worse state of play than marginal-but-consistently-applied offsides. Simply put, your method would have way more variation and be way more erratic.

 

[Ekkie Thump]

Given that it's obviously here to stay I reckon the best thing to be done is to give some distance of grace to the attacker, in a similar way grace is often afforded a speeding motorist.

Say you have a 5cm band extending backward from the defender. A part of the attacker would have to breach that entire band in order for the onfield decision to be overturned.

That would seem to be a distance that is at least somewhat clear and obvious.

 

[dove]

That strikes me as a worse state of play than marginal-but-consistently-applied offsides. Simply put, your method would have way more variation.

The main reason of all this discussion is that there is no consistency. Sometimes it’s due to human error maybe, other times clearly not. Zero consistency is the main problem we have.

 

[sullydnl]

Given that it's obviously here to stay I reckon the best thing to be done is to give some distance of grace to the attacker, in a similar way grace is often afforded a speeding motorist.

Say you have a 5cm band extending backward from the defender. A part of the attacker would have to breach that entire band in order for the onfield decision to be overturned.

That would seem to be a distance that is at least somewhat clear and obvious.

This is a better route, I think. Though in that case you would still get millimetre calls inside/outside the buffer zone. You would also get goals given where the player appears to be offside but wasn't quite offside enough. If people are happier with that though then.... *shrugs*

The main reason of all this discussion is that there is no consistency. Sometimes it’s due to human error maybe, other times clearly not. Zero consistency is the main problem we have.

Is it? Most of the complaints I've seen on offsides have been about marginal calls, not inconsistent calls.

Though if inconsistency is the problem then your solution makes it worse anyway as you're making it less accurate and more subjective.

 

[montpelier]

It is typical romantic opinion when you remove real life facts. Cool, i want that all games finish with 10 goals, without tackles and that all fans love each other. Oh, wait..but it is not possible. Football as every game has rules. Some of rules you don't need to like but they are there. You can't just allow some irregular goal because it is "beautiful and it is point of this game". Where it ends? Lets not allow defenders to foul attacker who kicked ball through their legs? Lets give a penalty for every 10 corners because that team "deserve it"? And so on...

And now i am the grinch and you are good elf in eyes of other people. . I am grumpy old man who tells the truth

How about legit and fair goals count more than the duff illegal ones?

3pts for a fair score, 2pts for a marginal offside, 1pt each for the rest?

I just want to see the ball in the onion bag and these pesky rules helping the defense is really annoying.

I thought I wanted correct decisions getting made but now I don't.

 

[Kerry Donaghy]

1) If the lines aren't blue and red, it isn't the final image.

2) The line I think you think goes to the attacker's hand is (as far as I can see from that image) drawing the defender's knee to the same plain as the attacker's foot, which is what is being deemed offside.

3. The "clear and obvious error" idea never applied to offsides.

1.Why bother showing them at all then? Genuine question, like name one single point in either the officials looking at them or the broadcaster showing them?

2. There's a big clear line with literally just a hand to the right of it, that's what the eye is drawn to for 99% of people.

3. It also states that it has to be a goalscoring opportunity, a simple pass down the wing is not a clear goalscoring opportunity. This ties into my earlier point that there's a serious lack of understanding of the game from alot of these guys.
They clearly dont understand the rules themselves.

Im sorry but you're defending the undefendable here, fair enough, clueless idiots is a bit harsh, but I stand by what I say, they simply don't understand the game and VAR is just making that more clear and obvious (ironically).

 

[calodo2003]

Can someone answer how the Wolves goal was disallowed? If there is a goal scoring part of the body in an offside position, the attacker is offsides; it appears that the forearm & hand of the Wolves attacker was the only part offside. If that player had scored with that part of his body, the goal would be disallowed. Why would the forearm then rule him offside?

 

[The Firestarter]

Every player already wears a vest with a GPS in it. Can’t be that hard to adapt the technology and have that provide a single reference point for each player on an offside call. No armpits, no ridiculous lines etc.

Except the resolution of non military grade gps is meters, therefore inapplicable to this problem. And what vests are you talking about in the first place?

 

[montpelier]

1. Why bother showing them? Seriously? Give one reason? (More important question, why are the officials looking at them?).

2.


1.Why bother showing them at all then? Genuine question, like name one single point in either the officials looking at them or the broadcaster showing them?

2. There's a big clear line with literally just a hand to the right of it, that's what the eye is drawn to for 99% of people.

3. It also states that it has to be a goalscoring opportunity, a simple pass down the wing is not a clear goalscoring opportunity. This ties into my earlier point that there's a serious lack of understanding of the game from alot of these guys.
They clearly dont understand the rules themselves.

Im sorry but you're defending the undefendable here, fair enough, clueless idiots is a bit harsh, but I stand by what I say, they simply don't understand the game and VAR is just making that more clear and obvious (ironically).

Why should a previously offside player be allowed to assist a goal?

 

[Member 119614]

If these super minor offside goals keep getting disallowed I'd rather have no offside rule at all anymore, even if that dramatically changes the way football will be played.

 

[sullydnl]

Can someone answer how the Wolves goal was disallowed? If there is a goal scoring part of the body in an offside position, the attacker is offsides; it appears that the forearm & hand of the Wolves attacker was the only part offside. If that player had scored with that part of his body, the goal would be disallowed. Why would the forearm then rule him offside?

Because it wasn't his hand that was deemed to be offside. Going by the incomplete images I've seen, it was the attacker's foot.

 

[Fts 74]

Could we not have a limited time to look at decisions, Say 60 seconds?

It's taking way too long to determine what should be a clear and obvious mistake.

Drs works well in cricket, I'm a fan of having a maximum number of referrals, VAR seems to check absolutely everything.

The joy of scoring a goal is no longer there until you get the VAR check complete.

Sad really.

 

[calodo2003]

Because it wasn't his hand that was deemed to be offside. Going by the incomplete images I've seen, it was the attacker's foot.

Wow, you could be right. A third of the attacker’s left foot is ahead of the defender. The fact that such could cause an offside call is embarrassing.

 

[RUCK4444]

It is typical romantic opinion when you remove real life facts. Cool, i want that all games finish with 10 goals, without tackles and that all fans love each other. Oh, wait..but it is not possible. Football as every game has rules. Some of rules you don't need to like but they are there. You can't just allow some irregular goal because it is "beautiful and it is point of this game". Where it ends? Lets not allow defenders to foul attacker who kicked ball through their legs? Lets give a penalty for every 10 corners because that team "deserve it"? And so on...

And now i am the grinch and you are good elf in eyes of other people. . I am grumpy old man who tells the truth

Fair enough your a guy who likes his rule book.

Don’t get me wrong I don’t like wrong calls for the sake of goals but to me it never seemed a major issue overall.

Sure there were bad calls, sometimes your team would benefit and sometimes it would go against you. We all sort of accepted that because it’s sport and you simply can’t be finite with sports and entertainment.

I just feel what we have implemented creates too much of an impediment to the flow and emotion of the game as we knew it and properly divides fans.

They should have tried to improve refereeing first, perhaps even having four linesman per game to cover one quarter of the pitch each. Maybe even pushing through young refs who can keep up with the speed of the game for a start.

 

[calodo2003]

If these super minor offside goals keep getting disallowed I'd rather have no offside rule at all anymore, even if that dramatically changes the way football will be played.

I think if there’s any body connection between the attacker & last defender (if any body parts are overlapping when the ball is played), it should be onside. If we are calling two toes ahead as offside, we should go completely the opposite way & encourage more scoring.

 

[Andycoleno9]

Fair enough your a guy who likes his rule book.

Don’t get me wrong I don’t like wrong calls for the sake of goals but to me it never seemed a major issue overall.

Sure there were bad calls, sometimes your team would benefit and sometimes it would go against you. We all sort of accepted that because it’s sport and you simply can’t be finite with sports and entertainment.

I just feel what we have implemented creates too much of an impediment to the flow and emotion of the game as we knew it and properly divides fans.

They should have tried to improve refereeing first, perhaps even having four linesman per game to cover one quarter of the pitch each. Maybe even pushing through young refs who can keep up with the speed of the game for a start.

Yes, as i said before Var has issues but because of Var there is much bigger chance that winner of CL, PL, World cup etc...is a team which really deserve it. Not a team who won it because they scored irregular goal. The thing which pisses me the most in football is when some team win something with dodgy ref decision( goal from offside, penalty given without reason or clear penalty not given , goal scored with the hand, clear red forgiven and things like that). And now VAR ( mostly) kills that.

 

[ROFLUTION]

That Wolves goal had me quite annoyed. Surely no one knows whether the ball goes off the foot in that specific milisecond. If its not a major and clear fault, the original decision should stand no? isnt that the rules?

 

[Kerry Donaghy]

Why should a previously offside player be allowed to assist a goal?

The key word here is relevance, there are offsides being given now that are simply not relevant to the actual goal.

Fair enough if a player runs in behind and has a three yard head start and scores or directly assists, thats fair enough, they have gained a direct advantage, that's offside.

Now though, for instance, offsides are being given where a simple pass out to the wing might be a millimetre offside, then that player could literally play the ball backwards to a teammate, at which point the offside is totally irrelevant, they're not even in behind the defence anymore. The player who has received the ball could then go and score the greatest goal ever, beating ten defenders and burying it in the top corner and they'd probably overrule it.

For centuries these sorts of offsides were never given because they were not relevant, so both sets of players just got on with it, nobody would even have noticed and even if they did, nobody cared, not even the defending team. During this time, football has become the most popular game in the world, if we now start chalking off goals for offsides such as this then the game has changed, for the worse.

If we're putting the responsibility of officiating the most popular game in the world in the hands of these people (and paying them decent money to do so) then surely it's not asking too much for them to understand what's relevant on the pitch and what isn't.

Thats why.

 

[montpelier]

Yes, as i said before Var has issues but because of Var there is much bigger chance that winner of CL, PL, World cup etc...is a team which really deserve it. Not a team who won it because they scored irregular goal. The thing which pisses me the most in football is when some team win something with dodgy ref decision( goal from offside, penalty given without reason or clear penalty not given , goal scored with the hand, clear red forgiven and things like that). And now VAR ( mostly) kills that.

Which is a sensible balanced view.

Some of the change the rules, its not fair, we want more goals, GPS tracking stuff is hysterical and batshit, lads.

Seriously.

 

[fergiesarmy1]

That Wolves goal had me quite annoyed. Surely no one knows whether the ball goes off the foot in that specific milisecond. If its not a major and clear fault, the original decision should stand no? isnt that the rules?

I found the Pukki one yesterday even more ridiculous plus it could cost jobs for Norwich the difference between going 2-0 up versus going 1-1 after that was huge for them. These refs and absolute clowns at shithead park seem untouchable and it’s ruining this season for me.

 

[padr81]

Technically VAR was right with all decision but my God its exposing incompetence and some stupid rules. There is no way our goal today should stand despite the ref not touching the ball.

 

[montpelier]

The key word here is relevance, there are offsides being given now that are simply not relevant to the actual goal.

Fair enough if a player runs in behind and has a three yard head start and scores or directly assists, thats fair enough, they have gained a direct advantage, that's offside.

Now though, for instance, offsides are being given where a simple pass out to the wing might be a millimetre offside, then that player could literally play the ball backwards to a teammate, at which point the offside is totally irrelevant, the player who has received the ball could then go and score the greatest goal ever, beating ten defenders and burying it in the top corner and they'd probably overrule it.

For centuries these sorts of offsides were never given because they were not relevant, so both sets of players just got on with it, nobody would even have noticed and even if they did, nobody cares, not even the defending team. During this time, football has become the most popular game in the world, if we now start chalking off goals for offsides such as this then the game has changed, for the worse.

If we're putting the responsibility of the officiating the most popular game in the world in the hands of these people (and paying them decent money to do so) then surely it's not asking too much for them to understand what's relevant on the pitch and what isn't.

Thats why.

Well, I think for my bit, offside application of the rule had got very sloppy, its now back as part of the game. If I catch an attacker offside, I also get the ball back with a free kick for it.

I do see the point you're trying to make though. Which is what made them start altering the interpretation in the first place.

 

[Anustart89]

That Wolves goal had me quite annoyed. Surely no one knows whether the ball goes off the foot in that specific milisecond. If its not a major and clear fault, the original decision should stand no? isnt that the rules?

With regards to the first bit, I agree. I think they should look one frame forward and one frame back as well. If you're not offside in all of them then it's allowed (on the other hand, if they're going to CSI three frames instead of one I wouldn't want it).

With regards to the second part, offside is "black and white" so it doesn't apply to offside. The clear and obvious part refers to subjective decisions, for example like the penalty that we got against City.

 

[Zlatan 7]

Yes, as i said before Var has issues but because of Var there is much bigger chance that winner of CL, PL, World cup etc...is a team which really deserve it. Not a team who won it because they scored irregular goal. The thing which pisses me the most in football is when some team win something with dodgy ref decision( goal from offside, penalty given without reason or clear penalty not given , goal scored with the hand, clear red forgiven and things like that). And now VAR ( mostly) kills that.

that’s simply not true

 

[RUCK4444]

Yes, as i said before Var has issues but because of Var there is much bigger chance that winner of CL, PL, World cup etc...is a team which really deserve it. Not a team who won it because they scored irregular goal. The thing which pisses me the most in football is when some team win something with dodgy ref decision( goal from offside, penalty given without reason or clear penalty not given , goal scored with the hand, clear red forgiven and things like that). And now VAR ( mostly) kills that.

Yeah but the thing is I cannot remember anything substantial being won by a team that benefited from an absolute bowler of a decision. Can you?

I mean it would take multiple examples of such a thing to warrant what we currently have.

Look at Moussett goal for Sheffield today, that’s feckin level.
I mean it is possible for two players to be level, we don’t have to break it down to millimetres.

 

[SadlerMUFC]

VAR isn't the problem (for the most part). Yes it needs some tweeking, but the biggest problem is the rules. Especially offside. The offside law needs to be changed...

 

[Andycoleno9]

Yeah but the thing is I cannot remember anything substantial being won by a team that benefited from an absolute bowler of a decision. Can you?

I mean it would take multiple examples of such a thing to warrant what we currently have.

Look at Moussett goal for Sheffield today, that’s feckin level.
I mean it is possible for two players to be level, we don’t have to break it down to millimetres.

Ok, now you are joking, right? Real Madrid and Barca in CL in couple of seasons. And you must look at bigger picture; don't look only finals. Look other games also.

 

[Zlatan 7]

Ok, now you are joking, right? Real Madrid and Barca in CL in couple of seasons. And you must look at bigger picture; don't look only finals. Look other games also.

Can you list these games?

I’d probably list more results that var have fecked up just over this last weekend

 

[RUCK4444]

Ok, now you are joking, right? Real Madrid and Barca in CL in couple of seasons. And you must look at bigger picture; don't look only finals. Look other games also.

Honestly other than the Henry handball for France I cannot think of any actual memorable occasions where I ever thought ‘ya know what something needs to be done’ never.

 

[Fitchett]

VAR just proves how biased and borderline corrupt refereeing in PL is. I am not surprised, been saying it for years, to me it’s a matter of time till it gets leaked in the media.

Absolutely spot on. I've always said you can forgive a referee for not picking something up, when he has one look, in real time and not necessarily from the best view. But the amount of wrong VAR calls proves that many of them are not incompetent, but corrupt.

 

[dwd]

Liverpool beat Palace 2-1 away. The winner comes shortly after Palace's winner disallowed by VAR for a 'push' on Lovren:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/50443051

Liverpool's opening goal given vs City despite VAR looking at it and not penalising TAA for handball:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/50278816

Liverpool awarded a penalty against Leicester by VAR in the 90+5th minute after Mane 'fouled':

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/49861470

Azpilicueta's equaliser ruled out by VAR:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/49705147

These were all close games that turned the tide in Liverpool's favour.

Spot on and there are many many more. VAR has gifted them the title.

 

[TheThingThatShouldNotBe]

I have countless complaints about VAR that I could go on about for ages, but ultimately the consequence of its introduction is that I’m watching less football than last season. I’ve turned off numerous opposition games partway through.

One of life’s great joys used to be celebrating a goal (for me at least), VAR has been disastrous for this. I find it all rather depressing.

 

[Megadrive Man]

Spot on and there are many many more. VAR has gifted them the title.

Just like VAR gifted Liverpool 97 points last season?

Reading through these last pages and there's about 5 cases where VAR has gone in Liverpool's favour, but no mention of VAR going against Liverpool? As if every single decision has gone for Liverpool this season!

The reason Liverpool are where they are is because they have carried on from last season, whereas Man City have dropped off significantly, mainly because their best two centre backs from last season retired and got a serious injury and Pep decided to waste 60 million on a fullback that he never plays instead of signing a replacement.

It really is pathetic to say things like VAR has gifted a team the title!

 

[VidaRed]

Hand the title to VAR.

 

[ROFLUTION]

I found the Pukki one yesterday even more ridiculous plus it could cost jobs for Norwich the difference between going 2-0 up versus going 1-1 after that was huge for them. These refs and absolute clowns at shithead park seem untouchable and it’s ruining this season for me.

Yeah the Pukki one had me annoyed too. We're talking pubic hairs. What really annoyed me about the Trent one, was that it look like they even drawed it onto fecking pixels. A picture combined by visible blocks/squares when zoomed in is for me not good enough for "such an advanced system"

With regards to the first bit, I agree. I think they should look one frame forward and one frame back as well. If you're not offside in all of them then it's allowed (on the other hand, if they're going to CSI three frames instead of one I wouldn't want it).

That's probably the best constructive criticism of VAR I've heard in a long time. I think they should do something like that - It would probably demand 3 times as many refs, to do each frame in the same amount of time though. Could this be done in other ways? I guess there needs to be a human being drawing on each frame, like in the current VAR?

The easiest would probably be to do a buffer-zone of 5-10cm, then also make that buffer-zone visible on VAR.

 

[Jimmy Skitz]

Change is coming:

VAR technology should only be called on to reverse “clear and obvious” mistakes regarding offside, according to the general secretary of the law-making International Football Association Board.

The weekend’s Premier League fixtures featured a number of marginal offside decisions which were checked by VAR, with goals ruled out for Wolves, Crystal Palace, Norwich, Brighton and Sheffield United.

Lukas Brud said the Ifab will reissue guidance on best practice regarding VAR to competitions which use it, probably after its annual general meeting at the end of February next year, which will include information on offsides.
In general terms, that advice will be that technology cannot definitively make a ruling on offside as it can over whether a shot has crossed the goal line, and that therefore VAR should only be used to correct “clear and obvious” mistakes.

“Clear and obvious still remains - it’s an important principle. There should not be a lot of time spent to find something marginal,” Brud told PA Sport.

“If something is not clear on the first sight, then it’s not obvious and it shouldn’t be considered. Looking at one camera angle is one thing but looking at 15, trying to find something that was potentially not even there, this was not the idea of the VAR principle. It should be clear and obvious.”

VAR should only be used for 'clear and obvious' offside errors, say law makers

Sounds like at least a re-interpretation is on the cards.

 

[Mb194dc]

Hopefully IFAB and FIFA will order this season null and void as well then .

I still think it's mainly the premier leagues implementation of VAR that is the main problem. Can't recall many similar issues with VAR in La Liga, or Serie A when I've watched. It's not perfect but it's 99% better from my experience.

The big issue in the premier league is the referees were already the poorest in Europe's big leagues, I think having VAR overrule them constantly, without them making the decision themselves using the screens has made them even worse. Confidence destroying probably?

First step to improve the referees and VAR is to replace Riley at PGMOL.

 

[Anustart89]

Interesting. Good, but I really didn't think they'd budge on the offside calls since they're black and white.

Hopefully we'll see this and not have tons of complains about marginal offsides being let go now since they've seen that it's offside and chosen not to call it.

 

[Brightonian]

Sounds like a step back in the right direction. The purpose should not be to definitively find out exactly what happened using fifteen camera angles analysed for ten minutes. It should be to correct an error by the refereeing team that is immediately obvious upon reviewing.

 

[DavidDeSchmikes]

Change is coming:

VAR technology should only be called on to reverse “clear and obvious” mistakes regarding offside, according to the general secretary of the law-making International Football Association Board.

The weekend’s Premier League fixtures featured a number of marginal offside decisions which were checked by VAR, with goals ruled out for Wolves, Crystal Palace, Norwich, Brighton and Sheffield United.

Lukas Brud said the Ifab will reissue guidance on best practice regarding VAR to competitions which use it, probably after its annual general meeting at the end of February next year, which will include information on offsides.
In general terms, that advice will be that technology cannot definitively make a ruling on offside as it can over whether a shot has crossed the goal line, and that therefore VAR should only be used to correct “clear and obvious” mistakes.

“Clear and obvious still remains - it’s an important principle. There should not be a lot of time spent to find something marginal,” Brud told PA Sport.

“If something is not clear on the first sight, then it’s not obvious and it shouldn’t be considered. Looking at one camera angle is one thing but looking at 15, trying to find something that was potentially not even there, this was not the idea of the VAR principle. It should be clear and obvious.”

VAR should only be used for 'clear and obvious' offside errors, say law makers

Sounds like at least a re-interpretation is on the cards.

Sounds like IFAB is saying the FA is using VAR wrongly.
Still don't understand why none of the English refs go the the screen off pitch. Stubbornness? Arrogance?