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

VAR - Love or Hate?

  • Total voters
    1,296
Ekkie Thump said:
I think that's fine tbh and I think while there would still be moaning it wouldn't be as loud. It leaves the decisions primarily with the people on the pitch and overturns egregious mistakes - as it should do.
Click to expand...

Seems to me you'd be adding a new complication for the sake of very small (and arguably no) improvement.

You'd swap allowing tight offsides to be called as offside by VAR with allowing tight offsides to not be called as offside by VAR. Both bringing their own problems and complaints.

But the process would still take just as long and you'd still get millimetre tight marginal calls, just pushed out by 10cm. 10cm actually not being all that much. It's, what, the size of a player's big toe? Still a very tight looking call for those of us watching it.
 
sullydnl said:
Seems to me you'd be adding a new complication for the sake of very small (and arguably no) improvement.

You'd swap allowing tight offsides to be called as offside by VAR with allowing tight offsides to not be called as offside by VAR. Both bringing their own problems and complaints.

But the process would still take just as long and you'd still get millimetre tight marginal calls, just pushed out by 10cm. 10cm actually not being all that much. It's, what, the size of a player's big toe? Still a very tight looking call for those of us watching it.
Click to expand...
Can you show us your toes please ?
 
sullydnl said:
Seems to me you'd be adding a new complication for the sake of very small (and arguably no) improvement.

You'd swap allowing tight offsides to be called as offside by VAR with allowing tight offsides to not be called as offside by VAR. Both bringing their own problems and complaints.

But the process would still take just as long and you'd still get millimetre tight marginal calls, just pushed out by 10cm. 10cm actually not being all that much. It's, what, the size of a player's big toe? Still a very tight looking call for those of us watching it.
Click to expand...

The difference would be in the situations that get called. Current rules mean you can be offside by the tip of your nose, whereas a 10cm gap would mean they only call "clear" offsides. It would bring the rule more in line with its original purpose.
 
do.ob said:
The difference would be in the situations that get called. Current rules mean you can be offside by the tip of your nose, whereas a 10cm gap would mean they only call "clear" offsides. It would bring the rule more in line with its original purpose.
Click to expand...
But 10.01 would be called and those clear offsides become marginal and we are back to square 1
 
cyberman said:
But 10.01 would be called and those clear offsides become marginal and we are back to square 1
Click to expand...

They just won't forensically check the decisions, if it looks onside at first glance they'll leave it at that.

It's happening already I think currently in EPL games, and other leagues already do it.

Which is why I can't recall any forensic disallowed goals from other leagues I've watched this season.

The 10cm distance is just the way of presenting this slight change in how VAR offside is implemented.

So pretty certain we won't see 10.01cm calls.
 
cyberman said:
But 10.01 would be called and those clear offsides become marginal and we are back to square 1
Click to expand...

The difference is that the situations that get called are clear offsides, as in there being a clear gap between defender and attacker.
 
sullydnl said:
Seems to me you'd be adding a new complication for the sake of very small (and arguably no) improvement.

You'd swap allowing tight offsides to be called as offside by VAR with allowing tight offsides to not be called as offside by VAR. Both bringing their own problems and complaints.

But the process would still take just as long and you'd still get millimetre tight marginal calls, just pushed out by 10cm. 10cm actually not being all that much. It's, what, the size of a player's big toe? Still a very tight looking call for those of us watching it.
Click to expand...

10cm is about 4" - slightly smaller than the length of a coke can.

I get it's still gonna be an issue but I'd rather the issue be in favour of the attack. I'm also of the opinion that anything under 10cm is definitely marginal and that in such circumstances we're better off sticking with the onfield ruling even if it's in error.
 
Anustart89 said:
We're just going to move the problem 10cm forward then. Was that really 10.1cm offside or was it 9.9?
Click to expand...

You'll look like a pillock if you're arguing with those margins. Yes there'll be the occasional 10.01 but it probably would have been called as offside in the old system.
 
awop said:
Can you show us your toes please ?
Click to expand...

Is that not right then? :lol: I looked up a size 9 shoe and it said it was 25cm so I figured 10cm would be about where the whole toe starts. Spatial awareness not one of my strong points I must admit.
 
Last edited:
Mb194dc said:
They just won't forensically check the decisions, if it looks onside at first glance they'll leave it at that.

It's happening already I think currently in EPL games, and other leagues already do it.

Which is why I can't recall any forensic disallowed goals from other leagues I've watched this season.

The 10cm distance is just the way of presenting this slight change in how VAR offside is implemented.

So pretty certain we won't see 10.01cm calls.
Click to expand...

Not sure what you mean here.

An offside situation would come up, the lines we see would be drawn. If it's quickly evident from the initial lines that it's onside then the rest of the process can be skipped. If it's a narrow decision though then the process follows through and it would continue to come down to millemetre differences. Adding a 10cm buffer doesn't mean they ignore the system they're using if it says the player is 10.1cm offside. It still isn't a subjective call, after all.

The only difference is that the VAR offside line would be more generous than the on-field offside line. It still remains a strict, black & white call though.
 
Not seeing the problem with a margin of error.

If the system isn't 100% accurate and someone was adjudged to be 10.1cm offside when they may have been 8cm offside then they're still beyond the last man and offside by 8cm. Not sure what's bad about that being called offside. With the lines drawn on the pitch, being offside by such a margin would look quite obvious and nobody would have grounds for legitimate complaint.

What are clubs going to do, produce evidence that a player wasn't quite 10 cm offside, forgetting that he was still offside?

Margin of error eradicates situations where a player was 1cm onside and the system says he's 1cm off etc.

If VAR is more than 10cm inaccurate then might as well bin it completely.
 
Last edited:
do.ob said:
The difference is that the situations that get called are clear offsides, as in there being a clear gap between defender and attacker.
Click to expand...
But then the gap between the rest becomes 10cm closer? There will always be razor tight calls. When does something become clear?
 
Chipper said:
Not seeing the problem with a margin of error.

If the system isn't 100% accurate and someone was adjudged to be 10.1cm offside when they may have been 8cm offside then they're still beyond the last man and offside by 8cm. Not sure what's bad about that being called offside. With the lines drawn on the pitch, being offside by such a margin would look quite obvious and nobody would have grounds for legitimate complaint.

What are clubs going to do, produce evidence that a player wasn't quite 10 cm offside, forgetting that he was still offside?

Margin of error eradicates situations where a player was 1cm onside and the system says he's 1cm off etc.

If VAR is more than 10cm inaccurate then might as well bin it completely.
Click to expand...

The problem is that you will then get situations where a player is deemed to be onside by the linesman, VAR then shows everyone that he was actually offside but because he wasn't more than 10cm offside it is allowed to stand regardless.

Fans then complain that not only was the wrong decision initially made by the linesman, the wrong decision was then allowed to stand by VAR. So one set of complaints has been swapped for another.
 
cyberman said:
But then the gap between the rest becomes 10cm closer? There will always be razor tight calls. When does something become clear?
Click to expand...

As long as there is an offside rule there will always be close calls, but by introducing a gap (or thickening the defender's control line) you remove all those calls where players are basically level and the situations that are offside purely on a technical level.
 
sullydnl said:
The problem is that you will then get situations where a player is deemed to be onside by the linesman, VAR then shows everyone that he was actually offside but because he wasn't more than 10cm offside it is allowed to stand regardless.

Fans then complain that not only was the wrong decision initially made by the linesman, the wrong decision was then allowed to stand by VAR. So one set of complaints has been swapped for another.
Click to expand...

True enough. Suppose it could be argued that such a thing would be incorporating benefit of the doubt to attacking players which has always been a thing to a degree.

You'd be sacrificing accuracy from the defender's point of view. Some goals that were a few centimetres offside would be allowed to stand while it would still catch all of the the bigger linesman mistakes where no flag is raised but a player is miles off. At the same time no goals that may actually have been marginally onside would be given off due to VAR not being accurate down to the last millimetre.

Would depend on who you ask as to whether that's good or not.

Edit: I don't necessarily know about 10cm as a margin, I'm not privy to just how accurate it is. They say a lot depends on which exact frame the action was paused at don't they? Not sure what the error margin can be in a frame, two frames etc.
 
Last edited:
sullydnl said:
Not sure what you mean here.

An offside situation would come up, the lines we see would be drawn. If it's quickly evident from the initial lines that it's onside then the rest of the process can be skipped. If it's a narrow decision though then the process follows through and it would continue to come down to millemetre differences. Adding a 10cm buffer doesn't mean they ignore the system they're using if it says the player is 10.1cm offside. It still isn't a subjective call, after all.

The only difference is that the VAR offside line would be more generous than the on-field offside line. It still remains a strict, black & white call though.
Click to expand...

Margin of error means system can't differentiate between such small margins anyway.

There is also a margin of error with goal line technology of 0.5cm, that is only with an unobstructed view of the ball. If the system can't see the ball because something in the way, can be bigger.

With VAR they'll just pass decisions with require forensic analysis to be proven offside.

It's happening already, anyone got an example of a forensic offside not from the EPL?

https://www.givemesport.com/1498162...an-not-every-offside-decision-will-be-correct
 
Mb194dc said:
Margin of error means system can't differentiate between such small margins anyway.

There is also a margin of error with goal line technology of 0.5cm, that is only with an unobstructed view of the ball. If the system can't see the ball because something in the way, can be bigger.

With VAR they'll just pass decisions with require forensic analysis to be proven offside.

It's happening already, anyone got an example of a forensic offside not from the EPL?

https://www.givemesport.com/1498162...an-not-every-offside-decision-will-be-correct
Click to expand...

I'm still not quite getting what you're saying.

The proposed 10cm system would see offsides that fall inside 10cm allowed. They would still take a detailed look at whether the offside does fall inside that 10cm buffer though. So a 10.1cm offside would get a different outcome to a 10.0cm one, in the same way a 0.1cm offside currently gets a different result to a 0.0cm one. All that's happened is the line has been pushed out.

Regarding the bold, other leagues use the exact same offside system as the PL and also have marginal offside calls. See below call that went against Madrid earlier in the season, for example.

 
sullydnl said:
I'm still not quite getting what you're saying.

The proposed 10cm system would see offsides that fall inside 10cm allowed. They would still take a detailed look at whether the offside does fall inside that 10cm buffer though. So a 10.1cm offside would get a different outcome to a 10.0cm one, in the same way a 0.1cm offside currently gets a different result to a 0.0cm one. All that's happened is the line has been pushed out.

Regarding the bold, other leagues use the exact same offside system as the PL and also have marginal offside calls. See below call that went against Madrid earlier in the season, for example.

Click to expand...


They do have marginal calls but they don't spend 5 minutes forensically checking.

The Jovic one he's offside by the line, very simple call. No forensic analysis needed.

They can say a 10cm margin, the tech isn't actually that accurate though... So it's BS, they can't measure to that level of accuracy. Especially not if trying to judge if it's 9.9 or 10.1cm...

They'll put the line but they won't go hugely deeper as they did in the premier League earlier in the season, with the decision taking very long period of time. If the player isn't immediately offside from the line, they'll leave it at that.

Pretty certain this use of the technology is actually already in place now in the premier League.

It's always been used like that in other leagues.
 
The most marginal disallowed stuff won't look quite as marginal when you take the lines away.

Goals will be allowed when someone can be 9cm offside, presumably.

Attackers get the benefit of all fine margins - working from the picture produced.
 


The Wolves offside goal that has prompted annoyance from the Wolves camp.

Key point here isn't just that he was offside but he was also offside by more than the 10cm buffer some have apparently argued for. In other words if you have a problem with offsides like this then it's the offside law itself that has to change, moving the line a bit won't help.
 
I think the biggest issue with that screenshot is that the offside players are so far away from the camera, making it actually hard to properly see what's going on.
 
I've come around to thinking that's it's slightly better. Mainly for how it has players behaving better and offside does now properly exist rather than being a complete free for all.

It isn't much better than another 2nd idiot ref helping to manage the game along though, they don't always seem to be massively concerned about correct decisions.
 
sullydnl said:


The Wolves offside goal that has prompted annoyance from the Wolves camp.

Key point here isn't just that he was offside but he was also offside by more than the 10cm buffer some have apparently argued for. In other words if you have a problem with offsides like this then it's the offside law itself that has to change, moving the line a bit won't help.
Click to expand...


I don't know why it can't be the other way around - literally how as long as any part of the striker is in line with the defender then they stay onside.

You will have strikers stretching their arms out as out wide as they can to be onside - sure it may seem unfair but it would still lead to more goals and consistency.

I can actually imagine it bringing back an element of physicality back in to the game of defenders somewhat tactically ocassionaly as well, with them having to sit a bit deeper, robust and pushing off their strikers rather than playing offside against pacey strikers all the time.
 
I'd love to trial a few friendlies in which there is no offside rule at all.

I wonder what would happen. I reckon there'd be so many goals scored. It'd be amazing.
 
cyberman said:
But 10.01 would be called and those clear offsides become marginal and we are back to square 1
Click to expand...
I don't think so, in that scenario the mindset should be that if you are ruled onside you've had the benefit of the doubt. As the distance approaches 10cm you are less likely to receive this benefit and were almost certainly offside. It is up to the club's not to complain about 10.1cm as being a ridiculous level of accuracy.
 
Bebestation said:
I don't know why it can't be the other way around - literally how as long as any part of the striker is in line with the defender then they stay onside.

You will have strikers stretching their arms out as out wide as they can to be onside - sure it may seem unfair but it would still lead to more goals and consistency.

I can actually imagine it bringing back an element of physicality back in to the game of defenders somewhat tactically ocassionaly as well, with them having to sit a bit deeper, robust and pushing off their strikers rather than playing offside against pacey strikers all the time.
Click to expand...

I suppose the worry would be how the game then evolves tactically. It would initially be a huge advantage for strikers, particularly in certain set piece situations, but teams would adapt and not necessarily in a way that is positive in terms of entertainment value.

Plus it wouldn't have any impact on what people are complaining about in terms of millimetre offsides.
 
The penalty in the Villa v Spurs game was as blatant as they come (given a right viewing angle), but the referee was in no position to see it right because he was so far behind. It's exactly the sort of situation VAR was introduced for, yet hardly anyone thinks it's comment worthy. If it were an incorrect call, you'd have five pages of "it's ruining my childhood" by now.
 
Last edited:
Yet another really poor decision in our game. It's a clear push on Williams, but just as clear that Azpilicueta is pushed into him by Fred. Shows the weaknesses on the system. It zooms in on isolated incidents without considering the bigger picture. Once again, a wrong decision that wouldn't have been made without VAR.
 
Jev said:
Yet another really poor decision in our game. It's a clear push on Williams, but just as clear that Azpilicueta is pushed into him by Fred. Shows the weaknesses on the system, it zooms in on isolated incidents without considering the bigger picture. Once again, a wrong decision that wouldn't have been made without VAR.
Click to expand...

Different is Azpilicueta used two hands. Fred barely touched him and it didn’t impact his movement. VAR decision was correct.
 
El Zoido said:
Different is Azpilicueta used two hands. Fred barely touched him and it didn’t impact his movement. VAR decision was correct.
Click to expand...
He used two hands to dampen a collision made inevitable by the Fred shove. It's a blatant mistake, the fact that it benefited us doesn't change that.
 
Jev said:
He used two hands to dampen a collision made inevitable by the Fred shove. It's a blatant mistake, the fact that it benefited us doesn't change that.
Click to expand...

Look from the reverse angle, Fred’s movement made no difference. Looks worse from the overhead view.
 
At least Neville is right with the offside. In no way can you introduce a tolerance.
 
Really intuitive from VAR to have the line for Giroud in red colour and the line for Maguire in blue colour.
 
You have to say, even though it benefited us today, that these calls weren't what VAR was made for. No team in our situation today would have looked at those goals and felt hard done by. Absolutely killing the game (though it helps when it rigs it our way).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.