VAR and Refs | General Discussion

I’m a bit baffled none of the clubs who voted to continue with VAR didn’t do some sort of fans questionnaire. What we fans seem to think about VAR just doesn’t matter to the people with power, which is also completely mindboggling.

Rarely do you get a fan saying VAR has benefitted the game these days - maybe in other leagues but I’d argue that’s the case for most people in england. The gap between the common man and the authorities is just huge.
 
Melville Red said:
However it’s a game played by individuals and it was reffed by an individual and two lines, oops sorry assistants refs, (who brought that shite in)?
Mistakes happen in all areas of life, some more important than others but this is a game and primarily it’s in the entertainment business and that entertainment is slowly been eroded by stopping the game and studying in minute detail incidents that really should be just left to the ref.
Daft offsides where they let play continue and then five minutes later put the flag up, it’s all negative. Remember the ref getting shouted at and songs sung about him going to Spec Savers? It was all part of the game and should be once more.
Games were not spoilt, the result might not have gone your way or certain decisions you didn’t agree with but Christ we still get that now with VAR only VAR really is ruining the game.
Click to expand...

Well that's because the way they've implemented VAR is a disaster. I'm convinced they sabotaging it.

Two assistant refs were needed to cover because of the pace of the game. Unless you're complaining you can't call a woman a linesman which is daft.

The offside delay means good goals aren't disallowed for a over eager flag which used to happen. Humans can't actually see when a ball is being kicked and simultaneously also see if a player further up the pitch is onside anyway so they are guessing 100% of the time.

Games were 100% spoilt when, for example, you could see replays of an onside goal given offside or vice versa immediately all over social media.

The fact that the implementation of VAR has been a shit show, and they're actively making it worse, doesn't mean things were better before. It could be done properly and there's definitely a way of implementing it which would work well. The refs just have to stop caring about their pride and ego, and stop seeing any challenge to their interpretation, of something they probably didn't really see very well, as some kind of insult.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
Games were never spoiled by correct decisions before VAR. Now we still have enjoyment being soured by bad refereeing AND when the correct decision is reached in the end, because we can no longer enjoy goals without sweating about VAR finding a way to spoil things.

The idea that all that matters in football is making sure that every decision is as close to perfect as possible shows a spectacular ignorance of the whole purpose of the fecking sport. It’s supposed to be entertainment, not a court of law.
Click to expand...

Sorry but I don't understand this everything's ruined mindset. I celebrate goals when they go in, unless it looks a bit dodgy for offside or an obvious foul. I don't have this VAR anxiety and don't understand it. That probably colour my opinion on the subject. I accept others have it as I've read enough people complaining about it.

When are games spoiled by correct decisions? I don't get what you mean there.

Your last point is odd. I'm fairly sure if I looked back you'd have been calling for the introduction of video evidence to assist the refs. Sport is entertainment but if they scrapped video evidence in other sports you watch such as Rugby, would you be for that? It's because of how badly they are operating it, not that there's anything inherently wrong with using technology. I get that you now hate VAR but I'm not sure you're being very logical about it. If we scrap it Refs will still be shit and there will be more bad decisions but sure we can just pretend the decisions were fine and that they all even out.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
Games were never spoiled by correct decisions before VAR. Now we still have enjoyment being soured by bad refereeing AND when the correct decision is reached in the end, because we can no longer enjoy goals without sweating about VAR finding a way to spoil things.

The idea that all that matters in football is making sure that every decision is as close to perfect as possible shows a spectacular ignorance of the whole purpose of the fecking sport. It’s supposed to be entertainment, not a court of law.
Click to expand...
Completely agree. I never wanted it before, and expected it to go this way. There’s nothing about it I like.
 
That Joelinton one is shocking. Completely unnecessary for him to do that. Could have tripped or pushed the keeper to stop the counter but decided to clothesline him which is much more dangerous.
 
Withnail said:
Well that's because the way they've implemented VAR is a disaster. I'm convinced they sabotaging it.

Two assistant refs were needed to cover because of the pace of the game. Unless you're complaining you can't call a woman a linesman which is daft.

The offside delay means good goals aren't disallowed for a over eager flag which used to happen. Humans can't actually see when a ball is being kicked and simultaneously also see if a player further up the pitch is onside anyway so they are guessing 100% of the time.

Games were 100% spoilt when, for example, you could see replays of an onside goal given offside or vice versa immediately all over social media.

The fact that the implementation of VAR has been a shit show, and they're actively making it worse, doesn't mean things were better before. It could be done properly and there's definitely a way of implementing it which would work well. The refs just have to stop caring about their pride and ego, and stop seeing any challenge to their interpretation, of something they probably didn't really see very well, as some kind of insult.
Click to expand...
The game survived for over a 100 years without the shit show that is VAR, we will obviously disagree on this so have a nice bank holiday. :)
 
Melville Red said:
Thanks, I know you mean well but I’m still confused by VAR :lol:
Click to expand...
Clear and obvious error test only applies to decisions which are open to interpretation/debate such as fouls or cards or interfering with play offsides or whether a handball was unnatural positioning (subjective decisions). These are the decisions where VAR will intervene and recommend an on-field review.

Rules which are matter of fact such as offside or contact with the hand immediately before scoring or going out of play in the build up are either true or not (objective decisions). If the fact is proven, there is no clear and obvious error threshold for intervention. They are obliged to intervene and overrule the on-field decision.
 
humdinger said:
That Joelinton one is shocking. Completely unnecessary for him to do that. Could have tripped or pushed the keeper to stop the counter but decided to clothesline him which is much more dangerous.
Click to expand...

I don't understand the logic of how Refs can think brushing someone's forehead with yours, or grabbing someone's collar is more dangerous/violent then literally raging someone down by their neck.
 
Withnail said:
Sorry but I don't understand this everything's ruined mindset. I celebrate goals when they go in, unless it looks a bit dodgy for offside or an obvious foul. I don't have this VAR anxiety and don't understand it. That probably colour my opinion on the subject. I accept others have it as I've read enough people complaining about it.

When are games spoiled by correct decisions? I don't get what you mean there.

Your last point is odd. I'm fairly sure if I looked back you'd have been calling for the introduction of video evidence to assist the refs. Sport is entertainment but if they scrapped video evidence in other sports you watch such as Rugby, would you be for that? It's because of how badly they are operating it, not that there's anything inherently wrong with using technology. I get that you now hate VAR but I'm not sure you're being very logical about it. If we scrap it Refs will still be shit and there will be more bad decisions but sure we can just pretend the decisions were fine and that they all even out.
Click to expand...

I would say at least half the goals any team score potentially " looks a bit dodgy for offside or an obvious foul" which means 50% of the goals my team score are spoiled by VAR. And feck knows my team doesn't score many goals!

I'm fully prepared to have old posts of mine dug up to make me look like a fool (and not for the first time) but I was never an advocate for video technology in football, other than the goal line tech, which is great. It just doesn't suit the sport. It works ok in rugby as the nature of the sport is quite stop/start (see also cricket) but otherwise the only sport I've seen it work in (field hockey) is when they use a challenge system which restricts the number of times the technology is used in any given game, they use a stop clock to measure time (so there's absolute transparency re timings) the discussions between officials and all the footage used is broadcast live and there isn't any offside rule. If all of the above also applied in football then maybe, just maybe, VAR might improve the game. If not, it can feck off.
 
Joelinton incident according to Dermot:

DERMOT SAYS: "I think in no way shape or form is this a red card. If you look at it, his intention is purely to delay the goalkeeper [Neto] from getting that ball up the pitch on the counter-attack.

"It looks worse because the goalkeeper is moving but if you look carefully, he grabs the goalkeeper by the chest - not the throat or the face.

"He's breaking up a promising attack - it doesn't mean he is covering for defenders. His sole purpose is to stop the goalkeeper releasing the ball.

"It is reckless and unsporting."
Click to expand...

I dont even know what to say anymore. I just give up at this point.
 
Garnacho's Shoelaces said:
Clear and obvious error test only applies to decisions which are open to interpretation/debate such as fouls or cards or interfering with play offsides or whether a handball was unnatural positioning (subjective decisions). These are the decisions where VAR will intervene and recommend an on-field review.

Rules which are matter of fact such as offside or contact with the hand immediately before scoring or going out of play in the build up are either true or not (objective decisions). If the fact is proven, there is no clear and obvious error threshold for intervention. They are obliged to intervene and overrule the on-field decision.
Click to expand...

The problem with that decision was, I don't know how anyone could conclusively say it was definitely a handball. It wasn't clear from the replays.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
I would say at least half the goals any team score potentially " looks a bit dodgy for offside or an obvious foul" which means 50% of the goals my team score are spoiled by VAR. And feck knows my team doesn't score many goals!

I'm fully prepared to have old posts of mine dug up to make me look like a fool (and not for the first time) but I was never an advocate for video technology in football, other than the goal line tech, which is great. It just doesn't suit the sport. It works ok in rugby as the nature of the sport is quite stop/start (see also cricket) but otherwise the only sport I've seen it work in (field hockey) is when they use a challenge system which restricts the number of times the technology is used in any given game, they use a stop clock to measure time (so there's absolute transparency re timings) the discussions between officials and all the footage used is broadcast live and there isn't any offside rule. If all of the above also applied in football then maybe, just maybe, VAR might improve the game. If not, it can feck off.
Click to expand...

Fair enough, my memories not the best.

There's a lot wrong with the officiating and on the stop clock thing, I couldn't believe they made the move to reduce added time this year. The ball is now in play less than 60 mins.

Certainly they couldn't have implemented a worse version of VAR if they tried and every year they seem intent on making it worse.
 
Ayoba said:
Joelinton incident according to Dermot:



I dont even know what to say anymore. I just give up at this point.
Click to expand...

Ah ok so clotheslines are ok because Gallagher decided after the fact that he didn't mean it.

We all know he'd have stated the opposite view if the ref had given a red.
 
Bit of a rough start for VAR. It probably was not a huge moment, but why was Ipswich denied a penalty at 3-1 for City? It was about as plum as it gets for me.
 
Only just watched the Joelinton incident. That is an outrageous decision - rarely do you see as blatant, obvious a red as that out in the open. Joelinton and Guimaraes have gotten away with some insane stuff the last couple of seasons.
 
A general thought about VAR and handball. Does any other sport involve a similar offence? Where the replay needs to confirm not only that something happened but that it happened deliberately? Because that just seems doomed to create an unsolvable controversy, indefinitely. Hence all the shuffling around of deckchairs on the Titanic with nonsense directives about natural and unnatural position of arms and a different rule for handballs that cause goals vs handballs that prevent them. Which is insane and couldn’t have happened without VAR.

Field hockey uses video technology but the equivalent offence is binary. Has the ball struck a limb? Yes or no. If yes, a foul has been committed. That’s an opinion that is suited to frame by frame, extremely slow replays. The interpretation of handball in football is absolutely not. If anything the real time impression of an experienced referee is more likely to get the right outcome.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
A general thought about VAR and handball. Does any other sport involve a similar offence? Where the replay needs to confirm not only that something happened but that it happened deliberately? Because that just seems doomed to create an unsolvable controversy, indefinitely. Hence all the shuffling around of deckchairs on the Titanic with nonsense directives about natural and unnatural position of arms and a different rule for handballs that cause goals vs handballs that prevent them. Which is insane and couldn’t have happened without VAR.

Field hockey uses video technology but the equivalent offence is binary. Has the ball struck a limb? Yes or no. If yes, a foul has been committed. That’s an opinion that is suited to frame by frame, extremely slow replays. The interpretation of handball in football is absolutely not. If anything the real time impression of an experienced referee is more likely to get the right outcome.
Click to expand...
The problem with handball in footabll is that, if you mandate that if the ball hits the hand/arm is always considered handball, the result will be everyone just smashes the ball at players in the box to get a penalty, uness it goes that route, which we'd all hate, there's always going to be some element of subjectiveness, I've no idea what the answer is though
 
Changeisgood said:
Bit of a rough start for VAR. It probably was not a huge moment, but why was Ipswich denied a penalty at 3-1 for City? It was about as plum as it gets for me.
Click to expand...
City mainly get favourable decisions because they've corrupted the impartiality of officials with their trips to UAE to referee matches about 10 tiers below their level for 30-40% of their yearly salary.
 
Red in STL said:
The problem with handball in footabll is that, if you mandate that if the ball hits the hand/arm is always considered handball, the result will be everyone just smashes the ball at players in the box to get a penalty, uness it goes that route, which we'd all hate, there's always going to be some element of subjectiveness, I've no idea what the answer is though
Click to expand...

It wasn’t an impossible problem in need of an answer before VAR though. That’s the issue here. For decades handball didn’t cause even a fraction of the controversy it’s causing every single season now. The ref made a call in real time. Sometimes he got it right. Sometimes he got it wrong. If he got it wrong it was just one of those things, rather than corruption or some sort of grave injustice. And you never had to look at the frankly preposterous sight of defenders so terrified of VAR they have to contort their body to keep their arms out of the line of fire. It’s mental that football has ended up like this.
 
Smacky The Frog said:
Only just watched the Joelinton incident. That is an outrageous decision - rarely do you see as blatant, obvious a red as that out in the open. Joelinton and Guimaraes have gotten away with some insane stuff the last couple of seasons.
Click to expand...
When you think of the mental gymnastics VAR and PMGOL went through to justify a reason to send off Casemiro for handling Will Hughes' (the aggressor) shirt, it stinks when they then put equal amounts of effort in to try and justify not sending off Joelinton for actual violent conduct.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
It wasn’t an impossible problem in need of an answer before VAR though. That’s the issue here. For decades handball didn’t cause even a fraction of the controversy it’s causing every single season now. The ref made a call in real time. Sometimes he got it right. Sometimes he got it wrong. If he got it wrong it was just one of those things, rather than corruption or some sort of grave injustice. And you never had to look at the frankly preposterous sight of defenders so terrified of VAR they have to contort their body to keep their arms out of the line of fire. It’s mental that football has ended up like this.
Click to expand...
Probably true, but VAR didn't change the rules applied to handball, that's on the ruling bodies, that said the interpretation is still fecked!
 
It continues to shine a light on how inept the officials and those who manage them are. Every week there are horrendous decisions made that should be corrected with the technology available. Either use it to make the right decision or do away with the technology.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
It wasn’t an impossible problem in need of an answer before VAR though. That’s the issue here. For decades handball didn’t cause even a fraction of the controversy it’s causing every single season now. The ref made a call in real time. Sometimes he got it right. Sometimes he got it wrong. If he got it wrong it was just one of those things, rather than corruption or some sort of grave injustice. And you never had to look at the frankly preposterous sight of defenders so terrified of VAR they have to contort their body to keep their arms out of the line of fire. It’s mental that football has ended up like this.
Click to expand...
I agree with you. Conversely, when refs got it wrong and a title or relegation is on the line, it wasn't just "one of those things". Fans were livid and actually called for assistance for the refs in that instance. It's not a perfect scenario but I would prefer the refs got the decision right cause if the wrong decision was the line between relegation, title win or top 4, the respective teams would call for change.
 
Il Prete Rosso said:
I agree with you. Conversely, when refs got it wrong and a title or relegation is on the line, it wasn't just "one of those things". Fans were livid and actually called for assistance for the refs in that instance. It's not a perfect scenario but I would prefer the refs got the decision right cause if the wrong decision was the line between relegation, title win or top 4, the respective teams would call for change.
Click to expand...

To me it was always part of football's rich tapestry. I don't think football is any better in an alternative universe without Maradonna's hand of god goal. I don't even mind Henry's handball against Ireland. It's all just great drama and part of the rollercoaster life of being a football fan. Where I do feel deeply aggrieved, though, is enduring all the obvious downsides of VAR (goal celebrations ruined, lengthy delays etc) and still feeling pissed off about key decisions every year (in fact, most weekends) The cons just don't justify the pros. To me anyway.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
To me it was always part of football's rich tapestry. I don't think football is any better in an alternative universe without Maradonna's hand of god goal. I don't even mind Henry's handball against Ireland. It's all just great drama and part of the rollercoaster life of being a football fan. Where I do feel deeply aggrieved, though, is enduring all the obvious downsides of VAR (goal celebrations ruined, lengthy delays etc) and still feeling pissed off about key decisions every year (in fact, most weekends) The cons just don't justify the pros. To me anyway.
Click to expand...
Yeah I see what you're saying. It ruins the 'organicness' of the sport. I honestly think that money had a huge part to play in implementing VAR but maybe that's my brain working overtime. :)
 
Important to note that they've tweaked the rule this year and Webb cited the phenomenon of defenders trying to defend with their arms behind their back in a recent interview I heard about it. I can't find it now but the below is the change.

According to current Premier League guidelines which were released to broadcasters and journalists including The Sporting News, ahead of the 2024/25 season, a deflection is taken into account if the ball comes off the same player or their teammate just prior to the ball striking the arm. In such a scenario, the rules regarding a "justifiable" position of the arm are greatly relaxed.

The example given by Premier League officiating chief Howard Webb was an incident the prior season that saw Wolves defender Joao Gomes concede a penalty for Luton Town. The incident, Webb said, would not be ruled a penalty under the new guidance because of a deflection off a teammate's knee which sent the ball up towards Gomes' outstretched arm. While a deflection does not guarantee a defender gets away with a handball, it does greatly relax the threshold of what is a "justifiable" position of the arm.
Click to expand...

https://www.sportingnews.com/uk/foo...efa-hand-ball-soccer/tdnqkct6nzocrbfvscrxvtzl
 
Il Prete Rosso said:
I agree with you. Conversely, when refs got it wrong and a title or relegation is on the line, it wasn't just "one of those things". Fans were livid and actually called for assistance for the refs in that instance. It's not a perfect scenario but I would prefer the refs got the decision right cause if the wrong decision was the line between relegation, title win or top 4, the respective teams would call for change.
Click to expand...


https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/football/12419385/manchester-united-sevilla-goal-europa-league-var/

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2008/mar/11/newsstory.manchesterunited

Just three decisions which come to mind but probably cost us an EPL, a UEL and FA Cup which would have completed our second treble.
 
Garnacho's Shoelaces said:


https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/football/12419385/manchester-united-sevilla-goal-europa-league-var/

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2008/mar/11/newsstory.manchesterunited

Just three decisions which come to mind but probably cost us an EPL, a UEL and FA Cup which would have completed our second treble.
Click to expand...


I remember the Drogba one very well. An even worse one was when Scholes had the goal that would have knocked Mourinho’s Porto out of the CL incorrectly chalked off. The ultimate sliding doors moment! I was so pissed off. But it was just an “oh ffs, how unlucky are we” sort of feeling. Which is infinitely preferable to the simmering sense of injustice I felt last season after being on the end of a bunch of VAR mediated unfair calls.
 
Ayoba said:
Joelinton incident according to Dermot:



I dont even know what to say anymore. I just give up at this point.
Click to expand...

Anyone remember Rooney getting sent off against West Ham once?

They were on the counter and instead of just bringing the player down for a standard yellow he booted him and got a straight red.

There's a line you can cross when your intention is mainly to stop the counter and that's over the line for me. It matters how you try to stop it too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.