VAR - Not the hero we want, the one we need

Problem with VAR is it can be used to give goals that were offside or where their was a foul in the build up.

If it's going to be done properly it should take those into account as well and have a video ref monitoring it during the whole match
 
Not sure which league did it, but one did use VAR and disallowed a goal that came from offside.

Might've been Portuguese one? Benfica game...
 
There were some problems with VAR in Belgium the first couple of months (mostly due to the cheap ass FA), but it seems to be working fine now. Last weekend 2 big decisions in 1 game corrected by the VAR. Final decision is still made by the head referee.
 
From what I've seen so far, mostly from the Bundesliga, VAR has been very successful.
 
Pavl3n said:
From what I've seen so far, mostly from the Bundesliga, VAR has been very successful.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately not. I think they started out all right after some technical difficulties. The VAR was only interrupting the game when he saw an obvious error from the ref regarding goals, red cards or mixing up players for yellow cards.

At some point this season, the VAR began to suggest the referee should take a second look at an on field screen for decisions that are matter of opinion/ hard to call/ not obvious errors. While they get most of the situations correct, it leads to many longer interruptions per game. It looks like they have not found a coherent way to implement VAR yet and are still testing a lot (which is what say said they would do this season).
 
Pavl3n said:
From what I've seen so far, mostly from the Bundesliga, VAR has been very successful.
Click to expand...

Not in the Freiburg game today. Baffled after watching the last five minutes of this game just now.
 
Italians are incredibly slow with VAR. Chievo - Bologna match just now, goal came in 85th minute, wasn't settled until close to 90th minute.
 
Aussies are pretty good with it. Took less than half a minute, and don't think that actual ref on the field did anything. Called a penalty, VAR check message pop up, green dot for correct decision, and that's it. Very fast, very good.
 
Mrs Smoker said:
Aussies are pretty good with it. Took less than half a minute, and don't think that actual ref on the field did anything. Called a penalty, VAR check message pop up, green dot for correct decision, and that's it. Very fast, very good.
Click to expand...


Whether something is dealt with quickly or not surely depends on the incident. Some penalty incidents are clear and decisions can be made quickly, others aren't clear cut at all and simply won't be able to be assessed and a decision made in a time frame that isn't going to be disruptive.

I think this is one of the biggest problem with the concept. It can work brilliantly if every situation was ideal. If it's a stonewall penalty, or an unquestionable red and there's no room for debate then it's brilliant, but if there needs to be a few different angles of an incident or if the replays are proving somewhat inconclusive then it isn't as useful and you won't get decisions made in less than half a minute. Even now replays of the same penalty claim are replayed for days on end, debates rage as to whether or not it should or shouldn't have been given. Sometimes think as if a people think VAR will have some kind of magical monitor that excludes doubt.

You can't look at one incident that VAR resolved quickly and think that this should be able to be the case across the board. Else we may as well start asking why open heart surgery takes hours when surgeons can whip off a foreskin in seconds. So yeah, if an incident is clear and obvious it can take seconds to give a decision. If it isn't, then it won't. Question is whether the times it can will make it worthwhile putting up with the disruption that will be caused in the times that it can't.
 
Last edited:
Fundamentally I still think people are in favour of the concept rather than the reality of it. The idea that bad decisions will be eradicated from the game, or even reduced significantly, through use of technology sounds great. Who wouldn't love that? It's the whole waiting around for minutes on end thing that I don't think people will be too keen on once they experience it. Sadly I think it's going to have to be introduced and allowed to fail before some people realise it. It's going to need the "Oh, this is a bit shit, isn't it?" penny to drop.

And the penny will drop. Whether it's discontent over how long it's taking to make a decision on a penalty incident, or annoyance that we've scored a 91st injury time winner against City and celebrations are immediately cut short it takes another 8 before we find out if it's allowed to stand. But as I say I don't think people will ever unwed themselves from the idea that it's the miracle goose that lays golden eggs until they see its flaws manifest themselves before their eyes. Which is why, sadly, I do think roll-out of it is inevitable.
 
Last edited:
Trials begin in the Cups
Looking forward to it being implemented correctly and the confusion of people trying to implement it incorrectly.

You can already imagine Merson, Thompson and co ranting nonsensically about it.



 
The game needs integrity more than it needs atmosphere.
 
I don't think they have the usage of it right at all. It's been a bit half arsed. They should use it sparingly but when they do use it, not with all this cloak and dagger bs where noone knows what's going on but shown for the whole stadium on the big screen. Mike up the officials as well like in Rugby. Make them up their game.
 
The moaning about VAR is ridiculous. Seeing the pundits and commentators reminds you of just how backwards football especially in Britain can be. What was a straightforward decision backing the ref's original judgement was drawn out into an hours debate by Sky.

It is a force for good and in tennis, cricket.. the fans go mad for hawk-eye and the build-up towards it being used is exciting and gets the crowd pumped. So no I disagree whole-heartedly and once fans get used to it, it will be an exciting use of technology and actually lead to more exciting moments in games rather than less.
 
There was this same resistance for other sports as well. People aren't good at accepting change. They'll keep improving it and people will get used to it eventually.
 
acnumber9 said:
How does VAR add more integrity? The ref still makes the decision.
Click to expand...

It gives him a better view of the situation and removes the question marks and inconsistency over decisions.

They have cocked up the implementation though as expected.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
Plus football is (I think?) unique in that you can watch umpteen replays of contentious decisions and still end up with differences of opinion about the correct decision. Very different to, say, tennis or cricket.
Click to expand...

With technology, offsides and penalty decisions can be corrected. If not every penalty decision, at least clear dives can be caught.
 
11101 said:
It gives him a better view of the situation and removes the question marks and inconsistency over decisions.
Click to expand...
The ref himself doesn’t see it though does he? He’s just listening to somebody giving their interpreatation of it. On last nights evidence anyway. And he most definitely wasn’t doing it for clear errors or big decisions. He stood over the ball after giving Chelsea a free kick for about 30 seconds talking to somebody for some reason before doing nothing. And then there was the pushing at the corner that he stopped to talk to somebody about and then the players without giving out any cards. It was shit.

On integrity it doesn’t really change anything. If a ref wants to influence a result he can still do it. As has been evidenced by somebody in Germany being sacked for questionable decision making.
 
Personally I think that should do it like a challenge system kind of like in tennis, each team can contest a decision say twice a half, and then once each half in extra time. Then when they actually do it they must actually check it properly not just have a quick look in a kind or half arsed way. They screw up VAR decisions way too often and I don't really understand why.

They should use a system like this where it isn't too disruptive to games imo, using VAR for everything thing just ruins the flow of matches and frustrates fans at the games.
 
roonster09 said:
With technology, offsides and penalty decisions can be corrected. If not every penalty decision, at least clear dives can be caught.
Click to expand...

Sure but there will still be loads of "unclear dives" and we'll end up arguing the toss about clear vs unclear and where that cut-off lies. A system which is supposed to rule out controversy needs to be 100% reliable. It's worthless if it's often inconclusive. Last night had a really good example actually. When Maitland-Niles jumped over a Chelsea boot in the box he was obviously evading a mistimed challenge that got nowhere near the ball. We're often told that contact is irrelevant and had he gone down that should probably have been a penalty. Would it have been a "clear dive" if - instead of staying on his feet - he'd hit the deck the instant he landed?
 
Not a fan, thought it slowed down the game. Errors happen all teams, it will equal itself out over the space of a season or two.

As for technology for calling offside correctly, I'm all for it. With technology now a days I'd imagine it could be done instantly - Straight to the refs watch like goal line technology.

Similar to FIFA games.
 
It was shite last night, the long stoppages is obviously a real thing
 
Pogue Mahone said:
Sure but there will still be loads of "unclear dives" and we'll end up arguing the toss about clear vs unclear and where that cut-off lies. A system which is supposed to rule out controversy needs to be 100% reliable. It's worthless if it's often inconclusive. Last night had a really good example actually. When Maitland-Niles jumped over a Chelsea boot in the box he was obviously evading a mistimed challenge that got nowhere near the ball. We're often told that contact is irrelevant and had he gone down that should probably have been a penalty. Would it have been a dive if - instead of staying on his feet - he'd hit the deck the instant he landed?
Click to expand...

That's a fair point.
 
Trizy said:
Not a fan, thought it slowed down the game. Errors happen all teams, it will equal itself out over the space of a season or two.

As for technology for calling offside correctly, I'm all for it. With technology now a days I'd imagine it could be done instantly - Straight to the refs watch like goal line technology.

Similar to FIFA games.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I'd like to see that. Tricky to do but surely not impossible. Any tech that requires retrospective reviews is crap but if's instantaneous then go for it. The goal-line stuff has been a great success.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
Yeah, I'd like to see that. Tricky to do but surely not impossible. Any tech that requires retrospective reviews is crap but if's instantaneous then go for it. The goal-line stuff has been a great success.
Click to expand...
I don’t see how that would be possible. Offside is too ambiguous. How can a machine determine if a player is interfering with play?
 
acnumber9 said:
I don’t see how that would be possible. Offside is too ambiguous. How can a machine determine if a player is interfering with play?
Click to expand...

Yeah, that would be the tricky bit. The tech would need to instantly tell the ref that a) there's been an offside and b) which player was offside. Which is basically what a linesman does anyway. The difference being that the decision about whether or not any player was offside at all would be 100% accurate.

So I imagine that in all the decisions when there's an element of doubt about players being active we'd still see the sideline discussion we get now (and in those scenarios, I could actually handle the ref seeing a video review, as the game is stopped anyway and offsides are never up for debate after seeing a replay)
 
charlenefan said:
It was shite last night, the long stoppages is obviously a real thing
Click to expand...

Most of the time it really isn't, it's just the EPL referees who are testing this for the first time so obviously it will take ages. We've been testing this in Poland this whole season, most of the decisions are made within seconds, very seldom does it take longer than a minute.

There are still controversies surrounding it, mind.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.