VAR, Refs and Linesmen | General Discussion

antk said:
I wouldn't choose the euphoria of celebrating Maradona's or Henry's handball over making sure the correct decision is reached much more often. I'd rather have contentious decisions than egregious errors. It makes for a better sport, and if the entertainment suffers for some so be it.

In any case I believe with around ten more years of improving the tech (like making automated offside detection standard across all leagues and competitions) and refining the rules (handballs, maybe offside definition), people will get used to it.
Click to expand...

The Maradona and Henry incidents were what VAR was sold to be the answer to. The retconning involved now in pretending fans for years were furious about marginal offsides that were undetectable to the naked eye, is almost impressive. Brexit denial levels of impressive.

"Of course we wanted to make everything more shit"

The only way VAR works is by pretending football phone-ins and post-match discussions were dominated by outraged fans who had zoomed in and identified a left bollock swinging ahead of the last defender. Thank God VAR has solved that perennial scourge of the game, for good.
 
The problem with the toenail offside is that you cannot accurately get a picture of when the ball was played forward. It’s so often between frames.
I think it’s better in cricket when there is “umpires call”. So if ir was given on field and it’s super close the decision stands but not the other way around.
Why not implement something like this?
 
antk said:
I wouldn't choose the euphoria of celebrating Maradona's or Henry's handball over making sure the correct decision is reached much more often. I'd rather have contentious decisions than egregious errors. It makes for a better sport, and if the entertainment suffers for some so be it.

In any case I believe with around ten more years of improving the tech (like making automated offside detection standard across all leagues and competitions) and refining the rules (handballs, maybe offside definition), people will get used to it.
Click to expand...

The Maradonna and Henry incidents are all part of football’s rich history. A parallel universe where those games were constantly delayed and interrupted so nerds could draw lines on screens (and referee’s decisions were still creating controversy) is a lot less interesting to me than the reality. And I say this as a supporter of the Ireland football team.
 
The Purley King said:
The problem with the toenail offside is that you cannot accurately get a picture of when the ball was played forward. It’s so often between frames.
I think it’s better in cricket when there is “umpires call”. So if ir was given on field and it’s super close the decision stands but not the other way around.
Why not implement something like this?
Click to expand...
This is supposedly fixed because they're using the same impact technology they use to detect handballs in this tournament. So it's no longer a person trying to pinpoint the moment the ball was played, and fair enough I guess. Still, I'd like see a larger margin of error introduced so the attacking player gets an advantage.
 
Ainu said:
This is supposedly fixed because they're using the same impact technology they use to detect handballs in this tournament. So it's no longer a person trying to pinpoint the moment the ball was played, and fair enough I guess. Still, I'd like see a larger margin of error introduced so the attacking player gets an advantage.
Click to expand...
Still, the fact that for years they were calling millimetre offsides based on their best guesstimation on when exactly the ball was played is probably the most tragicomic thing about VAR. The fact that this problem never seemed to occur to anyone involved goes to show how dumb these people are. It makes everything else wrong with VAR make more sense.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
The Maradonna and Henry incidents are all part of football’s rich history. A parallel universe where those games were constantly delayed and interrupted so nerds could draw lines on screens (and referee’s decisions were still creating controversy) is a lot less interesting to me than the reality. And I say this as a supporter of the Ireland football team.
Click to expand...
This is absolutely unhinged to me, and I honestly don't think we can debate this if this is where you are coming from. I guess I can be happy that current football organisations agree more with me than with you (for now).
 
Pogue Mahone said:
The Maradonna and Henry incidents are all part of football’s rich history. A parallel universe where those games were constantly delayed and interrupted so nerds could draw lines on screens (and referee’s decisions were still creating controversy) is a lot less interesting to me than the reality. And I say this as a supporter of the Ireland football team.
Click to expand...

It is what creates myths stories, dirty football, you need bad to experience good.

VAR gets rid of all these type of players we loved for being unhinged idiots with passion in their play like Materazzi, Gattuso, Keane, etc.
 
Do people even remember offside officiating before VAR? Some are complaining about being called for a few millimeters offside, but there was a truckload of offside calls every weekend where the attacker wasn't even offside in the slightest. Was this better?
 
VorZakone said:
It hasn't made the game worse for me and I'm a spectator. What did make the game worse for me was seeing a perfectly legal England goal in 2010 being disallowed against Germany. Today that goal would have counted.

Offside is offside, a line must be drawn somewhere. We can argue about error margins and thickness of the line, that's fair. But why overcorrect and argue for abolishing VAR instead of calling for improvements?

And handball is handball. Don't blame VAR, blame the rules.
Click to expand...
That has nothing to do with VAR, though. And I haven’t seen a single person ever complain about goal line tech.
 
Posh Red said:
That has nothing to do with VAR, though. And I haven’t seen a single person ever complain about goal line tech.
Click to expand...

The conflating is all they have. They have to pretend that goalline technology was controversial, had bedding in problems, was unpopular. Same as a toenail offsides was runing the game.

That's the only way VAR looks defensible, invent a reality that never existed and pretend that at least VAR has solved these fictional problems.
 
VAR should only look at clear and obvious errors. The rewinding and slomo should be scrapped.
 
There is no fix for VAR, some decisions will always split opinions. Even now when we have quick and extremely accurate offside decisions you have fans moaning that it's not in the spirit of the game.

Either you have VAR and accept that some time/flow will be lost and still not every decision will be to your liking or you scrap it and gain some time back but also some very bad decisions along with it.
 
antk said:
Do people even remember offside officiating before VAR? Some are complaining about being called for a few millimeters offside, but there was a truckload of offside calls every weekend where the attacker wasn't even offside in the slightest. Was this better?
Click to expand...

It seems so at times. I had the same conversation last night after the game, and the other two guys were adamant that the assistant would have never raised his flag in 1000 similar situations had VAR never existed. Hardly the case, as you mentioned, and the fabled "benefit of the doubt" goes right out the window if you believe that, in that split second, you saw a part of the body behind the last defender.

For better or worse, the referees officiate the game according to a rulebook. Making calls "in the spirit of the game" can open a whole new can of worms because you can't get into the minds of the players and judge their intent. It was tough on Andersen last night, but both calls were the correct ones. If his head had been clear, he would have put his hands behind his back. If anything, now with VAR, it shows that teams (managers and players) must learn to cope with these situations psychologically during a game.

Some people have also made up their minds and some others are biased. You'll hardly see three pages with post after post when VAR has helped the right decision to be made. It's like these instances don't exist. Or like my mates yesterday who were frothing at the mouth and i was wondering why. Then, i remembered that, for reasons that have nothing to do with footy, they dislike Germans with a passion.
 
ROFLUTION said:
It is what creates myths stories, dirty football, you need bad to experience good.

VAR gets rid of all these type of players we loved for being unhinged idiots with passion in their play like Materazzi, Gattuso, Keane, etc.
Click to expand...
"Need bad to experience good" is a bizarre argument. People are now literally arguing they're fine with bad decisions to spare some VAR intervention.
 
VorZakone said:
"Need bad to experience good" is a bizarre argument. People are now literally arguing they're fine with bad decisions to spare some VAR intervention.
Click to expand...
I am fine with the odd poor decision to avoid VAR intervention, and have always been so since before it was introduced. I never saw the need for it to begin with, because I always envisioned that it would take more away from the game than it added.
 
Ainu said:
This is supposedly fixed because they're using the same impact technology they use to detect handballs in this tournament. So it's no longer a person trying to pinpoint the moment the ball was played, and fair enough I guess. Still, I'd like see a larger margin of error introduced so the attacking player gets an advantage.
Click to expand...

It's not fixed, because even with Semi automatic where the use a sensor in the ball to pinpoint the exact moment the ball is played, it's still married to the closest frame from the cameras and the frame rate is still 50 FPS.

Let me explain a little further, Harry Maguire a player most will agree is one of the slower top level players has a recorded top speed of 30KMH. Now if harry is running at 30 KMH, he feet with Likely be individually moving at about 60KMH during each stride.

60KMH is about 16 MPS. Or in CM 1600 CM per second. So with a frame rate of 50 per second, 1600÷50=32CM. So between the frames Harry Maguires foot while running could move 32CM thats 1 Foot in old money. And that's only one player there are normally 2 players involved in offsides so taking into account that both players could potentially be moving in opposite direction. You margin of error is potentially 64cm or 2 feet. And thats with one of the slower players.

Toenail offside? No chance the technology is anywhere near accurate enough to confirm that. Not a cat in hells chance. Offside is offside? Apart from the fact it's just a guess but rather than a human having a guess its the technology.
 
Posh Red said:
I am fine with the odd poor decision to avoid VAR intervention, and have always been so since before it was introduced. I never saw the need for it to begin with, because I always envisioned that it would take more away from the game than it added.
Click to expand...
What did it take away from you? Having to celebrate 1 time instead of 2? That's such an enormous dealbreaker to you?

The latest Premier League statistics show before VAR was introduced, 82 per cent of refereeing decisions were correct. Now, since VAR was introduced, 96 per cent of decisions are correct.[/QUOTEhttps://www.skysports.com/football/...t-so-what-is-future-of-technology-in-football
Click to expand...
 
I'm fine with benefit of the doubt given to attackers if it's extremely hard to see whether it was offside.

But people are overcorrecting in their opinions and going extreme the other way, asking to get rid of VAR.
 
VorZakone said:
What did it take away from you? Having to celebrate 1 time instead of 2? That's such an enormous dealbreaker to you?
Click to expand...
That 96% is total bollocks. Referees marking their own homework twice and giving each other a little tug while they are at it.
 
Longshanks said:
It's not fixed, because even with Semi automatic where the use a sensor in the ball to pinpoint the exact moment the ball is played, it's still married to the closest frame from the cameras and the frame rate is still 50 FPS.

Let me explain a little further, Harry Maguire a player most will agree is one of the slower top level players has a recorded top speed of 30KMH. Now if harry is running at 30 KMH, he feet with Likely be individually moving at about 60KMH during each stride.

60KMH is about 16 MPS. Or in CM 1600 CM per second. So with a frame rate of 50 per second, 1600÷50=32CM. So between the frames Harry Maguires foot while running could move 32CM thats 1 Foot in old money. And that's only one player there are normally 2 players involved in offsides so taking into account that both players could potentially be moving in opposite direction. You margin of error is potentially 64cm or 2 feet. And thats with one of the slower players.

Toenail offside? No chance the technology is anywhere near accurate enough to confirm that. Not a cat in hells chance. Offside is offside? Apart from the fact it's just a guess but rather than a human having a guess its the technology.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I get all that. That's why I said I want to see a larger margin of error to favour the attacker. Just add x number of centimeters to the line, and as long as the attacker isn't beyond that, no offside. I think that would be a decent enough compromise.
 
Longshanks said:
It's not fixed, because even with Semi automatic where the use a sensor in the ball to pinpoint the exact moment the ball is played, it's still married to the closest frame from the cameras and the frame rate is still 50 FPS.

Let me explain a little further, Harry Maguire a player most will agree is one of the slower top level players has a recorded top speed of 30KMH. Now if harry is running at 30 KMH, he feet with Likely be individually moving at about 60KMH during each stride.

60KMH is about 16 MPS. Or in CM 1600 CM per second. So with a frame rate of 50 per second, 1600÷50=32CM. So between the frames Harry Maguires foot while running could move 32CM thats 1 Foot in old money. And that's only one player there are normally 2 players involved in offsides so taking into account that both players could potentially be moving in opposite direction. You margin of error is potentially 64cm or 2 feet. And thats with one of the slower players.

Toenail offside? No chance the technology is anywhere near accurate enough to confirm that. Not a cat in hells chance. Offside is offside? Apart from the fact it's just a guess but rather than a human having a guess its the technology.
Click to expand...

Why must it need to have 100% undeniable accuracy for it to be worth using? 99.9% is close enough for it to be considered worthwhile wouldn't you say?

The PL system even has a tolerance built in to allow for that, giving the advantage to the attacker and I assume this new system has something similar but to an even greater degree of accuracy.

Let me ask you this. Who is going to get more offside calls right; a linesman with one shot at it in real time or VAR? If you care so much about accuracy then surely close to 100% is better than whatever a linesman is capable of.
 
The main advocate to bring VAR into the game was Sky Sports, they spent days writing articles about Refs decisions, pushing agendas that certain refs favoured certain teams ( This is now true due to the involvement of oil states and the benefits of working on the side for them) Sky knew they could generate hours of TV by dissecting every little decision during a game.
What was sold to the fans was a lie, we were told it would be used for glaring mistakes, players stood offside, not a toe nail offside, deliberate handball missed, not a ball touching a hand that is that slight they now use a snickometer, (I cannot believe I just typed that about football)
We were assured it wouldn't disrupt the flow of the game or affect the match going fans enjoyment, well that has proved to be a real whopper of a lie, I have attended United matches since 1968 and I am now seriously losing interest in the game, not United, I have seen worse times at United during the seventies but I still loved the game, The game is being ruined as a live spectator sport.
 
Bale Bale Bale said:
Why must it need to have 100% undeniable accuracy for it to be worth using? 99.9% is close enough for it to be considered worthwhile wouldn't you say?

The PL system even has a tolerance built in to allow for that, giving the advantage to the attacker and I assume this new system has something similar but to an even greater degree of accuracy.

Let me ask you this. Who is going to get more offside calls right; a linesman with one shot at it in real time or VAR? If you care so much about accuracy then surely close to 100% is better than whatever a linesman is capable of.
Click to expand...

Because we are calling toenails offside, the PL has margin of error of 10CM I believe it's not anywhere near big enough.

We can't go round calling players a toenail offside after the fact with a technology that is absolutely nowhere near that accurate. Use the technology for what it's there for, and use VAR for what it's there for to pick up on the howlers.

Put a much larger margin of error probably around 30cm into the offside technology it isnt that difficult, at least then when someone is only just offside we can be reasonable happy with the built in margin of error that they were indeed offside. Where as right now it is very debatable to put it lightly.
 
That feeling yesterday of cheering like a mad man in the pub when Andersen scored, to the disappointment when it was overturned because one of his toes was offside, is exactly why I hate VAR.

Soul crushing killjoy.
 
Rob said:
That feeling yesterday of cheering like a mad man in the pub when Andersen scored, to the disappointment when it was overturned because one of his toes was offside, is exactly why I hate VAR.

Soul crushing killjoy.
Click to expand...
I know. I can handle the mm offsides as ridiculous as it is. But it’s the minute or so where teams think they’ve scored that is awful. Not worth it for it to be suddenly taken away because of a toenail. It’s killing the enjoyment of the game.
 
There's now a cloud over every single goal. Even a penalty, you have to fear there's been an encroachment.

A 40 yard screamer? If you squint, there could be a semi-plausible case for maybe there being an arguably some kind of infringement in the build up. No goal is safe.
 
antk said:
I wouldn't choose the euphoria of celebrating Maradona's or Henry's handball over making sure the correct decision is reached much more often. I'd rather have contentious decisions than egregious errors. It makes for a better sport, and if the entertainment suffers for some so be it.

In any case I believe with around ten more years of improving the tech (like making automated offside detection standard across all leagues and competitions) and refining the rules (handballs, maybe offside definition), people will get used to it.
Click to expand...
I would rather go back to the Maradona and Henry handballs than either of the decisions made last night. The Maradona one was oh well them's the breaks. If that's handball and offside then we might as well just scrap the game now. They are destroying the great game just to show how good AI is now.
 
VorZakone said:
What did it take away from you? Having to celebrate 1 time instead of 2? That's such an enormous dealbreaker to you?
Click to expand...
Yeah, it’s completely fundamental for me. Statistical improvements in the number of correct decisions isn’t of interest to me.

Goals will never be the same again with VAR.
 
Fully Fledged said:
I would rather go back to the Maradona and Henry handballs than either of the decisions made last night. The Maradona one was oh well them's the breaks. If that's handball and offside then we might as well just scrap the game now. They are destroying the great game just to show how good AI is now.
Click to expand...

I think you’re looking back with rose tinted glasses a little. If you looked back to a bad decision (pre VAR) at Utd you’d easily have 100 enraged people for every “them’s the breaks” post.
 
Posh Red said:
Yeah, it’s completely fundamental for me. Statistical improvements in the number of correct decisions isn’t of interest to me.

Goals will never be the same again with VAR.
Click to expand...

Do you watch rugby or cricket? They both seem to have adapted really well to delayed decisions. This is not meant as some kind of gotcha, sports are all subtly different and perhaps some lend themselves to VAR and others don’t. Point being, I think a) VAR itself will improve, and b) we will get used to it.
 
NicolaSacco said:
Do you watch rugby or cricket? They both seem to have adapted really well to delayed decisions. This is not meant as some kind of gotcha, sports are all subtly different and perhaps some lend themselves to VAR and others don’t. Point being, I think a) VAR itself will improve, and b) we will get used to it.
Click to expand...
I don’t to be honest. So perhaps there’s some truth in that, but I find it hard to ever envision being really happy with VAR. I’m sure it will
Improve though.
Also, I don’t feel like those sports ever had moments equivalent to the goal celebrations in football anyway, but could be wrong.
 
NicolaSacco said:
Do you watch rugby or cricket? They both seem to have adapted really well to delayed decisions. This is not meant as some kind of gotcha, sports are all subtly different and perhaps some lend themselves to VAR and others don’t. Point being, I think a) VAR itself will improve, and b) we will get used to it.
Click to expand...
I don’t see how this is a point in VAR’s favour. You get used to writing with your left hand if you lose your right arm in an accident. Doesn’t mean it improved your life.
 
Last edited:
NicolaSacco said:
I think you’re looking back with rose tinted glasses a little. If you looked back to a bad decision (pre VAR) at Utd you’d easily have 100 enraged people for every “them’s the breaks” post.
Click to expand...
I'm sorry but the idea that you have to keep your hands behind your back because a pen will be given against you if your hands is in a natural running position is destroying the game. The same would be said with giving a goal offside for a toenail. If this is the way we are going with football we might as well wrap it up now.
 
Jev said:
I don’t see how this is a point in VAR’s favour. You get used to writing with your left hand if you lose your right arm in an accident. Doesn’t mean it improved your life.
Click to expand...

Poor choice of words, maybe. If you get used to it but still hate it then yes. But you have to acknowledge, the majority of people react quite poorly to change, and it’s not necessarily because the change itself was the problem. Again, the above sentence can be true, and yet still not apply in this specific case, so there’s no right or wrong. I guess I err on the side of viewing the current problems as primarily a rules issue (in the case of handballs) or a speed issue (in the case of offsides). If I’m right then both of these can be fixed, allowing us to keep the accuracy of VAR without changing the fan experience too much. I’m possibly being hopelessly optimistic, I’m aware!
 
Fully Fledged said:
I'm sorry but the idea that you have to keep your hands behind your back because a pen will be given against you if your hands is in a natural running position is destroying the game. The same would be said with giving a goal offside for a toenail. If this is the way we are going with football we might as well wrap it up now.
Click to expand...

I agree with the handball thing- but I’d argue it should result in a rule change rather than scrapping VAR and having obvious fouls, violent conduct, and offsides consistently missed by the officials. Because that is what we’d be going back to.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.