The VAR Thread

[mr ashley]

I get what you mean, but i suppose it comes down to people settling on what VAR is trying to achieve. As they've shown already, the limitations of the technology (and some of the daft wording of the rules) mean that it's not possible for VAR to get 100% of the decisions "correct", or at least get everyone to unanimously agree with every single decision. However, the way it's being run at the moment is as if they believe that is what they're supposed to be doing, which is leading to all these ridiculous decisions like handballs, mm offsides, penalty retakes etc. etc.

If they take a step back and think about what it is people actually wanted. VAR to do, it was to stop the massive miscarriages of justice where the ref had got a decision horribly wrong and everyone and their dog could see it was wrong, yet the ref was hung out to dry and mistakenly award a penalty or allow a goal that was 5 yds offside etc. What I've said above would play into that. Nobody wanted VAR on the basis that it would catch people 1mm offside, so if it's as close as that and you can't obviously tell they're offside then the decision should be that they gained no advantage anyway and so should be given the benefit of the doubt. I think you'd still end up with some managers moaning when they lost the game but that'll be the case no matter what you do. I'd bet 90% would rather that than what we have now.

They still wouldn't get it 100% right every time, but they'd get it a lot more than they would without any technology and it would avoid those glaring refereeing errors while cutting out the fannying around with lines which nobody is ever going to be happy with.

A suggestion full of that elusive element: common sense.

 

[tototoner]

 

[Marty]

I don't really see what the problem is here. The sub touches the ball before it goes out of play, if you allow it in a "harmless" situation where the ball is running out you create potential problems for the refs down the line. What the sub does is an offence and offences need to be punished.

Giving a penalty seems a bit harsh, though. The indirect free kick has fallen way out of fashion but I'd introduce it for a whole load more situations than it is currently being used for, especially situations like this. So often the punishment of a penalty in no way fits the crime but that isn't VAR's fault, it's the lawmakers' fault.

 

[LeSoupeKitchen]

I don't really see what the problem is here. The sub touches the ball before it goes out of play, if you allow it in a "harmless" situation where the ball is running out you create potential problems for the refs down the line. What the sub does is an offence and offences need to be punished.

Giving a penalty seems a bit harsh, though. The indirect free kick has fallen way out of fashion but I'd introduce it for a whole load more situations than it is currently being used for, especially situations like this. So often the punishment of a penalty in no way fits the crime but that isn't VAR's fault, it's the lawmakers' fault.

There is no slippery slope here. This has never been a problem in football and god help us all if a decision like that is supported.

 

[Marty]

There is no slippery slope here. This has never been a problem in football and god help us all if a decision like that is supported.

If an indirect free kick had been given this is a non-case. It's only because it results in a penalty that people notice.

An easy rule tweak to make, you'd think.

 

[wooderz]

If thems the rules thems the rules, but it's a shit rule

 

[dontcallme]

If thems the rules thems the rules, but it's a shit rule

VAR isn't perfect but it gets blamed for a lot of rule following.

 

[wooderz]

I think if VAR is here to stay, and it looks like it is, then rules will have to change. Offsides by a gnats toenail can no longer be offside, penalties for handball where the ball was fired at you from 0.0001 yards can no longer be penalties.

However obvious corners that are given as goal kicks, should be corners and penalties for a player running into the back of you should not be penalties

 

[Monkey boy]

When did this happen?

 

[hughy]

The **** celebrating like that fucks me off more than anything else.

 

[sausage]

That's one of the key rules. An obscure one, but a rule nonetheless. It's 100% a good thing if VAR can apply rules correctly, and good on the VAR themselves for being 'on it'.

If people have issues with that rule, then the solution isn't to criticise the guy doing his job perfectly.

 

['O Zio]

VAR isn't perfect but it gets blamed for a lot of rule following.

This. If the rule is that a penalty has to be awarded in that situation then it's the rule that is stupid, not VAR (in this case anyway). Surely it should just be a free kick or something. Seems mad that a completely harmless shot rolling out of play for a goal kick is turned into a penalty. You'd sort of understand it if the substitute was on the sideline and broke up a solid goalscoring opportunity like a potential 1on 1 by getting in the way of a counter attack or something but this is just a bit weird.

 

[tototoner]

That's one of the key rules. An obscure one, but a rule nonetheless. It's 100% a good thing if VAR can apply rules correctly, and good on the VAR themselves for being 'on it'.

If people have issues with that rule, then the solution isn't to criticise the guy doing his job perfectly.

Agree main person to blame is the idiot sub

 

[sausage]

Agree main person to blame is the idiot sub

I am more and more surprised at how often footballers don't know the rules of the game they are pros in. Lots of ignorance in it.

 

[mr ashley]

VAR isn't perfect but it gets blamed for a lot of rule following.

VAR in general isn’t the issue. Being able to review decisions is a huge positive development.
it has highlighted some real issues with both the application of the laws and the judgement calls of the officials.

Take the latest clip as an example. Clearly the sub has no idea that his infringement is worthy of a penalty. If, after review, the ref is required to act he should have simply pulled the player to one side and explained the rule and sanction. Problem solved in one move.
The officials certainly didn’t need to actually invoke article 25 of subsection 4 of law 12-2 regarding entering the field of play (I’m paraphrasing but you get my point), just merely explain to the player that it exists.
VAR just allows pedants the opportunity to argue ‘the letter of the law’.

 

[Casparian]

The funny side of VAR unless you're Morata or Man City,actually ignore the City pity ?? well worth watching til the end imo if you wanna laugh?

 

[riggi]

 

[thecook]

Now they've gone and changed the rule so it wouldn't have been disallowed in an upcoming game. (edit - likely July)

I bet Scottie is even more pissed now!

Handball rule changed by law makers

Accidental handball leading to a goal-scoring chance or goal for a team-mate will no longer be penalised say football's law makers.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[wrd]

This for me, shows what we all knew 10 years ago which is that Wenger lost his grip of the game. All this change would do for me is reverse the problem we have now from attackers being screwed to defenders being screwed.

It actually beggars belief how much these ****s are paid to make the rules and they don't even understand the problem. The problem isn't whether it favours the attacker or the defender. The problem is that they're trying to use the same level of fidelity that fucking spaceX do landing their ships back on earth.

They are using such a ridiculous fidelity on that line when a human is picking the frame, a human is then placing 2 lines. Now that level of accuracy can't be used when a human has so much input. They need to put in a level of margin. If then the question of how far they are past the line is millimetres you can then go well you were given the benefit of the doubt with the margin but you're beyond the range we allow so it's offside. People would have to accept that the benefit of the doubt was built in with the margin on the tight calls then.

They've completely lost the purpose of the offside rule, to stop unfair advantages. Wenger's approach simply does not do that. I know we want to favour the attacker but for me this is punishing the defenders.

 

[TheBlueRooster]

If that is what they are proposing then I'm all for it. If any part of the player is onside then he should be deemed onside. It's better than the other way around where they have been offside by a millimetre.