Is there anyone who had not anticipated that it was a poor idea, who now accepts that it is indeed, a very poor idea?
Yep. I thought it could work but the way it is being applied is a total disaster.
Unfortunately I would guess it's here to stay - people in power don't like admitting to mistakes - but it must be revamped at the end of the season, if not before.
Is there anyone who had not anticipated that it was a poor idea, who now accepts that it is indeed, a very poor idea?
I stupidly thought it would work better than it has because of the trials that have gone on in other countries - Should have realised that the ego of the Premier League would do its own thing
Definitely think its here to stay - My issue though isnt so much to do with the offside rulings (as to be pedantic they are correct), more the fact that referees are solely relying on what VAR are telling them without reviewing it pitchside themselves
How was that not a penalty for Man City? His hand was out to the side and it stops the ball going through to the other City player.
VAR check it, but say no pen. Unbelievable.
It’s given in any other league but because we have the silly “clear and obvious” clause in this country, it’s not given.
Yet theyll spend 5mins drawing diagrams to show someone is a 1mm offside? It's nothing to do with clear and obvious, it's refs covering each other arses.
Last time I attended the thread, this was the last post! After the latest one, you have to scream that Clear and Obvious has to apply to offsides. Wolves should have had their goal! It would not have been a clear or obvious error to have allowed that goal.
For once I am arguing in the favour of the Anti VARs
Is there anyone who had not anticipated that it was a poor idea, who now accepts that it is indeed, a very poor idea?
It would not be poor if it was implemented correctly. If the offside rule was amended to perhaps daylight, then it would be ok. Get the ref to look at the pitch side screens as well.
Is there anyone who had not anticipated that it was a poor idea, who now accepts that it is indeed, a very poor idea?
It would not be poor if it was implemented correctly. If the offside rule was amended to perhaps daylight, then it would be ok. Get the ref to look at the pitch side screens as well.
but you would have the reverse of the same problem, goals being given because the tip of a players pinky was playing him onside
Is there anyone who had not anticipated that it was a poor idea, who now accepts that it is indeed, a very poor idea?
It would not be poor if it was implemented correctly. If the offside rule was amended to perhaps daylight, then it would be ok. Get the ref to look at the pitch side screens as well.
Doesnt matter if there is daylight or not... VAR will still rule if a player is regarded as offside if there armpit or toe is too far forward and will continue to take just as long
Put the whole "interferring with play" part of the rule to one side (which hasnt been the issue this weekend) and the offside rule is a very black / white decision
Honestly think that Football has two choices
(1) It accepts that the offside rule calls will be really tight (2) It goes back to the old system where VAR doesnt get involved but then you'll have Managers / fans going crazy when a clear decision doesnt go their way
The only thing I would implement about it is the fact that the Mike Riley (or one of the head refs) said that they're using sharper pictures in the VAR room, so what we see as tight on SKY isnt so tight in that room - Well if thats the case why arent we seeing this rather than poor pixelated shots, as would end the whole debate in an instant surely
Is there anyone who had not anticipated that it was a poor idea, who now accepts that it is indeed, a very poor idea?
It would not be poor if it was implemented correctly. If the offside rule was amended to perhaps daylight, then it would be ok. Get the ref to look at the pitch side screens as well.
It's how offsides are reviewed by VAR that needs to change.
Isn't the current law of offside along the lines of: If any part of the player that they can play a ball with is goalside of the last defender then the player is in an offside position.
Technically the VAR decision was correct, however it should never have been reviewed. The player was not clearly offside. You can't say VAR is to rectify Clear and Obvious errors if when an offside occurs, you don't allow for this.
If the VAR suggests a review the Ref should have to view it and make the call, not the bloke in the camera room. It doesn't save any time with the back and forth, copy Rugby and do it on the big screen too.
In all those games not one defender is appealing for offside, apart from the statuary arm up that happens after every goal. It's ridiculous. After every live match now I am expecting the goal to be looked at for some reason.
In all those games not one defender is appealing for offside, apart from the statuary arm up that happens after every goal. It's ridiculous. After every live match now I am expecting the goal to be looked at for some reason.
Every goal is looked at... Some just dont take as long as others so there is no delay
In all those games not one defender is appealing for offside, apart from the statuary arm up that happens after every goal. It's ridiculous. After every live match now I am expecting the goal to be looked at for some reason.
Every goal is looked at... Some just dont take as long as others so there is no delay
I am sure if they did that every goal would be ruled out for some infringement somewhere along the line... How far do you go back...
Is there anyone who had not anticipated that it was a poor idea, who now accepts that it is indeed, a very poor idea?
It would not be poor if it was implemented correctly. If the offside rule was amended to perhaps daylight, then it would be ok. Get the ref to look at the pitch side screens as well.
It's how offsides are reviewed by VAR that needs to change.
Isn't the current law of offside along the lines of: If any part of the player that they can play a ball with is goalside of the last defender then the player is in an offside position.
Technically the VAR decision was correct, however it should never have been reviewed. The player was not clearly offside. You can't say VAR is to rectify Clear and Obvious errors if when an offside occurs, you don't allow for this.
If the VAR suggests a review the Ref should have to view it and make the call, not the bloke in the camera room. It doesn't save any time with the back and forth, copy Rugby and do it on the big screen too.
This is what was particularly annoying about the Wolves disallowed goal yesterday. The Wolves player was offside by about two inches, which showed up when the system laid a computer generated line across the pitch. It's a judgement that is absolutely impossible for a linesman to make in real time. The system itself is effectively manufacturing an offside incident that a human being is incapable of of discerning.
The system affects the way officials make decisions on the pitch. They leave play to carry on, when they should be making a decision about offside, as VAR will review a goal anyway. The decision on the field is valueless because the official hasn't made a decision, they've just let play carry on. VAR is not reviewing the on field decision, it is making a microscopic judgement on the facts of the goal. I'm sure this wasn't the original intention of VAR but that's the rule of unintended consequences for you.
I'm against VAR in principal from a philosophical point in any case. All sporting endeavour is rife with error, from participants and officials alike. To try to legislate for perfection against the fallible human nature of sport seems a fool's errand to me.
Is there anyone who had not anticipated that it was a poor idea, who now accepts that it is indeed, a very poor idea?
It would not be poor if it was implemented correctly. If the offside rule was amended to perhaps daylight, then it would be ok. Get the ref to look at the pitch side screens as well.
It's how offsides are reviewed by VAR that needs to change.
Isn't the current law of offside along the lines of: If any part of the player that they can play a ball with is goalside of the last defender then the player is in an offside position.
Technically the VAR decision was correct, however it should never have been reviewed. The player was not clearly offside. You can't say VAR is to rectify Clear and Obvious errors if when an offside occurs, you don't allow for this.
If the VAR suggests a review the Ref should have to view it and make the call, not the bloke in the camera room. It doesn't save any time with the back and forth, copy Rugby and do it on the big screen too.
This is what was particularly annoying about the Wolves disallowed goal yesterday. The Wolves player was offside by about two inches, which showed up when the system laid a computer generated line across the pitch. It's a judgement that is absolutely impossible for a linesman to make in real time. The system itself is effectively manufacturing an offside incident that a human being is incapable of of discerning.
The system affects the way officials make decisions on the pitch. They leave play to carry on, when they should be making a decision about offside, as VAR will review a goal anyway. The decision on the field is valueless because the official hasn't made a decision, they've just let play carry on. VAR is not reviewing the on field decision, it is making a microscopic judgement on the facts of the goal. I'm sure this wasn't the original intention of VAR but that's the rule of unintended consequences for you.
I'm against VAR in principal from a philosophical point in any case. All sporting endeavour is rife with error, from participants and officials alike. To try to legislate for perfection against the fallible human nature of sport seems a fool's errand to me.
I agree with most of that, however I do believe clear and obvious errors should be able to be reviewed and overturned. Clear and Obvious however would need better defining than this:
"VAR can be used to overturn a subjective decision if a "clear and obvious error" has been identified.
The referee will explain their decision to the VAR, and what they have seen.
If the evidence provided by the broadcast footage does not accord with what the referee believes they have seen, then the VAR can recommend an overturn."
I've not commented on this thread so far, but the last few days have shown VAR to be a bloody farce. I was listening to Graham Potters press conference today where he said "might as well do away with refs and linnos, let computers and AI take over, then every decision will be 100% correct, but people won't enjoy the football game, and could stop going" can't say I disagree at all. VAR for offsides by a millimetre is just plain stupid and it's taking ages to sort it out....a complete joke!
Why is VAR reviewing every goal? Surely it should just be looking at errors, why is it assuming there might have been an error which led to a goal, when no one is appealing for anything and the referee isn’t seeking confirmation of anything.
I thought that VAR would level the playing field and get rid of those decisions that always seem to go in favour of the “bigger” club, but all we seem to see is VAR disallowing goals scored by the “smaller” club, often for no good reason.
Thing is, people were constantly moaning and calling for the introduction of technology. Now they are moaning and saying it’s ruining football because you can’t celebrate a goal etc. In that respect you cannot have it both ways.
Personally I think every decision should sit with the referee to keep consistency. With regards to offsides, the rules are complicating things which is a huge issue.
But overall VAR is working to the rules reasonably well, it’s just causing people to criticise for other reasons.
Thing is, people were constantly moaning and calling for the introduction of technology. Now they are moaning and saying it’s ruining football because you can’t celebrate a goal etc. In that respect you cannot have it both ways.
You do realise that these probably weren’t the same people, don’t you?
The daylight rule sounds good but this would only have the officials looking in the minutest detail as to whether they can see the tiniest speck of light between the players.
I'd rather they limit the time to make a VAR decision. If no decision can be made within, say, one minute of the process starting then the onfield decision stands.
Don't like it to be honest, Wolves scored a perfectly good goal and no way can you tell that was offside, the image was blurry and you can't even tell the exact moment the ball is touched you're talking millimetres and hundredths of seconds and they're making educated guesses in situations like that. If it's clearly offside that's one thing but when they can't be certain, like Wolves goal, they should revert to the on field decision.
In rugby the onfield ref and tmo both talk and discuss and the onfield seems like he has the ultimate decision and uses a certain degree of discretion and reasonableness to form a decision, eg when hard to see if a ball is grounded for a try. There are dubious and unclear decisions... ie England's try vs all blacks last year... Everyone just seems to get on with it and respect the refs decision.
Thing is, people were constantly moaning and calling for the introduction of technology. Now they are moaning and saying it’s ruining football because you can’t celebrate a goal etc. In that respect you cannot have it both ways.
You do realise that these probably weren’t the same people, don’t you?
Except that’s not true. I was looking on twitter and saw people complaining about VAR. It was pointed out that previously they wanted technology. My point was nobody really knew how it was going to work and that either way there is going to be someone moaning.
Comments
Definitely think its here to stay - My issue though isnt so much to do with the offside rulings (as to be pedantic they are correct), more the fact that referees are solely relying on what VAR are telling them without reviewing it pitchside themselves
So if any incident warrants a replay it is NOT offside or NOT a foul.
Saying "I'd like to see that again" is the same as saying "that was NOT offside".
For once I am arguing in the favour of the Anti VARs
If the offside rule was amended to perhaps daylight, then it would be ok.
Get the ref to look at the pitch side screens as well.
Put the whole "interferring with play" part of the rule to one side (which hasnt been the issue this weekend) and the offside rule is a very black / white decision
Honestly think that Football has two choices
(1) It accepts that the offside rule calls will be really tight
(2) It goes back to the old system where VAR doesnt get involved but then you'll have Managers / fans going crazy when a clear decision doesnt go their way
The only thing I would implement about it is the fact that the Mike Riley (or one of the head refs) said that they're using sharper pictures in the VAR room, so what we see as tight on SKY isnt so tight in that room - Well if thats the case why arent we seeing this rather than poor pixelated shots, as would end the whole debate in an instant surely
Isn't the current law of offside along the lines of:
If any part of the player that they can play a ball with is goalside of the last defender then the player is in an offside position.
Technically the VAR decision was correct, however it should never have been reviewed. The player was not clearly offside. You can't say VAR is to rectify Clear and Obvious errors if when an offside occurs, you don't allow for this.
If the VAR suggests a review the Ref should have to view it and make the call, not the bloke in the camera room. It doesn't save any time with the back and forth, copy Rugby and do it on the big screen too.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.telegraph.co.uk/football/0/var-premier-league-explained-does-work-decisions-can-changed/amp/
This is what was particularly annoying about the Wolves disallowed goal yesterday. The Wolves player was offside by about two inches, which showed up when the system laid a computer generated line across the pitch. It's a judgement that is absolutely impossible for a linesman to make in real time. The system itself is effectively manufacturing an offside incident that a human being is incapable of of discerning.
The system affects the way officials make decisions on the pitch. They leave play to carry on, when they should be making a decision about offside, as VAR will review a goal anyway. The decision on the field is valueless because the official hasn't made a decision, they've just let play carry on. VAR is not reviewing the on field decision, it is making a microscopic judgement on the facts of the goal. I'm sure this wasn't the original intention of VAR but that's the rule of unintended consequences for you.
I'm against VAR in principal from a philosophical point in any case. All sporting endeavour is rife with error, from participants and officials alike. To try to legislate for perfection against the fallible human nature of sport seems a fool's errand to me.
https://newsthump.com/2019/12/30/var-either-ruining-or-perfecting-football-depending-on-which-team-you-support/?fbclid=IwAR2PtwIYxPjtCslakG7sydrF0uqlqfihmW2asPUZ0ApKOXP98SpIXUkMA80
"VAR can be used to overturn a subjective decision if a "clear and obvious error" has been identified.
The referee will explain their decision to the VAR, and what they have seen.
If the evidence provided by the broadcast footage does not accord with what the referee believes they have seen, then the VAR can recommend an overturn."
I thought that VAR would level the playing field and get rid of those decisions that always seem to go in favour of the “bigger” club, but all we seem to see is VAR disallowing goals scored by the “smaller” club, often for no good reason.
What happens if a player has an erection?
‘Clear and obvious’ daylight! 😆
Everyone just seems to get on with it and respect the refs decision.