Video Assistant Referee (VAR)
Comments
-
It's around an hour, just over on average. There has been calls in the past for a 60 minute game with the watched stopped NFL-style for every stoppage, no matter how minor or short. I think the FA feel that it would actually lead to games at lower levels being less accurately timed than more. The 90 mins plus a few minutes typical game works out about right on average, where a supposed 60 minutes game with every stoppage accurately tracked will lead to wildly fluctuating playing times, at least initially.Kap10 said:I'd like to see "time ball in play" stats published. see how much of a 90 minute game we actually see.
2 -
stevexreeve said:
Official rules for the length of a football match.
First half
46 minutes
47 minutes if the game was stopped for any injury.
Second Half
48 minutes
+1 minute if the game was stopped for any injury.
+1 minute if the away team is winning or drawing and has been slowing the game down.
+1 minute if the game is deemed by the referee to be "very important".
In addition, the referee will add time for serious injuries where the game is stopped for three minutes or more. In this case the referee adds the actual length of time lost less two minutes.
WTF?
1 -
The Red Robin said:
Isn't 30 seconds also added on for goals and substitutions?
Well there's the thing. Mention that at a Continental game and you will be met with a blank stare. Seems like an English invention.1 -
Just watched it on southern news.... Actually Hodgson is a disgrace.. No worse than wenger has done in recent weeks.0
-
Wellington Phoenix v Melbourne Victory (earlier today) had a whopping 8 mins added to the first half. This was mainly due to the VAR, as they had to go back and check an incident several times.0
-
I've watched lots of Italian and German games this season. None have gone on that long, you don't know it's there unless something big is at stake (at most twice a game) and then justice is done.Danepak said:Wellington Phoenix v Melbourne Victory (earlier today) had a whopping 8 mins added to the first half. This was mainly due to the VAR, as they had to go back and check an incident several times.
I like it, Charlton could have benefitted from it a lot in the past.1 -
Given our dire form I would like to se each half no longer than seven minutes inclusive of injury time.5
-
Believe VAR is being used again tonight in the Chelsea V Arsenal game on Sky0
-
https://en.onefootball.com/premier-league-saturday-ball-play-minutes/Kap10 said:I'd like to see "time ball in play" stats published. see how much of a 90 minute game we actually see.
One weekend back in August, there was just 47 minutes of actual play between Burnley and West Brom.
Not sure we can have 25 minutes of added time in each half.1 -
I took it as satire, but with too much realism!PragueAddick said:stevexreeve said:Official rules for the length of a football match.
First half
46 minutes
47 minutes if the game was stopped for any injury.
Second Half
48 minutes
+1 minute if the game was stopped for any injury.
+1 minute if the away team is winning or drawing and has been slowing the game down.
+1 minute if the game is deemed by the referee to be "very important".
In addition, the referee will add time for serious injuries where the game is stopped for three minutes or more. In this case the referee adds the actual length of time lost less two minutes.
WTF?1 -
Sponsored links:
-
Martin Tyler quite obviously HATES this. lol0
-
Wonder what Zaha and Ashley Young are going to do as careers if VAR comes into all matches...
Tom Daley may have some tough competition in the coming years.1 -
Did Sepp Blatter write those rules?stevexreeve said:Official rules for the length of a football match.
First half
46 minutes
47 minutes if the game was stopped for any injury.
Second Half
48 minutes
+1 minute if the game was stopped for any injury.
+1 minute if the away team is winning or drawing and has been slowing the game down.
+1 minute if the game is deemed by the referee to be "very important".
In addition, the referee will add time for serious injuries where the game is stopped for three minutes or more. In this case the referee adds the actual length of time lost less two minutes.1 -
They should sit the VAR in Wenger's dugout. That way he'll finally see something.5
-
TV were really hoping for a review to be made. Maybe that a review was available made players less inclined to cheat? If so, it is a good thing.
Who would like to be remembered as the first cheat to be caught on VAR? Have the bookies opened betting yet? What are Zaha’s odds?0 -
The minute they introduced goal line technology in the top flight only, football started to be played under different sets of rules depending on the level. VAR extends this "us and them" even more, so NFL style for the big boys and the status quo for the rest isn't a stretch. It's just getting the authorities to admit they now preside over two (slightly) different games and going the whole hog.randy andy said:
It's around an hour, just over on average. There has been calls in the past for a 60 minute game with the watched stopped NFL-style for every stoppage, no matter how minor or short. I think the FA feel that it would actually lead to games at lower levels being less accurately timed than more. The 90 mins plus a few minutes typical game works out about right on average, where a supposed 60 minutes game with every stoppage accurately tracked will lead to wildly fluctuating playing times, at least initially.Kap10 said:I'd like to see "time ball in play" stats published. see how much of a 90 minute game we actually see.
I do not agree with this at all personally, but it's what most people want.1 -
Two massive refereeing errors on tonight's MOTD...0
-
Three blatant handballs this week missed in premiership ,could have cost Southampton and Swansea 2 points and ,who knows,their premier league status.
0 -
Iheanacho scored for Leicester tonight. Linesman gave offside.
VAR overruled and gave the goal.
First VAR goal in English football.
Remember that for future quizzes.4 -
In that situation it worked really well as play had been stopped as the goal had been scored.
It will cause an issue if the ref keeps blowing up to look at each and every penalty decision and stopping play, when normally play would continue if the ref didn't think it was a penalty.0 -
Sponsored links:
-
Bet that lineman will keep his flag down next time he isn't sure!0
-
The ref can't keep blowing up to look at each decision. The trial is designed so VAR can only be used when there is already a break in play in 4 specific circumstances:
Check for offside after a goal is scored/disallowed
Check if a given penalty shouldn't have been given
Check if a red card really should have been red
Check in the case of mistaken identity (which only really comes into play when a player is booked).
In all those cases the game has already stopped, more than likely the players are already hassling the referee and 1min for VAR really isn't going to make much difference (we've seen Man Utd players chase a ref on-mass for minutes on end in the past).1 -
I'm all for VAR but surely it should be like cricket & the reviews screened for all to see. Last nights "review" was a damp squib imo - everyone waiting around not knowing what was being looked at or if the lino was right or wrong. The tv viewers had to rely on the tv production rather than what the VAR ref was looking at & the crowd knew jack shit. More crowd participation needed.0
-
How long before managers are moaning that VAR isn't being used to check if a penalty SHOULD have been given though?randy andy said:The ref can't keep blowing up to look at each decision. The trial is designed so VAR can only be used when there is already a break in play in 4 specific circumstances:
Check for offside after a goal is scored/disallowed
Check if a given penalty shouldn't have been given
Check if a red card really should have been red
Check in the case of mistaken identity (which only really comes into play when a player is booked).
In all those cases the game has already stopped, more than likely the players are already hassling the referee and 1min for VAR really isn't going to make much difference (we've seen Man Utd players chase a ref on-mass for minutes on end in the past).
0 -
Definitely agree, not only should we all be able to see it, but like in cricket and rugby, we should be able to hear the conversation between the ref and the VAR. I'd like refs to explain all decisions really, like when a flag is thrown in NFL. So often referees seems to give decisions because the assume something must have happened that they didn't see clearly (and are punished for not giving by the refereeing adjudicators). That simply wouldn't happen if the referee had to say why it was a foul, he's not going to announce to a stadium, "free kick to the defence because there was a bit of pushing and shoving, couldn't really see exactly who, but it feels like there was probably a foul", if the referee can't with any certainty say what the foul was, who committed it and on whom he committed it, then it shouldn't be given.golfaddick said:I'm all for VAR but surely it should be like cricket & the reviews screened for all to see. Last nights "review" was a damp squib imo - everyone waiting around not knowing what was being looked at or if the lino was right or wrong. The tv viewers had to rely on the tv production rather than what the VAR ref was looking at & the crowd knew jack shit. More crowd participation needed.
The other mistake with the way VAR is set-up is that it's all based on the referee. The VAR can't look at a situation and signal the ref to act, the ref has to call for VAR. The whole system may be faster and more efficient if the VAR is given a chance to preempt the ref and look at stuff independently, calling the ref's attention to the important stuff.0 -
VAR should be as you say used as it is in Rugby where all can see and hear the discussion.
On top of this each club should be able to call on it ONCE per game, the refs use can be down to as and when for the ref.
0 -
So it works then, as proved last night.
Excellent.2 -
It works in regards to getting the correct decision, but I think the crowd lost interest after about 10 seconds. Needs to be a lot quicker.Greenie said:So it works then, as proved last night.
Excellent.
0 -
Last night the offside was effectively only relevant after the ball was in the net.randy andy said:The ref can't keep blowing up to look at each decision. The trial is designed so VAR can only be used when there is already a break in play in 4 specific circumstances:
Check for offside after a goal is scored/disallowed
Check if a given penalty shouldn't have been given
Check if a red card really should have been red
Check in the case of mistaken identity (which only really comes into play when a player is booked).
In all those cases the game has already stopped, more than likely the players are already hassling the referee and 1min for VAR really isn't going to make much difference (we've seen Man Utd players chase a ref on-mass for minutes on end in the past).
In a situation where the play is (incorrectly) stopped before the attacker shoots, and the keeper and defenders stop playing after hearing the whistle there's no way a goal could be given, even if the ball ends up in the net surely?1 -
The Comms is the issue with VAR looking at how its worked in Italy and Germany, were there is no idea of whats happened/or why its been refer to VAR. Might be the time to open up the Ref's mic when it is referred up.0
