VAR - are you a fan?

Gisappointed

Without the arm the ball would have gone out to the wing, and Mbweno doesn't get a shot off.  How can you identify intent? Not always arm to ball.

Raith_C_Chattonell

Have Arsenal got an insider working on VAR tonight?

KBslittlesis

Absolute waste of time as its obviously bent as feck.

Raith_C_Chattonell

Me and my son - oh and Gary Neville thought this was a red. 

Even Arteta must have thought it was dodgy - he subbed Havertz off when the game resumed.  One of the other Sky speakers says VAR upheld the yellow card decision as the force of the impact wasn't enough for red - well I s'pose he didn't actually break his leg 

MuttleyCAFC

Notts_Addick said:

There was a very simple law in place for years which was that handball had to be deliberate to be an offence. That may have had it's nuances but it was a damn sight better than the position we appear to have ended up in now.

The issue is there are so many variations now of what handball is/isn't that I don't think anyone, including referees, knows what the definition is. 

Change it back to deliberate handball with a caveat that any handball will be penalised if it leads to a clear goal scoring opportunity or denies one and I do think things would be so much easier. 

This comment is sanity. The penalty law has become a mess outside of VAR and it has been going on for years. You get managers saying now that they don't know what is or isn't a handball and to confuse matters it is interpreted differently in Europe. Of course you will get some refs interpreting intent differently. That is life. 

Radostanradical

As said before VAR gets the decision right 97% of the time.

The issue is its application, I see zero reasons to send a ref to a monitor to have a look at it if a professional ref is seeing it on a monitor miles away from a crowd and has decided its a handball.

Stu_of_Kunming

Radostanradical said:

As said before VAR gets the decision right 99% of the time.

Even the KMI panel has it lower than that.

It's total dogshit, get rid asap.

Radostanradical

Stu_of_Kunming said:

Radostanradical said:

As said before VAR gets the decision right 97% of the time.

Even the KMI panel has it lower than that.

It's total dogshit, get rid asap.

You are incorrect.

https://www.premierleague.com/en/news/4373884/whats-new-in-2025-26-season-ifab-laws-and-premier-league-football-principles

We can't let dinosaurs stand in the way of progress. It works but needs refining in its application. 60 sec clock to make a judgement and no monitor at ground.

PrincessFiona

Radostanradical said:

As said before VAR gets the decision right 97% of the time.

The issue is its application, I see zero reasons to send a ref to a monitor to have a look at it if a professional ref is seeing it on a monitor miles away from a crowd and has decided its a handball.

yet the VAR ref and the on field ref came to different decisions. Interesting the POGO said the next morning that the on field ref was wrong to over rule VAR. We said at the time, that is a bold (contraversial) decision to over rule VAR - just glad it wasn't a title/relgation etc deciding decision

SporadicAddick

Stu_of_Kunming said:

Radostanradical said:

As said before VAR gets the decision right 99% of the time.

Even the KMI panel has it lower than that.

It's total dogshit, get rid asap.

You are absolutely right - it's dogshit. Depending on what survey you read between 75% and 91% of fans believe football is better without VAR. I spoke to a Saints fan last night who doesn't want to get promoted, in a large part because the Championship is a more enjoyable experience without it.

Getting decisions right 99% or 97% of the time is a great stat that ignores the fact that the process of determining that stat is the partial ruination of the game (there are multiple other factors).  

SuedeAdidas

Radostanradical said:

Stu_of_Kunming said:

Radostanradical said:

As said before VAR gets the decision right 97% of the time.

Even the KMI panel has it lower than that.

It's total dogshit, get rid asap.

You are incorrect.

https://www.premierleague.com/en/news/4373884/whats-new-in-2025-26-season-ifab-laws-and-premier-league-football-principles

We can't let dinosaurs stand in the way of progress. It works but needs refining in its application. 60 sec clock to make a judgement and no monitor at ground.

What progress?

Radostanradical

PrincessFiona said:

Radostanradical said:

As said before VAR gets the decision right 97% of the time.

The issue is its application, I see zero reasons to send a ref to a monitor to have a look at it if a professional ref is seeing it on a monitor miles away from a crowd and has decided its a handball.

yet the VAR ref and the on field ref came to different decisions. Interesting the POGO said the next morning that the on field ref was wrong to over rule VAR. We said at the time, that is a bold (contraversial) decision to over rule VAR - just glad it wasn't a title/relgation etc deciding decision

Thats the point. Why should we bother asking the on-field referee to have a look at the monitor in a stadium surrounded by thousands of fans when the guy in a control booth can take 60 seconds (that should be the limit) and decide if it was a clear and obvious error. If so the VAR shpuld have the authprity to make a decision.

Radostanradical

SporadicAddick said:

Stu_of_Kunming said:

Radostanradical said:

As said before VAR gets the decision right 99% of the time.

Even the KMI panel has it lower than that.

It's total dogshit, get rid asap.

You are absolutely right - it's dogshit. Depending on what survey you read between 75% and 91% of fans believe football is better without VAR. I spoke to a Saints fan last night who doesn't want to get promoted, in a large part because the Championship is a more enjoyable experience without it.

Getting decisions right 99% or 97% of the time is a great stat that ignores the fact that the process of determining that stat is the partial ruination of the game (there are multiple other factors).  

Just because one dinosaur says i dont want to get to premier league because of VAR doesnt mean we can stand in the way of progress.

People have been against -

Passback rules
Offsides
Goal line technology

Whilst I agree we need to find a way to make tge VAR cleaner and operate more efficently it would be bizarre to take away a tool which actively helps to uphold the integrity of sporting merit.

SuedeAdidas

Radostanradical said:

SporadicAddick said:

Stu_of_Kunming said:

Radostanradical said:

As said before VAR gets the decision right 99% of the time.

Even the KMI panel has it lower than that.

It's total dogshit, get rid asap.

You are absolutely right - it's dogshit. Depending on what survey you read between 75% and 91% of fans believe football is better without VAR. I spoke to a Saints fan last night who doesn't want to get promoted, in a large part because the Championship is a more enjoyable experience without it.

Getting decisions right 99% or 97% of the time is a great stat that ignores the fact that the process of determining that stat is the partial ruination of the game (there are multiple other factors).  

Just because one dinosaur says i dont want to get to premier league because of VAR doesnt mean we can stand in the way of progress.

People have been against -

Passback rules
Offsides
Goal line technology

Whilst I agree we need to find a way to make tge VAR cleaner and operate more efficently it would be bizarre to take away a tool which actively helps to uphold the integrity of sporting merit.

I ask again… what progress?

Chris_from_Sidcup

And the good news is that just as we've all generally got used to VAR and it's marginal offsides for someone having a toenail offside, we could soon have Arsene Wenger's stupid new rule coming in.

Radostanradical

SuedeAdidas said:

Radostanradical said:

SporadicAddick said:

Stu_of_Kunming said:

Radostanradical said:

As said before VAR gets the decision right 99% of the time.

Even the KMI panel has it lower than that.

It's total dogshit, get rid asap.

You are absolutely right - it's dogshit. Depending on what survey you read between 75% and 91% of fans believe football is better without VAR. I spoke to a Saints fan last night who doesn't want to get promoted, in a large part because the Championship is a more enjoyable experience without it.

Getting decisions right 99% or 97% of the time is a great stat that ignores the fact that the process of determining that stat is the partial ruination of the game (there are multiple other factors).  

Just because one dinosaur says i dont want to get to premier league because of VAR doesnt mean we can stand in the way of progress.

People have been against -

Passback rules
Offsides
Goal line technology

Whilst I agree we need to find a way to make tge VAR cleaner and operate more efficently it would be bizarre to take away a tool which actively helps to uphold the integrity of sporting merit.

I ask again… what progress?

I literally wrote it above, in maintaining the itegrity of sporting merit.

Decisions being correct literally do this.

Algarveaddick

Radostanradical said:

SuedeAdidas said:

Radostanradical said:

SporadicAddick said:

Stu_of_Kunming said:

Radostanradical said:

As said before VAR gets the decision right 99% of the time.

Even the KMI panel has it lower than that.

It's total dogshit, get rid asap.

You are absolutely right - it's dogshit. Depending on what survey you read between 75% and 91% of fans believe football is better without VAR. I spoke to a Saints fan last night who doesn't want to get promoted, in a large part because the Championship is a more enjoyable experience without it.

Getting decisions right 99% or 97% of the time is a great stat that ignores the fact that the process of determining that stat is the partial ruination of the game (there are multiple other factors).  

Just because one dinosaur says i dont want to get to premier league because of VAR doesnt mean we can stand in the way of progress.

People have been against -

Passback rules
Offsides
Goal line technology

Whilst I agree we need to find a way to make tge VAR cleaner and operate more efficently it would be bizarre to take away a tool which actively helps to uphold the integrity of sporting merit.

I ask again… what progress?

I literally wrote it above, in maintaining the itegrity of sporting merit.

Decisions being correct literally do this.

If it's all the same to you, this dinosaur just wants to be entertained. 

SuedeAdidas

Radostanradical said:

SuedeAdidas said:

Radostanradical said:

SporadicAddick said:

Stu_of_Kunming said:

Radostanradical said:

As said before VAR gets the decision right 99% of the time.

Even the KMI panel has it lower than that.

It's total dogshit, get rid asap.

You are absolutely right - it's dogshit. Depending on what survey you read between 75% and 91% of fans believe football is better without VAR. I spoke to a Saints fan last night who doesn't want to get promoted, in a large part because the Championship is a more enjoyable experience without it.

Getting decisions right 99% or 97% of the time is a great stat that ignores the fact that the process of determining that stat is the partial ruination of the game (there are multiple other factors).  

Just because one dinosaur says i dont want to get to premier league because of VAR doesnt mean we can stand in the way of progress.

People have been against -

Passback rules
Offsides
Goal line technology

Whilst I agree we need to find a way to make tge VAR cleaner and operate more efficently it would be bizarre to take away a tool which actively helps to uphold the integrity of sporting merit.

I ask again… what progress?

I literally wrote it above, in maintaining the itegrity of sporting merit.

Decisions being correct literally do this.

I see no way in which football has progressed since the implementation of VAR. 

If that makes me Tyrannosaurus-Suede, then so be it. 

The game would be far better off if they just sorted some of the laws out to make them less subjective and used VAR for non-subjective decisions only. 

Stu_of_Kunming

Radostanradical said:

Stu_of_Kunming said:

Radostanradical said:

As said before VAR gets the decision right 97% of the time.

Even the KMI panel has it lower than that.

It's total dogshit, get rid asap.

You are incorrect.

https://www.premierleague.com/en/news/4373884/whats-new-in-2025-26-season-ifab-laws-and-premier-league-football-principles

We can't let dinosaurs stand in the way of progress. It works but needs refining in its application. 60 sec clock to make a judgement and no monitor at ground.

That article confirms exactly what I said. It’s lower than your stated 99% and it’s only got worse this season. 

Briston_Addick

If VAR existed in the 2015/2016 season the Leicester City Football Club would not have been champions of the Premier League; one of Arsenal (finished 2nd, 10 points behind), Spurs (3rd, -11pts), Man City (4th, -15pts) or Man Utd (5th, -15pts) would have been crowned instead and one of the greatest fairy tale stories in professional sport wouldn't have happened.

I don't say that with specific incidents in mind - "oh, they'd have lost two points there because that goal would have been disallowed", "so-and-so would have seen red for that challenge and therefore wouldn't have helped the comeback win" etc - but with the hindsight of seven seasons of VAR operation in the top flight where the only consistency appears to have been its favouritism of the big clubs over the smaller.

I hate VAR.

Radostanradical

Stu_of_Kunming said:

Radostanradical said:

Stu_of_Kunming said:

Radostanradical said:

As said before VAR gets the decision right 97% of the time.

Even the KMI panel has it lower than that.

It's total dogshit, get rid asap.

You are incorrect.

https://www.premierleague.com/en/news/4373884/whats-new-in-2025-26-season-ifab-laws-and-premier-league-football-principles

We can't let dinosaurs stand in the way of progress. It works but needs refining in its application. 60 sec clock to make a judgement and no monitor at ground.

That article confirms exactly what I said. It’s lower than your stated 99% and it’s only got worse this season. 

I said 97 recheck it

SporadicAddick

Radostanradical said:

Stu_of_Kunming said:

Radostanradical said:

Stu_of_Kunming said:

Radostanradical said:

As said before VAR gets the decision right 97% of the time.

Even the KMI panel has it lower than that.

It's total dogshit, get rid asap.

You are incorrect.

https://www.premierleague.com/en/news/4373884/whats-new-in-2025-26-season-ifab-laws-and-premier-league-football-principles

We can't let dinosaurs stand in the way of progress. It works but needs refining in its application. 60 sec clock to make a judgement and no monitor at ground.

That article confirms exactly what I said. It’s lower than your stated 99% and it’s only got worse this season. 

I said 97 recheck it

after you edited your original post from 99%?

Radostanradical

SporadicAddick said:

Radostanradical said:

Stu_of_Kunming said:

Radostanradical said:

Stu_of_Kunming said:

Radostanradical said:

As said before VAR gets the decision right 97% of the time.

Even the KMI panel has it lower than that.

It's total dogshit, get rid asap.

You are incorrect.

https://www.premierleague.com/en/news/4373884/whats-new-in-2025-26-season-ifab-laws-and-premier-league-football-principles

We can't let dinosaurs stand in the way of progress. It works but needs refining in its application. 60 sec clock to make a judgement and no monitor at ground.

That article confirms exactly what I said. It’s lower than your stated 99% and it’s only got worse this season. 

I said 97 recheck it

after you edited your original post from 99%?

Yes due to a typo i edited pretty quickly after typing either way we are talking 2%

Siv_in_Norfolk

SporadicAddick said:

Stu_of_Kunming said:

Radostanradical said:

As said before VAR gets the decision right 99% of the time.

Even the KMI panel has it lower than that.

It's total dogshit, get rid asap.

You are absolutely right - it's dogshit. Depending on what survey you read between 75% and 91% of fans believe football is better without VAR. I spoke to a Saints fan last night who doesn't want to get promoted, in a large part because the Championship is a more enjoyable experience without it.

Getting decisions right 99% or 97% of the time is a great stat that ignores the fact that the process of determining that stat is the partial ruination of the game (there are multiple other factors).  

Its great your Saints mate got what he wanted 

Gisappointed

VAR is good in theory but in England decisions are given that are blatantly wrong, like Mbweno handball.

The World Cup will demonstrate proper use of the laws. 

Stu_of_Kunming

Radostanradical said:

Stu_of_Kunming said:

Radostanradical said:

Stu_of_Kunming said:

Radostanradical said:

As said before VAR gets the decision right 97% of the time.

Even the KMI panel has it lower than that.

It's total dogshit, get rid asap.

You are incorrect.

https://www.premierleague.com/en/news/4373884/whats-new-in-2025-26-season-ifab-laws-and-premier-league-football-principles

We can't let dinosaurs stand in the way of progress. It works but needs refining in its application. 60 sec clock to make a judgement and no monitor at ground.

That article confirms exactly what I said. It’s lower than your stated 99% and it’s only got worse this season. 

I said 97 recheck it

You said 99% and edited it after my post. It's ok to be wrong sometimes.

2% might not seem a lot, but when it's sucking away the enjoyment of the game, even 100% wouldn't be enough to justify it.

O-Randy-Hunt

Gisappointed said:

VAR is good in theory but in England decisions are given that are blatantly wrong, like Mbweno handball.

The World Cup will demonstrate proper use of the laws. 

Maybe but will still take away the entertainment factor we once had for the game back when i was even more of a dinosaur.

PeterGage

Gisappointed said:

VAR is good in theory but in England decisions are given that are blatantly wrong, like Mbweno handball.

The World Cup will demonstrate proper use of the laws. 

I am not sure how you can use the word "blatant" when clearly there is an element of subjectivity to that situation and the subsequent ruling by the referee.

If the player had scored directly from the handball, then the goal would have been disallowed, even if the handball was considered to have been accidental. This was not the case.

Therefore the decision was all about was it deliberate; was the hand in an unnatural position to the general movement of the player at that time; that is where the subjectivity comes into play. No consideration should be given to the fact that the ball fell nicely to the player from the hand and ball coming-together.

 You personally can, of course, hold an opinion that the goal should have been disallowed, but that opinion is subjective and the decision was not blatantly wrong.

lordromford

@PeterGage
I generally read your posts on refereeing decisions with interest because you often illustrate a referee’s point of view, which can be illuminating.
I also appreciate that refereeing is a thankless task and referees are often damned if they do and damned if they don’t.

However, one thing that the addition of ex-referees to the teams of pundits on the tv has illustrated for me, is that teams of officials are literally that - a team. There is a huge reluctance for ex-refs to criticise refereeing decisions. I do understand why: These are people who are colleagues and peers. Often I imagine they are friends too. But the verbal gymnastics the likes of Dermot Gallagher and Howard Webb go through to avoid making direct criticisms is just not helpful.

The thing is, criticism should be constructive and useful. It’s ok to criticise a referee’s decision, but you can also clarify the difficulties in getting those decisions right.
Thats the thing with the Mbeumo decision. It was blatantly wrong. I’ve seen no real disagreement about that from anyone other than blinkered Man U fans and (no disrespect meant) referees and ex referees who are unwilling to criticise a peer too harshly. I know you mentioned the decision being subjective, but subjectivity and common sense are not mutually exclusive. By your logic, no decision can be blatantly wrong because if the decision was made, there must be a valid reason for that.

People make mistakes. Sometimes mistakes are absolute howlers. That’s ok. Everyone has made howlers in their life. Regardless of how he read the situation at the time, that ref had an absolute shocker with that decision. But that’s it. It’s over and we move on. I’m sure he’ll be perfectly ok next time he referees a match. 

The fact is, despite this ref making a huge mistake, the target of most people’s annoyance is with the VAR system, not the referees themselves. People understand that humans are flawed. So it’s frustrating when referees and ex-referees, (with an understandable air of authority), tell us that we’re wrong to frame an error as ‘blatant’ or similar.

Sometimes a decision is just wrong.

That’s life.

MuttleyCAFC

I think the handball law has years of confusion built into it. I know when I was managing quite a few years ago and the ref gave a penalty when one of my players tried to hoof a ball clear with nobody near him and sliced it and it went up and hit his hand. I questioned the ref in relation to intent as Messi couldn't have performed such a skill and he told me he understood what I was saying. He told me he understood and sympathised with what I was saying but he had recently received guidance that such a thing was a penalty. This has been going on for years as the football authorities wanted consistent decisions rather than let the ref decide intent. This was never going to work.

As for the Man Utd goal, I thought that as the handball directly led to a goal, then it gave an advantage to Man Utd and shouldn't have been given which the authorities have pretty much confirmed, even though I can appreciate the player may not have had intent. Anyway, it is a mess and could easily be simplified rather this constant search for perfection that will never happen and we even have a difference in interpretation in this country to abroad which is ridiculous.

I don't think that incident was anything to do with VAR. The ref saw it hit his hand in open play and decided it was unintentional. But didn't interpret the unintentional handball led to the goal which is the error.