VAR - are you a fan?

golfaddick

soapboxsam said:

Cheers @Off_it.

Andy Peake was the Cafc player fouled.

I thought it was Steve McKenzie. Absolute nailed on. 

Off_it

Off_it said:

soapboxsam said:

Cheers @Off_it.

Andy Peake was the Cafc player fouled.

I remember it like it was yesterday. I remember not even shouting for the penalty but cheering as it was that obvious, only for the ref to wave play on.

Drew 0-0 I think, so that could've been the winner.

Just looked it up. Was 23.09.89 and we lost 1-0, so it could've meant the draw.

soapboxsam

ARoss said:

As said, it’s the actual ref who is the VAR that is the problem, not VAR as a concept.

The other thing that needs to come in IMO is for the crowd to hear the comms between the ref and VAR so everyone knows what is being reviewed and why the conclusion has been reached.

This.

At both Cricket and Rugby the communication is so much better.

If it's stops a goal like Henry's double juggle against the Irish then it can only be a good thing despite the obvious anomalies that are cropping up early doors in this system.

killerandflash

The Villa goal being disallowed was a massive error by the referee

The Newcastle goal not being disallowed was a massive VAR error, it's a silly rule but I don't know how the VAR officials didn't see the handball in the lead up to the goal. The players who've had goals disallowed this season will be even more annoyed now.

soapboxsam

killerandflash said:

The Villa goal being disallowed was a massive error by the referee

The Newcastle goal not being disallowed was a massive VAR error, it's a silly rule but I don't know how the VAR officials didn't see the handball in the lead up to the goal. The players who've had goals disallowed this season will be even more annoyed now.

A shocker of an error which doesn't seem to come under the remit of VAR if ref blows for a dive ?
If the goal had been given then VAR would have confirmed the validity of the goal.

Rudders22

Interesting one this one. Apparently commentators saying "handball". Ref missed it. Doesn't give it? Arsenal then go on to score a few mins later. Do we go back to the VAR and give a penalty for handball?? Where do you draw the line. Normal rules say "no stay with goal as ref either missed it or didn't think it was handball" Under these fuckwit rules and fuckwit VAR we go back to VAR?? As for people saying "oh if VAR over rule the referees and undermine them, so what. If they didn't make the wrong decisions in the 1st place and they can use it as a learning curve/development tool. Problem has not always been the VAR. A lot of it is refereeing decision and lino decisions. Rant over. 

Chippycafc

soapboxsam said:

Algarveaddick said:

soapboxsam said:

killerandflash said:

To me the changes to the offside rule and the use of VAR are making judgements based on say 95% certainty at the moment

Much better than before but I don't believe the technology is 100% accurate yet, and to me the benefit should go to the attacker when there's this element of doubt. A football version of "umpire's call"

Agree, because in the woman's World cup when we played the Cameroon's they had a forward facing her own goal and by a cigarette paper their goal was chalked off.
I was pleased at the time but the law that attacking players in line with the 2nd last defender is onside is being lost because VAR can only represent the rules as they stand.
Clear up the laws and rules then VAR can only be a good thing. At the moment there are too many anomalies.

No it can't - for the reason I have given before - it takes the joy out of what is, ultimately, an entertainment.  

Even if they get every single decision spot on as far as 100% of people are concerned, I do not want to have to wait until a man in a TV studio tells me it is okay to celebrate. 

If you do, then you are a fan of a different game to the one I am a fan of.    

Back in the day at Old Trafford under Ferguson, no team got a penalty at United.
When one was given by a younger ref he nearly got chocked by Roy Keane and his gang.

I was at Arsenal when Kevin Richardson brought down a Charlton Player in the box.
A 100% stonewall penalty. It happened down the away end right in front of me.
Any of you guys remember ? Walsh ?

VAR would have given that, it was that blatant. Even Richardson was smiling as he knew it was the wrong decision.

VAR is superb but the human element still needs improving. If a ref makes a mistake them ref behind the screen should be brave and over rule him. 

You are definitely a fan of a different game to me if you can't see it's the only chance in some cases for a smaller club to get decisions at the bigger clubs.
Do you not like reviews at cricket ? Maybe your not into cricket.

At least a goal won't be disallowed in the Premier when the ball rebounds out.
Clive Allen from memory.

I was there that day stonewall penalty, I am sure Laurie sivell was the ref. Didn't we lose 1-0 that day to a penalty given for handball that came through a ruck of players from a corner.

VAR is a joke for all the reasons said in the last few years.... Still hadn't improved. 

SuedeAdidas

When a ‘goal’ is reviewed by VAR...... how far back in play does the review erm..........review?

Stig

I'm a fan of VAR (DRS) in cricket, but that's a sport that lends itself to it. For one thing there's a little break in play after every ball is bowled so it doesn't ruin the continuity of the event, it actually adds to the suspense. For another the action follows a predictable pattern so the cameras are always in the right place. They have a meaningful stepped reviewing procedure that is easy for all to follow. Even then though, the ball tracking part is still only the computer's best guess at what might have happened, it is not 100% accurate and is not error free. That said, I think they've got it just right in the way it's used. It's especially good when Tim Paine leads his country to test match defeat by making frivolous appeals. 

Football's not like that though. It's more messy, more spontaneous and more frenetic. You could mount a camera in every seat in a stadium and it still wouldn't be perfect. It slows down the greatest sporting spectacle there is, right at the crucial stage. It sets an expectation that we should be measuring things that are imperceptible to the human eye; that we should be seeking perfection where none exists. Let's just get on with a game of football. If the man in the middle says it's offside that's good enough for me, and if he sometimes gets it wrong I'll take that as something to talk about in the pub afterwards.  

stevexreeve

Stig said:

Stig said:

I'm a fan of VAR (DRS) in cricket, but that's a sport that lends itself to it. For one thing there's a little break in play after every ball is bowled so it doesn't ruin the continuity of the event, it actually adds to the suspense. For another the action follows a predictable pattern so the cameras are always in the right place. They have a meaningful stepped reviewing procedure that is easy for all to follow. Even then though, the ball tracking part is still only the computer's best guess at what might have happened, it is not 100% accurate and is not error free. That said, I think they've got it just right in the way it's used. It's especially good when Tim Paine leads his country to test match defeat by making frivolous appeals. 

Football's not like that though. It's more messy, more spontaneous and more frenetic. You could mount a camera in every seat in a stadium and it still wouldn't be perfect. It slows down the greatest sporting spectacle there is, right at the crucial stage. It sets an expectation that we should be measuring things that are imperceptible to the human eye; that we should be seeking perfection where none exists. Let's just get on with a game of football. If the man in the middle says it's offside that's good enough for me, and if he sometimes gets it wrong I'll take that as something to talk about in the pub afterwards.  

I agree!

PeterGage

Stig said:

I'm a fan of VAR (DRS) in cricket, but that's a sport that lends itself to it. For one thing there's a little break in play after every ball is bowled so it doesn't ruin the continuity of the event, it actually adds to the suspense. For another the action follows a predictable pattern so the cameras are always in the right place. They have a meaningful stepped reviewing procedure that is easy for all to follow. Even then though, the ball tracking part is still only the computer's best guess at what might have happened, it is not 100% accurate and is not error free. That said, I think they've got it just right in the way it's used. It's especially good when Tim Paine leads his country to test match defeat by making frivolous appeals. 

Football's not like that though. It's more messy, more spontaneous and more frenetic. You could mount a camera in every seat in a stadium and it still wouldn't be perfect. It slows down the greatest sporting spectacle there is, right at the crucial stage. It sets an expectation that we should be measuring things that are imperceptible to the human eye; that we should be seeking perfection where none exists. Let's just get on with a game of football. If the man in the middle says it's offside that's good enough for me, and if he sometimes gets it wrong I'll take that as something to talk about in the pub afterwards.  

As a follower of both cricket and football, you have beautifully and succinctly captured my exact thoughts in way I am not able.

Great post !

golfaddick

Stig said:

I'm a fan of VAR (DRS) in cricket, but that's a sport that lends itself to it. For one thing there's a little break in play after every ball is bowled so it doesn't ruin the continuity of the event, it actually adds to the suspense. For another the action follows a predictable pattern so the cameras are always in the right place. They have a meaningful stepped reviewing procedure that is easy for all to follow. Even then though, the ball tracking part is still only the computer's best guess at what might have happened, it is not 100% accurate and is not error free. That said, I think they've got it just right in the way it's used. It's especially good when Tim Paine leads his country to test match defeat by making frivolous appeals. 

Football's not like that though. It's more messy, more spontaneous and more frenetic. You could mount a camera in every seat in a stadium and it still wouldn't be perfect. It slows down the greatest sporting spectacle there is, right at the crucial stage. It sets an expectation that we should be measuring things that are imperceptible to the human eye; that we should be seeking perfection where none exists. Let's just get on with a game of football. If the man in the middle says it's offside that's good enough for me, and if he sometimes gets it wrong I'll take that as something to talk about in the pub afterwards.  

And even DRS is flawed. Ask Tom Paine. A howler of a decision that would have meant England lost should have been "reviewed" by someone & not just be down to not having any reviews left.

Generally offsides in football are pretty much spot on nowadays & if not & they are tight calls whose fault is that....the linesman or the team trying to push up & catching someone offside...??

Agree with you 100% Stig.

Algarveaddick

Chippycafc said:

soapboxsam said:

Algarveaddick said:

soapboxsam said:

killerandflash said:

To me the changes to the offside rule and the use of VAR are making judgements based on say 95% certainty at the moment

Much better than before but I don't believe the technology is 100% accurate yet, and to me the benefit should go to the attacker when there's this element of doubt. A football version of "umpire's call"

Agree, because in the woman's World cup when we played the Cameroon's they had a forward facing her own goal and by a cigarette paper their goal was chalked off.
I was pleased at the time but the law that attacking players in line with the 2nd last defender is onside is being lost because VAR can only represent the rules as they stand.
Clear up the laws and rules then VAR can only be a good thing. At the moment there are too many anomalies.

No it can't - for the reason I have given before - it takes the joy out of what is, ultimately, an entertainment.  

Even if they get every single decision spot on as far as 100% of people are concerned, I do not want to have to wait until a man in a TV studio tells me it is okay to celebrate. 

If you do, then you are a fan of a different game to the one I am a fan of.    

Back in the day at Old Trafford under Ferguson, no team got a penalty at United.
When one was given by a younger ref he nearly got chocked by Roy Keane and his gang.

I was at Arsenal when Kevin Richardson brought down a Charlton Player in the box.
A 100% stonewall penalty. It happened down the away end right in front of me.
Any of you guys remember ? Walsh ?

VAR would have given that, it was that blatant. Even Richardson was smiling as he knew it was the wrong decision.

VAR is superb but the human element still needs improving. If a ref makes a mistake them ref behind the screen should be brave and over rule him. 

You are definitely a fan of a different game to me if you can't see it's the only chance in some cases for a smaller club to get decisions at the bigger clubs.
Do you not like reviews at cricket ? Maybe your not into cricket.

At least a goal won't be disallowed in the Premier when the ball rebounds out.
Clive Allen from memory.

I was there that day stonewall penalty, I am sure Laurie sivell was the ref. Didn't we lose 1-0 that day to a penalty given for handball that came through a ruck of players from a corner.

VAR is a joke for all the reasons said in the last few years.... Still hadn't improved. 

Laurie Sivell was the Ipswich goalkeeper, Alan Seville was the ref that day. I too remember it well - the  following issue of VotV had a picture of Seville with his eyes closed on the front cover. 

Algarveaddick

soapboxsam said:

Algarveaddick said:

soapboxsam said:

killerandflash said:

To me the changes to the offside rule and the use of VAR are making judgements based on say 95% certainty at the moment

Much better than before but I don't believe the technology is 100% accurate yet, and to me the benefit should go to the attacker when there's this element of doubt. A football version of "umpire's call"

Agree, because in the woman's World cup when we played the Cameroon's they had a forward facing her own goal and by a cigarette paper their goal was chalked off.
I was pleased at the time but the law that attacking players in line with the 2nd last defender is onside is being lost because VAR can only represent the rules as they stand.
Clear up the laws and rules then VAR can only be a good thing. At the moment there are too many anomalies.

No it can't - for the reason I have given before - it takes the joy out of what is, ultimately, an entertainment.  

Even if they get every single decision spot on as far as 100% of people are concerned, I do not want to have to wait until a man in a TV studio tells me it is okay to celebrate. 

If you do, then you are a fan of a different game to the one I am a fan of.    

Back in the day at Old Trafford under Ferguson, no team got a penalty at United.
When one was given by a younger ref he nearly got chocked by Roy Keane and his gang.

I was at Arsenal when Kevin Richardson brought down a Charlton Player in the box.
A 100% stonewall penalty. It happened down the away end right in front of me.
Any of you guys remember ? Walsh ?

VAR would have given that, it was that blatant. Even Richardson was smiling as he knew it was the wrong decision.

VAR is superb but the human element still needs improving. If a ref makes a mistake them ref behind the screen should be brave and over rule him. 

You are definitely a fan of a different game to me if you can't see it's the only chance in some cases for a smaller club to get decisions at the bigger clubs.
Do you not like reviews at cricket ? Maybe your not into cricket.

At least a goal won't be disallowed in the Premier when the ball rebounds out.
Clive Allen from memory.

Yes - we clearly are fans of different games. I have been watching a game for not far off 50 years that I love, warts n all. The four years in the old Div one where we didn't get a single penalty away from home, utter bullshit, we were robbed on several occasions, made me mad as hell. Does it mean I want to wait until a man in TV studio tells me I can celebrate? No.

It is entertainment, and VAR is spoiling it. Stig's post is spot on.  

Chippycafc

Algarveaddick said:

Chippycafc said:

soapboxsam said:

Algarveaddick said:

soapboxsam said:

killerandflash said:

To me the changes to the offside rule and the use of VAR are making judgements based on say 95% certainty at the moment

Much better than before but I don't believe the technology is 100% accurate yet, and to me the benefit should go to the attacker when there's this element of doubt. A football version of "umpire's call"

Agree, because in the woman's World cup when we played the Cameroon's they had a forward facing her own goal and by a cigarette paper their goal was chalked off.
I was pleased at the time but the law that attacking players in line with the 2nd last defender is onside is being lost because VAR can only represent the rules as they stand.
Clear up the laws and rules then VAR can only be a good thing. At the moment there are too many anomalies.

No it can't - for the reason I have given before - it takes the joy out of what is, ultimately, an entertainment.  

Even if they get every single decision spot on as far as 100% of people are concerned, I do not want to have to wait until a man in a TV studio tells me it is okay to celebrate. 

If you do, then you are a fan of a different game to the one I am a fan of.    

Back in the day at Old Trafford under Ferguson, no team got a penalty at United.
When one was given by a younger ref he nearly got chocked by Roy Keane and his gang.

I was at Arsenal when Kevin Richardson brought down a Charlton Player in the box.
A 100% stonewall penalty. It happened down the away end right in front of me.
Any of you guys remember ? Walsh ?

VAR would have given that, it was that blatant. Even Richardson was smiling as he knew it was the wrong decision.

VAR is superb but the human element still needs improving. If a ref makes a mistake them ref behind the screen should be brave and over rule him. 

You are definitely a fan of a different game to me if you can't see it's the only chance in some cases for a smaller club to get decisions at the bigger clubs.
Do you not like reviews at cricket ? Maybe your not into cricket.

At least a goal won't be disallowed in the Premier when the ball rebounds out.
Clive Allen from memory.

I was there that day stonewall penalty, I am sure Laurie sivell was the ref. Didn't we lose 1-0 that day to a penalty given for handball that came through a ruck of players from a corner.

VAR is a joke for all the reasons said in the last few years.... Still hadn't improved. 

Laurie Sivell was the Ipswich goalkeeper, Alan Seville was the ref that day. I too remember it well - the  following issue of VotV had a picture of Seville with his eyes closed on the front cover. 

Was a long time ago... Can anyone explain why VAR was used to confirm arsenals goal was offside. Anyone could see the linesman was spot on. Total unnecessary hold up. 

Chippycafc

Just remember that ginger twat ref running backwards laughing his head off when he didn't give it. 

stevexreeve

Chippycafc said:

Algarveaddick said:

Chippycafc said:

soapboxsam said:

Algarveaddick said:

soapboxsam said:

killerandflash said:

To me the changes to the offside rule and the use of VAR are making judgements based on say 95% certainty at the moment

Much better than before but I don't believe the technology is 100% accurate yet, and to me the benefit should go to the attacker when there's this element of doubt. A football version of "umpire's call"

Agree, because in the woman's World cup when we played the Cameroon's they had a forward facing her own goal and by a cigarette paper their goal was chalked off.
I was pleased at the time but the law that attacking players in line with the 2nd last defender is onside is being lost because VAR can only represent the rules as they stand.
Clear up the laws and rules then VAR can only be a good thing. At the moment there are too many anomalies.

No it can't - for the reason I have given before - it takes the joy out of what is, ultimately, an entertainment.  

Even if they get every single decision spot on as far as 100% of people are concerned, I do not want to have to wait until a man in a TV studio tells me it is okay to celebrate. 

If you do, then you are a fan of a different game to the one I am a fan of.    

Back in the day at Old Trafford under Ferguson, no team got a penalty at United.
When one was given by a younger ref he nearly got chocked by Roy Keane and his gang.

I was at Arsenal when Kevin Richardson brought down a Charlton Player in the box.
A 100% stonewall penalty. It happened down the away end right in front of me.
Any of you guys remember ? Walsh ?

VAR would have given that, it was that blatant. Even Richardson was smiling as he knew it was the wrong decision.

VAR is superb but the human element still needs improving. If a ref makes a mistake them ref behind the screen should be brave and over rule him. 

You are definitely a fan of a different game to me if you can't see it's the only chance in some cases for a smaller club to get decisions at the bigger clubs.
Do you not like reviews at cricket ? Maybe your not into cricket.

At least a goal won't be disallowed in the Premier when the ball rebounds out.
Clive Allen from memory.

I was there that day stonewall penalty, I am sure Laurie sivell was the ref. Didn't we lose 1-0 that day to a penalty given for handball that came through a ruck of players from a corner.

VAR is a joke for all the reasons said in the last few years.... Still hadn't improved. 

Laurie Sivell was the Ipswich goalkeeper, Alan Seville was the ref that day. I too remember it well - the  following issue of VotV had a picture of Seville with his eyes closed on the front cover. 

Was a long time ago... Can anyone explain why VAR was used to confirm arsenals goal was offside. Anyone could see the linesman was spot on. Total unnecessary hold up. 

No objection to VAR looking at it provided they make up their mind within 10 - 20 seconds. If they can't sort it out in this time it's not obvious and the original decision should stand.

killerandflash

I would rather we had a system more like cricket where each team has 2 challenges say

A goal is scored and the defensive team think it was handball or offside, you can challenge. A bad challenge produces a yellow card and you don't like it (or vice versa) you can challenge.

Keep your challenges for the real howlers, as if you blow them like Tim Payne, tough!

Chippycafc

stevexreeve said:

Chippycafc said:

Algarveaddick said:

Chippycafc said:

soapboxsam said:

Algarveaddick said:

soapboxsam said:

killerandflash said:

To me the changes to the offside rule and the use of VAR are making judgements based on say 95% certainty at the moment

Much better than before but I don't believe the technology is 100% accurate yet, and to me the benefit should go to the attacker when there's this element of doubt. A football version of "umpire's call"

Agree, because in the woman's World cup when we played the Cameroon's they had a forward facing her own goal and by a cigarette paper their goal was chalked off.
I was pleased at the time but the law that attacking players in line with the 2nd last defender is onside is being lost because VAR can only represent the rules as they stand.
Clear up the laws and rules then VAR can only be a good thing. At the moment there are too many anomalies.

No it can't - for the reason I have given before - it takes the joy out of what is, ultimately, an entertainment.  

Even if they get every single decision spot on as far as 100% of people are concerned, I do not want to have to wait until a man in a TV studio tells me it is okay to celebrate. 

If you do, then you are a fan of a different game to the one I am a fan of.    

Back in the day at Old Trafford under Ferguson, no team got a penalty at United.
When one was given by a younger ref he nearly got chocked by Roy Keane and his gang.

I was at Arsenal when Kevin Richardson brought down a Charlton Player in the box.
A 100% stonewall penalty. It happened down the away end right in front of me.
Any of you guys remember ? Walsh ?

VAR would have given that, it was that blatant. Even Richardson was smiling as he knew it was the wrong decision.

VAR is superb but the human element still needs improving. If a ref makes a mistake them ref behind the screen should be brave and over rule him. 

You are definitely a fan of a different game to me if you can't see it's the only chance in some cases for a smaller club to get decisions at the bigger clubs.
Do you not like reviews at cricket ? Maybe your not into cricket.

At least a goal won't be disallowed in the Premier when the ball rebounds out.
Clive Allen from memory.

I was there that day stonewall penalty, I am sure Laurie sivell was the ref. Didn't we lose 1-0 that day to a penalty given for handball that came through a ruck of players from a corner.

VAR is a joke for all the reasons said in the last few years.... Still hadn't improved. 

Laurie Sivell was the Ipswich goalkeeper, Alan Seville was the ref that day. I too remember it well - the  following issue of VotV had a picture of Seville with his eyes closed on the front cover. 

Was a long time ago... Can anyone explain why VAR was used to confirm arsenals goal was offside. Anyone could see the linesman was spot on. Total unnecessary hold up. 

No objection to VAR looking at it provided they make up their mind within 10 - 20 seconds. If they can't sort it out in this time it's not obvious and the original decision should stand.

I don't like VAR as most people know but the decision wasn't even tight enough to use it...ridiculous. feel sorry for linesman, if I was one in the premier league I would stop flagging and just say let VAR sort it out. No point in them being there.

Callumcafc

To those asking the question, VAR can only go back as far as the last time play was restarted.

That’s why you’ll see referees making sure the keeper doesn’t take a goal kick or a player take a throw in while a potential review is in progress

stevexreeve

killerandflash said:

I would rather we had a system more like cricket where each team has 2 challenges say

A goal is scored and the defensive team think it was handball or offside, you can challenge. A bad challenge produces a yellow card and you don't like it (or vice versa) you can challenge.

Keep your challenges for the real howlers, as if you blow them like Tim Payne, tough!

Despite the obvious thrill of the match, I thought it made a laughing stock of cricket that the whole thing could be decided by a ridiculous umpire decision. Thierry Henry and Frank Lampard moments come to mind. The game will eventually be remembered for that decision - not the result!

Rudders22

I have now seen the one in the Leicester v Bournemouth game. How is that not a red. It should not have needed to go to VAR. What's more how can they give that as a yellow. 

ForeverAddickted

Rudders22 said:

I have now seen the one in the Leicester v Bournemouth game. How is that not a red. It should not have needed to go to VAR. What's more how can they give that as a yellow. 

Ever so slightly similar to how Sam Field caught Ameobi when we played Nottingham Forest

The difference being though that Tielemans was more of a stamp and couldnt have been further from the ball had he tried

Its what seperated them as red cards for me

Rothko

Tielemans tackle is worse, because I don't think the on field ref even gave a free kick for it, so it was missed, it was clear and obvious, and should have at least been referred to the screen for an on field review. 

I get the Premier League desire not to over involve VAR in the game, it's just it's far too far in that direction. 

soapboxsam

Algarveaddick said:

soapboxsam said:

Algarveaddick said:

soapboxsam said:

killerandflash said:

To me the changes to the offside rule and the use of VAR are making judgements based on say 95% certainty at the moment

Much better than before but I don't believe the technology is 100% accurate yet, and to me the benefit should go to the attacker when there's this element of doubt. A football version of "umpire's call"

Agree, because in the woman's World cup when we played the Cameroon's they had a forward facing her own goal and by a cigarette paper their goal was chalked off.
I was pleased at the time but the law that attacking players in line with the 2nd last defender is onside is being lost because VAR can only represent the rules as they stand.
Clear up the laws and rules then VAR can only be a good thing. At the moment there are too many anomalies.

No it can't - for the reason I have given before - it takes the joy out of what is, ultimately, an entertainment.  

Even if they get every single decision spot on as far as 100% of people are concerned, I do not want to have to wait until a man in a TV studio tells me it is okay to celebrate. 

If you do, then you are a fan of a different game to the one I am a fan of.    

Back in the day at Old Trafford under Ferguson, no team got a penalty at United.
When one was given by a younger ref he nearly got chocked by Roy Keane and his gang.

I was at Arsenal when Kevin Richardson brought down a Charlton Player in the box.
A 100% stonewall penalty. It happened down the away end right in front of me.
Any of you guys remember ? Walsh ?

VAR would have given that, it was that blatant. Even Richardson was smiling as he knew it was the wrong decision.

VAR is superb but the human element still needs improving. If a ref makes a mistake them ref behind the screen should be brave and over rule him. 

You are definitely a fan of a different game to me if you can't see it's the only chance in some cases for a smaller club to get decisions at the bigger clubs.
Do you not like reviews at cricket ? Maybe your not into cricket.

At least a goal won't be disallowed in the Premier when the ball rebounds out.
Clive Allen from memory.

Yes - we clearly are fans of different games. I have been watching a game for not far off 50 years that I love, warts n all. The four years in the old Div one where we didn't get a single penalty away from home, utter bullshit, we were robbed on several occasions, made me mad as hell. Does it mean I want to wait until a man in TV studio tells me I can celebrate? No.

It is entertainment, and VAR is spoiling it. Stig's post is spot on.  

You would have got to celebrate all those wrong decisions when we went those 4 years. Shame it wasn't brought in when Ferguson was intimidating refs at old Trafford.
If we score a goal and it's handball or off side, I can live with it being chalked off.

As we aren't in the premier it doesn't affect us now.

MuttleyCAFC

killerandflash said:

I would rather we had a system more like cricket where each team has 2 challenges say

A goal is scored and the defensive team think it was handball or offside, you can challenge. A bad challenge produces a yellow card and you don't like it (or vice versa) you can challenge.

Keep your challenges for the real howlers, as if you blow them like Tim Payne, tough!

I totally agree, but I would limit to one, but add a referee's call, a bit like umpire's call element. It would reflect the fact that some decisions will always be subjective. It would also give teams power to prevent genuine miscarriages of justice, and should they not take it, it would mitigate the error as some of the blame would be theirs. A bit like the terrible umpiring decision the Aussies could not appeal which cost them the previous Test Match. Far less can be made of it, because it was their own fault.

Chippycafc

I would love a system where the referees decision is final...

Algarveaddick

soapboxsam said:

Algarveaddick said:

soapboxsam said:

Algarveaddick said:

soapboxsam said:

killerandflash said:

To me the changes to the offside rule and the use of VAR are making judgements based on say 95% certainty at the moment

Much better than before but I don't believe the technology is 100% accurate yet, and to me the benefit should go to the attacker when there's this element of doubt. A football version of "umpire's call"

Agree, because in the woman's World cup when we played the Cameroon's they had a forward facing her own goal and by a cigarette paper their goal was chalked off.
I was pleased at the time but the law that attacking players in line with the 2nd last defender is onside is being lost because VAR can only represent the rules as they stand.
Clear up the laws and rules then VAR can only be a good thing. At the moment there are too many anomalies.

No it can't - for the reason I have given before - it takes the joy out of what is, ultimately, an entertainment.  

Even if they get every single decision spot on as far as 100% of people are concerned, I do not want to have to wait until a man in a TV studio tells me it is okay to celebrate. 

If you do, then you are a fan of a different game to the one I am a fan of.    

Back in the day at Old Trafford under Ferguson, no team got a penalty at United.
When one was given by a younger ref he nearly got chocked by Roy Keane and his gang.

I was at Arsenal when Kevin Richardson brought down a Charlton Player in the box.
A 100% stonewall penalty. It happened down the away end right in front of me.
Any of you guys remember ? Walsh ?

VAR would have given that, it was that blatant. Even Richardson was smiling as he knew it was the wrong decision.

VAR is superb but the human element still needs improving. If a ref makes a mistake them ref behind the screen should be brave and over rule him. 

You are definitely a fan of a different game to me if you can't see it's the only chance in some cases for a smaller club to get decisions at the bigger clubs.
Do you not like reviews at cricket ? Maybe your not into cricket.

At least a goal won't be disallowed in the Premier when the ball rebounds out.
Clive Allen from memory.

Yes - we clearly are fans of different games. I have been watching a game for not far off 50 years that I love, warts n all. The four years in the old Div one where we didn't get a single penalty away from home, utter bullshit, we were robbed on several occasions, made me mad as hell. Does it mean I want to wait until a man in TV studio tells me I can celebrate? No.

It is entertainment, and VAR is spoiling it. Stig's post is spot on.  

You would have got to celebrate all those wrong decisions when we went those 4 years. Shame it wasn't brought in when Ferguson was intimidating refs at old Trafford.
If we score a goal and it's handball or off side, I can live with it being chalked off.

As we aren't in the premier it doesn't affect us now.

I get it Sam. Like I said, we are fans of different games.  

Rudders22

Can you imagine if VAR was inn use in our play off fina? A) both goals may have been chalked off as possibly Purrington's foot was an inch offside 2) Patricks goal may have been chaulked off as one of our players had their arms on top of another defender 3) We wouldn't have a wild jubilant celebration like we did as we would be thinking "oh shit... wait for VAR 4) It would be down to the interpretation of VAR refs.

As it was when Purringtons goal was shown on the screen at Wembley me mate said "oh that looks offside and I replied "it's ok mate. It doesn't matter as VAR is not being used".

I prefer NOT to use it. It buggers up a game and spoils the entertainment i have had for 40yrs watching football. 

Chizz

lancashire lad said:

in cricket umpires continually bottle decision and refer them to VAR, but it doesn't really matter as it is not a time conscious game. They seem to have got it right in rugby because it is quite quick but in football they need to sort it out to be quicker. Once in use I expect that refs will bottle their decisions and refer to VAR more and more which will need to legislated against.

An umpire referring a decision to VAR in a cricket match would be unusual, since VAR isn't used in cricket, it's DRS.  

Having said that, maybe our best way of getting Steve Smith out would be to persuade the umpire to refer a close lbw decision to a group of top-level FIFA referees in their bunker at Stockley Park.