Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

VAR - are you a fan?

1…3536373840

Comments

  • Algarveaddick
    Algarveaddick Posts: 21,412
    Chris_from_Sidcup said:
    clive said:

    Fifa set to use VAR for corners at World Cup

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/c62lgler7rlo
    Load of bollocks.

    VAR for red cards (and yellows), plus the semi-automated offside tech we had at the Qatar world cup, and i think that is enough.
    Nope - like I said before, all or nothing, There is no logic to doing it any other way, Chris. 

    And for me it's nothing. 
  • cafc999
    cafc999 Posts: 4,993
    edited December 2025
    Our problem is that the prem use the assistant as the ref, not the assistant.

    The rugby boys use the assistant as the assistant
  • doronron
    doronron Posts: 828
    edited December 2025
    Definitely good, just shows how many mistakes are made and cleared up by VAR 
  • Dazzler21
    Dazzler21 Posts: 51,730
    Title needs updating still to:

    VAR, You a fan?

  • fenlandaddick
    fenlandaddick Posts: 1,852
    edited December 2025
    Not a fan. Crock of shite in current form
    Problems is with comments like this might end up getting it in the Championship. Looking forward to the 10 min wait for a decision .

  • Karim_myBagheri
    Karim_myBagheri Posts: 13,336
    Only have to look at the majority of comments on that article to see football fans do not want VAR. So no doubt they'll introduce it. 
  • LargeAddick
    LargeAddick Posts: 33,090
    I hate VAR. I'd rather scrap it and have refs making occasional errors. Some offsides are ridiculous, ruled out because the attackers toe was fractionally offside. I can just imagine a defender stepping up a bit and thinking yep, that'll be his toe offside. I dread if we get to the PL in my lifetime and I celebrate like mad a 92nd minute winner against league leaders Torquay Utd only for it to be ruled out 8 minutes later because Ty Campbell (Tyreece's son) touched the ball with his fingernail inadvertently.
  • BigRedEvil
    BigRedEvil Posts: 11,138
    Football would be better without VAR. It's ruined watching a game live. Get rid I say 
  • SuedeAdidas
    SuedeAdidas Posts: 7,872
    BigRedEvil said:
    Football would be better without VAR. It's ruined watching a game live. Get rid I say 
    It’s definitely worse if you’re at the game - but it’s awful watching on tv too. 

    Instead of a vacuum of information at the ground, you get ‘pundits’ looking to fill the dead air with incessant cobblers on the telly. 

    Get rid. Goal line tech only for me. 
  • stevexreeve
    stevexreeve Posts: 1,410
    Funny how they talk about "soft" penalties but not "soft" offsdes.

    Last night was a definite penalty because of the meaningful shirt pull but wirtz  should have been booked for diving!

    Has that ever happened?

  • Sponsored links:



  • jimmymelrose
    jimmymelrose Posts: 9,937
    Elthamaddick said:
    Starinnaddick said:
    In the Newcastle game last night the home team were awarded a penalty after VAR check. Both teams had been manhandling players in the box most of the game and getting away with it and the blatant impeding of goalkeepers is still being allowed. 
    there will be Pens in every single game at every level of football if last night is the precedent 

    ridiculous decision 

    In that case , there should be penalties in every game. I haven't seen this Newcastle match but there is too much holding and pulling generally - way too much because my tolerence of it is zero.

    There is no need to lay your hands on another player in football. The only acceptable usage should be defenders marking an opposition player, using their arm to  to keep the right distance from an attacker at corners because you should be watching the ball not the player. Ironically,  modern day defenders don’t do this anymore. Instead they are pulling or pushing and hardly watching the ball at all.

    I’d punish all of it regardless of whether it impedes the opposition player or not. If that means 20 penalties a match, so be it. Teams will soon realise that the opposition have won because they cheated less. Football would win in the long term.
  • jimmymelrose
    jimmymelrose Posts: 9,937
    Dazzler21 said:
    Title needs updating still to:

    VAR, You a fan?


    Err, no, why? Do you prefer worsening grammar and punctuation?
  • Oakster2
    Oakster2 Posts: 324
    I absolutely detest it - from the day it was introduced I have stopped watching games involving it (play off final excepted & thankfully it didn’t ruin that). 

    Maybe we should have had a penalty last night - but for the sake of the game I’d rather take the poor decision on the chin than have to sit around for 5 minutes while someone in a studio makes their own arbitary poor decision.

    Ruined the game.
  • Karim_myBagheri
    Karim_myBagheri Posts: 13,336
    Watching this Newcastle v man city game 3 minutes looking at a still image to try and work out if it's offside or if there's a foul. Var can't decide so it goes back to the ref who is still looking at the screen. 5 minutes... 
    Gives offside. 
  • LargeAddick
    LargeAddick Posts: 33,090
    VAR, what is it good for, absolutely nothing. I mean about five minutes to decide if Haarland was offside or not. It’s meant to be for clear and obvious errors. If you need to look at it multiple times it’s not clear and obvious. I fucking hate VAR. Offside given? Fucking ridiculous.

    A number of times at the weekend, including our game, the commentators said how nice it was not to have VAR and have spontaneous reactions to events and no long delays for decisions.

    Please scrap VAR, it’s ruining football.
  • carly burn
    carly burn Posts: 19,704
    And to think we are aspiring to get into this league!

    Hope we don't. It will probably be the end for me.

  • Karim_myBagheri
    Karim_myBagheri Posts: 13,336
    10 minutes later the lines have come out for the offside. 
  • Callumcafc
    Callumcafc Posts: 64,984
    edited 1:41AM
    He was standing in an offside position and deemed to be interfering with the defender who is unable to make an attempt to block the shot due to the attacker’s presence. 

    I said in the other thread that I probably wouldn’t have given it but upon further reflection, it’s pretty objectively offside by the letter of the law…

    I don’t think it was a referee error to not have given it in real time - it was a very complex and unusual situation. But by the letter of the laws as they are written, it was offside.
  • Gravesend_Addick
    Gravesend_Addick Posts: 7,343
    On balance it was probably the right decision on this occasion BUT.....

    I hate the way VAR is used in this country.   VAR was brought in to eliminate clear & obvious errors.  If it takes more than 5 minutes & various camera angles to make a decision then it's not a clear & obvious error.

    Scrap it
  • SporadicAddick
    SporadicAddick Posts: 7,070
    Callumcafc said:
    He was standing in an offside position and deemed to be interfering with the defender who is unable to make an attempt to block the shot due to the attacker’s presence. 

    I said in the other thread that I probably wouldn’t have given it but upon further reflection, it’s pretty objectively offside by the letter of the law…

    I don’t think it was a referee error to not have given it in real time - it was a very complex and unusual situation. But by the letter of the laws as they are written, it was offside.
    If we want to do everything by the letter of the law:-

     - 50% of throw ins would be awarded to the opposition as a result of a foul throw.
     - 100% of corners would lead to either a penalty or a free kick. 
     - There would need to be a digital 8 second countdown for when the goalkeeper has control of the ball (at the moment refs aren't counting from the exact moment of control, and we can't guarantee that they are counting exact seconds).
     - We will need a tape measure at every free kick to ensure full and accurate 10 yard distance at the point the free kick is taken. We will also need the ref to confirm that the kick is being taken from the correct spot, possibly using satellite technology.

    If we are using the exact letter of the law, let's at least do it properly. 

  • Sponsored links:



  • Algarveaddick
    Algarveaddick Posts: 21,412
    SporadicAddick said:
    Callumcafc said:
    He was standing in an offside position and deemed to be interfering with the defender who is unable to make an attempt to block the shot due to the attacker’s presence. 

    I said in the other thread that I probably wouldn’t have given it but upon further reflection, it’s pretty objectively offside by the letter of the law…

    I don’t think it was a referee error to not have given it in real time - it was a very complex and unusual situation. But by the letter of the laws as they are written, it was offside.
    If we want to do everything by the letter of the law:-

     - 50% of throw ins would be awarded to the opposition as a result of a foul throw.
     - 100% of corners would lead to either a penalty or a free kick. 
     - There would need to be a digital 8 second countdown for when the goalkeeper has control of the ball (at the moment refs aren't counting from the exact moment of control, and we can't guarantee that they are counting exact seconds).
     - We will need a tape measure at every free kick to ensure full and accurate 10 yard distance at the point the free kick is taken. We will also need the ref to confirm that the kick is being taken from the correct spot, possibly using satellite technology.

    If we are using the exact letter of the law, let's at least do it properly. 
    That's what I keep banging on about, just not quite so eloquently. 
  • Jints
    Jints Posts: 3,536
    I like Wenger's idea of changing the offside rule so there has to be daylight between attacker and defender for it to be offside. 
  • guinnessaddick
    guinnessaddick Posts: 29,275
    Jints said:
    I like Wenger's idea of changing the offside rule so there has to be daylight between attacker and defender for it to be offside. 
    What about night games?
  • usetobunkin
    usetobunkin Posts: 2,302
    Jints said:
    I like Wenger's idea of changing the offside rule so there has to be daylight between attacker and defender for it to be offside. 
    That's how it was years ago. And as Bill Shankly said "If a player is not interfering with play or seeking to gain an advantage. then he should be."
  • ForeverAddickted
    ForeverAddickted Posts: 96,937
    Jints said:
    I like Wenger's idea of changing the offside rule so there has to be daylight between attacker and defender for it to be offside. 
    The only thing its going to change is there will be more advantage to the Attacker
    You'll still be left with awkwardly tight calls for the officials to make.
  • mayoboy
    mayoboy Posts: 16
    Try not to watch PL teams but after the VAR decision (Newcastle v Man city) last night I immediately switched over.

    It cannot take 10 minutes to make that decision...it's killing the game.
  • O-Randy-Hunt
    O-Randy-Hunt Posts: 10,954
    If they bring the rule about daylight in, all they will do is get the var officials to spend 5 minutes to see if they can see a smidgen of daylight.

    In an ideal world I'd go back to refs and linos making mistakes like the good old days. They even themselves out over the season imo. Unfortunately var is here to stay though as its good for the game apparently.
  • Off_it
    Off_it Posts: 29,097
    The way VAR has been used for offside decisions since it's adoption has been wrong from the start.

    When you think what the offside law was originally introduced for - to stop people goal-hanging - then it's worked and continues to work, unquestionably. Maybe the offside law needs rewriting (or scrapping, even?) But it was never intended to catch people out who are half a toenail further forward than a defender as there is no real advantage gained by that.

    I was always amazed in the past by how many offside decisions linesmen actually did get right given they only get one look at it in real time and with no freeze frame. Even when something looked obviously onside or offside to the naked eye from the stands, you'd see a replay and then realise it was much closer than you first thought.

    If VAR was only used for clear and obvious errors when it comes to offside - the same as it is supposed to be used for penalties, etc - then I think most of us could live with that. The sort of decisions where a linesman has clearly just missed something, like a ball coming off a defender rather than an attacker, or an attacker being in their own half when the ball was played.  

    As it is, it's a bit of a joke. But I doubt that it's going anywhere - the genie is well and truly out of the bottle.
  • Jints
    Jints Posts: 3,536
    ForeverAddickted said:
    Jints said:
    I like Wenger's idea of changing the offside rule so there has to be daylight between attacker and defender for it to be offside. 
    The only thing its going to change is there will be more advantage to the Attacker
    You'll still be left with awkwardly tight calls for the officials to make.
    I think tight calls would be far fewer. It's much easier to ascertain if there is a clear gap between defender and attacker than whether a shoulder is half an inch in front of a knee or precisely level with it. 
  • Dugdaleclass
    Dugdaleclass Posts: 569
    Actually think that VAR has been working well in the Premiership this season, particularly with a focus on stopping all that wrestling nonsense at corners. Last night's delays over deliberations for an offside were a bit silly given it didn't change the way the game was going. I do like the fact the referee now has to explain to the crowd what his final decision is.

Categories

“Marketplace”