VAR is using highly sophisticated technology, but the outcome is still determined by human eyes and judgement. This is resulting in long disruptions to the game, human error, and mistrust from fans.

All the information, Laws of the game, camera angles etc needs, need to be fed into AI, Ai will then make an almost instantaneous decision, the result being far more accurate than is possible from humans sitting in a box, under pressure to make a decision from the crowd, and time constraints.

Fan's would appreciate the almost instantaneous decision that has been made, given all the available information, and done so without any perceived bias.

A full explanation of any decisions could be provided on a website for fans to read following the game, if they are interested to know.

I think you either don't have VAR at all, or, if you are going to use technology, it has to be the very best and most accurate that is available.

Algarveaddick said:

queensland_addick said:

VAR is using highly sophisticated technology, but the outcome is still determined by human eyes and judgement. This is resulting in long disruptions to the game, human error, and mistrust from fans.

All the information, Laws of the game, camera angles etc needs, need to be fed into AI, Ai will then make an almost instantaneous decision, the result being far more accurate than is possible from humans sitting in a box, under pressure to make a decision from the crowd, and time constraints.

Fan's would appreciate the almost instantaneous decision that has been made, given all the available information, and done so without any perceived bias.

A full explanation of any decisions could be provided on a website for fans to read following the game, if they are interested to know.

I think you either don't have VAR at all, or, if you are going to use technology, it has to be the very best and most accurate that is available.

AI will probably award a second down, behind the popping crease with a ten second penalty for speeding in the pit lane... 

Yeah… but that’s where the Coach’s Challenge comes in 👍🏼

Goal allowed by VAR. 

This is the first goal to be ruled "ok" under the new, experimental FIFA daylight rule/law.  The two players standing in offside positions were ruled not to have been offside when the player made his (saved) goal attempt.  The player on the corner of the six-yard box netted the rebound off the goalkeeper.  

Championship Clubs have rejected the use of VAR next season.

Championship clubs have turned down the chance to introduce a version of the video assistant referee system for next season.

Football Video Support (FVS), a variation of VAR which needs fewer resources and gives each coach two reviews per game, could have been brought in from August.

Professional Game Match Officials (PGMO) gave a presentation at the EFL's annual meeting last month.

The EFL subsequently canvassed feedback but it was clear clubs were strongly against any kind of video review system in the Championship.

BBC Sport understands the idea is closed for the foreseeable future and the idea is unlikely to be resurrected by the clubs in a year's time.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/c17vjwe4gyro

Callumcafc said:

Chippycafc said:

VAR should only be used for matters of fact not matter of opinion. If it takes more than a few seconds to decide then it isn't an issue. 

So you’re ok with offsides under VAR?

No cos it takes too long and they still get it wrong. VAR should be scrapped. 

VAR back in the frame again after 'the decision' which will probably mean we play West Ham next season.

Looks like a foul on the keeper but 1/ Raya is bullied in his own box going for the corner cross and weakly flops down too easily and 2/ at least three West Ham players are taken out by Arsenal defenders, the sort of nonsense that VAR was introduced to stop and 3/ the ref gave a goal at first so pre-VAR days and the drawn result would have stood.

Given that Arsenal have had their fair share of decisions go their way when attacking corners this season, I can see why Hammers' fans are feeling sore about this.

VAR is so frustrating because in the Burnley v Villa game it did its job well in spotting an offside goal which the officials were too far behind the play to spot.

The authorities need to sort out this chaos at corners. But it shouldn't involve the sort of thinking which was suggested by the MOTD's refereeing adviser who believes the solution is for the six yard box to be kept clear of players and only occupied by the keeper until the corner kick is taken. Obviously somebody who never played the game (or perhaps played it as a goalie).

   

Dugdaleclass said:

VAR back in the frame again after 'the decision' which will probably mean we play West Ham next season.

Looks like a foul on the keeper but 1/ Raya is bullied in his own box going for the corner cross and weakly flops down too easily and 2/ at least three West Ham players are taken out by Arsenal defenders, the sort of nonsense that VAR was introduced to stop and 3/ the ref gave a goal at first so pre-VAR days and the drawn result would have stood.

Given that Arsenal have had their fair share of decisions go their way when attacking corners this season, I can see why Hammers' fans are feeling sore about this.

VAR is so frustrating because in the Burnley v Villa game it did its job well in spotting an offside goal which the officials were too far behind the play to spot.

The authorities need to sort out this chaos at corners. But it shouldn't involve the sort of thinking which was suggested by the MOTD's refereeing adviser who believes the solution is for the six yard box to be kept clear of players and only occupied by the keeper until the corner kick is taken. Obviously somebody who never played the game (or perhaps played it as a goalie).

   

I thought that guy MOTD was over thinking the decision and his solution would never work. All that will happen with his idea is the the players will still be doing exactly the same as now only further out in more space and the keeper will stand on his back post looking at the flight of the ball, followed by him having at least two strides advantage over everyone else. I think he'd win 90% of corners unless they were taken short and then its back to the original problem.
Best apply the laws of the game properly, no shirt pulling or wrestling. Give free kicks or penalties and book every player who hols or pulls shirts. 
When this spoils world cup matches I'm sure there will be a FIFA directive.  

All the Premier league need to do is say that from next seasons refs/VAR will now be giving penalties for any kind of holding, pulling, wrestling etc and in week 1 of next season when we see about 15 penalties given teams will quickly stop.

Grimsby could have done with VAR yesterday, Salford'd 2nd goal would have been disallowed
Not as bad as the Stockport/Orient game in last season's playoffs when Kelman was allowed to go on and score from about 10 yards offside

Thing is there is not enough equipment and not enough officials to allow for VAR right down the EFL

Wrestling and blocking at corners is a joke. Almost every player is in the box. Either sort it out or just say it’s fair game and no fouls will ever be given for it 😄

It's the same issue everytime VAR is mentioned. It is the referee's usage and inconsistency at applying the rules of the game, put under a microscope due to replays. 

At least VAR has stopped the endless debates about whether a goal should or shouldn't have been awarded. 

Why is it that professional rugby does things so much better?

Each game has a Television Match Official at the game. He watches all the live action and is in two way communication with the referee. He can tell the ref when something has been missed or can immediately respond to the ref wanting help with a decision and use TV replays. They can be shown on the big screen for the ref to view and make the final decision (with the touch judges who are also refs).

The crowd can see and hear what is happening.

Crusty54 said:

Why is it that professional rugby does things so much better?

Each game has a Television Match Official at the game. He watches all the live action and is in two way communication with the referee. He can tell the ref when something has been missed or can immediately respond to the ref wanting help with a decision and use TV replays. They can be shown on the big screen for the ref to view and make the final decision (with the touch judges who are also refs).

The crowd can see and hear what is happening.

Rugby by its very nature is much more "stop - start" than football, and therefore TMO is less of an interruption to the flow than is the case with VAR and football. Rugby is a slower paced game with more visible / obvious set piece occasions. It is easier to see what is happening and in what order in a 16 man scrum in rugby relative to 16 footballers wrestling each other at a corner where there are multiple fouls happening simultaneously. Outside of the physical elements, there is also a cultural reason why VAR is less effective. In Rugby, the players and the crowd respect the ref's decision - I think that undoubtedly impacts on the willingness or ability for VAR to be as "transparent" as TMO.

TMO works because of the sport and the environment to which it is applied.

VAR fails for the same reason.