Will VAR Change Football for the Better?
Discussion
Bluevanman said:
Could be the end of VAR
https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5495032/2024/05/1...
Please Godhttps://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5495032/2024/05/1...
Bluevanman said:
Could be the end of VAR
https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5495032/2024/05/1...
We can but hope......https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5495032/2024/05/1...
Bluevanman said:
Could be the end of VAR
https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5495032/2024/05/1...
They're just teasing, I would put money on them voting to keep it but with a number of concessions. https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5495032/2024/05/1...
Blib said:
Frimley111R said:
Removing it would be a huge step back for football and day delay other imporvements for years.
Yeah.I love waiting upto five minutes for some chap in an office in London to decide whether or not I can celebrate a goal.
My favourite bit.
Going against the grain here but VAR as a concept is good. It’s the implementation that’s been very poor.
Offsides are far too precise to actually be accurate. There is no way they can state with 100% accuracy when the ball left the foot of the player passing it. There has to be a thicker line to compensate for this and allow for a margin of error.
Handballs are far too easy to get. Under current rules I still think that attackers should just kick the ball at opponents arms rather than try to score as they’re guaranteed a penalty. This needs clarifying and made harder. Ditto the opponent who throws his leg in front of a defender clearing the ball just to get kicked but is nowhere near the ball.
The de facto position that VAR appears to have taken is to try to rule every goal scored from open play, whilst awarding as many penalties as possible for the most minor infraction. That’s what needs to change. Things will speed up as a result of a positive change.
Offsides are far too precise to actually be accurate. There is no way they can state with 100% accuracy when the ball left the foot of the player passing it. There has to be a thicker line to compensate for this and allow for a margin of error.
Handballs are far too easy to get. Under current rules I still think that attackers should just kick the ball at opponents arms rather than try to score as they’re guaranteed a penalty. This needs clarifying and made harder. Ditto the opponent who throws his leg in front of a defender clearing the ball just to get kicked but is nowhere near the ball.
The de facto position that VAR appears to have taken is to try to rule every goal scored from open play, whilst awarding as many penalties as possible for the most minor infraction. That’s what needs to change. Things will speed up as a result of a positive change.
LF5335 said:
Going against the grain here but VAR as a concept is good. It’s the implementation that’s been very poor.
Offsides are far too precise to actually be accurate. There is no way they can state with 100% accuracy when the ball left the foot of the player passing it. There has to be a thicker line to compensate for this and allow for a margin of error.
Handballs are far too easy to get. Under current rules I still think that attackers should just kick the ball at opponents arms rather than try to score as they’re guaranteed a penalty. This needs clarifying and made harder. Ditto the opponent who throws his leg in front of a defender clearing the ball just to get kicked but is nowhere near the ball.
The de facto position that VAR appears to have taken is to try to rule every goal scored from open play, whilst awarding as many penalties as possible for the most minor infraction. That’s what needs to change. Things will speed up as a result of a positive change.
they're good starts that I agree with brother, I'd even go further, have a time limit on their decisions, if its that close, go with the on field call and also the officials seem to have no cognisance of their biases, so, there should be a European pool of VAR officials who dont know who they are VARing for that weekend until they turn up at their version of Shockley park, but they cant officiate in their own country. Offsides are far too precise to actually be accurate. There is no way they can state with 100% accuracy when the ball left the foot of the player passing it. There has to be a thicker line to compensate for this and allow for a margin of error.
Handballs are far too easy to get. Under current rules I still think that attackers should just kick the ball at opponents arms rather than try to score as they’re guaranteed a penalty. This needs clarifying and made harder. Ditto the opponent who throws his leg in front of a defender clearing the ball just to get kicked but is nowhere near the ball.
The de facto position that VAR appears to have taken is to try to rule every goal scored from open play, whilst awarding as many penalties as possible for the most minor infraction. That’s what needs to change. Things will speed up as a result of a positive change.
NRG1976 said:
Semi auto offside good.
Goal line tech good.
VAR get rid.
Get rid of it all. The very occasional goal not being given even though it was over the line, or being given when it wasn't, is brilliant stuff. Fans remember it for years, and can blame a defeat on it for ever even though they would have got thrashed anyway. Like Lampard v Germany in the WC. Goal line tech good.
VAR get rid.
Terminator X said:
Good riddance to it. Calling offside for an arm etc is insane.
On handball it always used to be hand to ball not ball to hand. Bring that back.
TX.
As you can't score a goal with an arm likewise you can't be offside with an arm.VAR has never done what you've described.On handball it always used to be hand to ball not ball to hand. Bring that back.
TX.
The handball rule is what it is,VAR doesn't decide what the rule is
Terminator X said:
On handball it always used to be hand to ball not ball to hand. Bring that back.
TX.
So a defender rushes out to block a shot, spreads his arms as wide as poss in the hope that the ball will strike his hand or arm. When the shot eventually hits his hand or arm, that's ball to hand, not hand to ball. His arm was already out and the ball was then kicked against it. You seriously don't think that should be a pen. Of course it should. That's why it's not as simple as you suggest. TX.
VAR is good. Implementation of the system with idiots is the problem. Rugby wouldn't get rid of the TMO because they use it properly.
It probably only needs one tweak to make it immeasurably different. GEt rid of this stupid "clear and obvious error" b
ks. Was it a foul. handball etc? regardless of the on field decision
It probably only needs one tweak to make it immeasurably different. GEt rid of this stupid "clear and obvious error" b
ks. Was it a foul. handball etc? regardless of the on field decisionMy biggest issue is that I don't believe that they can pick and choose what is subject to VAR and what is not. If VAR is switched "on", it needs to be on for everything. For example, currently they don't intervene when the wrong decision has been made about the ball going out of play, Why not? There was an incident on Tuesday when the ball clearly came off Gvardiol for a corner but it was given as a goal kick. Why didn't VAR correct that? And why is there a subjective decision about the degree to which a referee got an incident wrong before VAR intervenes?
They are trying to let the onfield officials run the game and only intervene when it's "clear and obvious" - if it's wrong, it's wrong. You can't be a bit wrong like you can't be a bit pregnant. Then they take 5 minutes reviewing an incident that VAR clearly felt was a "clear and obvious" error.... It's the worst of both worlds. Either everything should be subject to VAR or nothing should be.
They are trying to let the onfield officials run the game and only intervene when it's "clear and obvious" - if it's wrong, it's wrong. You can't be a bit wrong like you can't be a bit pregnant. Then they take 5 minutes reviewing an incident that VAR clearly felt was a "clear and obvious" error.... It's the worst of both worlds. Either everything should be subject to VAR or nothing should be.
Edited by TEKNOPUG on Thursday 16th May 11:06
VAR will only be 100% for offsides when they adopt the same grade of cameras as they have at finishing lines in horse racing, Olympic sprinting etc. But of course for football there isn't a fixed line to put a camera on.
I'd bin it entirely to be honest. If we leave a small element of VAR in, there will always be calls to expand it again, after Man U/Liverpool/Man City/Arsenal/Chelsea get a dodgy decision against *any lesser club* and the media go into meltdown again. As it can never practicably be 100% reliable for all aspects of the game, it shouldn't be used in any aspect. Just lance the boil and move on. Give us the beautiful, crazy game back.
I'd keep goal line tech though, that can be 100%.
I'd bin it entirely to be honest. If we leave a small element of VAR in, there will always be calls to expand it again, after Man U/Liverpool/Man City/Arsenal/Chelsea get a dodgy decision against *any lesser club* and the media go into meltdown again. As it can never practicably be 100% reliable for all aspects of the game, it shouldn't be used in any aspect. Just lance the boil and move on. Give us the beautiful, crazy game back.
I'd keep goal line tech though, that can be 100%.
Gassing Station | Football | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff