Will VAR Change Football for the Better?
Discussion
unident said:
Athlon said:
Should be awarded retrospectively if it is without doubt, what a crap re start if they can't get the basics right
That would get very messy, very quickly. 
Murph7355 said:
The keeper practically tried to walk out of the side netting!
The ref, the linesman and the tech all let the side down badly here (yes I'm biased!).
Scruffy game but that should have been 3pts and not 1. 5th place and not 6th. Piss poor.
Losing Henderson will be a real problem for the Blades. If I were ManUtd I wouldn't be extending the deal, not even for the remainder of this season (though obviously hope they don't take such a hard nosed stance!).
I’m not defending the decision, if you look back, I was the first to post about what a balls up it was. What I was doing in the quoted comment was to explain why the ref might not be to blame. He can’t see through multiple players to see where the ball was, the linesman should have done better. The ref, the linesman and the tech all let the side down badly here (yes I'm biased!).
Scruffy game but that should have been 3pts and not 1. 5th place and not 6th. Piss poor.
Losing Henderson will be a real problem for the Blades. If I were ManUtd I wouldn't be extending the deal, not even for the remainder of this season (though obviously hope they don't take such a hard nosed stance!).
unident said:
I’m not defending the decision, if you look back, I was the first to post about what a balls up it was. What I was doing in the quoted comment was to explain why the ref might not be to blame. He can’t see through multiple players to see where the ball was, the linesman should have done better.
Isn't it the case that under current rules they aren't allowed to over-rule goal line technology?ro250 said:
unident said:
I’m not defending the decision, if you look back, I was the first to post about what a balls up it was. What I was doing in the quoted comment was to explain why the ref might not be to blame. He can’t see through multiple players to see where the ball was, the linesman should have done better.
Isn't it the case that under current rules they aren't allowed to over-rule goal line technology?unident said:
I don’t think you can blame the ref. If he’s been told you can not give a goal without the buzz from the watch then that’s what he has to abide by. Too many bodies in the way for it to be seen by him, maybe the linesman should have done better. Equally it’s up to VAR to step in, not him to call for it, so that’s on them if they were permitted to intervene under the rules.
unident said:
ro250 said:
unident said:
I’m not defending the decision, if you look back, I was the first to post about what a balls up it was. What I was doing in the quoted comment was to explain why the ref might not be to blame. He can’t see through multiple players to see where the ball was, the linesman should have done better.
Isn't it the case that under current rules they aren't allowed to over-rule goal line technology?unident said:
I don’t think you can blame the ref. If he’s been told you can not give a goal without the buzz from the watch then that’s what he has to abide by. Too many bodies in the way for it to be seen by him, maybe the linesman should have done better. Equally it’s up to VAR to step in, not him to call for it, so that’s on them if they were permitted to intervene under the rules.
On a slightly different topic, has there been any update on the Man City player's condition?
unident said:
I don’t think you can blame the ref. If he’s been told you can not give a goal without the buzz from the watch then that’s what he has to abide by. Too many bodies in the way for it to be seen by him, maybe the linesman should have done better. Equally it’s up to VAR to step in, not him to call for it, so that’s on them if they were permitted to intervene under the rules.
I think the referee was possibly unsighted by players between him and the ball but how the linesman didn't spot it I don't know! However, even if the officials and Hawkeye all missed it there was apparently a 90 second window in which VAR could have been used and therefore to me it's a real process failure that that didn't happen. We've seen goals ruled out because part of a player has literally been millimetres offside yet something like last night - which was clearly visible to the naked eye in real time on TV - somehow gets missed; IMO it undermines having the technology if we're still getting decisions like that wrong.
gooner1 said:
What goal line technology?
On a slightly different topic, has there been any update on the Man City player's condition?
Hawkeye, or were you being sarcastic, because it apparently wasn’t turned on?On a slightly different topic, has there been any update on the Man City player's condition?
JNW1 said:
unident said:
I don’t think you can blame the ref. If he’s been told you can not give a goal without the buzz from the watch then that’s what he has to abide by. Too many bodies in the way for it to be seen by him, maybe the linesman should have done better. Equally it’s up to VAR to step in, not him to call for it, so that’s on them if they were permitted to intervene under the rules.
I think the referee was possibly unsighted by players between him and the ball but how the linesman didn't spot it I don't know! However, even if the officials and Hawkeye all missed it there was apparently a 90 second window in which VAR could have been used and therefore to me it's a real process failure that that didn't happen. We've seen goals ruled out because part of a player has literally been millimetres offside yet something like last night - which was clearly visible to the naked eye in real time on TV - somehow gets missed; IMO it undermines having the technology if we're still getting decisions like that wrong.
eltax91 said:
A biased blade here but what a joke of a decision. The officials need to get a pair. The way the blades players reacted should have been enough to ask VaR to check, let alone the obvious look of disappointment on some villa players too!! They had 1 minute and 9 seconds to review the decision before the passage ended. SS has it nailed writhing 20 seconds.
Given our run-in, that was the 2 points taken from us that we will miss out on Europe by knowing our luck.
But that’s football. All the money and technology in the world, it’ll never get perfect decisions.
To be fair I think I'd rather we didn't make Europe this year. And missing out by these particular two points will give me the perfect "sad face but never mind" option. Given our run-in, that was the 2 points taken from us that we will miss out on Europe by knowing our luck.
But that’s football. All the money and technology in the world, it’ll never get perfect decisions.
We don't have a strong enough squad to contend with Europe and a strong league performance IMO. I'm thrilled we are where we are. If we can get this going as a matter of course and build over a few seasons, that will be just fine (that and West Ham getting relegated
).JNW1 said:
,...
However, even if the officials and Hawkeye all missed it there was apparently a 90 second window in which VAR could have been used and therefore to me it's a real process failure that that didn't happen. We've seen goals ruled out because part of a player has literally been millimetres offside yet something like last night - which was clearly visible to the naked eye in real time on TV - somehow gets missed; IMO it undermines having the technology if we're still getting decisions like that wrong.
Ironically I believe Sheffield United have been on the receiving end of those sort of decisions more than any other club too. (https://www.espn.co.uk/football/english-premier-league/story/3929823/how-var-decisions-have-affected-every-premier-league-club) However, even if the officials and Hawkeye all missed it there was apparently a 90 second window in which VAR could have been used and therefore to me it's a real process failure that that didn't happen. We've seen goals ruled out because part of a player has literally been millimetres offside yet something like last night - which was clearly visible to the naked eye in real time on TV - somehow gets missed; IMO it undermines having the technology if we're still getting decisions like that wrong.
Still, them's the breaks.
(Good luck to Leeds on Sunday
)unident said:
gooner1 said:
What goal line technology?
On a slightly different topic, has there been any update on the Man City player's condition?
Hawkeye, or were you being sarcastic, because it apparently wasn’t turned on?On a slightly different topic, has there been any update on the Man City player's condition?
JNW1 said:
unident said:
I don’t think you can blame the ref. If he’s been told you can not give a goal without the buzz from the watch then that’s what he has to abide by. Too many bodies in the way for it to be seen by him, maybe the linesman should have done better. Equally it’s up to VAR to step in, not him to call for it, so that’s on them if they were permitted to intervene under the rules.
I think the referee was possibly unsighted by players between him and the ball but how the linesman didn't spot it I don't know! However, even if the officials and Hawkeye all missed it there was apparently a 90 second window in which VAR could have been used and therefore to me it's a real process failure that that didn't happen. We've seen goals ruled out because part of a player has literally been millimetres offside yet something like last night - which was clearly visible to the naked eye in real time on TV - somehow gets missed; IMO it undermines having the technology if we're still getting decisions like that wrong.
LotusOmega375D said:
It was turned on. None of the 7 Hawkeye cameras had a clear enough view to give the goal, due to Line of sight obstructions caused by the players and goal post.
Which apparently had never happened in 9000 games. Despite the players taking up pretty standard positions. Oh and the Hawkeye websites refers to the technology being able to remove all players from the shot and only leave the ball, goals and lines.
LotusOmega375D said:
It was turned on. None of the 7 Hawkeye cameras had a clear enough view to give the goal, due to Line of sight obstructions caused by the players and goal post.
That maybe what they’re claiming, but it’s b
ks. If they’d said that the system couldn’t cope with players getting in the way, then they would never have won the contract. They’re covering for what is the most likely reason. It wasn’t turned on. unident said:
JNW1 said:
unident said:
I don’t think you can blame the ref. If he’s been told you can not give a goal without the buzz from the watch then that’s what he has to abide by. Too many bodies in the way for it to be seen by him, maybe the linesman should have done better. Equally it’s up to VAR to step in, not him to call for it, so that’s on them if they were permitted to intervene under the rules.
I think the referee was possibly unsighted by players between him and the ball but how the linesman didn't spot it I don't know! However, even if the officials and Hawkeye all missed it there was apparently a 90 second window in which VAR could have been used and therefore to me it's a real process failure that that didn't happen. We've seen goals ruled out because part of a player has literally been millimetres offside yet something like last night - which was clearly visible to the naked eye in real time on TV - somehow gets missed; IMO it undermines having the technology if we're still getting decisions like that wrong.
unident said:
LotusOmega375D said:
It was turned on. None of the 7 Hawkeye cameras had a clear enough view to give the goal, due to Line of sight obstructions caused by the players and goal post.
That maybe what they’re claiming, but it’s bks. If they’d said that the system couldn’t cope with players getting in the way, then they would never have won the contract. They’re covering for what is the most likely reason. It wasn’t turned on. 
And... this technology is there to assist the refereeing. Any ref' with any b
ks would have quickly consulted his lino' and given the goal. The alternative is that sooner or later we no longer need refs and technology will be relied upon for everything. Frankly the who thing makes the "Best league in the world" a laughing stock. RichB said:
unident said:
LotusOmega375D said:
It was turned on. None of the 7 Hawkeye cameras had a clear enough view to give the goal, due to Line of sight obstructions caused by the players and goal post.
That maybe what they’re claiming, but it’s bks. If they’d said that the system couldn’t cope with players getting in the way, then they would never have won the contract. They’re covering for what is the most likely reason. It wasn’t turned on. And... this technology is there to assist the refereeing. Any ref' with any b
ks would have quickly consulted his lino' and given the goal. The alternative is that sooner or later we no longer need refs and technology will be relied upon for everything. Frankly the who thing makes the "Best league in the world" a laughing stock. Also interesting to see that the Villa players and manager were quite happy to take the benefit for what they must have known at half time to have been an incorrect decision. Remember these were the same group who made such a great scene about Leeds not kicking the ball out and scoring an unsporting goal just over 12 months ago; Bielsa immediately told his team to right the wrong on that occasion but no sign of anything similar from Mr Smith and his players last night. The Villa goalkeeper and defenders close by must have known immediately that it was a goal - appears the sporting standards and integrity they expect from others aren't always reciprocated....
I don't believe the system wasn't turned on. It's a standard part of the ref's pre match protocols to check it's functioning and his wrist thingy is connected. It's unlikely that they failed to switch it on and also the ref failed to check it was working. Both failures coinciding in the same game.
Some have said that refs do not have the power to override the goal line tech. I don't know if that's true but if it is, it absolves the ref from blame.
It would be a very brave ref that overrode the tech, even if he can. Unless the ball is nestling in the back of the net. When I first saw it, I thought it was definitely in. But when it wasn't given, I just assumed I'd got it wrong, until I saw the replay. It didn't occur to me that I was right and tech was wrong. Why would it occur to the ref, given it had never failed before.
Var should have alerted the ref, but var is rubbish anyway, most of us realise that. I no longer give var any credence at all, and quite frankly do not expect it to do the right thing.
Some have said that refs do not have the power to override the goal line tech. I don't know if that's true but if it is, it absolves the ref from blame.
It would be a very brave ref that overrode the tech, even if he can. Unless the ball is nestling in the back of the net. When I first saw it, I thought it was definitely in. But when it wasn't given, I just assumed I'd got it wrong, until I saw the replay. It didn't occur to me that I was right and tech was wrong. Why would it occur to the ref, given it had never failed before.
Var should have alerted the ref, but var is rubbish anyway, most of us realise that. I no longer give var any credence at all, and quite frankly do not expect it to do the right thing.
I think it was just one of those freak occurrences. Lots of factors transpired to prevent the goal being given. Although Hawkeye’s claim that this is the first such event in 9000 games is rather disingenuous. How many of those games have actually required any goal line technology intervention? Easily <10% I would say. Of those cases, probably none quite like that one.
Having said that it will probably never happen again.
Oh and it would have been a rubbish goal anyway....
Having said that it will probably never happen again.
Oh and it would have been a rubbish goal anyway....
I think they should now scrap goal line tech. Firstly, because the occasional valid goal not being allowed, or goal that shouldn't have been given, being allowed, is bloody good fun. Furious fans, controversy, anger, livid managers...what's not to like.
Secondly, people are prepared to accept not getting a valid goal due to human error. They are not prepared to accept it due to system error.
Secondly, people are prepared to accept not getting a valid goal due to human error. They are not prepared to accept it due to system error.
TwigtheWonderkid said:
Var should have alerted the ref, but var is rubbish anyway, most of us realise that. I no longer give var any credence at all, and quite frankly do not expect it to do the right thing.
I always thought the primary purpose of VAR was to help correct clear mistakes? It's certainly been used to correct what I would consider to be some very marginal "mistakes" but the one on Wednesday night wasn't in that category, it was about as clear as you could get! Somehow, though, the technology isn't used and the sort of obvious mistake it's supposed to help pick-up goes uncorrected. And, while I might have missed something, as far as I can see there's still been no explanation from the Premier League as to how and why the process failed on Wednesday night....
Gassing Station | Football | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff