Will VAR Change Football for the Better?
Discussion
Glassman said:
Could have done with VAR in my son's game yesterday; game poised at 2-2 and in the final 30 seconds our striker was one on one with the keeper. He got past him and the keeper tripped him. Stonewall penalty. Only, the ref was looking at his watch.
The team plays in a friendly league so point in arguing about it... even though the referee was the opposition's manager's son.
It's character building for your son. Life isn't fair, and you don't always get what you deserve. Your son is now at an advantage over many kids, who seem to be unaware of that fact. The team plays in a friendly league so point in arguing about it... even though the referee was the opposition's manager's son.
This is the most bizarre thread!
VAR does not make any decisions. It's a camera to allow referees to go back and make sure that the decision they need to make is correct in their eyes and not affected by cheating players, unsighted views, etc.
If the referee uses it it is his decision...HIS decision.
VAR is the first step into the 21 century for football, a sport which lags well behind many others in this respect.
VAR does not make any decisions. It's a camera to allow referees to go back and make sure that the decision they need to make is correct in their eyes and not affected by cheating players, unsighted views, etc.
If the referee uses it it is his decision...HIS decision.
VAR is the first step into the 21 century for football, a sport which lags well behind many others in this respect.
Frimley111R said:
If the referee uses it it is his decision...HIS decision.
Well it's not really. If a referee failed to refer an important decision to VAR despite protests from players on the receiving end, he wouldn't be refereeing again next week. It's not a free choice for the referee. It's there, and he is obligated to use it for relevant disputed decisions. TwigtheWonderkid said:
Frimley111R said:
If the referee uses it it is his decision...HIS decision.
Well it's not really. If a referee failed to refer an important decision to VAR despite protests from players on the receiving end, he wouldn't be refereeing again next week. It's not a free choice for the referee. It's there, and he is obligated to use it for relevant disputed decisions. Frimley111R said:
This is the most bizarre thread!
VAR does not make any decisions. It's a camera to allow referees to go back and make sure that the decision they need to make is correct in their eyes and not affected by cheating players, unsighted views, etc.
If the referee uses it it is his decision...HIS decision.
VAR is the first step into the 21 century for football, a sport which lags well behind many others in this respect.
Of course VAR makes decisions. If you saw the Chelsea game yesterday you would have seen this for yourself.VAR does not make any decisions. It's a camera to allow referees to go back and make sure that the decision they need to make is correct in their eyes and not affected by cheating players, unsighted views, etc.
If the referee uses it it is his decision...HIS decision.
VAR is the first step into the 21 century for football, a sport which lags well behind many others in this respect.
The Sheffield Wednesday player went down in the box. The referee pointed straight to the spot to award the penalty. That decision was then reviewed by VAR and it was communicated to the referee that he was clearly incorrect. The referee did not ever review the footage himself so, bearing in mind he then cancelled out the penalty just who do you believe did make that decision (that it was not a penalty) ?
I know there’s no VAR this season, but one for controversy when it comes in next season.
Brighton should’ve had a penalty, but not given. Burnley break and their striker is brought down for a penalty at the other end.
VAR would overturn the Burnley pen and award one to Brighton. Possibly making the score 2-1 in a relegation match. As it is it’s 3-0 and game over.
Brighton should’ve had a penalty, but not given. Burnley break and their striker is brought down for a penalty at the other end.
VAR would overturn the Burnley pen and award one to Brighton. Possibly making the score 2-1 in a relegation match. As it is it’s 3-0 and game over.
Clusterf
k today.
Case 1. Not available at Swansea despite being in all the other games. As a result penalty given when it wasn't and offside goal given when it wasn't.
Net result City through when they should have lost.
Case 2. Red card just now overturned Wolves v Utd. Crazy decision to overturn a call like that on VAR.
k today.Case 1. Not available at Swansea despite being in all the other games. As a result penalty given when it wasn't and offside goal given when it wasn't.
Net result City through when they should have lost.
Case 2. Red card just now overturned Wolves v Utd. Crazy decision to overturn a call like that on VAR.
snake_oil said:
Clusterfk today.
Case 1. Not available at Swansea despite being in all the other games. As a result penalty given when it wasn't and offside goal given when it wasn't.
Net result City through when they should have lost.
Well, no - the net result was City should have been denied the penalty and the game would have started from a goal kick. We won’t ever know what the score would have been had the penalty been denied. The way the game was going Swansea would have found it very difficult to hang on.k today.Case 1. Not available at Swansea despite being in all the other games. As a result penalty given when it wasn't and offside goal given when it wasn't.
Net result City through when they should have lost.
Another new low far VAR last night. Switzerland appeal for a pen (looks very soft in real time), ref plays on, Portugal go up the other end and win a pen, ref goes to VAR to review the first pen (looks just as soft on the replay) and gives it! So Switzerland get a pen and Portugal don't.
Utter bks. Don't care if the first pen was a pen or not. The whole thing is a farce. Scrap it now, and lets go back to referring, with the odd terrible decision thrown in for good measure.
Utter b
ks. Don't care if the first pen was a pen or not. The whole thing is a farce. Scrap it now, and lets go back to referring, with the odd terrible decision thrown in for good measure.Frimley111R said:
Lol, Sorry but you lot are stuck in the past. Every other main sport is light years ahead of you. It's like watching the UK motor industry in the 1970s. You lot seem to think that cheating and bad decisions are essential parts of the sport. These are completely unacceptable in any other top level sport. The only mind blowing thing is how long football has been able to get away with it.
Cheating can be dealt with without VAR. Bad decisions are part of the game. Everyone bangs on about football being in the past, and look at the success of VAR in rugby, cricket, tennis. Yet football remains hugely more popular than any of those 3. Makes you wonder why so many people love football if it's been so bad without VAR. 
TwigtheWonderkid said:
lets go back to referring, with the odd terrible decision thrown in for good measure.
This is the area they're targeting, I think. I think the technology is good but still could be better. Ultimately comes down to an umpire ruling so it's just an aide. Many of these reviews are inconclusive (and bloody hard to call) so with the pressure of the coaches, teams and thousands of fans... knowing the cameras are watching you, it's generally just not as good as it purports to be.
Add more officials/eyes and implement a zero tolerance for dissent. If players knew they weren't going to get away with rolling around pretending to be hurt etc etc we might just get a more disciplined game. Unlikely though.
Puggit said:
Referees are naturally biased towards the big teams - it was clear during the world cup that VAR was favouring the bigger teams. As a fan of a small team in the PL, you will not convince me that I have some sort of inferiority complex. Week in, week out I have seen the evidence of favouritism towards the big teams and not the small teams. The most clear example was the league match at the Etihad when City were given a goal falsely against Watford. A farcical decision.
We're not debating the number of penalties given - attacking teams will naturally benefit from more.
That must be why the giants of Croatia reached the final. And why little Germany flopped, and those footballing minnows from Brazil went out to the mighty Belgium? We're not debating the number of penalties given - attacking teams will naturally benefit from more.
If you admit attacking teams get more penalties, then surely attacking teams will score more goals and therefore have more disputed goals.
You moan that City were awarded a goal falsely against Watford. But I bet during the season City also had more goals disallowed than Watford. The reason for this is they score more goals than Watford, most of which will be allowed, some of which won't. You can bang on about bias all you like, but here's some news for you. Man City are miles better than Watford, because they have far better footballers than Watford. This coming season, with VAR, my guess is that Man City will still finish higher up the league than Watford.
There is simply too much at stake in modern day football to be getting stuff wrong.
I don't see why fans don't want VAR, remember how butt-hurt everyone used to get when England would go out of a World Cup/Euro comp due to a dodgy decision, or a missed penalty.
VAR 'should' eradicate things like this.
I watch rugby (sometimes) & it works, ok, as a poster has already said, there is natural breaks in rugby, but there also is in football.
As long as everyone is educated & there is transparency & the rules are made clear, then there shouldn't be any confusion.
Replays are used in other sports to aid decisions, i don't see what the issues with using replay to aid decisions.
I don't see why fans don't want VAR, remember how butt-hurt everyone used to get when England would go out of a World Cup/Euro comp due to a dodgy decision, or a missed penalty.
VAR 'should' eradicate things like this.
I watch rugby (sometimes) & it works, ok, as a poster has already said, there is natural breaks in rugby, but there also is in football.
As long as everyone is educated & there is transparency & the rules are made clear, then there shouldn't be any confusion.
Replays are used in other sports to aid decisions, i don't see what the issues with using replay to aid decisions.
theguvernor15 said:
I don't see why fans don't want VAR, remember how butt-hurt everyone used to get when England would go out of a World Cup/Euro comp due to a dodgy decision, or a missed penalty.
VAR 'should' eradicate things like this.
I don't want them eradicated. I want the pain of unfair decisions going against me. and the euphoria of them going for me. I want to be able to blame the failure of my team on rubbish referring instead of the reality, we were not good enough. Like England losing 4-1 to Germany, and Lampards "goal". I can pretend that if that decision had been right, we would have gone on to win. Saves me from the reality, we were tonked by the German under 21s. VAR 'should' eradicate things like this.
Seriously, if you think England's failure over the last 50 years is down to poor referring, then I'm struggling to believe you've actually seen them play!
TwigtheWonderkid said:
Another new low far VAR last night. Switzerland appeal for a pen (looks very soft in real time), ref plays on, Portugal go up the other end and win a pen, ref goes to VAR to review the first pen (looks just as soft on the replay) and gives it! So Switzerland get a pen and Portugal don't.
Utter bks. Don't care if the first pen was a pen or not. The whole thing is a farce. Scrap it now, and lets go back to referring, with the odd terrible decision thrown in for good measure.
It wasn’t a new low at all. The correct decision was made - if Switzerland had been given the penalty when they should have been, then Portugal would not have been up the other end of the pitch to get theirs so the whole ‘it was a penalty to Portugal’ is moot.Utter b
ks. Don't care if the first pen was a pen or not. The whole thing is a farce. Scrap it now, and lets go back to referring, with the odd terrible decision thrown in for good measure.If it wasn’t for VAR last night then the Swiss manager would have been in his post match interview lambasting a decision which was incorrect ( that the penalty was not awarded). As a result of VAR the outcome of the match was without argument.
It’s all very well you saying you like referees making wrong decisions, i appreciate that- but the game is too big these days for that and, besides, I am sure the referees won’t miss the death threats from bad decisions they have made in the past.
You and smartypants are just a pair of old duffers who don’t like change
in years to come you’ll look back on VAR and wonder how we ever got by without it . Sure, it’s not perfect now but its in its infancy and will get better with time.Gassing Station | Football | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff