Will VAR Change Football for the Better?

[Willmass]

mickk said:

GTO-3R said:

I don’t understand that either. It’s almost like it wasn’t even looked at!

It wasn't looked at, the officials have cars in the car park.

Not sure how they are going to justify this one .

How that’s not a penalty is beyond me , Superb strike for the goal though ,

May as well just dump all the VAR stuff in the nearest bin

[BrabusMog]

Aguero didn't really help his team by just stopping though... Still a clear pen but play to the whistle etc etc.

[TwigtheWonderkid]

They bottled that handball. Imagine having to chalk off a really good goal and go back and give a pen to Citeh? There'd be uproar. I did mention this scenario before VAR came in but was told by people "what are the chances" and that I was a luddite.

[Puggit]

Willmass said:

Not sure how they are going to justify this one .

They have already tried. By stating it didn't meet the threshold required, which they'd already stated this season was any touch of the arm.

Cretins in charge of our beautiful game.

[RichB]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

They bottled that handball. Imagine having to chalk off a really good goal and go back and give a pen to Citeh? There'd be uproar. I did mention this scenario before VAR came in but was told by people "what are the chances" and that I was a luddite.

As I said further back in this thread they have made an issue for themselves by changing the rules regarding handball in the penalty box at the start of this season. Having done so they don't have the strength of mind to play to their new rules. As you say, they bottled it!

All of us who played the game, knew the meaning of intentional handball or hand played the ball vs ball played the had (or whatever wording the FA used in any particular season). All basically meaning if the ball hit your hand from point blank range it was not handball.

[wjb]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

They bottled that handball. Imagine having to chalk off a really good goal and go back and give a pen to Citeh? There'd be uproar. I did mention this scenario before VAR came in but was told by people "what are the chances" and that I was a luddite.

Aguero would've missed anyway.

[ChevyChase77]

Micheal Oliver LIVERpoOl.

If VAR continues like this, this season out of any other cannot be taken seriously. It's becoming a joke now.

[Chuffedmonkey]

It needs scrapping for good or scrapping for the rest of the season and being revised. Trouble is all the teams that have been effected by it badly will make complaints. Man City have had 2 major VAR decisions this season go against them and as a result will say they have lost ground to Liverpool.

I remember hearing the french league scrapped it last season part way though the season as it was not working and said it would be revised. Trouble is PSG had not been effected by the decisions so made no impact.

[wjb]

Chuffedmonkey said:

It needs scrapping for good or scrapping for the rest of the season and being revised. Trouble is all the teams that have been effected by it badly will make complaints. Man City have had 2 major VAR decisions this season go against them and as a result will say they have lost ground to Liverpool.

So basically we should scrap it because city lost?

[Bussolini]

It's not VAR that is the problem, but crap referees and inconsistent application.

[DocJock]

The head ref for VAR said yesterday

1) TAA's arm wasn't in an unnatural position (despite replays showing him moving it away from his body, towards the ball)
2) It wasn't intentional (despite said movement towards the ball) which contradicts the change in the Laws for this season which removed that riterion.

If the bloke in charge can get it so wrong, what hope is there that it will ever be any use?

[TwigtheWonderkid]

I thought the change in the handball rule was for the attacking team only. If it touches an attacking players arm and a goal ends up being scored, it's no goal. But for defending players, it isn't automatically a penalty if it touches their arm.

[RichB]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

I thought the change in the handball rule was for the attacking team only. If it touches an attacking players arm and a goal ends up being scored, it's no goal. But for defending players, it isn't automatically a penalty if it touches their arm.

Thinking about it you're probably right TTWK. I get confused with the tweaking to the rules...

[Frimley111R]

Bussolini said:

It's not VAR that is the problem, but crap referees and inconsistent application.

Get out of here with your sensible comments and reasoning!!!!

I agree, but the fact is that there are more correct decisions with VAR than without it. Humans are making decisions on better information but some decisions will always be open to interpretation and some will agree with them and some will not. Referees in the Prem are not crap but almost no matter what they do someone will criticise them.

I don't know if it has helped here but I hope it reduces diving and that shocking way players consistently cheat by faking fouls/injuries to gain an advantage (which is a far bigger issue than VAR and yet somehow doesn't have its own thread?)

[ChevyChase77]

Frimley111R said:

Bussolini said:

It's not VAR that is the problem, but crap referees and inconsistent application.

Get out of here with your sensible comments and reasoning!!!!

I agree, but the fact is that there are more correct decisions with VAR than without it. Humans are making decisions on better information but some decisions will always be open to interpretation and some will agree with them and some will not. Referees in the Prem are not crap but almost no matter what they do someone will criticise them.

I don't know if it has helped here but I hope it reduces diving and that shocking way players consistently cheat by faking fouls/injuries to gain an advantage (which is a far bigger issue than VAR and yet somehow doesn't have its own thread?)

The problem is there is the benefit of replays now but the VAR team aren't applying them consistently. Gerard Deulofeu clear penalty v Spurs NOT given. Same player v Chelsea, not so clear, overruled and given.

You'll see a defender in the coming weeks have his had out by his side and it will be given as handball, then people will rightly ask why the TAA handball wasn't given.

As for reducing diving. You would think so - but there have been many cases of simulation not punished and cases where there isn't given.

[p4cks]

The main issue seems to be the application of the PL's rule... "VAR can be used to overturn a subjective decision if a "clear and obvious error" has been identified"

Clear, and obvious. Sending off the wrong player is clear and obvious; taking 4 minutes to determine a fella's toe is offside is not, in my opinion, clear or obvious.

Its introduction has been a joke, its application has been a joke and how the PL continue to defend it as being positive for the game is a joke. 7 out of 10? Please.

Clear and obvious my big toe.


The PL even has a page devoted to their defence of the VAR offside rules, with far too much effort demonstarted on there that attempts to their rationale. It's embarrassing.
https://www.premierleague.com/news/1488423

[DocJock]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

I thought the change in the handball rule was for the attacking team only. If it touches an attacking players arm and a goal ends up being scored, it's no goal. But for defending players, it isn't automatically a penalty if it touches their arm.

Actually, reading this again, it seems you are correct.

[LotusOmega375D]

With that Tottenham v Sheffield United one, toegate happened so long before the goal was scored that Tottenham even had time to head the ball out of the box. Sheffield United then had to initiate a whole new attack before scoring and subsequently having the goal chalked off 4 minutes later. How can that be right? Is VAR now rewinding and checking every detail all the way back to the last stop in play?

[TwigtheWonderkid]

p4cks said:

The main issue seems to be the application of the PL's rule... "VAR can be used to overturn a subjective decision if a "clear and obvious error" has been identified"

Clear, and obvious. Sending off the wrong player is clear and obvious; taking 4 minutes to determine a fella's toe is offside is not, in my opinion, clear or obvious.

OK, I'll say it again.

Offside is not a subjective decision. It's like a goal line decision. The player is either on or off. Not maybe, not almost. So clear and obvious doesn't apply to offside.

Fouls are subjective.

This is the ruling and this is how VAR works.

Now we can argue about how we think it should be, or whether we should have it at all (I think not), but I wish people would stop banging on about clear and obvious in relation to offside calls. Because it doesn't apply.

[jcremonini]

p4cks said:

The main issue seems to be the application of the PL's rule... "VAR can be used to overturn a subjective decision if a "clear and obvious error" has been identified"

Clear, and obvious. Sending off the wrong player is clear and obvious; taking 4 minutes to determine a fella's toe is offside is not, in my opinion, clear or obvious.

Its introduction has been a joke, its application has been a joke and how the PL continue to defend it as being positive for the game is a joke. 7 out of 10? Please.

Clear and obvious my big toe.


The PL even has a page devoted to their defence of the VAR offside rules, with far too much effort demonstarted on there that attempts to their rationale. It's embarrassing.
https://www.premierleague.com/news/1488423

It might help if you understood VAR better. The clear and obvious rule does not apply to offsides as that is binary rather than subjective. It has never applied to offsides. So your point is moot.

I’m still a supporter of VAR but have to admit it’s a joke that the EPL , with all their money and ability to learn from mistakes made from other leagues, have failed to get it right too many times. If you have to look at a foul or handball for more than a few seconds then it’s not clear and obvious, so stop looking at the replays and go back to the referee and his original decision.