A step too VAR?

[Silver Sean]

VAR is a load of wank and another nail in the coffin of a once great game. Add the other bullshit rule changes the corrupt wankers are considering (ball dead after pen taken etc) and they can stick it all up their know-nothing arseholes.

 

[gkmacca]

VAR is a load of wank and another nail in the coffin of a once great game. Add the other bullshit rule changes the corrupt wankers are considering (ball dead after pen taken etc) and they can stick it all up their no-nothing arseholes.

You think goal line technology was a bad move?

 

[Silver Sean]

You think goal line technology was a bad move?

Ah yes. I do think that was a good idea, but it creates an almost instant decision made by technology that cannot get it wrong. It's a yes or no. Done and dusted. Whereas every other area of VAR slows the game down horrendously, takes away the joy/despair of human error which has been a part of the game since it began and seems to cause as much if not more confusion than simply allowing the on-field officials to make the call.

 

[gkmacca]

Ah yes. I do think that was a good idea, but it creates an almost instant decision made by technology that cannot get it wrong. It's a yes or no. Done and dusted. Whereas every other area of VAR slows the game down horrendously, takes away the joy/despair of human error which has been a part of the game since it began and seems to cause as much if not more confusion than simply allowing the on-field officials to make the call.

I agree. But it wouldn't if it was used properly. VAR is there for glaring errors and serious incidents that the officials miss. VAR responds to those things more or less immediately with a clear decision. That should be it. That won't slow the game down at all. I repeat, VAR used properly ought to help the game. It's the misuse of it that's the problem.

 

[Insignificance]

I agree. But it wouldn't if it was used properly. VAR is there for glaring errors and serious incidents that the officials miss. VAR responds to those things more or less immediately with a clear decision. That should be it. That won't slow the game down at all. I repeat, VAR used properly ought to help the game. It's the misuse of it that's the problem.

It is operated by idiots. Of course it will not be used properly.

 

[Whaddapie]

The idea of VAR is great.

As Macca spells out so well, it's the poor application of it that's hurting the game.

Unlike many of you, I don't care about the game being slowed down here and there to get the big decisions correct, but when they're NOT correct, that infuriates me. Any part of the final decision has to be taken out of the referee's hands - He shouldn't even see it, for goodness sake...

The way it's done in NHL is the best, IMO. There's an official, sitting in Toronto, watching every game, who's alerted when there's something that needs reviewing... Then he alone watches it, and he alone decides what the correct decision is. The ref on the ice have no part in it, other than to uphold the decision made.

We need something far more like that.

 

[Silver Sean]

I agree. But it wouldn't if it was used properly. VAR is there for glaring errors and serious incidents that the officials miss. VAR responds to those things more or less immediately with a clear decision. That should be it. That won't slow the game down at all. I repeat, VAR used properly ought to help the game. It's the misuse of it that's the problem.

Aye. It should go to a TMO-style person in a studio away from the ground. Ref asks a question they answer. Would also stop players giving the ref grief if decision is out of his hands. I'd also like to see any player screaming in the ref's face to go to VAR given a swift kick in the bollocks.

 

[Ukrainian by marriage]

VAR's rapidly gone the way of car horns. Car horns were originally invented to be used only when there's a serious hazard that needs urgent attention. Nowadays it's used for everything from catching the attention of some bloke on a crowded pavement whom the driver wants to get a wave from, to a form of catharsis when there's a long delay and no one can move. The problem isn't car horns, it's the buffoons who misuse them. There's a sort of paradigm of idiocy that assimilates any useful invention and turns it into a fecking pain in the neck.

I like car horns. I have a 'Dixie' set in my shed, to be affixed once I retire. 😀

But yeah, Lineker is a twat.

 

[FoxForceFive]

Ahhh, novelty car horns. I always remember hearing them constantly when I was a kid.

One of the few times I agreed with the government intervening to make something illegal.

Now undercar lighting, that's boss, & I still have no idea why that was banned here.

 

[Mosely]

Now undercar lighting, that's boss, & I still have no idea why that was banned here.

I always thought it was because of bad shit leaking out the bulbs if/when they crash.

 

[Brizzle]

I agree. But it wouldn't if it was used properly. VAR is there for glaring errors and serious incidents that the officials miss. VAR responds to those things more or less immediately with a clear decision. That should be it. That won't slow the game down at all. I repeat, VAR used properly ought to help the game. It's the misuse of it that's the problem.

Agree - the sticky point is agreeing what is 'glaring' and what is not. Some people are trying to claim "he was clearly offside" when someone's foot might have been 1cm further forward than a defender, or a defender's and attacker's feet are in line but the striker is leaning towards the goal and the defender is leaning away from it. Decisions like that should be going to a 'stick with on field call' level of error, in my view.

It works well in cricket - LBW decisions show that the ball might hit the stumps by the smallest of margins, but it is a close enough margin (half a ball) to give the benefit to the umpire.

 

[gkmacca]

Personally I think the rule of thumb should be: can you see from no more than one replay that a mistake's been made?

If you need more than one replay, it's not an obvious error. VAR should be as unobtrusive as possible and I really see no logical reason why it can't be like that. At the moment it's a bit like refs waiting for goal line technology to confirm the ball's over the line when it's in the back of the net!

 

[Brizzle]

I really like the idea of the VAR review decision not being the ref - they are taking heat from fans and players during reviews - it should be someone quietly assessing and giving a definitive view of 'stick with your decision' or 'you've missed something'

 

[gkmacca]

Exactly. And I think it's great that, say, a Fellaini-style elbow in the face, or a two-footed challenge, or something of that nature, that a ref misses, or blatant simulation that cons a ref, are now open to being penalised via VAR.

 

[RedStar]

All for it. Just needs tweaking. Works perfectly in Rugby.

It’s more about the application than the concept for me.

If the end goal is to have something like TMO in rugby then Id rather they bin it all together. The amount of time spent reviewing the video during a rugby match is riduclous, and rugby is a far more broken game anyway. To introduce those sorts of delays into a football match would be a disaster. It also means a refs bottle any 50/50 decision and just get the TMO to review once play has stopped.

 

[Judge Jules]

I don't agree that the operation of the TMO in rugby is, er, riduclous. It works better on some occasions than it does on others but, as other posters have said, that's a reflection of the quality of individual officials rather than a comment on the usefulness of the process overall.