can't agree flash, I think they need to tweak the rules, and define a cut off on where it's used. But can't say I have an issue with VAR
Yeah hate it. Goal line technology and that's it.
Don’t like this measuring how much a player is offside and giving players offside because their right ear was that’s taking things too far.
Glad they didn’t overrule the Wolves goal last night as it looked slight questions mark on it but only because they talk of millimetres👍
Ref must use VAR for difficult decisions that are not clear cut and not VAR dictates to ref what decision to make. Ref must refer it to VAR and only if it’s unclear
I'm a big Man Utd fan but even I am in favour of VAR. That's coming from a die hard red devil as well btw.
Problem is where you draw the line.
A clearly wrongfully awarded corner which leads to a goal, why is that not ruled out? That's more of an error that the tip of the attackers shoulder blade being offside.
In the Chelsea match on Sunday - clear handball by the defender which by current rules would have been a penalty awarded by VAR but because it was slightly outside the area no free-kick given in a dangerous position even though VAR knew it was offside by the letter of the law.
I think it should only be used after a goal is scored and that's it. Wouldn't even do it for penalties as I think it's still far too subjective
Agree obers. Goal line tech can't be misinterpreted. Where do we draw the line with VAR. There's goals that come from a free kick which isn't a free kick etc. I would much prefer a basketball type situation with 3 or 4 refs.
Chelsea's missed penalty against Liverpool should have been retaken. How did they miss that?
comment by West London Express (U5874)
posted 2 minutes ago
Chelsea's missed penalty against Liverpool should have been retaken. How did they miss that?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
true.
comment by Obers (U3904)
posted 27 minutes ago
Problem is where you draw the line.
A clearly wrongfully awarded corner which leads to a goal, why is that not ruled out? That's more of an error that the tip of the attackers shoulder blade being offside.
In the Chelsea match on Sunday - clear handball by the defender which by current rules would have been a penalty awarded by VAR but because it was slightly outside the area no free-kick given in a dangerous position even though VAR knew it was offside by the letter of the law.
I think it should only be used after a goal is scored and that's it. Wouldn't even do it for penalties as I think it's still far too subjective
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I agree with this.
Many of the arguments for VAR hinge on the fact it's only for the 'clear and obvious' etc. Well, that's subjective.
Those calling for it in the first place will only be emboldened every time a referee's decision is disagreed with by the vocal minority.
Draw the line - on the goal line, and be done with it.
comment by Flashy flibble (U10324)
posted 3 hours, 58 minutes ago
Yeah hate it. Goal line technology and that's it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
yes
this is where it should have stopped at
But I felt that being gifted and cheated by bad decisions was part of the fun (for want of a better word) of being a football fan.
======
This is a bit of a weird statement.
Personally I don't care if its a game but I don't wanna be cheated. I never saw being cheated as "fun" or being a part of football.
I'd rather wait some minutes than be cheated but each to his own I guess.
comment by Nickasaurus (U9257)
comment by West London Express (U5874)
posted 2 minutes ago
Chelsea's missed penalty against Liverpool should have been retaken. How did they miss that?
=====
What about all the other penalties?
comment by Klopptimus Prime - Die Unerträglichen (U1282)
posted 9 minutes ago
But I felt that being gifted and cheated by bad decisions was part of the fun (for want of a better word) of being a football fan.
======
This is a bit of a weird statement.
Personally I don't care if its a game but I don't wanna be cheated. I never saw being cheated as "fun" or being a part of football.
I'd rather wait some minutes than be cheated but each to his own I guess.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I dread to get into pedantry, but 'cheating' implies that it's somehow deliberate. The ref on the weekend wasn't cheating when he missed the ball hit Laporte's arm.
What you're referring to is this apparently very recent obsession with every decision being correct according to the laws of the game. Which often are based on subjective calls - it being a contact sport there will always be an element of opinion over what's fair or not.
I think that's what's being referred to in the previous comment. My question is: would you rather the odd decision you disagree with, or have every rule changed so that there is no interpretation, only a black and white decision? And if you prefer the second option, what does the game look like then?
I dread to get into pedantry, but 'cheating' implies that it's somehow deliberate. The ref on the weekend wasn't cheating when he missed the ball hit Laporte's arm.
=====
I knew what you meant when I made my point.
comment by Klopptimus Prime - Die Unerträglichen (U1282)
posted 41 seconds ago
I dread to get into pedantry, but 'cheating' implies that it's somehow deliberate. The ref on the weekend wasn't cheating when he missed the ball hit Laporte's arm.
=====
I knew what you meant when I made my point.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
In which case, my question stands. Given that we now have VAR to make a note considered decision, how far do we go with rule changes in order to be able to make an objectively correct decision each time?
What you're referring to is this apparently very recent obsession with every decision being correct according to the laws of the game.
======
Nope. Just the major decisions would be enough, not every decision.
You made this statement to outline what you're arguing against. That's not what I said but it seems to be what you're opposed to.
Some decisions are still wrong even with VAR. Nothing wrong with expecting a reasonable level of accuracy in decision making.
Nothing wrong with expecting a reasonable level of accuracy in decision making.
-----
Of course. I agree. The issue I have with that statement is that it implies that referees have a track record of making a significant number of inaccurate decisions. The stats don't reflect that, depending what you read refs are typically 95% accurate or so, and linesmen even higher at around 99%.
For me the one unforgivable was missing a ball crossing the goal line. That's been fixed. What we're getting into now - even if you specifically aren't - is widening the scope to things like handball and offside.
Of course. I agree. The issue I have with that statement is that it implies that referees have a track record of making a significant number of inaccurate decisions. The stats don't reflect that, depending what you read refs are typically 95% accurate or so, and linesmen even higher at around 99%.
======
This is beside the point IMO.
Its not about the number of mistakes, more about the impact of said mistakes. If the impact is significant enough then VAR is welcome, even if refs don't always make that particular mistake.
Its not about the number of mistakes, more about the impact of said mistakes. If the impact is significant enough then VAR is welcome, even if refs don't always make that particular mistake.
---
While I don't agree it's beside the point at all - reducing the number of mistakes is very much the point of VAR - I do see what you're saying.
However. The impact of the solution must be weighed against the impact of the mistakes. The PL has attempted this with their 'high bar' for intervention. I guess we'll have to wait and see how it pans out over the season but I'm not convinced that the benefits outweigh the costs.
Agree your sentiments. how long before we have robotic refs wiith VAR built in ..resulting in digital speed deciions.
However. The impact of the solution must be weighed against the impact of the mistakes. The PL has attempted this with their 'high bar' for intervention. I guess we'll have to wait and see how it pans out over the season but I'm not convinced that the benefits outweigh the costs.
====
Well put.
I think the opposite so we shall see how it pans out.
comment by Tway (U1162)
Agree your sentiments. how long before we have robotic refs wiith VAR built in ..resulting in digital speed deciions.
=====
That wouldn't be a bad thing IMO.
I want to be entertained by the game, not by erroneous ref decisions.
I think VAR is a deadly poison - it will undermine refs and suck all the spectacle and joy out of the game. We'll be left with playstation football. You're welcome to that - but include me out.
Well done Gary Lineker and his mates with their slo-mo and slide-rule dissection - that's what started it.
Should have stuck with goal-line technology.
it will undermine refs
======
OK.
comment by Klopptimus Prime - Die Unerträglichen (U1282)
posted 10 hours, 44 minutes ago
However. The impact of the solution must be weighed against the impact of the mistakes. The PL has attempted this with their 'high bar' for intervention. I guess we'll have to wait and see how it pans out over the season but I'm not convinced that the benefits outweigh the costs.
====
Well put.
I think the opposite so we shall see how it pans out.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fair enough.
Page 1 of 1
First
Previous
1
Next
Latest
Sign in if you want to comment
Another VAR article.
Page 1 of 1
posted on 20/8/19
can't agree flash, I think they need to tweak the rules, and define a cut off on where it's used. But can't say I have an issue with VAR
posted on 20/8/19
Yeah hate it. Goal line technology and that's it.
posted on 20/8/19
Don’t like this measuring how much a player is offside and giving players offside because their right ear was that’s taking things too far.
Glad they didn’t overrule the Wolves goal last night as it looked slight questions mark on it but only because they talk of millimetres👍
Ref must use VAR for difficult decisions that are not clear cut and not VAR dictates to ref what decision to make. Ref must refer it to VAR and only if it’s unclear
posted on 20/8/19
I'm a big Man Utd fan but even I am in favour of VAR. That's coming from a die hard red devil as well btw.
posted on 20/8/19
Problem is where you draw the line.
A clearly wrongfully awarded corner which leads to a goal, why is that not ruled out? That's more of an error that the tip of the attackers shoulder blade being offside.
In the Chelsea match on Sunday - clear handball by the defender which by current rules would have been a penalty awarded by VAR but because it was slightly outside the area no free-kick given in a dangerous position even though VAR knew it was offside by the letter of the law.
I think it should only be used after a goal is scored and that's it. Wouldn't even do it for penalties as I think it's still far too subjective
posted on 20/8/19
Agree obers. Goal line tech can't be misinterpreted. Where do we draw the line with VAR. There's goals that come from a free kick which isn't a free kick etc. I would much prefer a basketball type situation with 3 or 4 refs.
posted on 20/8/19
Chelsea's missed penalty against Liverpool should have been retaken. How did they miss that?
posted on 20/8/19
comment by West London Express (U5874)
posted 2 minutes ago
Chelsea's missed penalty against Liverpool should have been retaken. How did they miss that?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
true.
posted on 20/8/19
comment by Obers (U3904)
posted 27 minutes ago
Problem is where you draw the line.
A clearly wrongfully awarded corner which leads to a goal, why is that not ruled out? That's more of an error that the tip of the attackers shoulder blade being offside.
In the Chelsea match on Sunday - clear handball by the defender which by current rules would have been a penalty awarded by VAR but because it was slightly outside the area no free-kick given in a dangerous position even though VAR knew it was offside by the letter of the law.
I think it should only be used after a goal is scored and that's it. Wouldn't even do it for penalties as I think it's still far too subjective
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I agree with this.
Many of the arguments for VAR hinge on the fact it's only for the 'clear and obvious' etc. Well, that's subjective.
Those calling for it in the first place will only be emboldened every time a referee's decision is disagreed with by the vocal minority.
Draw the line - on the goal line, and be done with it.
posted on 20/8/19
comment by Flashy flibble (U10324)
posted 3 hours, 58 minutes ago
Yeah hate it. Goal line technology and that's it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
yes
this is where it should have stopped at
posted on 20/8/19
But I felt that being gifted and cheated by bad decisions was part of the fun (for want of a better word) of being a football fan.
======
This is a bit of a weird statement.
Personally I don't care if its a game but I don't wanna be cheated. I never saw being cheated as "fun" or being a part of football.
I'd rather wait some minutes than be cheated but each to his own I guess.
posted on 20/8/19
comment by Nickasaurus (U9257)
comment by West London Express (U5874)
posted 2 minutes ago
Chelsea's missed penalty against Liverpool should have been retaken. How did they miss that?
=====
What about all the other penalties?
posted on 20/8/19
comment by Klopptimus Prime - Die Unerträglichen (U1282)
posted 9 minutes ago
But I felt that being gifted and cheated by bad decisions was part of the fun (for want of a better word) of being a football fan.
======
This is a bit of a weird statement.
Personally I don't care if its a game but I don't wanna be cheated. I never saw being cheated as "fun" or being a part of football.
I'd rather wait some minutes than be cheated but each to his own I guess.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I dread to get into pedantry, but 'cheating' implies that it's somehow deliberate. The ref on the weekend wasn't cheating when he missed the ball hit Laporte's arm.
What you're referring to is this apparently very recent obsession with every decision being correct according to the laws of the game. Which often are based on subjective calls - it being a contact sport there will always be an element of opinion over what's fair or not.
I think that's what's being referred to in the previous comment. My question is: would you rather the odd decision you disagree with, or have every rule changed so that there is no interpretation, only a black and white decision? And if you prefer the second option, what does the game look like then?
posted on 20/8/19
I dread to get into pedantry, but 'cheating' implies that it's somehow deliberate. The ref on the weekend wasn't cheating when he missed the ball hit Laporte's arm.
=====
I knew what you meant when I made my point.
posted on 20/8/19
comment by Klopptimus Prime - Die Unerträglichen (U1282)
posted 41 seconds ago
I dread to get into pedantry, but 'cheating' implies that it's somehow deliberate. The ref on the weekend wasn't cheating when he missed the ball hit Laporte's arm.
=====
I knew what you meant when I made my point.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
In which case, my question stands. Given that we now have VAR to make a note considered decision, how far do we go with rule changes in order to be able to make an objectively correct decision each time?
posted on 20/8/19
What you're referring to is this apparently very recent obsession with every decision being correct according to the laws of the game.
======
Nope. Just the major decisions would be enough, not every decision.
You made this statement to outline what you're arguing against. That's not what I said but it seems to be what you're opposed to.
Some decisions are still wrong even with VAR. Nothing wrong with expecting a reasonable level of accuracy in decision making.
posted on 20/8/19
Nothing wrong with expecting a reasonable level of accuracy in decision making.
-----
Of course. I agree. The issue I have with that statement is that it implies that referees have a track record of making a significant number of inaccurate decisions. The stats don't reflect that, depending what you read refs are typically 95% accurate or so, and linesmen even higher at around 99%.
For me the one unforgivable was missing a ball crossing the goal line. That's been fixed. What we're getting into now - even if you specifically aren't - is widening the scope to things like handball and offside.
posted on 20/8/19
Of course. I agree. The issue I have with that statement is that it implies that referees have a track record of making a significant number of inaccurate decisions. The stats don't reflect that, depending what you read refs are typically 95% accurate or so, and linesmen even higher at around 99%.
======
This is beside the point IMO.
Its not about the number of mistakes, more about the impact of said mistakes. If the impact is significant enough then VAR is welcome, even if refs don't always make that particular mistake.
posted on 20/8/19
Its not about the number of mistakes, more about the impact of said mistakes. If the impact is significant enough then VAR is welcome, even if refs don't always make that particular mistake.
---
While I don't agree it's beside the point at all - reducing the number of mistakes is very much the point of VAR - I do see what you're saying.
However. The impact of the solution must be weighed against the impact of the mistakes. The PL has attempted this with their 'high bar' for intervention. I guess we'll have to wait and see how it pans out over the season but I'm not convinced that the benefits outweigh the costs.
posted on 21/8/19
Agree your sentiments. how long before we have robotic refs wiith VAR built in ..resulting in digital speed deciions.
posted on 21/8/19
However. The impact of the solution must be weighed against the impact of the mistakes. The PL has attempted this with their 'high bar' for intervention. I guess we'll have to wait and see how it pans out over the season but I'm not convinced that the benefits outweigh the costs.
====
Well put.
I think the opposite so we shall see how it pans out.
posted on 21/8/19
comment by Tway (U1162)
Agree your sentiments. how long before we have robotic refs wiith VAR built in ..resulting in digital speed deciions.
=====
That wouldn't be a bad thing IMO.
I want to be entertained by the game, not by erroneous ref decisions.
posted on 21/8/19
I think VAR is a deadly poison - it will undermine refs and suck all the spectacle and joy out of the game. We'll be left with playstation football. You're welcome to that - but include me out.
Well done Gary Lineker and his mates with their slo-mo and slide-rule dissection - that's what started it.
Should have stuck with goal-line technology.
posted on 21/8/19
it will undermine refs
======
OK.
posted on 21/8/19
comment by Klopptimus Prime - Die Unerträglichen (U1282)
posted 10 hours, 44 minutes ago
However. The impact of the solution must be weighed against the impact of the mistakes. The PL has attempted this with their 'high bar' for intervention. I guess we'll have to wait and see how it pans out over the season but I'm not convinced that the benefits outweigh the costs.
====
Well put.
I think the opposite so we shall see how it pans out.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fair enough.
Page 1 of 1